>> good evening. i'm chris matthews. washington you want a fight? you got one. like curry answering james last night, hillary clinton spent the weekend putting up points. let bernie sanders charge up wall street she's working main street promising to create e equal opportunity. you wounder what the clinton campaign was missing? we know an opponent someone to light up her engine and thank god this isn't going to be boring after all. david axle rod, columnist with the "washington post" and hillary clinton's chief speech wry wry tore and senior advisor. hillary clinton picked up where she left off after the big announcement speech. while bernie sanders is going after concentrated wealth. clinton says there is nothing wrong with success, let's watch. >> i don't think americans are against success, i think americans are against people who get on the top of the ladder and start pulling it up so nobody else has the same chance they had and act as though they pulled themselves up by the boot straps and log cabin. at some point we're in this together and those of us who do have opportunities ought to be doing more to help other people do the same. >> pay attention. compared to what we heard from bernie sanders the day he announced for president. >> this campaign starting today is going to send the message to the billionaire class and that is you can't have it all to the billionaire class and i say your greed has got to end, and you cannot contend and if you refuse to accept your responsibility. >> i see a battle here. i hope we'll get hotter the standard and getting the tide to rise and against wall street. very different than what he was offering. >> definitely a battle. i don't know if it's going to actually grow into a battle. >> we talk about it in fact it will be interesting each of them is trying to talk to the sole of the democratic party and she's delivering what is essentially the traditional democrat. >> she's a democrat and he's a socialist. he says he is. not knocking the guy, he is what he is. he's saying what socialism means, take from the rich and use it to school programs and stuff like that. anyway, does the democratic party want to grow the pie or re redistribute the pie? >> in the coming weeks, i'll propose specific policies to reward businesses who invest in long-term value rather than the quick buck because that leads to higher growth for the economy, higher wages for workers and yes, bigger profits. everybody will have a better time. >> yesterday bernie sanders spoke about massive wealth redistribution. >> there has been a massive redistribution of wealth which has gone from the middle class and working families to the top one-tenth of 1%. we're going to take some money back for the middle class. >> well, david, the fight, hilary says we can do well if the rich pay their share. bernie is much more socialist about it. he's saying okay let's go get the money they got and give it to the people that need it. different point of view i think. >> look, we've got a situation where people now are, the median income in this country is what it was in 1989 and anxiety about that and there is a great deal of anger about what is seen as the rigging of the system. that is real. but i think hilary's fundamental approach reflects the main stream of the democratic party. i think she'll be the nominee of the party. i think people have lwill have a fling with bernie. he won't be around too so long. you'll see people flirt with that. at the end of the day, she'll be the nominee and incorporate elements of a more populous agenda but in a growth frame. >> that's interesting. melissa, what do you think? i love the metaphor not the one-night stand, that's gross but the wild kid, he's the fun to date for awhile but when it comes time to marry somebody, not bernie sanders. >> i agree. david is right. they both agree about one fundamental problem. >> i'm not interested what they agree about. i'll warning you right now. you're on the wrong show. go to al sharpton -- >> you're not going to vote me into changing. no, agree income inequality is the problem and different prescriptions. >> explain the difference. >> no, i mean she's, as you said he's more about redistribution of wealth and she's about growth for everyone and having everybody have a bigger share of the pie. her problem is the pie is this big and the very small, small fraction of people are getting the bulk of it so she's about having everybody get more of it and she's been pretty clear about that and he's about, i think, more punitive ways of going about it. >> is she smarter not to be so punitive? so she smart to be like we're on this together rather than go to war against the rich? is that a smart move today? >> i think it's who she is. >> when you register the party, the party is more to the left clearly and clearly hilary nudged herself to the left a bit and she said so but is it more angry and you have to get angry and snarl a bit really show you out to get the rich? do you have to to do that? >> i don't know about out to get the rich but people think there are inequities. if you're a growth democrat than you need to get the money somewhere to invest in education, to invest in research and development, to invest in infrastructure and invest in the pillars of growth and it has to come from the people who have gotten the benefit of the economy over the last so many years at -- >> how do you do it? >> well that's the issue that has, i mean that's a big issue because hilary said she's going to be a better negotiator with congress and i think people see her as someone that can navigate washington perhaps better than president obama but it's going to be hard because anything that is labeled spending is dead on arrival in this congress and that's going to be a problem for any democratic president. >> when it comes to wall street hillary clinton has scolded the financial community. here he is at this saturday's big announcement. here she is here. >> the financial industry and multi national corporations created huge wealth for a few by focussing too much on short term profit and too little on long-term value. >> wow she's for long-term investments. here is senator sanders and he sounds like he wants to destroy wall street. much different tone here. >> wall street cannot continue to be an island on to itself gambling trillions in risky financial instruments while expecting the public to bail it out. if a bank is too big to fail that bank is too big to exist. >> that's strong talk there, very strong. >> i think the sweet spot is in between the two statements and it's where elizabeth warren has been on the issue and where some of hilary's rhetoric has also gone in that direction and that is the system is rigged the system is rigged against middle class -- >> she's not talking like that now. >> well, but she has been talking. >> has been. i think -- >> look listen i can defend this speech was very worked on. i think she had a lot to do with writing. wasn't as good of a speech as jeb. jeb had a professional speech. may not have written a word of it but it sang. hers was much more her, the kind of speech a regular person would write, didn't you think? >> it was a political speech. >> but it was her. my mom. >> her mother she's laying out her life story and how the values she believes connected the values of the country that connect to where she wants to take the country. that's what you want out of a speech like that. the press constantly beats up on her not having enough detail so she threw in more policy detail than usually done in these launch speeches but i think that was probably preemptive because she knew she would get creamed if she didn't do that. it was good. i saw a reporter that said i loved that told me what she'll do about early childhood education and so on. >> she's always been there, i agree. you're laughing over there in the bleachers, what do you think was funny that you heard there, listen -- >> i thought -- >> you're chuckling at her. >> i thought it showed supreme confidence. she's so confident she gave the state of the union speech early, which i think -- >> i complete agree with you. did you see her today? i thought it was so presidential and i'm not her biggest fan normally. i have to say that i like the fact that she has this guy nick merril calling on press people in order like press conferences. wasn't that a big development she can say who gets to ask? poor andrea mitchell the best in the business didn't get to like eighth because they decide who gets to ask the questions. >> see how long that lasts. [ laughter ] >> what do you think? do you think that will be a problem? i thought she was great, top of her game because she was defining herself, the nixon days if you don't define yourself carefully where she wants to be somewhere left of center but not too far left somebody else will. anyway hillary clinton is taking a cautious approach, clearly the hot button issue of trade. here is what she said yesterday about the president's big tpp trade deal. very careful. >> they are the voices you heard them for the deal no matter what is in it and they are the voices against the deal no matter what is in it. well i kind of fall in the group that says let's find out what is in it and make it as good as it can be and let's make a decision. >> very interesting. now watch how much that sounds like her husband did back in 1992 in the race when he was talking about nafta. here is clinton. >> i am the one in the middle of this. mr. bush says it's a honky dory deal. i say it does more good than harm, if if we can get protection for the environment so the mexicans have to follow their own environmental standards, labor law standards and if we have a genuine commitment to train and reinvest in this economy. i have a realistic approach to trade. i want more trade. and i know there is good things in that agreement, but it can sure be made better. >> the that is masterful, david axle axle rod, masterful to support it after he became president without offending the unions on the way to becoming president. brilliant piece of work. your thoughts? hilary is trying to do the same. >> easier for hillary clinton because he wasn't the secretary of state in charge when these negotiations began and when she left in december of 2012 she was in australia, she called the tpp, she said it was going to be the gold standard for trade agreements, so this is very, very freighted for her. this is difficult terrain to navigate because she owned this to some degree and has to navigate through it. >> i was trying to be nice to her and you're dragging me back in. by the way, one other aspect her husband is clearly for this. if somebody can find him, he'll say so. go clinton, i heard him in tokyo, 100% said this was a magnificent bill. anyway, he won't be heard from for awhile. thank you david for being tougher on hilary than i was. we'll have you back melissa, who wrote some of these great words over the years. coming up president obama badly wants the historic trade deal with asia, his major achievement and believes it's essential but after democrats handed him a whooping this friday what can he do to save the effort? big question alive and jeb bush offer as bright shining preview for 2016. here he is. >> i've decided i'm a candidate for president of the united states of america. [ cheers ] >> so jeb is through the threshold, the question is his parry ready to layout the red carpet? apparently not. hillary clinton in the poll of history embracing the possibility she would be the first woman president. actually, the youngest woman president in history. it's a magnet to millions of americans and republicans simply don't have an answer to her. finally, let me finish with the battle for the 2016 democratic presidential nomination and we got one this is "hardball" a place for politics. urchases on your account in seconds. and once you find it you can switch it right on again. you're back! freeze it, only from discover. get it at discover.com. >> the district attorney isn't saying much but she had an unusual relationship. she had a relationship with richard matt. she was going to be the get away driver and run off with them long-term, chris? >> do we know anything about her plans? i go back to the question about the husband, nothing there yet? >> reporter: nothing there yet. i can tell you there are thousands of tips coming up. 800 servers but not one sighting of the killers. they could be anywhere maybe in mexico but the searchers on the ground say they are still here. there is no reason to believe they went anymore else. they believe they are on foot together somewhere in the dense rest behind me. they say they will get them it's just time. you talk to residents here and they say if they haven't caught them yet, they are probably long gone. >> i think they hitchhiked out in the middle of the night. thank you adam reese. what a story. we'll be back after this. put your hand over your heart. is it beating? good! then my nutrition heart health mix is for you. it's a wholesome blend of peanuts, pecans and other delicious nuts specially mixed for people with hearts. planters. nutrition starts with nut. i like my seafood like i like my vacations: tropical. and during red lobster's island escape, three new dishes take me straight to the islands. like the ultimate island seafood feast, with crab, lobster and jumbo shrimp. all you have to do... get here while you still can. the democrats abandoned their president, the lead of their party on a bill and program they demanded as part of this, that they previously voted for unanimously and asked for part of this process. so to me it was stunning they would do this. >> welcome back to "hardball" that was paul ryan talking about the trade vote that failed friday. ryan worked with president obama on passing the sweeping bill crucial to the president's economic legacy but on political life support. last week the president republicans got enough votes to pass fast track but democrats tanked the trade package by voting down workers assistance program and historically been supportive of. nancy pelosi joined in. >> i will be voting today to slow down the fast track to get a better deal for the american people. bigger check, bigger paychecks, better infrastructure help the american people fulfill the american dream. >> she looked tortured there. hillary clinton backed pelosi in a swing through iowa. here she is. >> the president should listen to and work with his allies in congress starting with nancy pelosi who have expressed their concerns about the impact that a weak agreement would have on our workers to make sure we get the best strongest deal possible and if we don't get it there should be no deal. [ applause ] >> well, that was carefully said by someone very much finessing this issue. ""the washington post"" said no one is declaring it dead but if they decline to lend a hand prospects appear merck kiirky. here he was yesterday. >> i feel strongly that both from a policy sense and a political sense, it is very wrong for the democrats to under cut the president at this stage. this deal though can still get done in the next couple of days. >> well the house is expected to vote again sometime this week. for more on the president and his last-ditch effort to save the trade agenda i'm joined by david corn and jake sherman jones. jake you're the expert. what's the chances? i felt pelosi was pulled by others on the progressive side of the democratic party that got to her. this is where the caucus is and she didn't want to be there but was there in the end. i think bill clinton is for this and hillary clinton probably leaning towards it but nobody wants to mess with strong labor. labor never looked stronger almost like a wounded animal is the most dangerous animal. let me ask, is there hope for either the republicans or democrats to save this bill? >> if there is hope the path is certainly not clear yet and here is the problem, if you listen to what pelosi says and other democratics say, they are voting against taa to tank the deal. so as long as there is a deal on the table, nothing is going to pass. i mean republicans are thinking of a couple options, thinking of passing tea. there is no clear sense how this will get through. there is talk of another part of trade agenda but really no sense the votes are there and you're right, pelosi is in a real tough spot. her caucus is overwhelmingly against this trade deal and there is really no unwinding from where we sit. their position is kind of firm at this point. >> i want to get to the politics of this. i know you don't like the sdming a lot of people don't and i'm mixed. i think the guy from new york, one of the guys said this weekend in the paper if this was just a simple bill they had a vote on, they could have gotten through but nobody wants to mess with labor. labor is really hot. >> i think that's true. labor is hot on it for policy reasons reasons. >> solidarity reasons, too. >> give me the cases. >> i think there are both. >> trade. >> they care about losing jobs and maybe union jobs because that weakens the union movement overall. solidarity is something -- >> do you think that's the case? someone works for state or local government, that will make them weaker? >> i think union leaders worry about that yeah. you don't want on the service sector to be unionized. >> or public sector. >> that's driving part of the union side and i think from the democratic side, there are, you talk to democratic members who are against this and they are like 20,000 different reasons. >> it's not complicated. >> just some policy. >> i agree. >> the president, you know did not do his job. >> let me ask you this the president starts on this show, the jerry connolly out in virginia. one show on this and i think that was an attempt to build support. never got past the 25, 26 dem democrats democrats. he got the people from virginia resuming economically with high tech and get back to the spell with the democratic party building the future across the great lakes areas, you know pennsylvania to wisconsin, iowa all those states. nobody up there is for this. still geographic problem for the democrats, they want to build their future. they lost the south and rockies, they only have the left coast if you will and that parts, how do you build a case for trade in that part of the country? >> i don't think they care about bidding a case for trade on a broad base scale. obama wanted to pass this bill. he wanted to do it with the coalition he could cobble together. you saw 27, 28, 29 democrats for this bill. if it passed he would have been completely fine with that. he was looking at the end result. he came to capitol hill and told people to play it straight. he didn't get into a policy argument. he didn't take any questions or field any comments in a closed meeting of house democrats. he's looking at this from a prague point of view. >> i worry about the fight we may have to go into iran and start a war. will this make him look weak? he can't deliver, bounce like that. >> i think the iranians will cut a deal if it's basically in their interest. and -- >> how about if he can't deliver? >> if he signs the deal the deal is a deal. he doesn't have to pass that deal. they can try to approve or disapprove it or take a back door way to under cut. it's not like this trade accord. it doesn't come for this deal. it probably doesn't help in giving him strength but at the end of the day, the iranians will acrecept the deal if they think there is something in it for them. >> they could be a rich country again. great to have your reporting here and david, yours counsel. up next how did it go wrong for richard nixon? fascinating. i read the whole book. evan thomas out with a major new buy ogden by ogden buy ogden fee about richard next son. this is "hardball." your place for politics. audible safety beeping the nissan rogue with safety shield technologies. the only thing left to fear is you imagination. nissan. innovation that excites. you wouldn't order szechuan without checking the spice level. it really opens the passages. waiter. water. so why would you invest without checking brokercheck? check your broker with brokercheck. i have type 2 diabetes. i started with pills. and now i take a long-acting insulin at night. i take mine in the morning. i was trying to eat right, stay active. but i wasn't reaching my a1c goal anymore. man: my doctor says diabetes changes over time. it gets harder to control blood sugar spikes after i eat and get to goal. my doctor added novolog® at mealtime for additional control. now i know. novolog® is a fast-acting, injectable insulin and it works together with my long-acting insulin. proven effective. the mealtime insulin doctors prescribe most. available in flexpen®. vo: novolog® is used to control high blood sugar in adults and children with diabetes. take novolog® as directed. eat a meal within 5 to 10 minutes after injection. check your blood sugar levels. do not take novolog® if your blood sugar is too low or you're allergic to any of its ingredients. tell your doctor about all medical conditions and medicines you take. ask your doctor about alcohol use, operating machinery, or driving. the most common side effect is low blood sugar. symptoms may include dizziness, sweating, confusion, and headache. severe low blood sugar can be life-threatening. other common side effects include low potassium in your blood and injection site reactions. get medical help right away if you experience trouble with breathing serious allergic reactions like swelling of your face tongue, or throat, sweating, extreme drowsiness dizziness, or confusion. now i know about novolog®. taken by millions since 2001. vo: ask your health care provider about adding novolog®. it can help provide the additional control you may need. ♪ every auto insurance policy has a number. but not every insurance company understands the life behind it. ♪ those who have served our nation have earned the very best service in return. ♪ usaa. we know what it means to serve. get an auto insurance quote and see why 92% of our members plan to stay for life. welcome back to "hardball." since becoming the first president to resign from office richard nixon's legacy is obscured by the shadow of watergate, of course. however great his flaws which cost him the presidency, he was a remark shlable odds. from 1952 through 1972, 20 years later, every national ticket but one over that whole spread of time. the average americans time and time again was eerily successful. a new book coming out tomorrow, "being nixon" by evan thomas examining the events that came to shape him. it's a compelling portrait of a politician who as president bill clinton said at his funeral in 1994 deserved to be judged in the whole. >> today is a day for his family, his friends and his nation to remember president nixon's life and totality. to them let us say may the day of judging president nixon on anything less than his entire life and career come to the a close. >> i'm joined by author and historian evan thomas. that's what you did, looked at him in totality. obviously, lots of words but the whole picture in going through this exploration as a historian, what did you find that grabbed you? >> i was surprised, you know we had this view of nixon as being a dark and somber and mean figure. i was surprised that he tried, he didn't always succeed but tried to be a confident and happen person. late at night he would write notes about the need to be joyful. he wanted to be that person. he didn't always sukecceed. he was good at bucking up and good with his family. he was a loving father. he was a surprisingly good husband. he was a much more complex tragic figure than the common cartoon allows. he was just a fascinating, i would argue the most fascinating political figure of the 20th century. >> i'm with you on that. let me ask you about the movies i'm a movie nut. the fact he saw 500 movies at camp david or white house movie theater and would say during a turkey of a movie or lemon as you put it, he would stay stick with it it will get better. that's the opposite of jack kennedy, let's get out of here this is no good and make everybody leave with him. nixon would be the last guy in the room. is that hope springs eternal in the movie theater? >> nixon approached watergate the way he approached the movies. hoped it would get better. of course there wasn't. nixon partly because he could see the dark side wanted to believe that things would work out in the end and he tried to keep up the hope that you have that scene of him saying good-bye and the helicopter. >> looking at it yeah. >> even on the helicopter, eddie cox said you'll be back and nixon just nodded his head yeah, i'll be back. he never lost faith. >> i want people to read the book because there is so much intrigue. there is so much to it. the one thing i worked when i worked on a book around this edge, eddie cox told me off the record but a long time he basically said how great pat nixon was. we thought she was plastic pat. no she looked out for me and was a really good person. that's in your book. pat nixon, this is a hand some picture. >> look how beautiful she is. >> what do you make of that story, she put up through thick and thin and all the hell she put up with and never left him. >> couldn't believe his good luck marrying the most beautiful girl. look at that early picture. she was a knockout, she was gorgeous. he was devoted to her. she helped him a lot when he felt like quitting she was the one who said you can't, you can't do it you can't do it to me and your children. she hung in there with him. ultimately, she did get worn out. by the end of watergate you can tell from the photos she's exhausted. she and the president really weren't talking that much at the end. nixon told his secretary he was resigning, not his wife. they would leave little notes on pillows at night and kind of like one of his saids said out of a novel. but there was a sadness at the end, it showed but you know, after he left the white house, the marriagech make resumed. nixon, the most uptight guy there ever was was bawling. tears are pouring from him. billy graham is trying to console him. he missed her. he loved his wife and he missed her. >> i think this is one of your great works, evan, buddy. this is one of the great works you've done. if anyone loves politics and agree there are two or three fascinating people in politics lbj, jack kennedy and nixon are the top three. >> yeah. >> we'll all agree about that because we'll never get to the bottom of them, never. >> i tried. >> you went a long way down to the bottom floor. thank you, evan. by the way, good luck with the book. the book is called being nixon for the inside like being malcavich. jeb bush declares his presidency candidacy. you're watching "hardball," the place for politics. believable! toenail fungus? seriously? smash it with jublia! jublia is a prescription medicine proven to treat toenail fungus. use jublia as instructed by your doctor. look at the footwork! most common side effects include ingrown toenail, application site redness, itching, swelling burning or stinging, blisters, and pain. smash it! make the call and ask your doctor if jublia is right for you. new larger size now available. leave early go roam sleep in sleep out star gaze dream big wander more care less beat sunrise chase sunset do it all. on us. get your first month's payment plus five years wear and tear coverage. make the most of summer... with volvo. when a moment spontaneously turns romantic why pause to take a pill? and why stop what you're doing to find a bathroom? with cialis for daily use, you don't have to plan around either. it's the only daily tablet approved to treat erectile dysfunction so you can be ready anytime the moment is right. plus cialis treats the frustrating urinary symptoms of bph, like needing to go frequently, day or night. tell your doctor about all your medical conditions and medicines, and ask if your heart is healthy enough for sex. do not take cialis if you take nitrates for chest pain as it may cause an unsafe drop in blood pressure. do not drink alcohol in excess. side effects may include headache, upset stomach, delayed backache or muscle ache. to avoid long-term injury, get medical help right away for an erection lasting more than four hours. if you have any sudden decrease or loss in hearing or vision or any symptoms of an allergic reaction stop taking cialis and get medical help right away. why pause the moment? ask your doctor about cialis for daily use. for a free 30-tablet trial go to cialis.com i'm richard lui, a low pressure system turning in the gulf could become a tropical storm. residents in texas and louisiana are urged to prepare for floods. the 16-year-old that lost an arm thisin a shark attack that week send in good condition. the head of the naacp spokane chapter resigned earlier. she's accused of pretending to be black. she'll be a gust on msnbc tomorrow morning in an exclusive interview with maelissa harris-perry. now back to "hardball." i've decided i'll a candidate for the president of the united states of america. >> back to "hardball" after six months touring the countries as a presumed 2016 presidential candidate, jeb bush formally announced his entry into the crowded field of candidates. at the top of his speech he called for an end to democratic leadership in the white house slamming clin slamming slamming hillary clinton's dan da canada see. >> the party in the white house is planning a no suspension primary for a no-change election to hold on to power, to slog on with the same agenda under another name. that's our opponent's call to action this time around. that's all they have got left. i for one, am not eager to see what another four years would look like under that kind of leadership. >> no, no no. >> the presidency should not be passed on from one liberal to the next. >> wow, bush also vowed to stick to his principles promising to run an optimistic and inclusive campaign. >> my message will be optimistic because i'm certain we can make the decades ahead the greatest time to be alive in this world. i will campaign as i would serve, going everywhere speaking to everyone keeping my word facing the issues without flinching and staying true to what i believe. i will take nothing and no one for granted. i will run with heart and i will run to win. [ cheers ] >> pretty fine speech. after weeks of missteps staff shakeups and the shifting positions in 2003 invasion of iraq, of course, will bush's message get the campaign on track? bush has slipped into third place, ben carson dr. ben carson leads the field at 11 followed by scott walker at ten and bush is tied with rubio at 10% and mike huckabee at 8%. i'm joined by the round table. howard of the "huffington post" and senior political reporter perry bacon. first of all, that list is a joke. dr. carson it's a joke. it's not going to be that way. it doesn't mean anything except whimsy. but bush is running to me for the nomination of a political party that no longer exists. he has a mexican wife. he is the brother of a president who let us in a ground war in iraq his party is totally against. get down the list. he's more common core. everything he's for the hamajority of the party protests. like the approach he gave us today. >> it's less about him right now and more about can he disqualify scott walk skperp can he disqualify marco rubio. $100 million. >> you say -- >> i suspect he's going to be positive on himself and i expect scott walker is going to do well in debate. so you got to think about that. i think jeb can win if he disqualifies opponents the way mitt romney won last time. winning this way will be hard. >> interesting how times have changed. there he is the most established name in america, bush. grandson or whatever of prescott bush in connecticut. he shows up in a shirt. the only thing about him was preppy was the button down. no tie, no jacket no suit. i don't know what kind of shoes he was wearing but might as well be wearing khakis and the guy, why is that so important? is he really credible as a candidate against the establishment like he was showing himself to be today? >> i would say -- >> against the elite? >> chris, i would say it's strategy. the reason walker and rubio are where they are in part is because they are younger and self made individuals that tell a different story. it's difficult for the bushes. >> cuban americans. >> he has to rely on the story of his wife and audacity and guts he showed marrying her, falling in love and marrying her -- >> never heard that before. the that was gutsy. >> that was to bring colombia back into the bush family. >> how can you be anti immigrant except for the first lady? i love the way you said that. >> the way hillary clinton dug back into his history, he's digging back for those things that attach him to new traditions and waves and trends. you're right about the party. the party has moved way to the right of where the bush family as an institution has been known to be. >> the reality is that the last time a republican won a presidential election was george w. bush in 2004 and did it by winning 40% of the latino vote and john mccain got 31% mitt romney 27% and what jeb bush was doing was politely saying is we don't have a prayer. >> i thought 60% of the supreme court. [ laughter ] >> i think it's the right point. >> yeah, scott walker and marco rubio specifically, i talked to the a scott walker strategist that said jeb bush's speech was bizarre, trying to alienate -- >> what are you talking about? [ laughter ] >> bush hails from one of the most prominent families in america, political families portrayed himself as an anti elitest outsider ready to clean up washington. >> we don't need another president that holds the top spot among the pampered elites of washington. we need a president willing to challenge and disrupt the culture and i'll be that president. >> the pampered elite. he's a bush. excuse me they were born on third base and thought they had a triple or double. >> i think that george w. went after that as governor by trying to be a regular governor and learning how to use a chainsaw. [ laughter ] >> i don't know what jeb is doing in that regard. he's a smart guy he studies the issues. he's tough, he's nasty as a politician. >> jeb is? >> jeb. to say he's going to run against the pampered elite is interest sglg is sglg. >> is he going to screw up up washington like he did texas. >> put it this way, if a bush can run as a change agent -- >> up next, hillary clinton and the poll of history, a big thing for a lot of voters her being the first woman, in fact the youngest woman elected. what a great line. republican haves no answer to that. no answer. it's great in politics when the other side can't come back. this is "hardball" a place for politics. natural gas producer... and we could soon become number one in oil. because hydraulic fracturing technology is safely recovering lots more oil and natural gas. supporting millions of new jobs. billions in tax revenue... and a new century of american energy security. the new energy superpower? it's red, white and blue. log on to learn more. i've smoked a lot and quit a lot but ended up nowhere. now i use this. the nicoderm cq patch, with unique extended release technology helps prevent the urge to smoke all day. i want this time to be my last time. that's why i choose nicoderm cq. summers heating up with royal caribbean's wow sale. our biggest sale of the summer is going on now. get a 50% reduced deposit. plus up to $200 onboard spending money. and up to 30% off your cruise. call 1-800-royal-caribbean or your travel agent today. audible safety beeping audible safety beeping audible safety beeping the nissan rogue with safety shield technologies. the only thing left to fear is you imagination. nissan. innovation that excites. tomorrow the house committee will interview and lead by trey gouty of south carolina will depose him behind closed doors. republicans want to know why he e-mailed hillary clinton up substantiated intelligence about libya and whether he was paid for it and whether he used his clinton connections to help his business partners. i got a few questions for the republicans on that panel. who cares? and what's this got to do with benghazi? well be right back. ♪ ♪ time upon a once people approached problems the way same. always start at the starting. and questions the same asking. but that only resulted in improvements small. so we step a took back and problems turned these inside-up-down to approach them newly. and that's when we it saw. garbage can create energy. light can talk. countries can run on jet engine technology. when you look at problems in ways different you new solutions find. ♪ ♪ i like my seafood like i like my vacations: tropical. and during red lobster's island escape, three new dishes take me straight to the islands. like the ultimate island seafood feast, with crab, lobster and jumbo shrimp. all you have to do... get here while you still can. we are back. the biggest story of the night, hillary clinton gave her first full press conference today, first of the 2016 campaign and defined her economic message and her race for the white house. here she goes. >> i don't think americans are against success. i think americans are against people who get on the top of the ladder and start pulling it up so nobody else has the same chance they had and act as though they pulled themselves up by the boot straps and a log cabin they built themselves. >> campaigner willing to embrace the title of first woman president in history. here she is with a great line. >> while i may not be the youngest candidate in this race but i will be the youngest woman president in the history of the united states. >> that's a great line. today's "washington post" reporter says the clinton campaign has figured out how to showcase clinton's potential as the first female president. electing her would be the biggest change the presidency has ever seen after 43 men in the job she would be the first woman. i thought that was a great line i will be the youngest woman because i will be the only woman. >> she is running as a woman and running as her mother's daughter so stressing the feminine side and struggles of her own mother. i think leaders like angela merkel in germany -- >> she is a role model. >> sort offluencing the idea that it is time for a woman. i think it is the best thing hillary has. >> i think angela merkel -- there have been other great woman leaders, but angela merkel naut is not a warrior but a damn success. >> part of it is out of necessity. there are democrats who are concerned there is not a lot of enthusiasm for her. the other point that i would make -- >> what is the largest group in the democratic party? >> women, of course. one of the things people forget is when president obama was running in 2007-2008 he had less experience but there was concern that hillary clinton wasn't all that qualified either. fast forward eight years she has had four years as secretary of state which is the single most qualified credential. >> why doesn't she talk about it. >> she didn't learn the lesson in total. >> she never mentioned secretary of state over the weekend. >> first of all, democrats tend to care about the economy, social security and things like that more. second of all, the obama clinton foreign policy is not something to brag about, the growth of isis failures in iraq. i think in terms of hillary clinton president talking about income and equality issues. notice jeb bush and ted cruz talk about foreign policy. >> she wants to run as an outsider and doesn't want to talk about secretary of state or white house or senate. she wants to talk about her mom. >> i am a woman and you are not. thank you. when we come back faced with a battle for 2016. there is one now. get fast-acting, long-lasting relief from heartburn with it neutralizes stomach acid and is the only product that forms a protective barrier that helps keep stomach acid in the stomach where it belongs. for fast-acting, long-lasting relief. try gaviscon®. put your hand over your heart. is it beating? good! then my nutrition heart health mix is for you. it's a wholesome blend of peanuts, pecans and other delicious nuts specially mixed for people with hearts. planters. nutrition starts with nut. if you have moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis like me... and you're talking to a rheumatologist about a biologic this is humira. this is humira helping to relieve my pain and protect my joints from further damage. this is humira helping me reach for more. doctors have been prescribing humira for more than 10 years. humira works for many adults. it targets and helps to block a specific source of inflammation that contrubutes to ra symptoms. humira can lower your ability to fight infections, including tuberculosis. serious, sometimes fatal infections and cancers including lymphoma have happened, as have blood liver and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions and new or worsening heart failure. before treatment get tested for tb. tell your doctor if you've been to areas where certain fungal infections are common, and if you've had tb hepatitis b, are prone to infections, or have flu-like symptoms or sores. don't start humira if you have an infection. talk to your doctor and visit humira.com this is humira at work. you wouldn't take medicine without checking the side effects. hey honey. huh. the good news is my hypertension is gone. so why would you invest without checking brokercheck? check your broker with brokercheck. shopping online... ...is as easy as it gets. wouldn't it be great if hiring plumbers carpenters and even piano tuners... were just as simple? thanks to angie's list now it is. start shopping online... ...from a list of top rated providers. visit angieslist.com today. my name is mary molina and i'm a pipeline engineer for pg&e in the sacramento region. new technology is being used in all facets of the company and what we do. pg&e is employing these technologies as an investment to the system for the long run. we're not just going to roll up and go home because we live here and we work here and we care about the work and we care about doing it right. we all have the same goals to make the system safe and to make the community safe. together, we're building a better california. let me finish with a battle for the 2016 democratic presidential nomination. the good news is there is a battle. the definition of the battle offered by the front runner hillary clinton. unlike bernie sanders who calls herself a socialist she refused to let the democratic party be confused with the british labor party and refused to let it be said by party's enemies or friends that the primary goal is an assault on those who made it in this country. what hillary clinton is offering is the case for opportunity and fairness for those who are not and wants those she calls every day americans to have a clear opportunity to improve their lives to get significantly higher incomes, relief from student loans, real stuff, not battle cries against those who already have it. it is an intriguing and powerful dichotomy we are seeing. hillary offering herself as a classic liberal. it's a debate a contest that can only bring truth to those who think this is precisely where the battle lines should be drawn while those on the right argue whether to invest in a credible candidate for president or put their sucker money on one of the contestants stuffed in the clown car. that's "hard ball" for now. "all in with chris hayes" starts right now. >> i think i was talking about my mom. i lost my train of thought here. >> it is official. yet another bush is running for the white house. tonight full analysis of jeb bush's big speech and why he was heckled at his own announcement. and then the hillary clinton campaign has officially launched. >> she is smiling with her mouth but her eyes are saying where is my latte? >> hillary clinton meets the press, defends herself from mitt romney and explains why america needs
washington, you want a fight? you got one. like curry answering james last night, hillary clinton spent the weekend putting up points. let bernie sanders charge up wall street, she's working main street promising to create e equal opportunity. you wounder what the clinton campaign was missing? we know, an opponent, someone to light up her engine and thank god this isn't going to be boring after all. david axle rod, columnist with the "washington post" and hillary clinton's chief speech wry tore and senior advisor. hillary clinton picked up where she left off after the big announcement speech. while bernie sanders is going after concentrated wealth. clinton says there is nothing wrong with success, let's watch. >> i don't think americans are against success, i think americans are against people who get on the top of the ladder and start pulling it up so nobody else has the same chance they had and act as though they pulled themselves up by the boot straps and log cabin. at some point we're in this together and those of us who do have opportunities ought to be doing more to help other people do the same. >> pay attention. compared to what we heard from bernie sanders the day he announced for president. >> this campaign starting today is going to send the message to the billionaire class and that is you can't have it all to the billionaire class and i say your greed has got to end, and you cannot contend and if you refuse to accept your responsibility. >> i see a battle here. i hope we'll get hotter, the standard and getting the tide to rise and against wall street. very different than what he was offering. >> definitely a battle. i don't know if it's going to actually grow into a battle. >> we talk about it in fact, it will be interesting each of them is trying to talk to the sole of the democratic party and she's delivering what is essentially the traditional democrat. >> she's a democrat and he's a socialist. he says he is. not knocking the guy, he is what he is. he's saying what socialism means, take from the rich and use it to school programs and stuff like that. anyway, does the democratic party want to grow the pie or redistribute the pie? >> in the coming weeks, i'll propose specific policies to reward businesses who invest in long-term value rather than the quick buck because that leads to higher growth for the economy, higher wages for workers and yes, bigger profits. everybody will have a better time. >> yesterday bernie sanders spoke about massive wealth redistribution. >> there has been a massive redistribution of wealth which has gone from the middle class and working families to the top one-tenth of 1%. we're going to take some money back for the middle class. >> well, david, the fight, hilary says we can do well if the rich pay their share. bernie is much more socialist about it. he's saying okay, let's go get the money they got and give it to the people that need it. different point of view, i think. >> look, we've got a situation where people now are, the median income in this country is what it was in 1989 and anxiety about that and there is a great deal of anger about what is seen as the rigging of the system. that is real. but i think hilary's fundamental approach reflects the main stream of the democratic party. i think she'll be the nominee of the party. i think people will have a fling with bernie. he won't be around too so long. you'll see people flirt with that. at the end of the day, she'll be the nominee and incorporate elements of a more populous agenda but in a growth frame. >> that's interesting. melissa, what do you think? i love the metaphor, not the one-night stand, that's gross but the wild kid, he's the fun to date for awhile but when it comes time to marry somebody, not bernie sanders. >> i agree. david is right. they both agree about one fundamental problem. >> i'm not interested what they agree about. i'll warning you right now. you're on the wrong show. go to al sharpton -- >> you're not going to vote me into changing. no, agree income inequality is the problem and different prescriptions. >> explain the difference. >> no, i mean, she's, as you said, he's more about redistribution of wealth and she's about growth for everyone and having everybody have a bigger share of the pie. her problem is the pie is this big and the very small, small fraction of people are getting the bulk of it so she's about having everybody get more of it and she's been pretty clear about that and he's about, i think, more punitive ways of going about it. >> is she smarter not to be so punitive? so she smart to be like we're on this together rather than go to war against the rich? is that a smart move today? >> i think it's who she is. >> when you register the party, the party is more to the left clearly and clearly hilary nudged herself to the left a bit and she said so, but is it more angry and you have to get angry and snarl a bit really show you out to get the rich? do you have to to do that? >> i don't know about out to get the rich but people think there are inequities. if you're a growth democrat, than you need to get the money somewhere to invest in education, to invest in research and development, to invest in infrastructure and invest in the pillars of growth and it has to come from the people who have gotten the benefit of the economy over the last so many years at -- >> how do you do it? >> well, that's the issue that has, i mean, that's a big issue because hilary said she's going to be a better negotiator with congress and i think people see her as someone that can navigate washington, perhaps better than president obama but it's going to be hard because anything that is labeled spending is dead on arrival in this congress and that's going to be a problem for any democratic president. >> when it comes to wall street, hillary clinton has scolded the financial community. here he is at this saturday's big announcement. here she is here. >> the financial industry and multi national corporations created huge wealth for a few by focussing too much on short term profit and too little on long-term value. >> wow, she's for long-term investments. here is senator sanders and he sounds like he wants to destroy wall street. much different tone here. >> wall street cannot continue to be an island on to itself, gambling trillions in risky financial instruments while expecting the public to bail it out. if a bank is too big to fail, that bank is too big to exist. >> that's strong talk there, very strong. >> i think the sweet spot is in between the two statements and it's where elizabeth warren has been on the issue and where some of hilary's rhetoric has also gone in that direction and that is the system is rigged, the system is rigged against middle class -- >> she's not talking like that now. >> well, but she has been talking. >> has been. i think -- >> look, listen, i can defend this speech was very worked on. i think she had a lot to do with writing. wasn't as good of a speech as jeb. jeb had a professional speech. may not have written a word of it but it sang. hers was much more her, the kind of speech a regular person would write, didn't you think? >> it was a political speech. >> but it was her. my mom. >> her mother, she's laying out her life story and how the values she believes connected the values of the country that connect to where she wants to take the country. that's what you want out of a speech like that. the press constantly beats up on her not having enough detail so she threw in more policy detail than usually done in these launch speeches, but i think that was probably preemptive because she knew she would get creamed if she didn't do that. it was good. i saw a reporter that said i loved that, told me what she'll do about early childhood education and so on. >> she's always been there, i agree. you're laughing over there in the bleachers, what do you think was funny that you heard there, listen -- >> i thought -- >> you're chuckling at her. >> i thought it showed supreme confidence. she's so confident she gave the state of the union speech early, which i think -- >> i complete agree with you. did you see her today? i thought it was so presidential and i'm not her biggest fan normally. i have to say that i like the fact that she has this guy nick merril, calling on press people in order like press conferences. wasn't that a big development she can say who gets to ask? poor andrea mitchell the best in the business didn't get to like eighth because they decide who gets to ask the questions. >> see how long that lasts. [ laughter ] >> what do you think? do you think that will be a problem? i thought she was great, top of her game because she was defining herself, the nixon days, if you don't define yourself carefully where she wants to be somewhere left of center but not too far left, somebody else will. anyway, hillary clinton is taking a cautious approach, clearly the hot button issue of trade. here is what she said yesterday about the president's big tpp trade deal. very careful. >> they are the voices you heard them for the deal no matter what is in it and they are the voices against the deal no matter what is in it. well, i kind of fall in the group that says let's find out what is in it and make it as good as it can be and let's make a decision. >> very interesting. now watch how much that sounds like her husband did back in 1992 in the race when he was talking about nafta. here is clinton. >> i am the one in the middle of this. mr. bush says it's a honky dory deal. i say it does more good than harm, if, if we can get protection for the environment so the mexicans have to follow their own environmental standards, labor law standards and if we have a genuine commitment to train and reinvest in this economy. i have a realistic approach to trade. i want more trade. and i know there is good things in that agreement, but it can sure be made better. >> the that is masterful, david axle rod, masterful to support it after he became president without offending the unions on the way to becoming president. brilliant piece of work. your thoughts? hilary is trying to do the same. >> easier for hillary clinton because he wasn't the secretary of state in charge when these negotiations began and when she left in december of 2012, she was in australia, she called the tpp, she said it was going to be the gold standard for trade agreements, so this is very, very freighted for her. this is difficult terrain to navigate because she owned this to some degree and has to navigate through it. >> i was trying to be nice to her and you're dragging me back in. by the way, one other aspect, her husband is clearly for this. if somebody can find him, he'll say so. go clinton, i heard him in tokyo, 100% said this was a magnificent bill. anyway, he won't be heard from for awhile. thank you david for being tougher on hilary than i was. we'll have you back, melissa, who wrote some of these great words over the years. coming up, president obama badly wants the historic trade deal with asia, his major achievement and believes it's essential but after democrats handed him a whooping this friday, what can he do to save the effort? big question alive and jeb bush offer as bright shining preview for 2016. here he is. >> i've decided i'm a candidate for president of the united states of america. [ cheers ] >> so jeb is through the threshold, the question is his parry ready to layout the red carpet? apparently not. hillary clinton in the poll of history embracing the possibility she would be the first woman president. actually, the youngest woman president in history. it's a magnet to millions of americans and republicans simply don't have an answer to her. finally, let me finish with the battle for the 2016 democratic presidential nomination and we got one this is "hardball" a place for politics. [baby cooing] your baby looks at the world... ...through those delicate little baby lashes. and one of those chubby baby hands... ...latches onto your finger so hard... it's like she's saying i love you. that's why aveeno® baby lotions... ...active naturals® oat formula... ...is designed for your baby's sensitive skin. because, while you count each miraculous toe... ...you know they're counting on you. [baby coos] aveeno®. naturally beautiful babies. richard matt. she was going to be the get away driver and run off with them long-term, chris? >> do we know anything about her plans? i go back to the question about the husband, nothing there yet? >> reporter: nothing there yet. i can tell you there are thousands of tips coming up. 800 servers but not one sighting of the killers. they could be anywhere, maybe in mexico but the searchers on the ground say they are still here. there is no reason to believe they went anymore else. they believe they are on foot together somewhere in the dense rest behind me. they say they will get them, it's just time. you talk to residents here and they say if they haven't caught them yet, they are probably long gone. >> i think they hitchhiked out in the middle of the night. thank you adam reese. what a story. we'll be back after this. ent spontaneously turns romantic why pause to take a pill? and why stop what you're doing to find a bathroom? with cialis for daily use, you don't have to plan around either. it's the only daily tablet approved to treat erectile dysfunction so you can be ready anytime the moment is right. plus cialis treats the frustrating urinary symptoms of bph, like needing to go frequently, day or night. tell your doctor about all your medical conditions and medicines, and ask if your heart is healthy enough for sex. do not take cialis if you take nitrates for chest pain as it may cause an unsafe drop in blood pressure. do not drink alcohol in excess. side effects may include headache, upset stomach, delayed backache or muscle ache. to avoid long-term injury, get medical help right away for an erection lasting more than four hours. if you have any sudden decrease or loss in hearing or vision or any symptoms of an allergic reaction stop taking cialis and get medical help right away. why pause the moment? ask your doctor about cialis for daily use. for a free 30-tablet trial go to cialis.com the democrats abandoned their president, the lead of their party on a bill and program they demanded as part of this, that they previously voted for unanimously and asked for part of this process. so to me, it was stunning they would do this. >> welcome back to "hardball" that was paul ryan talking about the trade vote that failed friday. ryan worked with president obama on passing the sweeping bill, crucial to the president's economic legacy but on political life support. last week the president republicans got enough votes to pass fast track but democrats tanked the trade package by voting down workers assistance program and historically been supportive of. nancy pelosi joined in. >> i will be voting today to slow down the fast track to get a better deal for the american people. bigger check, bigger paychecks, better infrastructure, help the american people fulfill the american dream. >> she looked tortured there. hillary clinton backed pelosi in a swing through iowa. here she is. >> the president should listen to and work with his allies in congress starting with nancy pelosi who have expressed their concerns about the impact that a weak agreement would have on our workers to make sure we get the best strongest deal possible and if we don't get it, there should be no deal. [ applause ] >> well, that was carefully said by someone very much finessing this issue. ""the washington post"" said no one is declaring it dead but if they decline to lend a hand, prospects appear mirky. here he was yesterday. >> i feel strongly that both from a policy sense and a political sense, it is very wrong for the democrats to under cut the president at this stage. this deal, though, can still get done in the next couple of days. >> well, the house is expected to vote again sometime this week. for more on the president and his last-ditch effort to save the trade agenda, i'm joined by david corn and jake sherman jones. jake, you're the expert. what's the chances? i felt pelosi was pulled by others on the progressive side of the democratic party that got to her. this is where the caucus is and she didn't want to be there but was there in the end. i think bill clinton is for this and hillary clinton probably leaning towards it but nobody wants to mess with strong labor. labor never looked stronger, almost like a wounded animal is the most dangerous animal. let me ask, is there hope for either the republicans or democrats to save this bill? >> if there is hope, the path is certainly not clear yet and here is the problem, if you listen to what pelosi says and other democratics say, they are voting against taa to tank the deal. so as long as there is a deal on the table, nothing is going to pass. i mean, republicans are thinking of a couple options, thinking of passing tea. there is no clear sense how this will get through. there is talk of another part of trade agenda but really no sense the votes are there and you're right, pelosi is in a real tough spot. her caucus is overwhelmingly against this trade deal and there is really no unwinding from where we sit. their position is kind of firm at this point. >> i want to get to the politics of this. i know you don't like the sdming a lot of people don't and i'm mixed. i think the guy from new york, one of the guys said this weekend in the paper if this was just a simple bill they had a vote on, they could have gotten through but nobody wants to mess with labor. labor is really hot. >> i think that's true. labor is hot on it for policy reasons reasons. >> solidarity reasons, too. >> give me the cases. >> i think there are both. >> trade. >> they care about losing jobs and maybe union jobs because that weakens the union movement overall. solidarity is something -- >> do you think that's the case? someone works for state or local government, that will make them weaker? >> i think union leaders worry about that, yeah. you don't want on the service sector to be unionized. >> or public sector. >> that's driving part of the union side and i think from the democratic side, there are, you talk to democratic members who are against this and they are like 20,000 different reasons. >> it's not complicated. >> just some policy. >> i agree. >> the president, you know, did not do his job. >> let me ask you this, the president starts on this show, the jerry connolly out in virginia. one show on this and i think that was an attempt to build support. never got past the 25, 26 democrats. he got the people from virginia resuming economically with high tech and get back to the spell with the democratic party building the future across the great lakes areas, you know, pennsylvania to wisconsin, iowa, all those states. nobody up there is for this. still geographic problem for the democrats, they want to build their future. they lost the south and rockies, they only have the left coast if you will and that parts, how do you build a case for trade in that part of the country? >> i don't think they care about bidding a case for trade on a broad base scale. obama wanted to pass this bill. he wanted to do it with the coalition he could cobble together. you saw 27, 28, 29 democrats for this bill. if it passed, he would have been completely fine with that. he was looking at the end result. he came to capitol hill and told people to play it straight. he didn't get into a policy argument. he didn't take any questions or field any comments in a closed meeting of house democrats. he's looking at this from a point of view. >> i worry about the fight, we may have to go into iran and start a war. will this make him look weak? he can't deliver, bounce like that. >> i think the iranians will cut a deal if it's basically in their interest. and -- >> how about if he can't deliver? >> if he signs the deal, the deal is a deal. he doesn't have to pass that deal. they can try to approve or disapprove it or take a back door way to under cut. it's not like this trade accord. it doesn't come for this deal. it probably doesn't help in giving him strength but at the end of the day, the iranians will accept the deal if they think there is something in it for them. >> they could be a rich country again. great to have your reporting here and david, yours counsel. up next, how did it go wrong for richard nixon? fascinating. i read the whole book. evan thomas out with a major new biography about richard next son. this is "hardball." your place for politics. boy: once upon a time, there was a nice house that lived with a family. one day, it started to rain and rain. water got inside and ruined everybody's everythings. the house thought she let the family down. but the family just didn't think a flood could ever happen. the reality is floods do happen. protect what matters. call the number on your screen or visit the website to learn more. i take prilosec otc each morning for my frequent heartburn. because it gives me... zero heartburn! prilosec otc. the number 1 doctor-recommended frequent heartburn medicine for 9 straight years. one pill each morning. 24 hours. zero heartburn. welcome back to "hardball." since becoming the first president to resign from office, richard nixon's legacy is obscured by the shadow of watergate, of course. however great his flaws which cost him the presidency, he was a remarkable odds. from 1952 through 1972, 20 years later, every national ticket but one over that whole spread of time. the average americans time and time again was eerily successful. a new book coming out tomorrow, "being nixon" by evan thomas examining the events that came to shape him. it's a compelling portrait of a politician who as president bill clinton said at his funeral in 1994 deserved to be judged in the whole. >> today is a day for his family, his friends and his nation to remember president nixon's life and totality. to them let us say may the day of judging president nixon on anything less than his entire life and career come to the a close. >> i'm joined by author and historian evan thomas. that's what you did, looked at him in totality. obviously, lots of words but the whole picture in going through this exploration as a historian, what did you find that grabbed you? >> i was surprised, you know, we had this view of nixon as being a dark and somber and mean figure. i was surprised that he tried, he didn't always succeed but tried to be a confident and happen person. late at night he would write notes about the need to be joyful. he wanted to be that person. he didn't always succeed. he was good at bucking up and good with his family. he was a loving father. he was a surprisingly good husband. he was a much more complex tragic figure than the common cartoon allows. he was just a fascinating, i would argue the most fascinating political figure of the 20th century. >> i'm with you on that. let me ask you about the movies, i'm a movie nut. the fact he saw 500 movies at camp david or white house movie theater and would say during a turkey of a movie or lemon as you put it, he would stay stick with it, it will get better. that's the opposite of jack kennedy, let's get out of here this is no good and make everybody leave with him. nixon would be the last guy in the room. is that hope springs eternal in the movie theater? >> nixon approached watergate the way he approached the movies. hoped it would get better. of course, there wasn't. nixon partly because he could see the dark side wanted to believe that things would work out in the end and he tried to keep up the hope that you have that scene of him saying good-bye and the helicopter. >> looking at it, yeah. >> even on the helicopter, eddie cox said you'll be back and nixon just nodded his head, yeah, i'll be back. he never lost faith. >> i want people to read the book because there is so much intrigue. there is so much to it. the one thing i worked when i worked on a book around this edge, eddie cox told me off the record but a long time, he basically said how great pat nixon was. we thought she was plastic pat. no, she looked out for me and was a really good person. that's in your book. pat nixon, this is a hand some picture. >> look how beautiful she is. >> what do you make of that story, she put up through thick and thin and all the hell she put up with and never left him. >> couldn't believe his good luck marrying the most beautiful girl. look at that early picture. she was a knockout, she was gorgeous. he was devoted to her. she helped him a lot when he felt like quitting, she was the one who said you can't, you can't do it, you can't do it to me and your children. she hung in there with him. ultimately, she did get worn out. by the end of watergate, you can tell from the photos, she's exhausted. she and the president really weren't talking that much at the end. nixon told his secretary he was resigning, not his wife. they would leave little notes on pillows at night and kind of like one of his saids said out of a novel. but there was a sadness at the end, it showed, but you know, after he left the white house, the march make resumed. nixon, the most uptight guy there ever was was bawling. tears are pouring from him. billy graham is trying to console him. he missed her. he loved his wife and he missed her. >> i think this is one of your great works, evan, buddy. this is one of the great works you've done. if anyone loves politics and agree there are two or three fascinating people in politics, lbj, jack kennedy and nixon are the top three. >> yeah. >> we'll all agree about that because we'll never get to the bottom of them, never. >> i tried. >> you went a long way down to the bottom floor. thank you, evan. by the way, good luck with the book. the book is called being nixon for the inside like being malcavich. jeb bush declares his presidency candidacy. you're watching "hardball," the place for politics. i'm richard lui, a low i've decided i'll a candidate for the president of the united states of america. >> back to "hardball" after six months touring the countries as a presumed 2016 presidential candidate, jeb bush formally announced his entry into the crowded field of candidates. at the top of his speech, he called for an end to democratic leadership in the white house slamming hillary clinton's dan canada see. >> the party in the white house is planning a no suspension primary for a no-change election to hold on to power, to slog on with the same agenda under another name. that's our opponent's call to action this time around. that's all they have got left. i for one, am not eager to see what another four years would look like under that kind of leadership. >> no, no, no. >> the presidency should not be passed on from one liberal to the next. >> wow, bush also vowed to stick to his principles promising to run an optimistic and inclusive campaign. >> my message will be optimistic because i'm certain we can make the decades ahead the greatest time to be alive in this world. i will campaign as i would serve, going everywhere, speaking to everyone, keeping my word, facing the issues without flinching and staying true to what i believe. i will take nothing and no one for granted. i will run with heart and i will run to win. [ cheers ] >> pretty fine speech. after weeks of missteps, staff shakeups and the shifting positions in 2003 invasion of iraq, of course, will bush's message get the campaign on track? bush has slipped into third place, ben carson, dr. ben carson leads the field at 101 followed by scott walker at ten and bush is tied with rubio at 10% and mike huckabee at 8%. i'm joined by the round table. howard of the "huffington post" and senior political reporter perry bacon. first of all, that list is a joke. dr. carson, it's a joke. it's not going to be that way. it doesn't mean anything except whimsy. but bush is running to me for the nomination of a political party that no longer exists. he has a mexican wife. he is the brother of a president who let us in a ground war in iraq his party is totally against. get down the list. he's more common core. everything he's for the majority of the party protests. like the approach he gave us today. >> it's less about him right now and more about can he disqualify scott walk skperp can he disqualify marco rubio. $100 million. >> you say -- >> i suspect he's going to be positive on himself and i expect scott walker is going to do well in debate. so you got to think about that. i think jeb can win if he disqualifies opponents the way mitt romney won last time. winning this way will be hard. >> interesting how times have changed. there he is the most established name in america, bush. grandson or whatever of prescott bush in connecticut. he shows up in a shirt. the only thing about him was preppy was the button down. no tie, no jacket, no suit. i don't know what kind of shoes he was wearing but might as well be wearing khakis and the guy, why is that so important? is he really credible as a candidate against the establishment like he was showing himself to be today? >> i would say -- >> against the elite? >> chris, i would say it's an strategy. the reason walker and rubio are where they are in part is because they are younger and self made individuals that tell a different story. it's difficult for the bushes. >> cuban americans. >> he has to rely on the story of his wife and audacity and guts he showed marrying her, falling in love and marrying her -- >> never heard that before. the that was gutsy. >> that was to bring colombia back into the bush family. >> how can you be anti immigrant except for the first lady? i love the way you said that. >> the way hillary clinton dug back into his history, he's digging back for those things that attach him to new traditions and waves and trends. you're right about the party. the party has moved way to the right of where the bush family as an institution has been known to be. >> the reality is that the last time a republican won a presidential election was george w. bush in 2004 and did it by winning 40% of the latino vote and john mccain got 31%, mitt romney 27% and what jeb bush was doing was politely saying is we don't have a prayer. >> i thought 60% of the supreme court. [ laughter ] >> i think it's the right point. >> yeah, scott walker and marco rubio specifically, i talked to the a scott walker strategist that said jeb bush's speech was bizarre, trying to alienate -- >> what are you talking about? [ laughter ] >> bush hails from one of the most prominent families in america, political families portrayed himself as an anti elitest outsider ready to clean up washington. >> we don't need another president that holds the top spot among the pampered elites of washington. we need a president willing to challenge and disrupt the culture and i'll be that president. >> the pampered elite. he's a bush. excuse me, they were born on third base and thought they had a triple or double. >> i think that george w. went after that as governor by trying to be a regular governor and learning how to use a chainsaw. [ laughter ] >> i don't know what jeb is doing in that regard. he's a smart guy, he studies the issues. he's tough, he's nasty as a politician. >> jeb is? >> jeb. to say he's going to run against the pampered elite is interest . >> is he going to screw up up washington like he did texas. >> put it this way, if a bush can run as a change agent -- >> up next, hillary clinton and the poll of history, a big thing for a lot of voters her being the first woman, in fact, the youngest woman elected. what a great line. republican haves no answer to that. no answer. it's great in politics when the other side can't come back. this is "hardball" a place for politics. ♪ and i'll never desert you ♪ ♪ i'll stand by you ♪ yeah! yeah. so, that's our loyalty program. you're automatically enrolled. and the longer you stay, the more rewards you get. great. oh! ♪ i'll stand by you ♪ ♪ won't let nobody hurt you ♪ isn't there a simpler way to explain the loyalty program? yes. standing by you from day one. now, that's progressive. heroes charge! ♪ ♪ (lightning strike) ♪ (kiss) ♪ test download heroes charge now! tomorrow the house committee investigating benghazi will interview sydney blumenthal. the house select committee will depose blumenthal behind closed doors. politico reports that republicans want to know why he e-mailed hillary clinton unsubstantiated intelligence about libya and whether he was paid for it and whether he used connections to help business partners. i have a few questions for republicans on that panel. who cares? and what does this have to do with benghazi? we'll be right back. we are back. the biggest story of the night, hillary clinton gave her first full press conference today, first of the 2016 campaign and defined her economic message and her race for the white house. here she goes. >> i don't think americans are against success. i think americans are against people who get on the top of the ladder and start pulling it up so nobody else has the same chance they had and act as though they pulled themselves up by the boot straps and a log cabin they built themselves. >> campaigner willing to embrace the title of first woman president in history. here she is with a great line. >> while i may not be the youngest candidate in this race, but i will be the youngest woman president in the history of the united states. >> that's a great line. today's "washington post" reporter says the clinton campaign has figured out how to showcase clinton's potential as the first female president. electing her would be the biggest change the presidency has ever seen after 43 men in the job she would be the first woman. i thought that was a great line, i will be the youngest woman because i will be the only woman. >> she is running as a woman and running as her mother's daughter so stressing the feminine side and struggles of her own mother. i think leaders like angela merkel in germany -- >> she is a role model. >> sort offluencing the idea that it is time for a woman. i think it is the best thing hillary has. >> i think angela merkel -- there have been other great woman leaders, but angela merkel is not a warrior but a damn success. >> part of it is out of necessity. there are democrats who are concerned there is not a lot of enthusiasm for her. the other point that i would make -- >> what is the largest group in the democratic party? >> women, of course. one of the things people forget is when president obama was running in 2007-2008 he had less experience but there was concern that hillary clinton wasn't all that qualified either. fast forward eight years she has had four years as secretary of state which is the single most qualified credential. >> why doesn't she talk about it. >> she didn't learn the lesson in total. >> she never mentioned secretary of state over the weekend. >> first of all, democrats tend to care about the economy, social security and things like that more. second of all, the obama clinton foreign policy is not something to brag about, the growth of isis, failures in iraq. i think in terms of hillary clinton president talking about income and equality issues. notice jeb bush and ted cruz talk about foreign policy. >> she wants to run as an outsider and doesn't want to talk about secretary of state or white house or senate. she wants to talk about her mom. >> i am a woman and you are not. thank you. when we come back faced with a battle for 2016. there is one now. let me finish with a battle for the 2016 democratic presidential nomination. i want some gray...but not too much. only touch of gray uses oxygen to gently blend away some gray but not all for that perfect salt and pepper look. satisfaction guaranteed. just you and the look you want. just for men touch of gray let me finish with a battle for the 2016 democratic presidential nomination. the good news is there is a battle. the definition of the battle offered by the front runner hillary clinton. unlike bernie sanders who calls herself a socialist she refused to let the democratic party be confused with the british labor party and refused to let it be said by party's enemies or friends that the primary goal is an assault on those who made it in this country. what hillary clinton is offering is the case for opportunity and fairness for those who are not and wants those she calls every day americans to have a clear opportunity to improve their lives to get significantly higher incomes, relief from student loans, real stuff, not battle cries against those who already have it. it is an intriguing and powerful dichotomy we are seeing. hillary offering herself as a classic liberal. it's a debate, a contest that can only bring truth to those who think this is precisely where the battle lines should be drawn while those on the right argue whether to invest in a credible candidate for president or put their sucker money on one of the contestants stuffed in the clown car. that's "hard ball" for now. "all in with chris hayes" starts right now. >> i think i was talking about my mom. i lost my train of thought here. >> it is official. yet another bush is running for the white house. tonight full analysis of jeb bush's big speech and why he was heckled at his own announcement. and then the hillary clinton campaign has officially launched. >> she is smiling with her mouth but her eyes are saying where is my latte? >> hillary clinton meets the press, defends herself from mitt romney and explains why america needs a woman president. plus why politicians in rick scott's florida are paying just $8 a month for health care while denying medicaid for the poor. and as she steps down
>> there was too much looking down and i think it was a little too fast. not enough change of pace. >> she is probably the most tragic of all our first ladies. they never should have married. >> she later wrote as a memoir that i myself never made any decisions. i only decided what was important and when to present it to my husband. you stop and think about how much power that is, it is a lot of power. >> part of the battle cahill against cancer is the fight the fear that accompanies the disease. >> she transformed the way we look at these bugaboos and made it possible for people to survive and flourish. i cannot know how many presidents have that kind of impact on the way we live our lives to regret smocking around the white house grounds, i am reminded about all the people who lived there before and particularly, all of the women. >> "first ladies, influence and image."monday night at 9:00 p.m. eastern on cnn, c-span radio and scheming live at cpspan.org. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] >> i am the president of the white house historical association. welcome to the new public home, the david m. rubenstein center for white house history. in a recent arrangement with the national trust preservation, which owns this decatur house complex, the association is now co stewards of this historic site for 30 more -- for 30 or more years to come. first ladies, influence and image is a partnership project with our good friends at c-span. i would like to thank our colleagues there. if they would wave, i would like to acknowledge them. the co-chief operating officer, vice president of programming, and the executive producer for the first lady series. we appreciate their enthusiasm for a subject that rarely receives the attention it deserves. as you will see in your program, listed on c-span's website, the series will be a comprehensive visual biography. over the course of 35 shows in prime time on monday nights each first lady will get her 15 minutes of fame and many will actually get 90 minutes. tonight is a special kick off for the series and we are so pleased that our guest here in washington and those at homes from coast to coast are joining us for this moment. we have expert panelists here to enlighten us. i will introduce them in just a moment. but first, we have a special message from first lady michelle obama that we would like to share. >> hello everyone. i am pleased to kick off this series d telling the lives of america's first ladies. in the coming weeks you will have the chance to learn about the stories, achievements, and legacy of these truly a remarkable women. as you watch i am sure you will begin to see why i am so honored and humbled to follow in their footsteps. working on causes ranging from the trustee to women's rights to environmental stewardship, each of these would then left their own indelible stamp on the white house and on our nation's history. like them i found that this role offers an extraordinary opportunity to give back and make a real and lasting difference in people's lives. for me that has meant help our kids lead healthier lives, working to get our military families the benefits and support they earn, opening the white house to as many people as possible, and encouraging all of our young people to achieve every one of their dreams. no matter what causes we take on as first ladies we have all shared the singular experience of meeting people from every corner of this country and seeing firsthand the character, courage, and spirit of our fellow citizens. that is the true blessing of being first lady. that is why i do my best to live up to the example of the women who came before me and the people that i need every day. folks who work so hard and contribute so much to this great country we call home. >> our panelists may come and join us. we are so grateful for mrs. obama taking the time to wish us well and offer her reflections on the role of the first lady. they will be eliminated by those we have gathered here today. -- illuminated by those we have gathered here today. later we will bring you a first- person point of view from within the walls of the white house itself. our first panel will be moderated by steve scully. mr. scully is c-span's senior executive producer and political editor. since 1981 he has been responsible for coronary -- for coordinating all aspects of c- span's programming, c-span.org, and c-span radio. elected by his peers from the white house press corps, he is the former president of the white house correspondents association in 2006 and 2007. he currently serves as a waca board member. joining steve on stage, we have edith mayo. she's the curator at the national museum of american history. her books include "the smithsonian's book of first ladies.:" rosalyn terborg-penn is an author focusing on the american women's history. her books include african american women and the struggle for the boat, 1850-1920. she is a university professor and has founded the association of black women historians. finally, we have william seale. he is a great friend of the association. he is editor of white house history, the award winning journal of white house historical association. [laughter] he is also a ham. [laughter] you will indeed received a copy of the journal at the end of the program. he is also author of "the president's house." it is my great pleasure to turn it over to steve scully. >> we want to thank decatur house, our partners for the project. our panel here, these of the people that have been the guiding force behind this project. thank you for being here. i want to begin with you, why study these first ladies? why these women important to understand and know? >> they are extremely interesting because they are the ones closest to the president. we all say "if i could have only been there." well, they are. they are wonderful observers and also make a difference. >> edith you have studied the first ladies. from martha washington to the turn of the century into the 20th century, how did it change over that hundred 25 years? >> to begin with, nobody thought the first lady was going to do anything. i think that one of the things that is very interesting is that the white house, or the executive mansion in new york and philadelphia, provided a situation where you had the president's home and his work place both in the same place. martha becomes a social partner and hostess for the nation to her husband. abigail is a political partner to her husband. having those two rules established, the women who follow can merge or change or advance one or both of these aspects. dolley madison combined them. then you have a position that is very visible both at home and to visiting diplomats. it has become more visible, more activist, and the technology has changed the coverage of the first lady's role. >> during this time period, which first lady made her mark? who had the most influence? >> in the 19th century, i cannot pick one. let me take two? dolley madison, because she can set you -- she conceptualizes first lady. she is the fourth president's wife and only the first first lady. she is in the white house in the beginning and seems to enjoy all of the activity. i think she personified that. after she is long gone, they considered her first lady. i think she is significant. i also like mary todd lincoln. she has had a bad rap. the movie is fiction. even though some of it depicted her. she was of very influential woman in terms of her husband's feelings about slavery. she comes with an abolitionist mind. she also worked in the community among the free blacks in particular, of raising money for the downtrodden in the city. and during the war she was a volunteer nurse. so what can i tell you? i think she really personified a lot of the things we think of today as the role of the first lady. >> who enjoys the of first lady the most? if you want to use the word "detested," who would you put on that list? >> julia grant. suddenly she had a pedestal to be on and she absolutely adored it. she loved it and try to persuade him to run for a third term. he didn't, she didn't like it. she tells how they got on the train to leave washington and she fell and wept and wept. she claimed her place in later life and would come back in great glory to the white house. i do not know if anyone hated it. mrs. franklin pierce came in under horrible circumstances, having lost two sons. one of the way to the white house. -- one in a train wreck on the way to the white house. she was a pretty good politician and she was as smart lady and was involved in political things that she just did not have the heart for it. at one point she fell in love with jefferson davis's two year old child. and then he died. that happened again to her. i would say she is a candidate for not liking it, jane per se. -- jane per se. -- jane pierce. >> supposedly she fainted when she heard her husband was a nominee for the presidency. that would give you some idea about her feelings of being in politics. then she had this horrible tragedy that she never recovered from. >> i already mentioned dolly madison. in the early part of it she enjoyed her role as first lady. >> i agree with that. >> she was voluptuous and laughing and painted up. and he was a mousy little man. he was quiet and a genius. she absolutely adored him. they were inseparable. a lot of it was taking up things he couldn't do. >> she was his pr person. if that position had existed at that time. she loved doing that. she loved presenting herself as "queen dolley." the republican queen with a small "r." i think she is thoroughly enjoyed her roles. >> we learned that jackie kennedy was the first one to have a press secretary? >> no, i think it was edith roosevelt that had the first one. >> that was for her specifically? >> the series is titled "influence and image." let me ask you about the influence these ladies had on their spouses. who were among the most influential? >> mrs. tax -- mrs. taft was very influential. i suppose mrs. madison would be one. another one was mrs. hayes from ohio. she was not only be loved by the american people but she had a big influence on him. >> you talked about the image earlier. which first lady was most concerned or consumed with her image? >> i do not think she was consumed with her image but she certainly image hurt us and's presidency -- imaged her husband's presidencey, and that was dolley madison. she conceptualize the white house as a stage on which her husband can conduct politics and diplomacy and which she can present herself as first lady. she decorated the white house. she was the first person to do so. previous presidents had brought their own furniture and so forth and she was the one who decided that this needed to have a professional touch. she hired an architect to come in and help her designed the furniture and reception rooms. she was very instrumental in imaging his presidency. >> didn't she also cling to this in later years of poverty when her son ran for everything she had? and the issue of the dress, which may have been taken before the white house was burned, because it was packed for summer and mrs. madison took these things with her. a journal seemed to be published in white house history. [laughter] she wore her red dress over and over again. there is thought that that dress was made out of those curtains. >> what was the name of the book? [laughter] >> look at the early 19th century into the civil war, the turn-of-the-century, the industrial revolution, women getting the right to vote in 1920, the great depression, how did these women reflect the times in which they lived? >> i think eleanor roosevelt is a good example of that. she was into everything. she remained so even into the kennedy era. i was amazed to learn that she regretted that she had never gone to college. i have -- i was shocked she had never gone. she was home school and went academies. i suppose she had an equivalent of what we would consider a college education. on the cutting edge of every reform -- and one of the reasons was she did not have to stay at home. there was someone there to be the secretary and housekeeper for her husband. she was all over the place. i think she is a good example of the growing influence of the 1920's and women's growing liberation. the idea that women can get out into more -- that coincides with the women's suffrage era as well. >> i was going to say -- looking at the first lady, you can pretty much tell what is or is not happening with american women at any given point in the historical past. i think the present a particular window on the past. everybody knows the position of first lady. whether you know in particular first lady or not they become a wonderful hook on which to hang a lot of other historical events. i think they serve as a window on the past. >> if we have two microphones on each side so if you would like to come up to the microphone -- a brief introduction of who you are, where you are from, and a brief question. we will get to them momentarily. we would not be here today if it weren't for jackie kennedy. this would be one of those government nondescript office buildings. explain the story behind that and how she tried to redefine the role of first lady. >> the area was doomed to be high rise office buildings. you had commerce. this was to have a six story or seven story white model building designed by the people who did williamsburg. it was modeled for the time. the well-known separatist the architecture was a friend of the kennedys and both of the kennedys were upset about the white house losing its residential scale and its neighborhood. between mrs. kennedy and the president himself, they stirred the fine arts commission to resend -- to rescind permission to build this building. it happened right at the end of the kennedy administration. mrs. kennedy personally appear at the fine arts building and stirred everybody up for it. that is what happened. that is why we have lafayette square. >> jacqueline kennedy certainly was -- that was one of her causes, historic preservation. we see that through saving pennsylvania avenue as well as the white house. when she moved to new york she credited activities that save grand central station and a number of historic sites. that is one of her causes. >> and to think she was 32 when she came to washington and immediately set the white house to be a more appropriate setting. it looked like a sheraton hotel. [laughter] mrs. kennedy wanted antiques and things and it. she was persuaded against that. kennedy was very worried about that, creating a lot of trouble over furnishing. it proceeded with it and she got a crew -- she got a guru. it was a lollipop era. >> jacki was determined to be behind the scenes. a lot of people to not realize that the influence she had upon jack -- one of them was the idea of improving within's role in society as a whole. she was the one that taught him into establishing a woman's condition -- a women's commission. >> you talk about dolley madison, was there a 19th century counterpart that preserved the white house or make changes that has a lasting legacy? >> go-ahead. >> the garfields -- no, it was the hayes' first. they didn't know what to do with the white house, it was beat up and happy. they went to the library of congress and asked what would be more appropriate to have in a historic white house. he came up with this idea of a first lady's hall with portraits of all the first ladies. hayes was very excited and he commissioned mr. andrews, who became head of the corporate. he did another one -- the library commission paid $5,000 for that. and then he did another one of of dairy voluptuous dolley madison and the library commission said "no." the garfields did the same thing. the roosevelts insisted on using various artifacts. they took the lincoln bed and draped it up. they fixed the place -- mrs. herbert hoover was the first one who did a scarlet approach to it all. she had all of the objects in the attics and storage documented as to what they were when they came to the white house. that has all been a treasure to work with as far as a curator. >> the hoovers paid for their own entertainment. >> and they received many charitable things. they were immensely rich people. they have -- >> one of the women in the 19th century was very concerned about the size and the grandeur of the white house, mrs. harrison. she and her husband came into the white house on the anniversary of the presidency. it had been 100 years since washington had been inaugurated. they had a very large family and they found that as the present the -- the presidency expanded, the rooms in the white house were being taken over gradually by people who were assistance to the president or who were executive assistants and some white. she thought there should be a west wing. she had an architect drop plans for an expanded white house with a west wing and an east wing and gardens and one of the wings was supposed to be an art gallery because she thought we should showcase of american art more than was possible to do in the white house here. this renovation would bring the white house into the modern era. but one of her husband's opponents in the congress would not pass the appropriation. there had been all of this planning and all of this work and she had very strenuously lobbied through teas and luncheons. what a legacy of that was it did not happen then but there was so much discussion of it that when the roosevelt came in they picked up on those plans and redefined them. and then you get the west wing and the renovation of the white house. >> harrison's life never lived in the white house. james buchanan never married. when they never married, who fulfilled that role? >> they have hostesses the invited to come. interestingly enough, dolley madison was the hostess for thomas jefferson. if you didn't, a daughter would become law or a relative would be, or one of the wives of your closest friends in government. you had this. let me get back to this idea of renovations and changes. it is a recurring theme that you see all the way through. since dolly madison was the first one who lived in the white house, she was the one who was there when the british burned it down. the idea was getting it back together. you see this recurring theme and dc it strongly with some women rather than with others. mary todd lincoln wanted to clean up the mess that buchanan left there. she was stressed from congress because she was, "spending too much money" on redesigning. the jackie kennedy had the same idea of finding the original furniture and putting it in. i think that that is the theme we need to think of. >> and nancy reagan as well? >> yes. >> the whole idea of the first lady who images, in many image -- in many instances, her husband's administration. >> how did we get from the washington to the current first lady? >> dolly madison. [laughter] but that is the first one. >> sack retailer, who was president at the time when dali died -- zachary taylor, who was president at a time when dolley died, said she was the first lady of the revolution. >> after mrs. hayes, it is constant. >> let us get to some questions. please introduce yourselves. >> i work here at the white house historical association. my question for the panelist is was there a first lady who husband did not have a particularly successful presidencies but who is remembered for being a good first lady in spite of that. >> that is a good question. [laughter] >> this may be a first. >> maybe mrs. coolidge. it depends on how you feel about calvin. grace coolidge was a very beloved figure, particularly in washington. she had a very outgoing and affable personality where he was known to not say too much very often. she was his pr person because she got along with everybody and had a wonderful disposition. her nickname was "funny." >> mrs. hoover, too. she was president of the national girls scouts. she was very active with children. she was very sensitive to racial issues. she was out there, big time. the hoovers are remembered as the ones to give us the depression, probably not fairly. >> how she approached the job as first lady, how he approached the presidency back in 1923 when the party died -- for >> that i do not know. i think bill would probably know that better. >> to be frank, mrs. harding was considered class a in washington. she was rougher than most first ladies. >> how so? >> she was very outspoken. the hardings entertained in the white house with all of the booze on her. platas roosevelt said whiskey on the table and spittoon on the side. -- roosevelt said whiskey on the table and spittoon on the side. they were rough people but women idolized him. one of the first record its beaches was his dedication to the tomb of the unknown soldier. it is perfectly beautiful, that baritone voice. there were problems with florence. >> some many of the white house family members -- so many of the white house family members have been vilified for reasons that our political sometimes. people resented the fact that florence was a good manager and ran her husband's newspaper, ran his campaign -- and i argue that people might have not liked it but they respected her. they might have talked behind her back but then they did that with a lot of people. they did that to mary todd lincoln. it was not just a twentieth century thing, it is something you find through out. they talked about jackie kennedy. it is interesting to the kinds of things that happen. politics, as you know, it's ugly. i am going to tell the truth -- they talk about michelle obama. "she does not look like a first lady." in my experience, none of them look alike. the only difference is she is brown. that is significant. you hear about the publication more so than you hear about their success. >> let me turn it over to hear. >> i in 8, washington dc. -- i am nate, washington dc > talk about frances cleveland and the relationship between grover cleveland and his ward. he married her out of guardianship. she was emulated and admired. tell us more about that relationship and her role as a very young first lady. >> she was the jacqueline kennedy of her era. she was young, she was beautiful. when they first began courting people thought she was dating -- people thought he was dating her mother. he had asked her mother's permission to begin writing to her when she was in college. he sent her flowers and candy. it turned into a courtship. when it finally announced their engagement, i think it is such a wonderful commentary that when they would appear in public after they had announced their engagement come if there were a band at the occasion, they would strike up a song from the mikado. "he is going to marry young, young." [laughter] when she went to the white house she tried to protect the family from reporters and spying eyes. all these rumors into maybe the children were deformed or had some terrible disease, this is why nobody could get in to see them. grover had to issue a press release saying that wasn't the truth. france is herself met with the press and said she was so fortunate to be married to this wonderful man. would it be that every woman in america could have such a happy marriage. >> woodrow wilson also married in the white house. anybody else married while president? >> tyler did. his wife died and then a year later he married a woman his daughter's age. they had about a year in the white house together. the girl's father died in an accident aboard the steamboat. she went into mourning but she wasn't going to miss the parties. >> next question. >> i and emily porter, i am a graduate student at george washington. i would like to know now that the president's wife is running for president, she is actually going out there and campaigning for him -- is that in modern conception or is there someone from the past, 19th century or earlier, that we would have been surprised to know played a huge influence in getting her husband nominated. >> in the late 19th century, you had some new campaign techniques. one was the front porch campaign which had not been used in the earlier part of the 19th century. and you had a whistle stop campaign. the early front porch campaigns were garfield and harrison. what you find is that type of campaigning brings up the party's base full to the home -- brings the parties faithful up to the home. the wife becomes invisible partner on the ongoing campaign, even though at that point she, herself, did not become politicized. she is very much in her home. she was very much a part of her husband's campaign. you find a lot of women in the 20th century who were campaigning behind the scenes. certainly eleanor roosevelt was extremely active in the campaign. by the time you get to mamie eisenhower, she was the one who accompanied her husband to the west will stop -- to the whistle stop. that is a real watershed. after mamie, you cannot have a presidential wife who is not involved visibly in the campaign. >> harding had a front porch campaign, too. >> winded first ladies began to take platforms? the literacy campaign with barbara bush -- >> i would say ladybird johnson, "lets beautify america." >> and certainly jacqueline kennedy in raid -- in renovating the white house, which i thought was a brilliant stroke because she was still involved with the national home, so people are not in fear that she should be interfering with. it was so much based on scholarship and the decorative arts that after that it is very difficult to see a first lady without some kind of cause. >> about lady bird, i think "beautify america" was code for "look at the environment." it wasn't just the white house. i think she was really on the cutting edge of modern day environmentalism. >> she gave more than two hundred speeches on preserving the environment and taking environmental responsibility for the nation and the world. >> thank you. >> i am with morgan state university. you mentioned you believe a lot of the first lady's reflected what was happening in the country at the time. i am wondering if any of the first lady's, aside from their humanitarian or civic and efforts, to time to champion when menopause liberation struggles or were they active in any form from within's struggles? >> certainly in the 20th- century. betty ford brought the feminist movement to the national forefront and was unapologetically a feminist. before that, i would say lucy hayes championed temperance, which was very much a feminist issue in the 1870's and 80 '80s. if you were married to someone who was an alcoholic, it devastated your family. at a time when most women did not work, if you had an alcoholic husband or sun, it devastated your family. she was a temperance advocate. if you go back to mary lincoln, who was very much in favor of abolition, probably more so than her husband. >> my favorite is abigail adams. >> remember lincoln said temperance was going to be his next cause after the imagination proclamation. -- the emancipation proclamation. >> their influence as first lady? >> pat nixon was one of those who greeted the white house. she really built the collection that was there now. she shuffled them in the, the antiques and paintings and things like that. she acquired them in very large numbers. she could be remembered for that. >> it is very interesting, jackie kennedy is the one who is known for beginning that -- refurbishing the white house. but it was pat nixon who brought in more arts and antiques than any other first lady. she is hardly known at all. it was very interesting when we put up the first lady of the early '90s -- i had put a section in it of what mrs. nixon had done. i received a wonderful letter from julie eisenhower saying she was glad her mother was being recognized for what she did to the white house. >> another behind-the-scenes kind of person, you do not know how much to give on international level. -- how much she did on an international level. she travels on behalf of her husband to various countries throughout the world. she believes in public education. together the carters -- everybody was horrified by. it was the idea of bringing the common people's ideas to the board. it was ok to be a regular person whose child goes to public school. mrs. carter was quite active and is very rarely recognized for that. >> we conducted a poll, this is going to be very quick, i want to ask you a yes or no. should the first lady be paid? >> you are looking at me. i think not. i think she would come under all kinds of scrutiny. i do not know who would be her supervisor. i am sure somebody would. that would be very limiting to her role of being able to choose a cause or champion some particular avenues of approach to the first lady's role. >> i agree. >> the other question, should the first lady have a job outside of the white house? should they be able to hold a position. >> they can now. there are no rules. if you worked along with a husband and he or she became president, why would you do that? why would mrs. obama called back to the law firm or hospital in chicago? i do not think it is likely. >> i disagree. it depends on the situation. mrs. obama had already given up the law firm when she started having her children. that was a choice she already made. if she is already a professional woman, and i do not mean going to work in the local canteen, if she is already a professional woman and she wants to continue her professional activities she should have the option if she so chooses to continue to work in her profession. >> should be job of the first lady, the platform or roll, be a platform for politics? >> definitely. i think it already is. i do not think it to be married to a man for 20, 30, 40 years and have shared his career and his bed that she is not going to be involved. i cannot see how you can separate those. >> final question for each of you. if you could sit down with a former first lady and ask her one question, who would it be and what would you ask? >> you would do that. [laughter] i do not know. i cannot think of anyone. >> my favorite one of all time was lady bird johnson. i would have loved to have had a conversation with her. i would have asked why she didn't run for president. [laughter] >> i guess it would be jacqueline kennedy, for me. how did you stay married to that man with all that was going on in your marriage? [laughter] thank you very much. and the book is titled? >> what book? [laughter] it is called, "white house history." >> thank you all very much for being with us. [applause] >> monday night, first ladies, employment and image, featuring martha washington, her life before meeting george washington, being a general's wife. we will show you some of the places that influence her life, including colonial williamsburg, and philadelphia. be part of the conversation with your phone calls, tweets and facebook posts, live monday night eastern on c-span, seized a radio and c-span.org. >> if we turn away from the needs of others, the airline ourselves with those forces which are bringing about the suffering -- we align ourselvse with those forces which are bringing about the suffering crate art of the city in this country is nothing short of a public health crisis -- bringing about the suffering. >> obseity in this country is nothing short of a public health crisis. >> they serve as a window on the past to what was going on with american women. >> many of the women who were first ladies were writers, journalists. >> they are in many cases more interesting as human beings than their husbands. if only because they are not defined and consequently limited by political ambition. >> dolley was the most socially adept and politically savvy. >> she loved every minute of it. mrs. monroe hated it. >> she warned her husband, you cannot rule without including what women want and have to contribute >> you were a little breathless and there was too much looking down and i think it was a little too fast. not enough change of pace. >> he is probably the most tragic -- she probably the most tragic of all our first lady'ie. >> they never should have married picks she said i only decided what was important and present it to my husband -- >> they never should have married. >> she said i only decided what was important and went to present it to my husband. >> she transformed the way we look at these bugaboos and made it possible for people to survive and flourish as a result. i do not know how many presidents realistically have that kind of impact on the way we live our lives. >> walking around the white house grounds, i am constantly reminded about all of the people who ever lived there before and particularly all of the women. >> first ladies, influence and image, from martha washington to michelle obama, monday nights at 9:00 eastern on c-span, seat and radio and teeming life -- cspan radio and streaming live. >> i now like to introduce the moderator for our next panel. for more detailed information, you will find those in the program. martha is a professor at telson university -- at towson university. she is interested in the presidential press relations and white house communications operations. she is also director of the white house transition project, and non-partisan effort by presidency scholars to provide information on presidential transitions and white house operation to those who came into the white house in 2001 and 2009. she work with barack obama and john mccain and with the team representing president george w. bush. i refer your program for more information on her publications and finally, i can say she is a proud member of the board of directors of the white house historical situation. >> we have a wonderful here -- a wonderful panel here representing people who work in the white house for several administrations and people who of come with particular president and first ladies. through our discussion, we will get a sense of the environment that if first city operates in. if through our discussions we will get a sense of the environment that a first lady operates in. it is a difficult place to be. in some ways it is as beautiful. as the white house is it has many different roles. it is a museum, it obviously is a residence, it is a park, and it is a workplace. all of those combined -- for the first lady it gives opportunity for her and her husband, and also some hazards as they live their lives in the white house. it is also a place for children, a place to raise a family. with a first lady who has received no compensation for what she does, it is a difficult thing to say exactly what her role is. we will talk about the environment and talk about particular first lady's. among our panelists, they have been in the white house since the. when betty ford was first lady. -- since the period when betty ford was first lady. she does a great deal about the operations and the comings and goings. gary walters worked as chief usher from 1986. he came from a time when betty ford was first lady. he worked into the bush administration. susan sher was chief of staff with michelle obama. and that he is curator at the white house, a position that came about as a result of the work jackie kennedy did. we are going to talk about state dinner and use that as an introduction for all of us and how they are put on, where the first lady comes into it, all of the various parts of the white house that get involved. it certainly is a big event and one that involves everybody. gary, can you start as off? as chief usher you handled the residence staff. >> i would be glad to. the first notice of a state dinner or state visit comes from the state department. it usually goes through the social secretary of the white house. soon after the socialists a cap -- after the social security -- social secretary had a conversation with the first lady, he would lay out who, when, where, and how it was going to be about. there was a lot of planning. there is a lot of planning. usually these events are planned three, four, sometimes as much as a year in the future. sometimes a lot less time depending on world situations. but certainly the planning is intensive. and i think one of the things that most people forget about state dinners is they set a style for the white house from a social aspect and they also set a first lady style. we deal with things like the flowers, the table settings, what color dress is the first lady going to wear at a state dinner? because things get coordinated. i can remember the chief florist at the white house getting together with the first ladies and actually having a sample of the fabric and color and texture and planning flowers and the color of the table cloth and-how the table was going to be set, with what kind of decorations. but basically the first lady has a tremendous responsibility to set the tone for a state visit. i wrote down a number of different things that the first lady gets involved in, first through the social secretary and then things that she deals directly with the chief usher, with the which he was, and they -- with the chefs, and they include about eight different things. i've mentioned a few already, flowers, the first lady helps choose the flowers, whether they're in season or a particular flower that she likes, the decorations, not only the decorations at the table but what flowers or trees or plants are going to be put around the state floor for the official visit, what the decorum is going to be for the dinner, the kind of dress that's going to go ford -- go forward at the dinner, white tie, black tie, is it business? the color choices, i already went over that with the dresses and colors of fabrics and tablecloths. but there are a couple other things that usually fall in the first lady's aspect of what she is dealing with and that deals with a great deal of how the serve personnel are going to present themselves because quite frequently at these dinners we have individual aspects of foreign countries, the kind of foods they like, whether or not we have -- are allergic to certain -- allergies to certain food or food groups. and there's a myriad of details the first ladies need to go through, both personally and involvement with the chefs, like roland mesnier and the other chefs at the white house, the chief floral designer. she has to be involved in choosing the entertainment with the social secretary, what music is going to be played at the state dinner, what music will be played for the dancing afterwards. there are a myriad amount of questions that have to be asked of her and that she will have to make decisions upon to allow these dinners to proceed in a good manner. >> can you tell us about the menu, and make sure and talk about your desserts. >> yes. for a chef to be able to perform at the white house, to be involved with state dinner or any level dinner, it's fairly an honor, let me tell you. there's not a better place to cook or bake in the world. even though the money is not so good, it doesn't matter. you are having fun doing it, let me tell you. and the involvement with the menu, it was quite an other deal -- an ordeal to come to a final menu because we had many people who had their handiness, too, as they say. you would start with the basic menu, somebody would throw a menu out there and then, you know, you would come back, as gary said, people with allergies and also talking about allergies, people from different denominations, if you have kosher people at the dinner, if you have -- there's so many things you have to watch out, and then you don't have shell fish at some of these things. it's amazing you have to go through before you have a final menu. usually what i did, i waited until the chefs in the kitchen fight it out on the menu, then i put the dessert down. it was a sure bet for me because then all the kink had been worked out and i knew what it was going to be so it was easiest way. for me for the dessert, like everybody, you come to the white house, at first you don't know which way to go. most of the chefs come from hotel restaurant outside of places like these and you are going to continue what you have learned outside in the hotel and restaurant business. and i might say the white house, up to mrs. reagan's time, pretty much had their menus and dessert like you would any hotel and restaurant around the country. you can go back and look. you can find pies, chocolate cake, all these good stuff there. i don't think mrs. reagan cared for pie or chocolate cake. [laughter] like she said to me once, roland, we in california don't eat cheesecake -- actually, she did but that's another story. [laughter] so again, i knew. i knew right away that she was looking for something extraordinary. can i deliver? can i do it? i don't know. but i'm surely going to try like hell. and i did just that. and we had also a very interesting man in the white house those years who was the head decorator of the white house. and he was very close to the family. and he had a good eye for food and everything and colors and he did walk with us a lot and did help me a lot, i must say. so you get your sources from wherever you can. and i think this is when the dessert took off on mrs. reagan's at the white house in those years because she definitely wanted to take a different route. and if you studied the dessert, look at the dessert, totally different from what was done before, and i'm sorry to say after i left, it stunk. you want the truth, i'm giving you the truth. [laughter] you can research. but it was such a pleasure and i learned one thing -- mrs. reagan taught me a lot. she is a mentor to me. she told me in a day's work, you don't have eight hours, you have 24. she did teach me that. on certain occasions where she requested a special dessert that was so tedious and those years i was the only pastry person in the white house. there was no assistant. there was no part-time stuff. and she requested this special dessert. and we had two days before the state dinner, 140 people, i said to mrs. reagan, the dessert is wonderful and we have only two days left and that's when she corrected me. she said, you have two days and two nights. [laughter] and you know, it sounded very odd at first but is the best lesson i'd been taught then because the sky's the limit if you push yourself. and you can make it up and if you do make it happen, you feel like the king on the hill. and she is the one who made it for me. >> can you tell us about a particular state dinner or just how the process worked? >> as gary was talking, he said about the colors and matching the colors for the fabrics on the tables and the flowers and what dress the first lady is going to wear. i remember the visit of queen elizabeth ii in 2007, the first white tie state dinner the bush administration did in working closely with mrs. bush and the team around you and the social secretary. one of the most fun calls i got to make was to the queen's dresser and mrs. davis, the most wonderful personalities, what color is the queen wearing because you certainly didn't want the first lady of the house and then queen elizabeth to be in the same color. so that was one of the little items, as gary said. there's so many people and so many things that go into making this a beautiful and flawless event that is respectful of your guests but also reflective, too, of the president and first lady. we all want to put our best foot forward when working at the white house and this is a time to showcase everything that's perfect. >> and did the first ladies talk about a state dinner as being an event that was showcasing america? >> definitely. >> and what their goals were. >> definitely. >> can you tell us about that, susan? >> certainly. you know, the state dinners are really about diplomacy and the p -- the role of the first lady and her office are with the help, with great help from the state department. there's a huge amount of protocol involved. and there's no detail that is too small because what everybody does, one doesn't want to make a mistake. that would be insulting in a great way. so there are a number of details but it is important to remember it's about diplomacy and enhancing the diplomacy between the two countries. i was thinking about our second state dinner which was with mexico because of some of the personal touches. part of it was tablecloths that were mayan blue and flowers, there were roses and prickley pears that were beautiful. but my favorite, in the east room there was a dinner, a tent, wonderful entertainment by beyonce. but there were bouquets and baskets of flowers on top of the tent with monarch butterflies, just sort of floating -- looking like they were floating down. and the reason that is significant is that monarch butterflies fly from canada to the united states in the summer and then in mexico, and where they land for the most part is the birthplace of the president of mexico, president calderon. so that's meaningful. and these kind of touches make a difference. one other thing i would add is that we had a -- an outside chef who helped the terrific white house chefs, rick bayless, who is a very well known mexican -- well, his food -- he's american but his food is mexican. and people at the time questioned why we would do such a thing since obviously the best mexican food is in mexico. well, because we had had conversations, the first lady had visits mexico and was with the president and his wife and they had heard about rick bayless who is a chicago chef, and expressed an interest. and that's why we had that particular chef at that time. >> betty, can you tell us some of the research that goes into first setting up of state dinners and that first ladies might do? >> well, we do keep in the curator's office, records of a clipping file and historical information on entertainment over the years and the particular state dinners, and we were with a resource for many idea of roland's desserts which were themed to particular countries being entertained at a state dinner. and i also should say that we worked with the first lady's office, the first lady, the usher's office in terms of needing to order additional pieces of presidential china that would be used for state dinners as well. i know we had supplements made of the f.d.r. service and the wilson service to fill out those services because they had been depleted by breakage and so forth over the years. and in the year 2000 when the white house historical association offered to fund a new state service, we worked very closely with mrs. clinton in deciding about the colors, the designs that would go on the service, how those particular colors would look in the various settings in the state dining room or the east room, and i do remember mrs. clinton's mother, mrs. rodham was living in the house at the time and would come to some of these meetings about showing samples from the porcelain factory, and none of them seemed to be satisfactory. and she said, you know, i've been -- the bathroom of my suite is a beautiful yellow color, she said. and i think we should try that yellow color. so we got a sample of the wallpaper and sent it off to lennox, and they did some samples and worked out beautifully and that was sort of mrs. rodham's legacy i think in terms of state dinners. >> let's go to looking at transitions. the transitions into the white house that a family makes and the transitions out as well. because often for a president, he's been running for office for a couple of years, and he's a political person who is most likely been at the white house numerous times. but in coming into the white house, there are first ladies who really have not spent much time. now, we have an example with michelle obama, who was not familiar with the white house, whereas laura bush was very familiar with coming in with george w. bush during the george h.w. bush presidency. so can you tell us a little about your -- about, say, michelle obama's transition in and how she prepared for it? >> well, michelle obama is a serious student, but i have to say, i don't think there's any way one can really be prepared in the sense to really know what it's going to be like. you know, her husband had been a u.s. senator for a few years. but she and the girls had stayed in chicago where her whole family and support were. and the bush people were incredibly helpful and generous in -- and in particular about what the office was like and structure of all that. and the bushes were as well personally when the obamas visited. but i have to say there is no substitute for being there. so mrs. obama and the family were, you know, first at the adams hotel and then at the blair house and then came to the white house for coffee, as is the tradition, inauguration morning, and everyone went off to the inauguration and then what the white house resident staff does is just unbelievable where they all in that time when this inauguration is going on, they move, in this case the bushes out and the obamas in so they get back from the festivities of the parade, etc., and they walk in and now live in this new home. it's really quite startling. i don't think there's any amount of preparation that really can help one understand what this all means. >> anita, can you tell us about the bushes coming in and gary can tell us from the viewpoint of running the whole operation. how that transition works. but personally when she came in. >> sure. >> what she was thinking about. >> i wasn't working with her directly, of course, at that time in coming in in 2001 but i had been part of the transition team, the one that was set up in virginia before the election actually was finally decided and then once we were in the government space and we were planning from a personnel side of it. but one of the first visits that a president and incoming first lady gets is from gary walters, was a list of things they need to think about and be knowledgeable about when they come into the white house. i'll let gary talk a little bit about that. but 2001 was a very different experience than some past transitions. we didn't know for six weeks who the president of the united states was going to be. so no real official conversation could be taking place to prepare for a transition, certainly very different than 2008-2009 when in fact, you know, mrs. bush had everything packed up and almost out of the white house well before we left in january of 2009, and there were just a few itty-bitty little boxes that were in the china room that morning that needed to be moved out. and she was saying through the summer, it's not like we don't know we're going to leave. so she was very prepared. but coming in, it is incredibly seamless. the chaos that goes on that morning to unpack boxes and move in. the real first family is not aware of it which is so extraordinary which gary can talk a lot more about how the staff handles it. >> well, transitions are unique. there's a four-year transition when the presidents are running for re-election just as president obama just did. and the staff has to start gathering information on those people who are in the opposition party who are also expecting to be inaugurated on january 20. so i know when i was there, i started 6-8 months before the election, started gathering information on the candidates that were running and then once the political parties had their conventions, certainly, and the selections were made, i became more intense on the gathering of information on the nominee. and sometimes that's difficult. after four years, you have to be loyal to the family that's there. it is, and you used the right word, susan. it's their home that we're talking about. luckily i was involved in the home, not the political aspect of the white house. and some people forget that at times. this is a family that's moving in and out of the white house. and replacing their home, or establishing a new home. but when you have a transition after four years, you are wearing two hats. you're loyal to the family that's there and you want the staff to spend 100% of their time doing what has to be done for the family that lives there and the sitting president and first lady. but you also have to be preparing for what may happen in the future. but on inaugural day, and luckily when you have a second term, there's not much going on on inauguration day. everybody kind of takes a deep breath and lets things proceed. but when you're doing a transition from one family to another after eight years, the family that's there knows they're leaving on january 20 four years in advance. they have plenty of time to prepare themselves both mentally and to start moving their furniture, their furnishings out. when you have a four-year term, it's an entirely different ballgame. and the family that's coming in, once you have the election, if the family that's moving out is not going to be there any longer, certainly, the incoming president, there's a long conversation that goes on with both the first lady, first and foremost, but with the president, also. because not only does the home transition on inaugural day, the west wing, which is very symbolic of the presidency, one of the first things the press want to see on inaugural day is the oval office. what desk did the president choose, what paintings did he choose for the walls, what statutes are in there, what ones went out from the previous administration. there's a tremendous amount that goes on on inaugural day related to it, but at best five hours from the time the president and president-elect leave the white house, go down to the capitol for the inaugural festivities and come back for the inaugural parade in front of the white house. and one family is moved completely out, another family has moved completely in and when i say "completely" to the point of all their clothes are hung up, all their favorite foods are in the pantry, all their toiletries are in the bathrooms that they've selected, all the rooms have been changed to their desire. it's done in five hours. and they refer to it as chaos, i refer to it as organized chaos. we divide the staff up to two different groups. the group that was responsible for moving things out and the group that was responsible for moving things in. we only have two elevators at the white house. the president's elevator is the larger of the two. >> and it's tiny. >> so there's a lot of going up and down steps. there's a lot of elevator traffic and it -- luckily i just got to be the maestro that gave directions and the wonderful staff, including roland and the kitchen staff who were preparing for the events that are going to take place not only that evening but in the coming days as the new president welcomes in and thanks those people who helped him get elected. >> roland, i wonder if you can tell us about another aspect of it and that is about the human relationships that form that are close that when a president and his family leave, the impact that it has on the staff. >> yes, yes. it's a very strong bond between the family and the staff, because we really get to know everybody from the president, first lady on down, family, pets, name it. really the white house is a big family. that's what it is. and everybody is there for only one thing, one thing only, is to please the family. whatever they want, whatever they like, whatever the family -- not only the president but anybody on the family. so you don't really think about them leaving even a day before, two days before, even though you know they're leaving, they're gone or lost the election, whatever. but then when it hits you, it's bad, very odd, right here. and for me, i always said it's like funeral day. that's the closest thing i can describe it. because, you know, i don't know about all the stuff in the white house, but for me i've never been a party guy. i don't care what party they belong to, president and first lady of the united states. that's what count. that's who i served, they're all the same. so you really love those people. you'll do anything for them. i mean, anything. if you don't feel that way, i don't think you should be there, i really think. it's the same paying respect to the house is the same thing. it's a sacred house. everything goes hand in hand. so the morning of the departure of the family, we usually got it together in the state dining room, all the staff will be around the room and waiting for them to come in, the president, first lady, maybe child, like when chelsea was in the white house, she was part of it. and pets, too. you know, when mrs. bush, mrs. barbara bush, she didn't go nowhere without millie. millie was, i call her the presidential dog. she was. she knew how to act very presidential at all times. it was an amazing dog. and she knew who she was at all times. more than i did. [laughter] but let me tell you, those days where i dreaded those days. and even today, it brings emotion to me. i mean, although some of them were -- i remember when the clintons left, the president and mrs. clinton, they did eight years, that was all good. there was a great finish. so it was for the staff, it was very hard to see them go. when president bush sr. left, he had lost an election. that was supersad because of that. and you know, i never thought -- i never even thought that a president would cry, they're too big for that. they're too strong. but i've seen them cry, and really cry and that makes it double hard again. when i see president and mrs. bush come into the room to say goodbye, and president bush could not speak. he just cried. >> i remember it. that's it. no more. i can't go no more. >> i would like to say, too, it's as close to people that work in the residence are to the family, we also work very closely with their staff, particularly the first lady's staff and all of a sudden they're gone by noon on inauguration day. and you worked with these people for eight years and many of them become your friend. and some in the west wing as well, those we work more closely with. but then all of a sudden they're gone and the next day, there's a whole group of strangers coming in, they don't know you and you don't know them and it's a very difficult time, i think, much as roland expressed, saying goodbye to these families. but to them it's a whole new adjustment, it's a whole new job sometimes. >> the new people coming in sometimes scare the hell out of you, too. [laughter] i will tell you a very quick thing. when the reagans were coming in, the day of the inauguration, i was making raspberry sauce in the blender and the top of the blender came off and went all over my coat so i was ready to go wherever on the third floor, a room it could change and everything and the decorator, he was here, a short man i never saw before. he came and he look back to me, things are changing. i got scared. but does it. >> gary wants to chime in here. >> k makes it easy to be on the panelist. -- he makes it easy to be on the panel. he makes it so entertaining. it is the resident staff that continues to support every president that comes in and the staff around them. they go through these adjustments as well. we do not often think about that. he was talking about how difficult it was on that morning to see goodbye to the outgoing president and the first family. there was a happier time in 2009 when george bush and mrs. bush were there with their son and daughter-in-law to say goodbye once again under very different and happier circumstances after a successful eight years. that was a historical moment and something i will not forget. i needed a few minutes to compose myself as well. i saw on the south lawn the long-time resident staff member who has taken kiccare of the pe. he wasn't upstairs. he said, i cannot do it. it was too difficult for him. he would never go up to the historical meeting to say goodbye because it was so difficult. that struck me. >> one thing we do not want to forget in this mix is the fact that the staff has done this time and again. the majority of the president staff -- and resident staff stays throughout their careers. i had the same reaction. it is the most horrific day in our life. we have about five minutes to accept that and move on. there is another president and a family moving in. we will meet them and be their staff in five minutes. we have to turn the emotion it around immediately from this very sad departure on inaugural day. i remember i was standing as the last person to leave the white house was amy carter. everyone else had gotten in the cars and were waiting. she came up to me. it is a day i'll never forget. we have to turn back around immediately and get the new family moved in. the family thinks they have to come in and adjust to the executive resident staff. that is probably the latest mantra that the resident staff has to live by tom at no, it is not the white house way, but the family weight within the white house. -- way within the white house. i think the resident staff does it better because it has been through it before then the families do. these are people who work for the previous president. now you are working for me. how are you going to respond? how do i respond to you? we know in the resident staff when that has taken place. usually when you walk in a room and there is a conversation going on amongst family members or staff members, conversation stop. we are behind the screens. we are with the family all the time. the family is very reluctant to speak out openly. at some point, two weeks, six months, a year, number stations continue when you walk into the room. -- conversations continue when you walk into the room. there is a collective ah, we have made it. there is no greater grapevine than the white house staff. >> we had talked earlier about the get-togethers the resident staff has after the president and his family have left when the presidential libraries are opened. if you could briefly talk about those. >> many recent administrations have been generous and inviting to the opening of the library's. many have taken advantage of it and gone to them. it is like a family reunion. this recently, i started working there in the johnson administration. they had a wonderful reception by inviting all previous johnson administration staff to come. after all of those years that have gone by, 40 years, it was wonderful to see people that you work with all those years ago. there is that co-moderating -- radery that you work for a common sense that you are in it together in these crises or good times and bad times. you have fond memories of the people that you worked with over the years. >> looking at the white house, the organization has grown enormously that supports the president. also the organization has gotten larger support for the first lady. both anita need and susan served as chief of staff for laura bush and michelle obama. i wonder if you can tell us about the organization that he first learned he needs -- that a first lady needs. you both had titles not only as chief of staff of the first lady, but assistant to the president. how did those titles work together? >> there is no doubt that looking at the organization chart has clearly grown. the east wing staff has grown. that is a result of how much more is expect ited of the firsl ady and what she chooses to do with the lab form, which is a privilege to represent both at home at -- chooses to do with the platform, which is a privilege to represent both at home and abroad. there is pressure to do something with this opportunity. the staff gross to support the initiatives. -- grows to support the initiatives. how can they support the work of the administration? going to the point that they are not paid. they want to engage and really use the background and experience of often to city to their work -- and authenticity to the work. the first lady is not running a shadow government. she has the hardest unpaid job in the world. it is an extraordinary opportunity and privilege. as chief of staff, the starstruck or -- structure is built around that. in addition to the social office and the importance of the diplomatic role, it is the policy work. we have to think harder for being the first first lady to establish the role of the project director in the office of the first lady. -- thank carter for being the first first lady to establish the role of the project director in the office of the first lady. laura bush came into the white house in 2001. she had been typecast it as a shy, retiring librarian/teacher. who will you be? she said, i know laura bush pretty well so i will be her. [laughter] they were confident in their relationship as husband and wife and the partnership had in public and private life. she was going to take her interests from texas to washington, which is establishing the national book festival, which is now continuing. it is running on its 13th year. she had an interest in education that was a major initiative of the administration. they have the first state dinner for mexico. that changed everything. the pivot that not only our country had to make, but she had to make as well in having this role and lack form and what to do with it -- platform and what to do with it and how to be part of this effort. mrs. bush delivered a radio address in 2001. she talked on the plight of afghan women. the brutal treatment of women. that became an important cause for her. she recognized and tote -- she was asked about her role. after that radio address, she visited her daughter. women at the makeup counter can up to her and said, thank you for speaking out about afghan women. she realized that she had this enormous platform that was global. from that point forward and to this day is fully engaged in afghan women issues. we were able to fulfill an important desire she had, which was to go to afghanistan, which we did within two months of the second term. >> susan, can you tell us about let's move and the military family initiative? >> sure. mrs. obama new that being the first lady was an opportunity for a platform. when she got to the white house, she was not sure how that would lay out. during that election campaign, she spent a lot of time with military families. these were extraordinarily resourceful people who had never asked for help. she felt that when she got to the white house, this is an area where she could make it your friends. she started with the idea of a white house kitchen garden. she thought, it this would be great to have a conversation in this country with children and health. the country was ready to have this conversation. at some point she said to her staff, i would like this to be a campaign. i want this to be something that will be something i'm working on. it is something i'm sure she will be involved in for the rest of her life. we work for months. i was thinking about your question of the first wing. -- west wing. one of the most important roles is to coordinate things. it became a name, let's move. it was supposed to be at a community center, but there was one of those snowstorms. things were well carbonated with the west wing. somehow we realized that the president was going to stop by the press briefing room at the exact time where she was going to launch let's move from the state dining room. that was one of those things that we somehow realized -- we do not think that the president would want to step on the ursa lady -- first lady's initiative. [laughter] >> it was very popular and continues today through campaigns or the personalities and not just the general ways that people perceive them to be here they tend to have much stronger support. that leads to an election and reelection for the first lady to go out and campaign for her husband. it happened that both -- first lady's feel in the role of political support for their husbands. you can compare it with before they came into office and then when they worked in the reelection campaign. before they came into office, they did not have a lack of political experience and speaking on behalf of the president. they certainly did by the reelection. >> and terms of the popularity question, every problem in the world comes to the desk of the american president. by virtue of that reality, not everyone will be happy. your popularity will take a hit from time to time. the first lady does not have that escher. -- pressue. -- pressure. in terms of the political involvement which is a slightly different rushed in for laura bush -- different question for laura bush that was for michelle obama, the minute she started dating george w. bush, three- month agreement -- engagement, he was from a lyrical family. she became quite good at giving speeches. -- he was from a lyrical family. she became quite good at giving speeches. he famously talks about how they were coming back from a speech and he asked her, how is my speech? it was horrible. he drove the car right through the garage. [laughter] she was an honest ursa and. -- person. the spouse is the one person who can be most honest with you. they do get deeply engaged in deeply involved. it is important to see success of their spouse. by 2004, she was a formidable person in that campaign during a difficult time. the country was in two wars. very tough time. she got out there. her speech at the new york convention in 2004 she spoke to the human side of being the president of the united states and the tough decisions. i think it was an important moment. >> susan? >> i think i would agree with anita that one of the things the first lady can do to humanize the president and one of the things mrs. obama has always felt is that she was forced to campaign, but had to do it in a voice that was natural to her and honest. she did not want to campaign for kennedy because she did not really know him at all. in the president was working on health care reform, i think it was about three different speeches on the subject, but it was in the policy wonky sense. this was a campaign of a different sort. it was about breast cancer survivors and how continuing care is important and healthcare reform would help to get preventive care. when it came to the actual reelection campaign, it was sort of a no-brainer. she has always felt it was to support the administration. this is something she felt strongly about, the reelection. she gave many speeches. and the natural. -- and a natural. she likes to get out and about and meet normal people on the campaign trail. >> one of the things that we talked about, i asked you all to come up with a question for analysts.r finaellow i do not -- fellow panelists. let's get to it. everyone can chime in with answers. would you like to start us off? do you have a question on the role of a first lady? >> my head just -- my question --there is such an interest in first dladies. in terms of privacy, how do you draw the line in terms of releasing information or protect in the privacy of the first lady and family? >> great question. she is the protector of the family sanctuary. your trend have a private life in the public eye -- you are trying to have a private life in the public eye. it is not easy. people want to know about you, your family life, so striking a balance is difficult, but important. also who can be honest with the first -- and also who can be honest with the first lady. it becomes difficult when you have young children t. >> that is the area that mrs. obama feels strongly about and has consulted former first ladies. at clinton is someone who felt protective of chelsea clinton. she is a young and wonderful woman who grew up in the white house. having small children in the white house above a place where there are reporters all the time, how do you handle it if the girls want to ride their bikes on the south lawn? that is where the reporters find themselves when the president gives speeches. you have to come up with all kinds of rules. one is which the children cannot be photographed unless they are with one of their parents. that was one of those compromises. people have accepted for the most part that the girls are able to go to summer camp and go to school and have a more or less normal life. something that i think their friends and their friends families are great about in encouraging and supporting. the tug of war with the press is something that is inevitable. the obama snow that people -- know that you all are genuinely interested, yet these girls have a right to privacy. >> do have a question? >> i have a question for anita. how do you feel about guest che fs in the white house? [laughter] do you agree to bring certain guest chefs to the white house because the first lady tells you so or because you like having a guest chef in the kitchen? >> i think the first several times over the bush years, they would participate in some very big events, including the congressional barbecue. they brought their favorite texas barbecue chef to work with the kitchen and to share that. i also remember another time where they brought guests chefs in. mrs. bush made about 20 or 35 visits to the golf coast and the redevelopment. -- during the redevelopment. one of the chefs was at one of the events that we did in new orleans. it was an important message to the public that the gulf coast was coming back of the restaurant were reopening. there was an important reason to showcase the new american chefs and reasons why they would come. as long as the household staff and the kitchen staff is comfortable and sees it as an opportunity to share their experience with an outside chef, i think it could be fine and fun. >> susan? >> sorry if that is not the answer you wanted. >> the current white house chef s are fantastic. the obamas appreciate what they do. part of it, especially the state dinners, is to showcase the cooking. in every situation in which there are guest chefs, there is a collaboration. there's no a guest chef knows about how things are done. these collaborations showcase the best of american cuisine and a real collaboration between the guest chefs and the white house chefs. >> may i add something to that question mig? i need to. deep down, what does she really feel? you do not know what she feels. i'm talking about other chefs in the past. i take it as a slap in the face. i am the chef of the white house. i do everything for the family day in and day out. the day when i can shine i'm told that someone else will be coming? it is like me asking to be the president for one day. [laughter] why not? it's another job. let's put it this way -- i do not believe in that and i never will. this is my job. i would like to shine once in a while when it is my chance. we know that the guest chef comes only for one thing -- to promote their establishment. that is the only reason they come. if you tell them they cannot publicize, how many do you think would show up? [laughter] i needed to say that. [laughter] >> i would like to ask me that, what is the most difficult aspect of the role of the first lady? >> a couple of things. one of the hardest things is seeing the person you love the most being criticized. you have to be strong and confident in your relationship to know who your husband is and he knows who you are. one of the toughest is balancing the time of private and public requirement. it can be difficult. whether it is the end of four years or eight, you run out of time to do all the things you wanted to do. >> gary? >> i have a question for martha. what influence have you found for that transitioning activities? dy willink the worst ladfirst la be responsible for setting up the home and the family. there is so much that goes up in setting up the west wing and appointments and policy that a president one not have time to be spending on how the home is going to be created. i think that first lady has a it for her and she has to learn how to bring her family in. particularly with a young family like michelle obama had. that is what they have to focus on. before hand, they can start thinking about their issues as both recent first ladies have done. but the physical move is something that they will have to handle. maybe he is going to be involved in the oval office in the setting of the oval office. as george bush proudly talked about every item being procured for the white house and why he chose the pictures and it was not just his choosing. >> do we have time for questions? >> do i get to ask mine? [laughter] of the five administration the work for, what was the one time that you felt you were able to shine your craft the most? the one favorite? >> it is quite difficult to go there. at the beginning i can dwell on everyone else learning to sing in the white house. i really could see what she wanted. she said that this is a private home. this is our home. we will showcase the best we can do. what better place to showcase the best? the best furniture, the best wallpaper, the best carpet. it is the people's home. this is why they embark into making those spectacular desert all the time. the funny thing is that after the reagans the part of the house, it continued. every a ministration after that gave me carte blanche to do that. they knew, somehow, i would produce a dessert that they could be proud of. also at the time we were already doing some diplomacy with the desert, by introducing the desert with design that reflected the inviting head of state. that is why they let me do all the way to transition of food. if you remember, the food way back, every course was served on a big platter, like a desert. but then that went away. it went more to the restaurant service. but the desert for never touched. -- was never touched. during the clinton that change. mrs. clinton [indiscernible] there is a reason for that. she must have liked that, or she would have said no more of that. [laughter] i assumed. in -- i am very proud of that. it remained so until my last day. we made many desserts for the first family that touched them. i remember when george w. came to the white house, the first governors dinner that we were going to have, i wanted something texan. i wanted the governor to know who the president was, a texan. so, i came up with a design called tumbleweed. if you have been in texas, you have seen them. that is what the desert was, tumbleweed. mrs. bush did not care for it. [laughter] but president bush loved it. >> of course. >> i remember we were discussing these things and mrs. bush said go ahead. things like these make the family very proud. >> they had one problem with the first ladies and one problem with him, never do the same dessert twice. they were always different. >> i wanted something very interesting. we did not repeat, we did not. that was the entire shop. the head of state would come in and i would beg my staff to throw the ideas and to the basket. we said the best ones would flow and that is what we will do. i tell you what, i know that mrs. reagan sometimes said you cannot serve that. it will fall on the lap of a lady. i would tell her, it would not. [laughter] i remember we had a giant pear. i was on my knee, explaining the desert. when i explained to her that it would not fall, she grabbed it so that it stop shaking. i said -- ok, you win. [laughter] >> on that note, let's go to some questions. >> i am from the museum education program of george washington university as well. my question or comment is during my lifetime is possible that there will be a first gentleman. what are your thoughts on the influence of the first lady's of what that role would be? >> i will say the became close, we came very close in 2008, right? i think the white house is very resilient. although that would have been different, as that would have been a former president. a very different situation. but the fact that potentially a man was getting closer to that, i think the white house is a very resilient and flexible place that will adapt to all kinds of changes. just as staff is asked to renew family, i think that is the remarkable thing about the white house. >> i had a brief conversation with dennis thatcher when he came to the white house. he was wandering around the state floor, she was speaking to the president. i told him some of the history of the white house. i made very sure that he saw the area of the white house [indiscernible] [laughter] he was very engaging and i asked him what his role was. he says that his role is whenever she wanted. >> ok. i think that there are ways where it will have to change. i think that one of the issues is about working outside the home. >> chemistry professors, there are ways in which there are men who probably do not want to play the traditional first lady role. it is right that the white house is resilience. there will probably be a lot of questions asked. >> my name is heather and my question is for [indiscernible] the bride. the president bush library will be opening soon. i want to know how mrs. bush's legacy is being preserved? >> thank you for asking. the library is opening on the 25th of this year. mrs. bush has been share of the architecture committee, landscape design committee, interpretive planning committee. she has a great deal of influence on what it will look like. this will be their life's work for the rest of their lives for the bush presidential institute. we did a lot of working with other libraries. the first lady's role is generally relegated to a tiny area of the library. this will not be the case this time. her work will be integrated throughout from the moment that you step in to the moment you leave the library. she is very proud of that. he is very proud of that fact. thank you for asking. >> i would like to check -- i would like to thank our panelists. >> you can see here the wonderful support system that first ladies have, whether this is the resident staff or the staff that comes with them, they all former wonderful support structure. thank you. [applause] >> thank you for an en lightning session and tricky for making this a special occasion at our new national center for white house history. on your way out, there will be a bag we do not want to forget. the most recent addition of whitehouse history. i think you will find particularly interesting, it is on whitehouse fashion. in cooperation with c-span and the association, a special addition for the original series of our first lady's book was produced. that is also in the back. you are welcome to pay a visit as you leave the foyer. you are also welcome to take a tour of the c-span bus and learn about first ladies. thank you again for making our inaugural session very special. [applause] >> monday night, but first program in our new weekly series, first ladies, featuring martha washington. her life before meeting george washington, being a general's wife, and studying the precedents for the role of first lady. we will show you some of the areas that amateur including one was hurt -- that iraq was her including williamsburg. live monday at 9:00 eastern. our website has more about the first ladies, including a special section, welcome to the white house. it chronicles life in the executive mansion during the tenure -- the tenure of each of the first ladies. we have comments from noted historians and thoughts on michelle obama from all of first lady throughout history. c-span.org/products. >> c-span, created in 1979, brought to you as a public service by your television provider. >> next, from the national governors' association winter meeting, a discussion on employing people with disabilities and what state can do to improve cyber security. after that, a conversation with supreme court justice ruth bader ginsburg. colorado nation's governors are helping their annual winter meeting this week in washington, d.c. the first panel was about employing people with difficulties -- was about employing people with disabilities. remarks by this year's national governors' association chair, jack markell and mary fallin
good evening. the news tonight isn't so much that americans are fed up with washington and disapprove of the job congress is doing. sadly that's pretty much a constant of late. but it is news that our discontent has set an all-time record. our new nbc news/"wall street journal" poll shows some numbers not seen in the history of polling. 83% of us now disapprove of congress. the president is riding a 45% approval. his lowest number notably since two summers ago. it perhaps fueled his trip to illinois and then missouri today. the places like that, a whole lot easier to distance yourself from washington. our chief white house correspondent political director chuck todd here with us in our studios in new york with all of it. chuck, good evening. >> brian, that's exactly what this is. when presidents are in trouble, things aren't going well in washington they do one thing. they get out of washington. the president here trying to channel the public's anger and try to reconnect with it. a public that seems to be slowly disconnecting from him. ♪ >> reporter: president obama traveled to gailsburg, illinois in an attempt to re-energize his presidency and demonstrate to the public he is focused on trying to speed up the economic recovery. >> today, five years after the start of that great recession, america has fought its way back. >> reporter: in a new nbc news "wall street journal" poll, 29% believe the country is headed in the right direction near a two-year low. a growing majority believes the country is on the wrong track. the president acknowledged during this recovery the middle-class is stagnating. >> even though our businesses are creating new jobs and broken record profits nearly all the income gains of the past ten years have continued to flow to the top 1%. >> reporter: while unemployment has fallen during his presidency, from a high of 10% to 7.6% today, these folks at a florida jobs fair this week are still frustrated. >> you can send out 100 resumes and you never get a response. there are so many people out there looking for jobs. >> right now it is terrible. it is terrible. you can do a lot better. >> reporter: back in illinois, the president's talk wasn't just all about the economy. he blamed republicans in congress for obstructing his agenda and constantly trying to repeal his signature health care law. >> stop taking meaningless repeal votes and share your concrete ideas with the country. >> reporter: on this point the public agrees with the president. 56% called congressional republicans too inflexible when dealing with the president. only 19% believe they are striking the right balance. still the public is not very optimistic about the president's second term. just 43% think he can be effective. a majority, 53%, believe he won't be able to get much done. but the president pledged to try. >> the only thing i care about is how to use every minute of the remaining 1,276 days of my term to make this country work for working americans again. >> brian, one of his big challenges in the next six months is implementing health care. right now all-time record low of people in our poll thinks his health care law is a good idea. just 34%. he has got a lot of challenges on his plate. >> chuck todd covering it all in the new york studios. chuck, thanks. of all the 535 members of congress, there was one name in particular that americans came to know two years ago because of what he did and what led to his resignation. new york democratic congressman anthony weiner was caught in a string of inappropriate internet relationships some of them illustrated with vivid photographs. his name was tossed on the stack of disgraced former politicians until he decided to run for mayor of new york city. but yesterday he was forced to admit his behavior continued after he left congress and this now involves his prominent wife and the prominent political family named clinton. weiner insisted today this is not about him. but the race for mayor, the media attention and the anger being vented right now is all about him. we get our report on all of it from nbc's andrea mitchell. >> reporter: today anthony weiner said it was all about the city not about him. >> you know, i am fine. i have an amazing wife and child upstairs. i have a comfortable life. this is not about me. >> reporter: but to many it did seem to be all about him especially after watching his wife, huma abedin, long time hillary clinton confidant break her silence to come to his defense. >> it took a lot of work. and a whole lot of therapy to get to a place where i could forgive anthony. that was a decision i made for me. for our son, and for our family. >> reporter: to outraged editorial writers and tv commentators, weiner was hiding behind his wife. >> to cover his butt. dragging a nice woman, drags her out to stand there next to him, it makes richard nixon and pat nixon look like it was a royal marriage. >> reporter: "the new york times" decried his arrogance. "the wall street journal" compared him to eliot spitzer. the paper wrote another "narcissist attempting a political comeback after humiliating his wife." then there its the time line. weiner's latest online sext, a full year after he resigned from congress in disgrace. a week before this gauzy, "people" magazine, profile, quoting huma as saying "anthony has spent every day since then trying to be the best dad and husband he can be." to the clintons, huma is family. bill clinton officiated her marriage to weiner and said if he had a second daughter it would be huma. her mentor, hillary clinton, proved that wives and voters can forgive. >> i am not sitting here some little woman standing by my man. like tammy wynette. >> reporter: weiner seems to be channelling bill clinton. >> i won't stop fighting until the last dog dies. >> i will be there for you until the last dog dies. >> reporter: in the september issue of harper's bazaar headlined "the good wife" huma wrote putting yourself out there comes with a cost. in life as in fiction. >> voters need to see you together up on the stage holding hands. >> i want to be a great state's attorney. i can't do it without you. >> reporter: before the latest revelations, weiner was leading a crowded primary race for mayor. he has already had plenty of money in the bank, some say he has nothing to lose at least not politically. >> andrea, to another matter on your beat. that is caroline kennedy's name in the news. tonight, a story i think you first reported was coming down the track in april. >> back in april. she has been nominated. she has to be confirmed by the senate. i think that really is just a formality. she will be ambassador to japan. she has no ambassador experience. there is plenty back in her history. her grandfather, joe kennedy was ambassador to great britain. but the kennedy name is magic in japan. back in the '60s, japan was on its heels, jfk, his brother, and their first ambassador to japan, really set the relationship going forward. this is the third largest economy. it is a big job. women are not accepted in business and in the professions the way they are here in the states, at least better in the states. in japan. so this is going to be a big challenge for her. caroline kennedy, as i say the kennedy name, celebrity, an early, strong supporter of barack obama when he was running against hillary clinton. >> andrea mitchell thank you for all of it. the duke and duchess of cambridge, william and kate, revealed the name of their newborn son. he is george alexander louis. or as he will be addressed this royal highness prince george of cambridge. tonight the family made their way to kate's parents house in the village of bucklebury where kate's mother, the baby's only living grandmother, carol middleton is expected to play a big role in the days and years ahead for that matter. nbc's chris jansing has made her way to bucklebury tonight. chris, good evening. >> reporter: good evening, brian. from a pub frequented by the middletons, you know it is a real break with royal tradition to take a two-day heir to the throne out of the palace into the countryside. unexpected too that they named him so quickly. but what is not a surprise is the name itself. just 24 hours after the world first glimpsed the baby cambridge, he got a very grownup name. >> it's george! >> reporter: george alexander louis. >> lovely combination actually. >> i think it's a tremendous name. very traditional. >> reporter: ending a week's long guessing game. >> it matters an enormous amount in royal, because what they're consciously doing is to fling back the memory, the imagination, sometimes hundreds of years. >> reporter: george the name of six previous kings two of them immortalized by hollywood. >> apart from the place we must not mention. >> reporter: there was "the madness of king george iii" who lost the american colonies. >> the united states. >> reporter: and george vi in "the king's speech." he the beloved father of the queen. >> it got much better, papa. >> bless you. >> reporter: who met her great grandson for the first time this morning. then will and kate did most untraditional thing taking his royal highness out of the palace off to kate's hometown of bucklebury. welcomed by the sounds and the sights of celebration. but most of all, by the familiar comfort of kate's family, who built a bond with william over ten years of the couple's courtship. >> he is known to call michael middleton dad. carol said to dote on her son-in-law. a photograph of him on her mobile phone. >> reporter: like diana, carol middleton was a hands-on open ly affectionate mom.ly affectionate mom. a descendant of coal miners who with her husband built a multimillion dollar business and raised a future queen. now as prince george's only grandmother she is in a unique position of influence. >> she will be there to say this is what we achieved with very little. you can go on and do great things, king or not. >> reporter: and back to the names, apparently, kate liked the name alexander for the girl. that may be why alexander now for george. and also louis for lord mountbatten. who was very close to prince charles. it is worth pointing out, brian, that prince george when he becomes king isn't obligated to take any of those names. >> chris jansing in a prominent but still very small town. chris, thanks for your reporting tonight. sadly, an awful scene in northwestern spain to report tonight where a high-speed train derailed tearing at least one car open on the tracks. there are reports of about 45 dead. dozens more perhaps 70 wounded. rescue crews are still working to free people who they fear are trapped inside. the mayor of rio apologize ed today for the lapse in security that allowed crowds to surround at times completely stop the pope on his ride into the city from the airport monday. the pope was in the small fiat minivan and was at times completely exposed. this morning, security was tighter, more visible with 5,000 military and police sup limiting plain clothed security. as pope francis celebrated mass before 150,000 people. later this evening, he was out again as a crush of people surrounded him wanting to take photos. tonight three weeks after the deadline passed doubling student loan rates leaving millions of american students in the lurch, the u.s. senate has now passed a bill that will lower rates for college students this fall. the house passed a similar bill. it is likely to pass the senate version now, sending the combined act to the president for his signature. still ahead for us this evening, american hospitals. with the kinds of services you see at restaurants and spas, that includes some emergency rooms, given the cost of health care isn't about time, we got a little customer service. later the story behind what is easily the picture of the day featuring a very familiar face with a new look for a reason. as we mentioned our health news tonight is about a big change happening in hospitals. more and more trying to be a nice place to stay even though few of us ever want to go there. there is a financial incentive to offer patients better services and surroundings to the tune of $1 billion a year. our report on all of it from dr. nancy snyderman, our chief medical editor. >> reporter: an early morning massage. >> that's wonderful. >> this is lavender. >> reporter: some aroma therapy. >> nice. >> reporter: these are the amenities, not at a spa, but at california's st. helena hospital. 61-year-old o'rourke sweeney is here for heart surgery. >> we want patients to know they're more than a procedure to us. that we will take care of them. that they're our guests in our home. >> it's not just the act of actually massaging. it's the fact that they care enough to do this. >> reporter: it is happening in hospitals across the nation. the affordable care act ties $964 million in medicare funding this year to patient satisfaction. there is even a grading system. lower scores can mean fines. a 32-question government survey asks patients for example whether doctors carefully listen to you and patients have taken to social media sites to post reviews of their doctors. >> i feel thoroughly googled every time a patient walks into my office. it's pretty obvious that patients are more savvy today. >> reporter: in new york, the hospital has a no-wait emergency room. every patient who walks in is instantly triaged into an e.r. bed. but with faster access comes frustration. >> in the emergency department you have to balance two responsibilities, the responsibility to the patient you are seeing and the responsibility to all the other patients walking in the door. because we have to see everyone who comes in for whatever they come in for. >> reporter: critics say mandated patient surveys might have unintended consequences. "forbes" magazine discovered hospitals trying to artificially boost their satisfaction scores. one of the more egregious things that i came across was the example of a hospital that was providing vicodin goody bags as they called to to discharged patients. >> reporter: american hospital association responds that they're committed to care delivered in the right way in a manner that respects the values and preferences of the patient and family. >> give me a breath. >> reporter: at saint helena's, o'rourke sweeney recovers from his surgery. modern health care, now balancing patient satisfaction with the best path to healing. dr. nancy snyderman, nbc news, new york. and quickly here, we got a situation in the gulf tonight. if you know the region, 40 miles south of grand isle, louisiana, it's a natural gas platform. it collapsed and is burning to the water line. officials are telling us there are few environmental dangers evident. if you know the region and its history of course we have heard that before. we'll keep an eye on it. when we come back, the story behind the "photo of the day." i we came across a photo today that is almost shocking to look at at first. taken at kennebunkport, maine at the summer home of former president george h.w. bush 41. in fact, it's shocking because it shows the former president in a way we have never seen him before. >> reporter: it doesn't look at all like the former 41 we have come to know. then you see the reason for the former president's new look. the 2-year-old named patrick sitting in his lap. patrick is the son of one of president bush's secret service agents. he's lost his hair during chemo while undergoing treatment for leukemia. so the former president and most of his security detail did the only thing that made sense to them. they shaved their heads and became the largest hairless solidarity flash mob in the entire state of maine. for the former president, this is more personal than it may look. there's a history here for the bushes. george and barbara lost their second child to leukemia. their daughter robin was just four years old when she died. they, of course, have never gotten over it. that much was evident during an emotional interview, jenna bush conducted with her grandfather a year ago. >> there is people in heaven that you want to see? >> definitely. >> who would you want to see first? >> my mom. and my father. and maybe robin our little girl that died. >> just days ago former president bush enjoyed a warm, gracious day at the white house as the obamas hosted the bushes to pay tribute to his points of light foundation. he has been in a wheelchair, and scooter to his great frustration ever since his legs gave out a few years back. late last year he had a health scare, serious enough to gather family members around his hospital bed. but for this world war ii veteran and former president who went skydiving the day he turned 85 it's his disposition that has always broken through and powered him on. patrick's family says he faces a long road but his prognosis is positive especially if you believe in the healing power of having a good friend. former president, making news today in his own way. another break and when we come back tonight, even if you're thinking of hitting all the museums you can in washington this summer, you won't be allowed to see this one. finally tonight, if washington, d.c. is the capital of all museums, and considering this is the height of summer tourist season, we wanted to show you one place not on the tour. where the public is not allowed. but it contains vast treasures nonetheless of a secret variety. specifically the tools of the trade of the cia. tonight our chief foreign correspondent richard engel has been offered a rare look. >> reporter: it's the greatest museum you'll never see. and it's filled with secrets. hidden cameras, weapons, decoding machines. >> figuring out how the enigma worked is one of the turning points of the war. >> absolutely. >> reporter: world war ii when the cia began as the oss, the office of strategic services. ever since, the agency has created tools for spies. not james bond, not maxwell smart. >> hello, chief? >> reporter: these are for real, vintage pistols with silencers, a camera carrying pigeon, a 70s era drone the size of a dragonfly, the insectothopter. a coin-sized cold war camera. >> this is a microdot camera. the film pack is this disk. >> reporter: it's american history, but no visitors allowed. the secrecy protects cia officers undercover. >> i love this. even in your own museum. oh, to celebrate the accomplishments. all of their faces are blurred out. the killing of osama bin laden is represented here too. this is the mock up. i recognize this from seeing it so many times. this is bin laden's compound. a mock up. >> the original model was used to brief the policy makers. >> the white house? >> to brief the president. >> brief the president? >> absolutely. the assault team used it to plan their raid. >> reporter: so tell us more -- >> we had hundreds of pieces of all source intelligence to make it as accurate as possible. >> including the internal spaces? >> including -- i can't talk about that. >> can't talk about that? >> no. >> reporter: they can talk about this, osama bin laden's personal ak-47, recovered by navy seals on the night of the raid. much like in the movie "zero dark 30." the real one. this one has never been seen until now. >> yes, this is the rifle that was recovered from the third floor of the abbottabad compound by the assault team. it is a russian ak with chinese markings. >> reporter: on the night of the raid, bin laden never fired a shot. now he's gone and his gun is a museum piece. one of thousands here for private viewing only. richard engel, nbc news, at cia headquarters. >> back on the record, that's our broadcast on a wednesday night. thank you for being here with us. i'm brian williams. we hope to see you right back here tomorrow evening. good night. good wednesday evening. >> we begin with a story you'll see only on nbc bay area. a popular amusement park under fire tonight. six flags discovery kingdom is working to clean up a mess after we asked questions about debris in a nearby creek. the junk is from the park and from an old ski show? >> reporter: that's right. it appears that some of the park's leftover ski equipment from the once popular water ski show never got cleared out. the departments of fish and wildlife says it has launched an investigation and a local environmentalist is demanding that the park clean up its back jared mess. >> a lake like this can't take care of itself. >> reporter: doug is on a mission to preserve the city's lake and nearby creek. >> i got one. oh, no, no. darn. it's not a keeper. it's not indigenous to these waters. >> reporter: he has been chronicling a mess, debris that six flags discovery kingdom has failed to completely clean up. >> we used to have structures in the water back here that discovery kingdom used to use in the water ski shows. and they deteriorated and the storms carried them down stream. you can see the red has not
on those tests, and we are even in about a winning teachers on their ability to improve reading or writing, whether they teach it or not. it does not matter. when everyone is focused on that, how have you guys succeeded in pushing a social and emotional character development agenda so well? we do not have much time, so let's start with you, shelley. >> it is necessary that you help people make the link between social and emotional learning and the academic curriculum. people understand the culture and climate of schools is critical. i have indicated my board, teachers, and parents. the resonance of that has been very responsive. when you state it that way, i have not found difficulty in moving forward, in any of the district's i have been in. people understand character matters. when you create a positive climate, students will do better. >> for me, asa started this for us, and we can now let -- we cannot let children fall behind. fortunately, there is a lot of evidence that shows kids to have these skills to read better. we have been pointing back to the evidence of why this will improve reading, which is one of our primary goals. we have a great deal of opportunity with the common core. you will not succeed at a richer curriculum without these skills of persistence in problem- solving, ability to work with others. the common core, which you will hear about later today, oopened the other academic are opportunities in which to learn about social and emotional learning. >> we can talk a lot, we have the research and the numbers, but for communities, they need to see it. for us, what i have been doing is encouraging our teachers to inter-visit. i have been encouraging parents to visit different schools where you can see the interrelated this between the curricula, but also a place where people are nice to each other. people need to see it. in october, we had a district- wide conference focusing on bullying, not just looking at the reasons for bullying, but giving people the strategy's of how you go beyond. what needs to be in place in order for that to happen? the conference was focused for parents. we spent a lot of time -- it was saturday, so they give up their time. we reserve space so that we could take care of the kids while the parents were engaged, sharing some of their perspective. i think the entire notion of triangulating this in communities, looking at parents and schools, students, we have a committed to going initiative and one of our our schools where we are looking at what are the resources that our families need? it is not just what they need during the school day, but what do they need beyond the school day in order to do this work well? >> and the curriculum and standards must build the spirit and our children. we have to recognize, we practice the policy of the tension --attention-ality. anyone who approaches our doors with curriculum materials or other programs that might support us, they have to meet the checklist. if it does not address it, if it does not allow us to do it in collaboration with academic goals, if those resources are designed to push us towards addressing those topics in isolation, we address them. >> let me say what none of them mentioned, a significant factor is courageous leadership. we want to thank challis, eric, and gail, and sonya for being champions of social and emotional learning. thank you. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] >> we are at the home of the united states first president, george washington. this is not vernon. visitors and staff are celebrating his birthday. his actual birthday is this friday, but in 1971, the date of the holiday was changed. since then, the federal holiday has not fallen on the actual day that he was born. visitors to mount vernon celebrating washington's 281st birthday this year. we will be taking it to other submitting a locations on this president's day holiday. in the meantime, remarks from marissa mayer. later, a look at mental health and addictions. before that, here is our look at our first ladies series. >> i think the women themselves in many cases were interested in politics but had no vehicle to express that in their own lives, so they were attracted to men who were going to become politically active, or were already politically active. >> each of them, i find, intriguing. probably half of them are out there because they are so obscure historical. half of these women probably would be totally unrecognizable to most men and women on the street. >> c-span premiers it new series "first ladyies." exploring the lives of the women who served as first lady. from martha washington to michelle obama. season one begins tonight at 9:00 eastern and pacific. watched the program earlier in the day live at 2:00 eastern on c-span. >> now the woman who runs yahoo!, cdo marissa mayer. she was at the world economic forum in davos, switzerland, and she shared her insights on the direction of new technology. she is the youngest ceo of a fortune 500 company. the world economic forum brings together thousands of liters in business. this is about half an hour. >> welcome to "insight and ideas with marissa mayer." the c.e.o. of yahoo! if i am not mistaken, this is the first such conversation since becoming ceo. >> that's right. >> well, it is an honor for both me and the economic forum. e're here to talk about the future of technology. let's begin with the one nut that no one seems to be able to crack. the platform shift from desktop to mobile. how do you crack that nut? >> it is really important. if you look at what is happening in terms of the shift to mobile, the number of mobile phones has tripled in five years. tablet sales will out-sell laptops this year if predictions hold true. it is really incredibly important. a lot of consumers are making the shift. one is understanding how this works, what this provides. and how we can benefit user expectations. the other piece is monetization. whenever you see a consumer shift of this type, there will be an interesting value added for -- to create modernization around it. >> where does that confidence come from? >> the bane of my existence from 1999 to 2004, i was at google, and every time i would interact with anyone externally, the one question they would ask me, search is wonderful, it is great to be able to find everything, how is anyone going to make any money from this? now that seems almost absurd, because search is the giant moneymaker online. that said, whenever you see consumers adopting a technology platform, a particular application like search with this much volume, you know that advertisers will want to participate. there's usually a way where you can introduce advertising such that it is not intrusive, that it adds value, that enhances the experience. that's what we need to work on. >> we can look back and see how that was done with search. everybody gets to play monday morning quarterback and feel smart about it. can you tell yet what some of the shifts will be in mobile that will allow mobile to duplicate the success of search as a money maker? it has to make money or else at some point innovation will grind to a halt. >> well, i think people already are. for example, the application stores, a lot of people sell applications. i think the main thing is, search is a daily habit. what people do on their phones often becomes a daily habit. when i thought about the strategy for yahoo!, i pulled the list of what people do on their phones in rank order frequency. if you ignore a few exceptions, and maps because it was really expensive and hard to do right, the list looks like, e-mail, weather, news, financial quotes, sports scores, photos. you get the idea. it was funny. because phil and i would recite that list on account of my being the new c.e.o. at yahoo! i would say what am i doing? my friends and family would say, you are describing yahoo! business. i would say, no, i am listing in frequency order what people do on their phones. the nice thing is at yahoo!, we have all the content that people have on their phones. >> search remains one of the defining experiences for most internet users. it seems to me that it will remain fundamental to what we do. how do you see it evolving? >> all of the innovations you will see in search will be in the user interface layer. if you look at the past few years, there has been universal search, search will not always be text based. when you are typing, it is responsive. voice search, a third of searches are done by voice on the phone. all of those types of things are what we will see in the future. i also think that there is a huge opportunity in the future around search personalization. what do i know already? what are my preferences? and how to present the information? we can go about how we shape the internet and order it for you. there are all of these news feeds all over the web. twitter, facebook. the question is, what order should people read these in the morning? what should they look at? how should they do that? to really do that, you need terrific personalization. >> personalization replaces search? once the computer figures out what it is we like to look for, it will look for it on our behalf? and we won't have to go and do it any longer? >> i think the right way to look at it is not that it replaces search, but that it becomes a critical part of the search. one provocative way of thinking about it is in terms of the logic, that is your query. in the future, you become the query. it is what you type, it is your background, it is where you are, it is your preferences, it is what you looked at yesterday. the search box can take all that input and create something that is customized for you. the nice thing is, if you are the query, you could possibly type in search terms. or you could be the query passively. this is the notion that we can pick up your contacts, who you are talking to, where you are. we can provide useful information or a series of links, pictures, videos more useful than your current context. >> right now for most of us, the web is still a very managed curated experience. how long does it take before we get there? >> i think it will happen in the next three to five years. a lot of what we have seen happen, image recognition, voice recognition, translation, these are backbone technologies. it is a matter of being able to take personalized notions, what articles to click on, taking all of those signals and mapping it to understand that when i like clean energy on facebook and i tweet out something about green energy, that is a same interest of mine. >> are different companies go to do it differently, is this something that everyone will have to move in the same direction on? you have to understand what the ontology of entities is. how are things name, how are they organized into hierarchies? for example, you need to know that wisconsin is a state and that there are cities inside of it. if i say i like wisconsin there are a whole bunch of interest that passed it off of that. he need to understand that hierarchy of objects. you also need to understand how they relate to each other. >> does this personalization become complementary to search, does that create a new paradigm? the most recent thing that any of the large internet companies have come out with is this social search that facebook has introduced. it is that a stepping stone? >> there is the social graph. what i am talking about, it will give way to the interest graph. you know this set of things i am interested in, you know the other set of things other people are interested in. they aren't just based on, did they go to the same school, do they work in the same place, they are based on, are they interested in the same things? we can create personalization technologies because you can see what people are doing and provide you with information. there's also a very powerful social component because we can show you interests you may have in common with people you did not realize. i recently found out that the founder of linkedin and i both had the same major at stanford. symbolic systems. so you can find these kinds of things in the interest graph. you can also find people who you may have never met who you should know because you have things in common with them. >> it would seem to me a pretty high bar to entry. you have to have a platform that is fairly broad and a huge level of user engagement. right? >> that's right. and we are lucky at yahoo! because we also have finance and sports and games and things like omg! celebrity news. there are a lot of different verticals. it has broad applications like search and mail. >> does the interest graph have the potential to disrupt the paradigm for tech power that was, in some way, set by your old boss, the four horsemen, could the interest or something else change that order of the universe? >> i think all four of those players do a terrific job, providing a lot of great experiences. all four of those people will become major players. the analogy misses that there are other players in the space. twitter is very exciting and interesting. technology is not stagnant. it is amazing to think about different waves of the internet and technology. the first wave was yahoo! itself. the directory. there are these pages out there, how do you organize them? then that got so large, the directory model broke down and gave way to search. the next wave came with social. now we're on the mobile wave. that has all happened in about 15 years. we have gone through four major technology shifts in terms of who the players are. there are always opportunities for a new disruption. i think a lot of this will be around interest, but that's just my prediction. >> so we shouldn't, as consumers or in any other role that we may occupy, worry about the control that certain companies may exercise over the internet itself and the information that it contains? >> well, i think that privacy will always be something that users should consider. i also think privacy is always a trade-off. when you give up some of your personal information, you get something in return. it is about making those trade- offs. how the information, allowing them to control the information you have, and choice. did you want to use the services in a personalized way or not? those are the big three components of privacy online. i also fundamentally believe that user data belong to the end user. >> >> the question of control is the one that gets people most exercise. how do you ensure -- how does any company that participates in the space, this industry, guarantee that remains the case and provides users with enough confidence that the information they share is not being abused? >> the second part is all about transparency. what searches do you have and how are they being used? that is something that is really important. there will be industry standards in terms of providing users an account statement. some of these primary platforms, what they show you it is what data you have stored there. one of the key pieces that also provides user choice is making sure the data is portable. it allows your barrier to switching carriers to be lower. one of the analogies i use, the papers you wrote in college, are they yours? absolutely. >> i feel that they are. nobody else is interested in them. >> but nothing else you have done over the past 10 years is not nearly as coherent and structured, but just as insightful in terms as they were your words expressed your way. and it tells a lot about what you learned. i do believe fundamentally they are yours. if you can take that history and pick it up and move to a different search provider and take that as an interest graph and use it in a different application, that should fundamentally belong to you. you are allowing the service to access it to get better information and better results. either they deliver on that promise or you take your data and go elsewhere. >> well, that raises an interesting question. should you be able to take all of that data? it sounds to me that it could be a great deal to move into one platform or another. is that possible? i can see a platform being resistant to that. >> it is technologically possible. a lot of the players are providing for something like that. it is not something that is generally something that people think about doing every day. but it is an option. i think it is an important one. it can give users a lot of confidence in terms of how things are handled. >> and described how one of your employees asked how yahoo! is going to compete if it doesn't have one of these four key distribution technologies. there is the mobile operating system, hardware, the brother, and social. i do not know that we got an answer. >> one of our employees as that. given that we do not have mobile hardware or a social network, how are we going to compete? >> it is a question for every company that seeks to compete >> of the four horsemen of the internet, almost all of them are playing in one, if not several, of those mediums. i think the big piece here is that it really allows us to partner. yahoo! has been a friendly company. it ultimately means there is an opportunity for strong partnerships. that is what we will be focused on. we work with apple and google in terms of the operating system. we have a strong partnership with facebook. we're able to work with some of these players in order to bolster our user experiences. >> is that diecast? you talk about this new graph, the interest graph. is that the kind of technology that will become key to distribution? >> with the web becoming so vast, there is so much context and so much social context, and now there is so much location context, how do you pull all that together? your personalization comes in to make sense of the content. it is the internet ordered for you. it brings yahoo! back to its roots. you cannot just categorize anymore. a feed of information that is ordered for you. it is also available on your mobile phone. >> some of those technologies remain -- there is competition in the browser world, in the mobile hardware world, and in the operating system world. what about social? >> facebook provides an amazing platform. now what happens with social is what you do with it. it will be the predominant platform. what happens in social is what you do with it. it is taking that and finding useful context. you are in davos right now, do you know who else is? and be able to offer me the opportunity to meet up with someone who i did not know would be here. >> there is a natural conflict in the world of technology between innovation and execution. we have seen many companies struggling with this. can both be done well at the same time? >> it was pointed out to me a few years ago. one hypothesis is what is the opposite of innovation? a lot of people would say the status quo. there is another school of thought that says the opposite of innovation is execution. if you have to be in execution mode, it is hard to find a space to innovate. for us, there is a great period of execution. can we take these products and revitalize them for the web and make the transition to mobile? will there be room to innovate? to say this is how yahoo! groups worked on the web, but now there are these new opportunities. can we spot some of those innovative ideas? >> is size a bear to innovation? >> i do not think so. you can innovate at scale and with large size. if you have 10 engineers and you are going to grow that to be 20 or 30, do you want to do the same set of things two or three times better, or do you want to be doing two to three times the things? interestingly because of execution, because there's so much the opposite, if you wanted to execute perfectly, get the design exactly right, work through the details, you would invest two to three times as many people per project. if you want to find those new ideas, it wants to take those same people and put them on something that is far flung that you have never thought about. it really is this tension. you can innovate at scale but you need to save room to have small teams working on those ideas. >> share with us your experience over the past few months. >> you arrived to an innovative company, but perhaps there was too much going on. what have you focused on? what are you most excited about? particularly the ones you have the most control over. >> i was genuinely pleased. i knew there had to be great people at yahoo!. the same way that when you look at art, you can tell if it was created by a nice person or not. or a depressed person or not. you can tell with yahoo! products that there are really nice, smart people there that have a great time. it is a great company overall that has a very fun culture. my first few months, my focus -- technology companies live and die by talent. we talk about the talent wars. it is not that people in talent wars are not competitive with each other, it is just that when you start to see the best people migrating from one company to the next, it means the next wave is starting. i believe that really strong companies all have very strong cultures. yahoo! is no exception. they have been a strong company for a long time. they have a strong culture. they are different from every other corporate culture. i want to find a way to amplify it. amplifying it is how you find the energy, and energy is what you can harness. if we have people and they are excited about what they're working on every day and they realize the next big hurdle is mobile, you can take that energy around the culture and find fun ways to apply it that can be really impactful. >> what are some of the things you found that we will see over the next few months? >> i do not like to talk about things before we do them. i do think a lot of the keys is what i have already talked about. there is a real opportunity to help guide people's daily habits in terms of the content they read. that is something we're really working on. all these daily habits, these -- news, sports, games, answers, groups -- these are the types of things where we have been underinvested in them. a little love will go a long way. yahoo! groups has not been refreshed in 11 years. it will go a long way if we start to modernize some of these products. >> when people get excited about technology, they forget about the role of design. going back to some of those routes and saying, now that social the allows everyone to be a publisher and for you to be able to find interesting question to answer, topics were you are a demint expert and write about them, and four friends who know you can come by your answer, i think there is powerful that we can unleash their in terms of the content for end-users and its utility. >> whether it is the big companies or start-ups, what other start-ups excite you? >> there are so many things. this is a question like to ask people. the one answer you never want to give is, i am very discerning, there is nothing that good. there are so many amazing thing that you get to see all the time. all kinds of amazing technologies on mobile. when you think about what it means to be location sensitive. something i've spent a fair amount of time thinking about. all kinds of terrific technology is there. some of these are very basic in terms of being able to check-in. if you know where people are and where they check in, there are all sorts of sophisticated thing that you could go on to do. there are amazing technologies like that. he in bridging out from the mobile technologies and desktop technologies, those are terrific things happening. in the world of biotech, being able to do dna analysis, analyzing and helping infertile couples doing a better job conceiving children there is a great company i know of. there is an amazing company working on wireless power. can you have an automated energy machine? they actually think you can send energy use in waves. the thing about that, in terms of us running around and putting things in, you just need to get close enough to the router to pick up on the power. what that could do to the world of advertising. the signs of bus stops little from behind, they have wireless power behind it. you could be at the bus stop and charging what you use your device. they're all kinds of exciting things that people work on every day. >> when people get excited about technology, they often forget about design. apple changed the way that many of us interact with technology. interact with the internet itself. that may be that form can be as important as function. how much you think about that? how important is it to what you are doing? >> i think about design a lot. apple is the gold standard. in that, apple's philosophy is that the design and technology itself should fall away. i think that is really true. i think in a lot of these interactions, technologies become very powerful when they do just fall away. the fact you can switch from is amazing. the fact kids are using tablets. parents will upload videos, showing before they even talk, they know how to turn the page on the ipad. they can have it within videos. they cannot even express what they like that part, but they know how to get their. what is powerful about that, it uses the national paradigms' that people already have embedded in their minds, in eight to us. it allows us to use technology. that is incredibly powerful. that's overall what you want to have happen, to be able to whittle away the technology so that all the complication lies underneath. there is that thin layer that you interact with. one of the reasons why voice recognition has taken off to the degree that is has and why siri is something that is so interesting for people. you can just say what you are thinking and transcribe an e- mail or a text or a search. now there is this whole set of technology and supercomputers that with your voice, you canyou can have it do what you want them to do. >> is that to say that a level of curation, something akin to a wall garden, may be necessary? >> i think there is a clear tension there. i do think that the application systems that exist in i.o.s. and in apple is very curated, but absolutely beautiful. i do not think it is such a bad thing because it has raised users' expectations for design. people used to not think about design or appreciate it that much. when you see something that is beautiful, it does create a lot of respect. i think that is one of the reasons why apple has garnered so much praise for its design is that it made sure that, for example, the entire ecosystem of politics on that platform work -- >> c-span is visiting historic sites on this president day. visitors are commemorating george washington's 280th birthday with the old guard fife and drum corps. this is the same group that guards the tomb of the unknown soldier at arlington national ceremoncemetery. >> after a successful bayonet charge. by 1779, the continental army had become a formidable opponent for the british. they were able to stand their ground during british bayonet charges and produced several victory during the latter part and ultimately help secure the independence of the united states. as a military tradition, military units displayed their disciplined, pride, and professionalism. the commander in chief when not pass 4 review for you the audience. once again, ladies and gentlemen, the commander in chief guard. [applause] >> a look at some of the activities at mount vernon today as we bring you to historic sites on this president's day. we begin our series on the country's first ladies in about one hour 20 minutes. here is a preview. >> i think the women themselves in many cases were interested in politics but had no vehicle to express that in their own lives, so they were attracted to men who were going to become politically active, or were already politically active. >> each of them, i find intriguing. probably half of them out there precisely because they are so obscure. half of these women probably would be almost totally unrecognizable to most men and women on the streets. >> tonight, c-span premiere's its new series "first ladies." historians, chiefs of staff, social secretaries, chefs, and curators explore the lives of the women who served as first lady, from martha washington to michelle obama. season one begins tonight at 9:00 eastern and pacific. watch the program earlier in the day, live at 2:00 eastern on c- span. >> before the inaugural episode of first ladies begins, here is a discussion on mental health and addiction. speakers include a former surgeon general, ray kelly, and connecticut senator christopher murphy. the discuss the challenges of dealing with mental illness including the lack of funding and the stigma that accompanies it. we will also hear from two activists that lost their son from issues from mental health and addiction. this is from california. >> thank you. i imagine you are getting a little weary now. it may seem as if we are changing the subject, but we are actually not. let me begin by thanking the clinton foundation and the help matters initiative team for including mental health in this year's discussion. that is critical. i know that president clinton thinks so. i want to take a few minutes to try to frame that issue in the context of our overall discussion. as surgeon general, in 1999, i have the opportunity to release the first ever surgeon general's report on mental health. and then i was asked by the director general of the who if i would come to geneva and present the report before that body in may 2000. so it has not been that long since we really started to discuss mental health at this level. i have to say, our major recommendation in our reports was for parity of access to mental health services. that was 1999. it was not until 2008 that legislation was passed, signed by president bush in october 2008, for parity of access and mental health services. president obama issued an executive order that resulted in the affordable care act, among other things. let me begin by defining mental health. i want to do that because we've almost immediately get to mental illness. but i think mental health is critical to think about. in our report, after a lot of debate, we designed -- defined mental health as the successful performance of mental functions. such that one is able to be productive in his or her work, to develop and maintain positive relationships with other people, beginning with families, to life to changes in one's and environment, and to deal with adversity. just think about that. being productive, developing positive relationships with others, adapting to change, like adolescents, for example, dealing with adversity. we saw 30% rate of depression in new orleans after hurricane katrina. so mental health is being able to deal with these life challenges and circumstances and to be productive. it should follow then that mental disorder, mental illness represents alterations in those mental functions such that one is able to carry them out because the mood disorders, thinking disorders, were behavioral disorders. so mental disorders follow immediately from the definition of mental health. i do not want you to take your mental health for granted, because that is what we do. we take our known health for granted, and so therefore, we are not sympathetic when people have mental illnesses, because we have not thought about the fact we could lose it. we do not want to take our mental health for granted. there were five key messages in the surgeon general's report that came out in 1999. the first message is that mental health is fundamental to overhaul health and well-being. mental health is fundamental. mental disorders are common. just as things go wrong with the heart, lungs, kidneys, liver, things go wrong with the brain. they always have and always will. the only question is, how will we respond, as individuals, families, as a society? we estimated 20% to 25% of americans will experience a mental disorder in any given year. almost 50 million people. somewhere around 13 to 14 million children experiencing some sort of known disorder each year. mental disorders are disabling. they are as disabling as cardiovascular disease or cancer. in fact, studies show right up there with cardiovascular disease and cancer, or between the two, in terms of disability. there was also some good news in our report. the best news, of course, was that mental disorders are treatable. 85% to 90% of the time, we should be able to treat people with mental disorders and return them to productive lives and positive relationships. mrs. carter, who held the first- ever white house conference on mental health, likes to say that recovery is possible. there is hope because recovery is possible, and indeed, we have that ability. the bad news from our report, more than half of the people who experienced a mental disorder will not get the treatment they need. only one-third of children. there are a lot of reasons for that in terms of our system, but there is also the issue of stigma. even today, we still have a lot of stigmas surrounding mental disorders. we keep trying to push back the stigma so that people will realize that mental disorders represent a brain disease. as i said before, just as things go wrong with other organs, they go wrong with the brain. i hope i do not need to tell you the brain is the most important organ in the body. it is not functioning right, nothing else functions right. we are involved now with the nfl, dealing with the issue of chronic traumatic encephalopathy with " but ballplayers and trying to prevent it with people coming up. it is not just with football, think about boxing, soccer, hockey. the brain is too important an organ to be subject to the banging of heads. so we have declared that the banging of hence can no longer be considered a sport. the brain is too important. that is the message we're trying to send at every level. kids start banging heads at elementary school seen what the guys on tv do. those are our major messages. i think we have made progress -- item and have time to talk about those -- but we have the integration of mental health and primary care. we have no integrated mental health and primary care in five mental health centers. we have developed a strategy for treating mental health in the emergency room so as to give dignity to the individual and family, but also to try to transmit them to continuity of care. we have demonstrated that we can reduce waiting times by as much as 80%, and reduce the cost by 60%. we can do a lot of things to improve mental health and mental health care. i want to say a word about the relationship between mental health and substance abuse and addiction. you have an outstanding panel following me who is going to talk about these issues and how they have experienced them in different capacities. let me say, and actions are, in fact, brain diseases, and dealing with addiction requires one to seriously encounter it addictions has a brain problem. christopher in his recent book "recovered to live" talks about what people in the addiction go through. and the importance of hope in recovering. you are familiar with the 12- step program. according to the director of the substance abuse and mental health services administration, about half of people, according to her, who are afflicted have diagnosable mental disorders. conversely, of course, what we see is a relationship between the severity of the mental illness and the risk of addiction. so there is clearly a relationship. it is something that we have to take seriously, as it relates to children, especially. alcohol is the leading addiction affecting certainly millions in this country, costing millions of dollars and lives, but also becoming addicted to illicit drugs of various kinds. of course, now more and more prescription drugs. there are other addictions, as you know. there is gambling. there is sex. these can all become addictions subject to the same obsessive compulsive behavior, which you will hear more about. addictions are serious, the cost millions of dollars and millions of lives every year. but prevention is possible and recovery is possible. let me close by trying to reconnect our discussion throughout the day with our discussion of mental disorders. when i left the government, after releasing this report on obesity in december 2001, we started a program called action for help the kids, working with schools. in this program, we were tried to get the schools to go back to physical education k-12, just taking more seriously the way that children eat at school, and the schools came back at us and said, we have all these problems. we are trying to keep programs, they are cutting out music. now you are going to dump this problem, dealing with those schools left behind, and you want to dump this problem on us? they went on like this until 2005, when viewing the literature, it became clear, those children who were physically active and consumes a healthy breakfast learned better. they were more disciplined in the classroom, they perform better on standardized exams on reading and math, so we called that the learning connection. three months ago in washington, we had been updated conference on that. but there is this connection between help the living and mental health. there is a connection that we should not forget about in terms of healthy lifestyles. if we want our children to perform optimally, a need to be physically active on a regular basis, a need to engage in regular nutrition -- good nutrition. that was a connection that we saw, an association, but as scientists, we want to go beyond that, we want mechanisms. now we have studies showing changes in the brain that takes place when children are physically active and get a good nutrition. weather is the frontal lobe or the hippocampus, there are changes that you can track changes of healthy lifestyle. knowing all of that, we have not been able to get to the point where we, as a society, are committed to investing in our children being able to engage in physical education k-12, and to have good nutrition. now, there is a relationship here that i think is really important, and it is that schools tend to be the great equalizer. i grew up in alabama during the worst period of discrimination and segregation. our parents used to tell us, if you just stay in school and get an education, you can go anywhere you want to go, do what you want to do, even though they have less than an elementary school education, they knew that there was this connection. so the schools were viewed as the great equalizer. when it comes to this problem, and so many children growing up in homes and communities, and may not know that they have access to help their lifestyles, healthier food -- hopefully that is changing -- hopefully at school they will have that. i think the schools need to be major players. especially now that we know that there is this connection between healthy lifestyles and mental health, mental acuity, performance. we even know, for example, in treating depression, physical activity should be a major part of that treatment. some studies show physical activity is equal to medication, but ideally we now know that it should be a combination of physical activity and medication in treating depression to be optimally effective. those are the things that we know. the brain is part of the body. in my opinion, it is the most important part. so when we talk about healthy lifestyles, one of the major benefits would be on the brain, and there will indeed be a connection, not only between learning, but between living healthy lives and mental acuity, and reducing a number of disorders and promoting mental health through healthy lifestyles. thank you. [applause] >> ladies and gentlemen, please welcome the chairman of the bryans' which, gary mendel. >> good afternoon, everyone. it is truly my privilege to be here today. i would like to extend my appreciation to president bill clinton, chelsea clinton, and their health matters initiative, for bringing to the forefront these two important issues, mental health and addiction, which are so clearly related. there is so much i want you to know today about addiction. i could speak about the facts all day. but today, i am here as a father and i speak to you as as. because if you leave here today knowing just one thing, i would like you to know about my son, brian. brian was from the beginning of very loving child, and always cared about others. but he also struggled. he struggled with anxiety, and he struggled with add. he was the last to be picked for soccer. but he was the first to crawl under a fence at yankee stadium to give a homeless person a quarter, which he did when he was a eight-years-old. that was brian. as a teenager, as many of our kids do, he tried marijuana as the use escalated, his mother and i tried absolutely everything. wilderness programs, up therapeutic schools, the best we have in the country. he tried his hardest, too. he even made it to college. but unfortunately addiction is a harsh and unrelenting disease. harder drugs followed. more relapses more rehabs. from one program he wrote me, dear dad, i want you to know i am trying my absolute hardest to be a good son. to know bryans character -- brian's character and the cruelty of addiction, i have to tell you what happened on a october 20, 2011 when he was 13 months clean. he spent the morning researching suicide notes. in the first he read was kurt cobain's. kurt's was angry and bitter, but brian was not. his note was about his -- is that this entire breadstick nation. even in his last minutes, his thoughts were about others. and i do not want to hurt anyone anymore, he wrote. do anything illegal or get high. i thought sobriety was worth a shot, hoping to get back to normal life, but has not worked. i love you all more than i can write. then my brian, the same brian that at nine months old i remember playing peekaboo around the coffee table in the living room and would crawl around the table and look up at me with that smile of his, then my brian, he hung himself. he was 25 years old. i wish i could tell you the english bowls with time, but it does not. it intensifies with me, knowing my son died of a disease that is preventable, and we do not prevent. that is treatable but we do not treat. that is undeniable, and we continually denied. a disease that in the time of this panel, 60 minutes, will 15 more brian's. 350 more will buy during this day. 350 more family members -- 350 more families will be torn apart. forever. as has my family. in the aftermath of his death, i set out to learn what could be done to spare other families from the suffering. it has been a journey in darkness. addiction works that way. it is shaded by stigma, family struggled and isolation. four other diseases there are research budgets, breakthroughs and medications. for addiction, there is some research but it is not put into practice where it could have lives ofan's life and so many like his. there are non-profits like the american cancer society that provide a place for families to turn to for information, support, and hope. for addiction, there is no such entity. that is brian's story. that's my story. if it were our story alone, it might end there, but it must not end there, because -- because it is the story of 20 million americans suffering every day with the disease of addiction and 80 million family members who love them dearly. so for their sake, and as a pledge to the clinton health matters initiative, and in brian's memory, i have made a promise. enough's. enough. no more research ignored. no more americans suffering alone, feeling ashamed because they have a disease. no more lives wasted. that is the promise of b rian's wish. our new organization will launch later this year with the new name that reflects the national mission. we will make a permanent and large-scale impact on this disease. the goal is simple, to cut in half the number of americans who suffer from this disease, the number of americans who die from this disease, and the cost to our society of this disease. the solutions are clear, prevention, treatment, recovery. we will provide resources to families, we will ensure parents know what puts their children at risk. we will move research of a scientist shelves into the communities where they belong. shelvesf scientists's to the communities where they belong. once and for all, we will eliminate this drama critics stigma of addiction. all this i promise as a parent -- once and for all, we will eliminate the stigma addiction. these are promises that depend on all of us. addiction requires a national commitment. addiction requires a national voice. it claimed my son, brian. it is not too late to save another parent's child. thank you. [applause] now, i would like to introduce john to come up on the stage. >> that was simply incredible, and what a way to start this discussion. thank you very much. congratulations to health matters and the clinton foundation for making sure addiction and mental health or part of this conference. 90-95% of conferences that are on health and health care did not include anything on mental health and addiction, and we cannot say enough about president clinton and staff for making this topic included. indeed it should be. look at the tragedies we have dealt with as a country in connecticut and colorado over the past year. everyone talks about guns. very few people talk about mental health. president clinton today talked about headlines in the past year that he paid particular attention to. one that i paid attention to was a headline that appeared in most newspaper saying we now have more deaths each year from prescription drug overdose then we do from automobile accidents. it was a shocking headlines. i hope it just does not sit there as a headline with little action. we have put a panel together to address this. we will make sure we leave time for your questions. there is a polling question to start with. approximately how many people in the united states die each year from drug and alcohol addiction? please text your answers in, and we will revisit that to see what your guesses are on that question. we have asked each member of the panel to take a few minutes and share with you, and then we will all take part in answering questions that people have. first, let me introduce the newly-elected, a kick from -- newly elected senator from connecticut, christopher murphy. >> thank you for having me in having this panel today. for the past 30 days i have been eating and sleeping and breathing newtown, conn. . brighter to my swearing in last week, i was the congressman, so that day i was on the scene a couple hours after the incident took place. to witness that hoping, incomprehensible grief is something that a lot of days i wish i had not seen, but when we were there, and the first reports of the shooting were coming in there were conflicting to do it was and how many there were. we knew. we were now the subjects of the tv stories. we have watched this on tv before. we had seen tucson and blacksburg's. we knew it was most likely a very deeply, mentally ill young man, probably in his early 20s. probably white. we do not know everything about adam laza we want to know, but we know he fits that description. -- adam lanza. beyond the anecdotal evidence of people with mental illness and cannot find treatment and go into something very troubling are equally troubling statistics. today there are over 8 million children and young adults living with a diagnosed serious mental illness. that is triple the number of young adults and adolescents who were diagnosed when president clinton took office. the number has exported -- exploded. the concurrent problem is this. over the past four years as the recession hit state budgets, which primarily pair the burden of taking care of these kids, funding for mental health has dropped by about $4.3 billion across the country, just the demand went up by 10 percent. so that bad news is the foundation for what could be to come. this gives us an opportunity to really confront tough questions for how we treat mental own this and how we fund it. i will flag areas of concern for me. i think the nra has gotten everything wrong in their approach to this tragedy, but maybe the most troublesome is the suggestion we should have a national database of everyone with a mental illness. as if there is some direct correlation between people that have a mental illness and a procession toward violence. we have made so much progress in the past 15 years and overcoming the stigma so that like my family who has a long, proud open history of mental illness we can treat it just like a physical illness. and what that all away if we get the response wrong in this way. if we go with those that say the answer is to keep a database of everyone with a mental illness or even serious mental illness, first, we feed the belief that everyone with a mental illness is prone to violence. it is not inherent in mental illness. second, we will make it harder, especially parents with kids to have a son or daughter on the verge of mental illness from getting help. it means that your kids will be put on a mass murderer watch list they cannot ever get off of. right now today you are not allowed to get a gun in this country if you have a serious mental illness that you have been adjudicated on, such that you can be prone to violence. i think we can make that tougher. i think we can talk around the edges of it, but i think it would be dangerous to further stigmatize. second is funding. we know there is a crisis in terms of the budget. the question is, we've balance the budget on the backs of state and mental health budget? one of the things i have been so stunned about is we often go looking for answers to big problems without figuring out what the question is first. what i mean is this -- we have these twin neurological funding crises in this country. we have an aging population with alzheimer's, parkinson's, and dementia. we have a tripling of the number children and young adults who need access to the system. these crises are in competition with each other. whether we want to admit it or not, one is winning and one is losing. i know we need to do more in terms of access to seniors who have serious neurological illnesses, but the fact is if you are an alzheimer's patient and are in medicare and medicaid you will have a pretty good shot to get what you need. corresponded to that is the deeply troubled mentally ill young man isolated living in his parents' basement contemplating evil is most likely not going to get what he needs. we are ready made that choice in the way restructure the funding was today. we need to be honest with ourselves that if we do not start thinking about that choice and whether we want to continue to make it, then we will not find the money someplace else. these of the conversations i hope come out of this. let's be honest about where money is and where it is not. not let's make sure we do do anything in the wake of connecticut that makes it even harder for the parent who knows they have a son or daughter who knows they need a little bit of help from going out and getting it. i think there are very important things that can come from this horrifying past 30 days if we get it right. >> thank you, senator. next we have mr. harris. [applause] next is mr. harris schwartz berg. >> i am here because i am very passionate about mental health, because i think it is one of the few things we can all immediately impact. i can speak about it on many levels. my family was touched directly by mental illness and my brother passed away about five years ago at the age of 47 after battling pie -- bipolar diseases whole life. i watch my family struggled with it, my family, and i know how we can tear apart a family, and we're just one of many millions. i see it as an employer with 15,000 employees in knowing statistically that of my 15,000 police roughly 4500 are dealing with some sort of depressive disorder -- knowing that of my 15,000 employees, roughly 4500 are dealing with some sort of the press of order. another 4000 are dealing with family members that have similar issues. we do not just see it in the way the government measures it with the fact that $50 billion of absenteeism, but also measure it with present he is some. i am here also as a parent of three girls that i know how to deal with many issues everyday, but the real reason i was asked to speak is the issue is very scary. the statistics, i do not have to repeat them. the number one market right now for inside the presence is preschoolers. that is a shocking number. -- for anti-depressants i preschools list. -- is preschoolers. the fear we have in my house and my family and everyone here, we of taken a little bit of action ourself as well. we have met at the university of michigan depression center, and we funded a stem cell research program there to see what can happen for our grandkids and my grandkids grandkids and oliver grandkids. then we went a little bit further and realize that our own community, there is nothing really going on to help the kids that are under so much stress, anxiety. we teamed up with the university of michigan depression's center and our local high school and created a program called the event program, which is to fight -- try to teach children and teachers how to study anxiety. what we are seeing is you can make a difference. what makes a difference is really just reaching out and speaking to people. the issue here is stigma. the stigma goes away when you are ok talking to people. when you reach over to your neighbor and say what is going on? we have gotten involved in what we hope will be the first of a nationwide program with the principle, a unique individual who has really taken this program and run with it, and receive the impact on the kids, but we're really here and i really here to discuss that we can help the stigma, talk about it. we all live in similar communities. we all know that someone has breast cancer, heart attack. you might call them up and ask if your kids need a list somewhere. how can i help you? you have never done that when you heard someone just institutionalize their 16-year- old. there is a problem with that. it is not physical. you cannot see it. it is the guy sitting next to you on the train, the high school quarterback. it would be better if it was a third arm so you can see what it is. but you cannot we have to realize that these people, regardless of the severity, it is a sickness and illness and cannot just turn away from it. we have to help. that is what we're hoping the program we're planning to get there will do in being out here talking very openly is a great first that. as i was telling someone behind the stage, is hard to find something else to do. the great thing i saw was when president clinton was proud of her daughter and gave her a kiss after her presentation. that is what we all have to do, because the kids have to say it. [applause] next, i would like to introduce carolyn jackson, ceo of st. christopher's hospital for children in philadelphia. thank you. located in north philadelphia, the third poorest nation -- district in the nation. our children grow up with significant challenges and health disparities. when i first came here in 2010 as the ceo i knew that we needed to consolidate our general pediatrics practices on campuses, and i knew that we need to expand them for better access. we have over 25,000 of kids to receive primary-care on campus. the thing i did not know when we started is we needed to change the care model. it took a bullet-rated -- bullet-riddled car for me to realize that. a group of teachers were fighting after school and a carload of boys and drove over to the home of three brothers to settle the score. when they arrived, they fired at point-blank range into the car, killing the teenagers and wounding the driver. the driver immediately came to say chris, the place he knew, trusted, the place where he and his friends had received care since infancy. that is when i realized it was not enough just to a better access. we needed to find a way to help the kids break out of the cycles that their circumstances have put them in. we created the center for the urban child. it will be going into a 30,000 square foot office building on the campus that tenet healthcare has graciously approved for us to build this year. the center for the urban child strives to provide high-quality, efficient cost-effective care for kids in the local community, while providing wraparound services that will address the determinants of their health. everything from food insecurity to domestic violence to behavioral health. from of behavioral health standpoint, prevention is the thing we want to focus on the most. most pediatricians do not treat mental illness. they are not comfortable with it and do not take the time to diagnose it. we will train our peers -- pediatricians as well as the general residents to look for the signs and symptoms of behavioral health problems in the children they care for as well as their parents. we will arm them with the tools to care for the less complex behavior and health issues. things such as mild depression and adhd. will have psychologists that will help the children immediately, if something is determined as a potential that may be more complex issues. we will have four or five exam rooms -- one: two every four or five exam rooms. -- one consult room to every four or five exam rooms. the big thing has been adverse childhood experiences. much like what we've seen in colorado and connecticut, there are events that happen every day that are small events that we do not think of them have a long- term impact on kids. these events have long-term impact on the behavioral and physical health of kids in communities. so we want to make sure we are also build think the resilience in to these children so they can overcome their circumstances. i am pleased to say joining us and a few weeks is our pediatrician in chief. dr. stonefeld has spent time recently in connecticut and in colorado, helping those communities and helping those adults teach the children how to overcome and how to have resilience and get past the terrible tragedies that happened. we believe his expertise as a developmental pediatrician as well as with the national center will help instill the same resilience for the kids in our community. our goal is to give the kids the tools they need to rise above their circumstances, and to become successful contributing members to our society. thank you. [applause] >> i would now like to introduce the managing general partner of the everest group. >> thank you. in my family i have to extreme situations. my dad is 95. he is a doctor. he is in good health. still working six days a week. sunday is the day he does not work and is very upset because he is not working. he works at a chervil clinic in new delhi in the get like 600 patients per day and they dispense free medicine and free consultation. on the other hand i lost my son when he was almost 28-years-old. exactly two months after he lost his son -. i could not believe what happened. apparently in the morning he just never woke up. we went to washington, d.c., and he was doing his mba program. yet one more semester to go. he just died of a sudden. i talked to the doctor who was in the coroner's office. he was an indian guide. he can say -- he said i can tell you what happened, a mixture of oxygen code on and alcohol. -- oxycodene and alcohol. said he would not believe, a young people are dying mixing with prescription drugs and alcohol. i said wouldn't they get sick. he said no. he said you mix them with alcohol and your heart just quits functioning. your brain does not give the signal. i called president clinton, and saw him. he knew all about it. his own neighbor who lost his son in the same way within 10 days i lost my son. he said we have to get the word out as to how these things happen. he called cnn. they did a one-hour program, which is just aired a few months ago. they're still broadcasting it. they talked about that. last year 15,000 people died from the misuse of prescription drugs. these are young lives. they did not have to die that way, you know. the program on tv. i got hundreds of e-mails from people. hundreds of families to of lost their children the same way. every day we read something in the paper, in the wall street journal, new york times where they're talking about a prescription painkillers and how they are being used -- abused. a lot of times people did not even know if you take a prescription drug and mix it with alcohol it is legal. so finally i told president clinton that's what we want to do is support the foundation in helping how to prevent future deaths. these floods can easily be saved you know. he was gracious enough to help us in this mission, and that is why i am here. thank you very much. [applause] >> next, commissioner ray kelly of the new york police department. >> thank you. i want to think the clinton foundation for inviting me. -- thank. i also want to thank president clinton for his efforts to stabilize at a millions of people around the world. i have been asked to speak about the challenges of prescription drug abuse, and i want to give examples of what we face in new york city. last year to men walked into a pharmacy in east harlem at 11:00 in the morning. they were armed with guns. one threatened a cashier, and they have very specific directions. they wanted all the toxic oxy and perkaset. a clerk pushed the panic button. three police officers showed up quickly. the second started to shoot at the police officers. ran out the door. it was a retired -- there was a retired police officer across the street. he shot and killed this individual. this brought to an end a situation that could have been extremely tragic. this individual was wanted for four similar robberies and shootings. in long island, just before that, and off-duty agent went into a pharmacy to get croaks, cancer drugs for his father. he ordered all hold up. he was shot and killed trying to take action. the perpetrator was also shot and killed by responding officers. he had in his possession cash and ox andi. just before that an individual went into a pharmacy. he had no criminal record. he proceeded to shoot and kill to workers and customers in the store. he was looking for prescription drugs for himself. the police department has seen the destructive power of addiction firsthand. we a police officer injured in the line of duty. he was given painkillers, started to abuse them. he then started to rob pharmacies on his own. interestingly with him and some of the other -- some of the other robberies, they go into the store and only looks for oxicodene. we're purse current -- concerned about this being a gateway to crime, practically for young people. -- oxicodone. obviously with the proliferation of guns on the street, we certainly didn't not want that to be compounded. i must say as far as health is concerned, the overarching issue in policing in america is the fact that there were some in a concealed weapons, handguns on the street. in new york city about 60% historically of our murders for the past 20 years have been with handguns. for the past year we've been able to driver murders down to a 50-year low. we have done that, we believe, through a proactive policing and areas where there is an increase in crimes or violence. we a taken thousands of weapons off the streets, and we believe we of saved countless lives in doing that. certainly the abuse of prescription drugs makes our job that much harder, and in part, because the source of the drugs, the nature of the source. virtually all of them, unlike heroin or cocaine, begin with a bout with prescription. health-care professionals, doctors, and pharmacists in particular are involved, either willingly or unwillingly in the facilitation of the abuse of prescription drugs, and there is a lot of money to be made in this business. last year of the drug enforcement agency we raided an outdoor market in manhattan where they were selling these types of bills hand to hand. the confiscated 9000 pills. -- we confiscated 9000 pills. we have ongoing at least two dozen major drug diversions of prescription drug diversion cases. we have put together a strategy that we believe could make a difference. this strategy really forms the foundation of our pledge to the clinton health matters initiative. the first is we have formed a drug diversion task force with the drug administration association. this is a significant force. it also gives us access to their nationwide distribution database. this has been extremely helpful in aiding us to attack this problem. secondly we created an awareness program focused primarily on students in high school and college. we of teamed with the department of education. we have put together a curriculum that was finished in november of last year. we a begun teaching it in schools. at least 1000 students have already been taught. our goal is to teach many, many more. this fall we will begin this orientation at freshman orientation. when freshman, to colleges in new york city we have 71 colleges, and we think this can be affected. we want to reduce the number of robberies and burglaries that take place in this area. we are in the process of constructing the database of 6000 pharmacies in york and connecticut and new jersey as well. we call it safe cap. but the debate of this we believe we will give them very useful crime prevention, better lighting when the stores are closed, and a better system. that sort of approach. we are also doing of bait -- a bait program with the producer of oxicodone. will be gps buttons inside the pill bottles so we can track them. we think it can be of major help in conducting investigations, and also deterring this type of theft. fourth, we have engaged in a major training evolution for our own people. police officers and the over 5000 school safety agents that work in the new york city police department. we want to make them familiar with being able to identify these strokes, and also what they respond to. and if they cannot serve anyone who is obviously being affected by the drug. just last thursday the mayor bloomberg put out a directive in new york city that they are not to give any prescriptions for long-term or long use of the opiads. the prescription is only good for three days. they will not kill any that have been reported stolen or lost. we think these are common sense initiatives that will make a difference. nothing you do is without a cost. this will cost about $4 million. that is the basis of the pleasure -- program. we look forward to working in collaboration with the clinton health matters initiative. thank you. [applause] >> thank you, commissioner kelly. again, gary mandel. >> thank you. i already spoke, so there is not much more i have to add. i think after hearing the panelists is what i would add is every panel the spoke with wonderful ideas and programs. i think the opportunity is what i have seen as i of look this over the past year is what i've seen in other diseases. the american heart association has led an effort by being an entity that is brought together all of the different efforts and the country into a vision and leadership. the results have been in the past 20 years deaths by heart disease have dropped by 30% in the past 20 years. in cancer, the american cancer society has done the same thing. the initiatives happening in different states and different, smaller entities in the past 20 years. deaths related to cancer have dropped 20%. 30 percent down and heart. 20 percent down and cancer. -- in cancer. wise, there is no such entity for drug and alcohol addiction. the results in the past 10 years down 30, down 20. the deaths related to drug poisoning have doubled in the past 10 years. i would finish my remarks, which i started earlier, with hope. a new national organization that does not drink for drug and alcohol addiction. the results have been pretty phenomenal with heart and cancer. we can take these ideas and put them into action and -- in a national entity that has the power to leverage policy makers and people around the country to get the same results that have been achieved in cancer and heart. that is our vision, and that is our pledge to the clinton health matters initiative. [applause] >> we now have a few minutes left. we can take questions from the audience. >> when we speak about mental- health, one of the components i do not hear about or see about is the youth that are mentally or physically challenged, that are born with a condition that they have no control of. i hope to kickstart a little league program, and the challenger division is something that the little league established back in 1989. the program is huge, but -- i do not know where we would classify it as far as mentally and physically challenged youth and young adults, but we're missing the components. there are a few organizations that help out with youth and young adults that are physically challenged, but it is a trickle effect. the family members that are affected by it, residents involved in the communities. what would be your thoughts on the adults that are physically and mentally challenged. it is not a drug addiction or alcohol. they are born with it. how do we engage those folks and encourage them to be healthy members of society and not just pushed them to a place where they do not have a voice? our issue is there isfor a lot of the used to go to that are mentally and physically challenged. -- our issue is there is no place for youth to go to that are mentally and physically challenged. thank you. >> who would like to address that? >> one of the things we have is a special needs clinic. that addresses just what you mentioned. not all of the children have mental health issues, but they all have at least physical health issues. we have that clinic partner closely with our developmental pediatrician, and with what we're doing for the center of urban child. if we can get the lower level behavioral health issues out of the psychiatrist's office, then they can be freed up more to care for the kids to have the complex medical conditions that are more difficult. i think a medical home is really something good for that and something we are developing. i would be happy to talk to you about that if that would be helpful. >> thank you. i am so grateful he challenged us last year to talk more openly and comprehensively about mental health. one thing i kept thinking about while each of you were talking is another conversation that clearly is long overdue and our country, and we had just heard a to have around bullying. bullying often seems to fall on both sides of the mental-health equation in that those bullied and lawyers often struggle with depression, anxiety and have been clinically dead those with mental health challenges. i would be very grateful to hear whomever would want to comment on how you think your work either in the school districts or the hospital or anyone who was working on addiction, how you think about your work helping to eliminate the real challenge of bullying that seems to be so pervasive these days in our schools and online chat rooms and across the country. thank you. >> again, back to where we started talking before. where we're seeing is the first up is i do not want to say confrontation, but talking. in the program we're working at in this school, which is right near the house actually is listening to these kids come out and say what is on their minds and it is helping some of the problems. the kids are talking about what is bothering them and what is bothering them about the other people, and the dialogue being built is attacking the issue of bullying. the police generally have something going on themselves, and this is their outlet. if we can do a good job of cutting their legs out from under them, and letting them speak openly, and let the other kids were speaking saying it is not all right. it is as simple as letting the kids openly talk. we are seeing in various places, and the folks at the university of michigan are seeing the same thing that open dialogue is working. in the past a lot of times it was the bully who was told to stay home, do not do anything. now, it is a very open dialogue. that is helping them. >> we have not focused on this too much, but what -- but when i was in texas prior to moving to philadelphia, our local school district was very involved. it was all about cutting out bullying. they would form organizations within the schools where it was their job to be friend everyone, and their job to have random acts of kindness, and they created a chain of caring and rode down the events that they did in the schools and in the district that or caring for others. it was amazing how many times the chain it wrapped up the football field and had this amazing ceremony that invade the community and kids. there are things out there. i think that is a partnership with the school and a pediatrician office in the communities. >> there is a wave of change that people are figuring out that school climate is one of the most important things you can do to impose discipline, and also provide incentives against bullying. there is a wonderful program that started in chicago. president obama was a big component -- component of it. it was screaming schools around incentivizing good behavior. we invested a lot of time and money and that in connecticut. it paid dividends in terms of referrals into the school discipline process, and also, pay dividends in the number of incidences of bullying. and we for schools to report incidents of bullying so we can track who is doing well into is .ot doing well and repea pbis is one of the success stories that has reduced bullying, and we're pushing legislation to provide money to bring it to states that have not seen it yet. >> it is very hard to find money for prevention. when i think about what happened in connecticut, that is one of the things i focus on, do we as society -- can we decide we're going to pay for this? whether it was private dollars, public dollars. i told a couple members of the panel that we have a unique children's program for children from 7-12 that live every day of their life with addiction because of their parents or step-parents. it is very hard to find programs like that, because no one is willing to pay for them. how do we change the commitment of the society? salt with the program was started at the high school, when we came in to speak to the school to talk about what they're doing for depression, society, they had no program. the answer was we had nothing in the budget. our answer was we will pay for it and bring the resources in. educators told us it was the first time in 35 years they had a private member of the community say they will do that. it comes back to being a good member of the community, and not necessarily writing a check, but it is shocking when you look at the cost it adds to our economy of mental health. $50 billion just from absenteeism. and it is not that hard to put the programs to the other, and the economics are very simple. the costs of not investing in the mental health system cannot take 10 years to pop up somewhere else on the budget. they show up in that 12-month time period in the past two years we of closed 4000 psychiatric inpatient beds in this country. during that same time, prisons have seen a 25% increase in the number of prisoners with serious mental illness. we all know a prison bed will cost you $30,000. the psychiatric beds will cost you less here than you find those dollars somewhere else in the system, whether it is a homeless shelter or prison. it is in real time, not 5-10 years down the line. >> except for gary, i did not hear, what specifically is being done to try to demystify mental illness so it is seen as a disease, and who are you reaching out to, if anyone? what else do you need? members of the media are here and members of the entertainment industry are here to help you put a face to it and speak to the community at large without fear. >> the answer is if your question is what is being done and what can be done -- three parts. what is being done? what can be done, and how can people help? what is being done is very little is the answer. as i said, you have american cancer, american heart, american lung, autism speaks, which has done a wonderful job and is only 7 years old. there is no american addiction and mental health society. it does not exist. what is being done? very little. half the americans in the united states just -- i just read the gallup poll, half americans do not believe drug addiction is a disease. it is scientifically proven. the reality is there are about 80% of kids in high school tried drugs or alcohol. those are not all bad kid, 80% of kids. they are all our kids. one in 12 become addictive. half of those become addictive because it is genetic, and the other half become addictive for certain risk factors, probably 50. is genetic, 30. is other risk factors. probably 50 is genetic. 30 is other risk factors. very little is being done. what can be done is we need a national entity to represent these diseases. and raise the dollars that are raised by those entities. for example, american cancer raises $950 million per year. most of it is raised by millions of people putting in 20-$30 each. american heart raises about 600 million per year. again, 85% of it is people putting in $20 each. the beauty of it is not only are they putting in $20 or $30 each, but they are becoming members, activists, they're writing letters to the congressman, getting laws changed. i am leading to the third question of what needs to be done and how can everyone help? the first thing you can do, again, in my opinion, go to brianswish.org and sign up and we will keep you informed as we move forward. what i see our entity doing, which i think is the answer in solution, is taking a wonderful idea is we have heard of here today, and finding out which ones have evidence behind them working, and which ones should be brought to scale across this country. why are we doing it in new york city? why can't we replicate it and do it across the country? if there is something working in philadelphia, we should find a way to bring it to scale and bring it across this country. we should text it. we should randomly control it to see if it is working. if it is working, we should take it across the country. that is what is done with american cancer and american heart. american cancer spends 125 million on research. american heart spends 95 million. for this field privately we're talking less than a couple of million dollars of research per year. 125 million, 95 million, less than a couple million. that is what needs to be done in my opinion. i am not saying it is easy, but it is doable. it has been proven by mothers of drunk driving. proven by autism speaks. it can be done. there is no question it can be done. i'm not saying it will be easy, but please go to brianswish.org to give us your e-mail address. i work -- i want to work together with this team up here to find out how we take these ideas and bring them together and skill them across the country. to me, that is the answer. >> c-span is at the decatur house today in downtown washington with the white house historical situation established enough to -- national center for white house history. it is where we begin our first series, first ladies. our first group of historians will discuss the history of america's first ladies and a panel will talk about the first ladies from the perspective of white house. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] >> i am the president of the white house historical association. welcome to the new public home, the david m. rubenstein center for white house history. in a recent arrangement with the national trust preservation, which owns this decatur house complex, the association is now co stewards of this historic site for 30 more -- for 30 or more years to come. first ladies, influence and image is a partnership project with our good friends at c-span. i would like to thank our colleagues there. if they would wave, i would like to acknowledge them. the co-chief operating officer, vice president of programming, and the executive producer for the first lady series. we appreciate their enthusiasm for a subject that rarely receives the attention it deserves. as you will see in your program, listed on c-span's website, the series will be a comprehensive visual biography. over the course of 35 shows in prime time on monday nights each first lady will get her 15 minutes of fame and many will actually get 90 minutes. tonight is a special kick off for the series and we are so pleased that our guest here in washington and those at homes from coast to coast are joining us for this moment. we have expert panelists here to enlighten us. i will introduce them in just a moment. but first, we have a special message from first lady michelle obama that we would like to share. >> hello everyone. i am pleased to kick off this series d telling the lives of america's first ladies. in the coming weeks you will have the chance to learn about the stories, achievements, and legacy of these truly a remarkable women. as you watch i am sure you will begin to see why i am so honored and humbled to follow in their footsteps. working on causes ranging from the trustee to women's rights to environmental stewardship, each of these would then left their own indelible stamp on the white house and on our nation's history. like them i found that this role offers an extraordinary opportunity to give back and make a real and lasting difference in people's lives. for me that has meant help our kids lead healthier lives, working to get our military families the benefits and support they earn, opening the white house to as many people as possible, and encouraging all of our young people to achieve every one of their dreams. no matter what causes we take on as first ladies we have all shared the singular experience of meeting people from every corner of this country and seeing firsthand the character, courage, and spirit of our fellow citizens. that is the true blessing of being first lady. that is why i do my best to live up to the example of the women who came before me and the people that i need every day. folks who work so hard and contribute so much to this great country we call home. >> our panelists may come and join us. we are so grateful for mrs. obama taking the time to wish us well and offer her reflections on the role of the first lady. they will be eliminated by those we have gathered here today. -- illuminated by those we have gathered here today. later we will bring you a first- person point of view from within the walls of the white house itself. our first panel will be moderated by steve scully. mr. scully is c-span's senior executive producer and political editor. since 1981 he has been responsible for coronary -- for coordinating all aspects of c- span's programming, c-span.org, and c-span radio. elected by his peers from the white house press corps, he is the former president of the white house correspondents association in 2006 and 2007. he currently serves as a waca board member. joining steve on stage, we have edith mayo. she's the curator at the national museum of american history. her books include "the smith sonian's book of first ladies.:" rosalyn terborg-penn is an author focusing on the american women's history. her books include african american women and the struggle for the boat, 1850-1920. she is a university professor and has founded the association of black women historians. finally, we have william seale. he is a great friend of the association. he is editor of white house history, the award winning journal of white house historical association. [laughter] he is also a ham. [laughter] you will indeed received a copy of the journal at the end of the program. he is also author of "the president's house." it is my great pleasure to turn it over to steve scully. >> we want to thank decatur house, our partners for the project. our panel here, these of the people that have been the guiding force behind this project. thank you for being here. i want to begin with you, why study these first ladies? why these women important to understand and know? >> they are extremely interesting because they are the ones closest to the president. we all say "if i could have only been there." well, they are. they are wonderful observers and also make a difference. >> edith you have studied the first ladies. from martha washington to the turn of the century into the 20th century, how did it change over that hundred 25 years? >> to begin with, nobody thought the first lady was going to do anything. i think that one of the things that is very interesting is that the white house, or the executive mansion in new york and philadelphia, provided a situation where you had the president's home and his work place both in the same place. martha becomes a social partner and hostess for the nation to her husband. abigail is a political partner to her husband. having those two rules established, the women who follow can merge or change or advance one or both of these aspects. dolley madison combined them. then you have a position that is very visible both at home and to visiting diplomats. it has become more visible, more activist, and the technology has changed the coverage of the first lady's role. >> during this time period, which first lady made her mark? who had the most influence? >> in the 19th century, i cannot pick one. let me take two? dolley madison, because she can set you -- she conceptualizes first lady. she is the fourth president's wife and only the first first lady. she is in the white house in the beginning and seems to enjoy all of the activity. i think she personified that. after she is long gone, they considered her first lady. i think she is significant. i also like mary todd lincoln. she has had a bad rap. the movie is fiction. even though some of it depicted her. she was of very influential woman in terms of her husband's feelings about slavery. she comes with an abolitionist mind. she also worked in the community among the free blacks in particular, of raising money for the downtrodden in the city. and during the war she was a volunteer nurse. so what can i tell you? i think she really personified a lot of the things we think of today as the role of the first lady. >> who enjoys the of first lady the most? if you want to use the word "detested," who would you put on that laslist? >> julia grant. suddenly she had a pedestal to be on and she absolutely adored it. she loved it and try to persuade him to run for a third term. he didn't, she didn't like it. she tells how they got on the train to leave washington and she fell and wept and wept. she claimed her place in later life and would come back in great glory to the white house. i do not know if anyone hated it. mrs. franklin pierce came in under horrible circumstances, having lost two sons. one of the way to the white house. she was a pretty good politician and she was as smart lady and was involved in political things that she just did not have the heart for it. at one point she fell in love with jefferson davis's two year old child. and then he died. that happened again to her. i would say she is a candidate for not liking it, jane per se. -- jane per se. -- jane pierce. >> supposedly she fainted when she heard her husband was a nominee for the presidency. that would give you some idea about her feelings of being in politics. then she had this horrible tragedy that she never recovered from. >> i already mentioned dolly madison. in the early part of it she enjoyed her role as first lady. >> i agree with that. >> she was voluptuous and laughing and painted up. and he was a mousy little man. he was quiet and a genius. she absolutely adored him. they were inseparable. a lot of it was taking up things he couldn't do. >> she was his pr person. if that position had existed at that time. she loved doing that. she loved presenting herself as "queen dolley." the republican queen with a small "r." i think she is thoroughly enjoyed her roles. >> we learned that jackie kennedy was the first one to have a press secretary? >> no, i think it was edith roosevelt that had the first one. >> that was for her specifically? >> the series is titled "influence and image." let me ask you about the influence these ladies had on their spouses. who were among the most influential? >> mrs. tax -- mrs. taft was very influential. i suppose mrs. madison would be one. another one was mrs. hayes from ohio. she was not only be loved by the american people but she had a big influence on him. >> you talked about the image earlier. which first lady was most concerned or consumed with her image? >> i do not think she was consumed with her image but she certainly image hurt us and's presidency -- imaged her husband's presidencey, and that was dolley madison. she conceptualize the white house as a stage on which her husband can conduct politics and diplomacy and which she can present herself as first lady. she decorated the white house. she was the first person to do so. previous presidents had brought their own furniture and so forth and she was the one who decided that this needed to have a professional touch. she hired an architect to come in and help her designed the furniture and reception rooms. she was very instrumental in imaging his presidency. >> didn't she also cling to this in later years of poverty when her son ran for everything she had? and the issue of the dress, which may have been taken before the white house was burned, because it was packed for summer and mrs. madison took these things with her. a journal seemed to be published in white house history. [laughter] she wore her red dress over and over again. there is thought that that dress was made out of those curtains. >> what was the name of the book? [laughter] >> look at the early 19th century into the civil war, the turn-of-the-century, the industrial revolution, women getting the right to vote in 1920, the great depression, how did these women reflect the times in which they lived? >> i think eleanor roosevelt is a good example of that. she was into everything. she remained so even into the kennedy era. i was amazed to learn that she regretted that she had never gone to college. i have -- i was shocked she had never gone. she was home school and went academies. i suppose she had an equivalent of what we would consider a college education. on the cutting edge of every reform -- and one of the reasons was she did not have to stay at home. there was someone there to be the secretary and housekeeper for her husband. she was all over the place. i think she is a good example of the growing influence of the 1920's and women's growing liberation. the idea that women can get out into more -- that coincides with the women's suffrage era as well. >> i was going to say -- looking at the first lady, you can pretty much tell what is or is not happening with american women at any given point in the historical past. i think the present a particular window on the past. everybody knows the position of first lady. whether you know in particular first lady or not they become a wonderful hook on which to hang a lot of other historical events. i think they serve as a window on the past. >> if we have two microphones on each side so if you would like to come up to the microphone -- a brief introduction of who you are, where you are from, and a brief question. we will get to them momentarily. we would not be here today if it weren't for jackie kennedy. this would be one of those government nondescript office buildings. explain the story behind that and how she tried to redefine the role of first lady. >> the area was doomed to be high rise office buildings. you had commerce. this was to have a six story or seven story white model building designed by the people who did williamsburg. it was modeled for the time. the well-known separatist the architecture was a friend of the kennedys and both of the kennedys were upset about the white house losing its residential scale and its neighborhood. between mrs. kennedy and the president himself, they stirred the fine arts commission to resend -- to rescind permission to build this building. it happened right at the end of the kennedy administration. mrs. kennedy personally appear at the fine arts building and stirred everybody up for it. that is what happened. that is why we have lafayette square. >> jacqueline kennedy certainly was -- that was one of her causes, historic preservation. we see that through saving pennsylvania avenue as well as the white house. when she moved to new york she credited activities that save grand central station and a number of historic sites. that is one of her causes. >> and to think she was 32 when she came to washington and immediately set the white house to be a more appropriate setting. it looked like a sheraton hotel. [laughter] mrs. kennedy wanted antiques and things and it. she was persuaded against that. kennedy was very worried about that, creating a lot of trouble over furnishing. it proceeded with it and she got a crew -- she got a guru. it was a lollipop era. >> jacki was determined to be behind the scenes. a lot of people to not realize that the influence she had upon jack -- one of them was the idea of improving within's role in society as a whole. she was the one that taught him into establishing a woman's condition -- a women's commission. >> you talk about dolley madison, was there a 19th century counterpart that preserved the white house or make changes that has a lasting legacy? >> go-ahead. >> the garfields -- no, it was the hayes' first. withdidn't know what to do the white house, it was beat up and happy. they went to the library of congress and asked what would be more appropriate to have in a historic white house. he came up with this idea of a first lady's hall with portraits of all the first ladies. hayes was very excited and he commissioned mr. andrews, who became head of the corporate. he did another one -- the library commission paid $5,000 for that. and then he did another one of of dairy voluptuous dolley madison and the library commission said "no." the garfields did the same thing. the roosevelts insisted on using various artifacts. they took the lincoln bed and draped it up. they fixed the place -- mrs. herbert hoover was the first one who did a scarlet approach to it all. she had all of the objects in the attics and storage documented as to what they were when they came to the white house. that has all been a treasure to work with as far as a curator. >> the hoovers paid for their own entertainment. >> and they received many charitable things. they were immensely rich people. they have -- >> one of the women in the 19th century was very concerned about the size and the grandeur of the white house, mrs. harrison. she and her husband came into the white house on the anniversary of the presidency. it had been 100 years since washington had been inaugurated. they had a very large family and they found that as the present the -- the presidency expanded, the rooms in the white house were being taken over gradually by people who were assistance to the president or who were executive assistants and some white. she thought there should be a west wing. she had an architect drop plans for an expanded white house with a west wing and an east wing and gardens and one of the wings was supposed to be an art gallery because she thought we should showcase of american art more than was possible to do in the white house here. this renovation would bring the white house into the modern era. but one of her husband's opponents in the congress would not pass the appropriation. there had been all of this planning and all of this work and she had very strenuously lobbied through teas and luncheons. what a legacy of that was it did not happen then but there was so much discussion of it that when the roosevelt came in they picked up on those plans and redefined them. and then you get the west wing and the renovation of the white house. >> harrison's life never lived in the white house. james buchanan never married. when they never married, who fulfilled that role? >> they have hostesses the invited to come. interestingly enough, dolley madison was the hostess for thomas jefferson. if you didn't, a daughter would become law or a relative would be, or one of the wives of your closest friends in government. you had this. let me get back to this idea of renovations and changes. it is a recurring theme that you see all the way through. since dolly madison was the first one who lived in the white house, she was the one who was there when the british burned it down. the idea was getting it back together. you see this recurring theme and dc it strongly with some women rather than with others. mary todd lincoln wanted to clean up the mess that buchanan left there. she was stressed from congress because she was, "spending too much money" on redesigning. the jackie kennedy had the same idea of finding the original furniture and putting it in. i think that that is the theme we need to think of. >> and nancy reagan as well? >> yes. >> the whole idea of the first lady who images, in many image -- in many instances, her husband's administration. >> how did we get from the washington to the current first lady? >> dolly madison. [laughter] but that is the first one. >> sack retailer, who was president at the time when dali died -- zachary taylor, who was president at a time when dolley died, said she was the first lady of the revolution. >> after mrs. hayes, it is constant. >> let us get to some questions. please introduce yourselves. >> i work here at the white house historical association. my question for the panelist is was there a first lady who husband did not have a particularly successful who isencies whbut remembered for being a good first lady in spite of that. >> that is a good question. [laughter] >> this may be a first. >> maybe mrs. coolidge. it depends on how you feel about calvin. grace coolidge was a very beloved figure, particularly in washington. she had a very outgoing and affable personality where he was known to not say too much very often. she was his pr person because she got along with everybody and had a wonderful disposition. her nickname was "funny." >> mrs. hoover, too. she was president of the national girls scouts. she was very active with children. she was very sensitive to racial issues. she was out there, big time. the hoovers are remembered as the ones to give us the depression, probably not fairly. >> how she approached the job as first lady, how he approached the presidency back in 1923 when the party died -- for >> that i do not know. i think bill would probably know that better. >> to be frank, mrs. harding was considered class a in washington. she was rougher than most first ladies. >> how so? >> she was very outspoken. the hardings entertained in the white house with all of the booze on her. platas roosevelt said whiskey on the table and spittoon on the side. they were rough people but women idolized him. one of the first record its beaches was his dedication to the tomb of the unknown soldier. it is perfectly beautiful, that baritone voice. there were problems with florence. >> some many of the white house family members -- so many of the white house family members have been vilified for reasons that our political sometimes. people resented the fact that florence was a good manager and ran her husband's newspaper, ran his campaign -- and i argue that people might have not liked it but they respected her. they might have talked behind her back but then they did that with a lot of people. they did that to mary todd lincoln. it was not just a twentieth century thing, it is something you find through out. they talked about jackie kennedy. it is interesting to the kinds of things that happen. politics, as you know, it's ugly. i am going to tell the truth -- they talk about michelle obama. "she does not look like a first lady." in my experience, none of them look alike. the only difference is she is brown. that is significant. you hear about the publication more so than you hear about their success. >> let me turn it over to hear. >> i in 8, washington dc. -- i am nate, washington dc > talk about frances cleveland and the relationship between grover cleveland and his ward. he married her out of guardianship. she was emulated and admired. tell us more about that relationship and her role as a very young first lady. >> she was the jacqueline kennedy of her era. she was young, she was beautiful. when they first began courting people thought she was dating -- people thought he was dating her mother. he had asked her mother's permission to begin writing to her when she was in college. he sent her flowers and candy. it turned into a courtship. when it finally announced their engagement, i think it is such a wonderful commentary that when they would appear in public after they had announced their engagement come if there were a band at the occasion, they would strike up a song from the mikado. "he is going to marry young, young." [laughter] when she went to the white house she tried to protect the family from reporters and spying eyes. all these rumors into maybe the children were deformed or had some terrible disease, this is why nobody could get in to see them. grover had to issue a press release saying that wasn't the truth. france is herself met with the press and said she was so fortunate to be married to this wonderful man. would it be that every woman in america could have such a happy marriage. >> woodrow wilson also married in the white house. anybody else married while president? >> tyler did. his wife died and then a year later he married a woman his daughter's age. they had about a year in the white house together. in anrl's father died accident aboard the steamboat. she went into mourning but she wasn't going to miss the parties. >> next question. >> i and emily porter, i am a graduate student at george washington. i would like to know now that is runningnt's wife for president, she is actually going out there and campaigning for him -- is that in modern conception or is there someone from the past, 19th century or earlier, that we would have been surprised to know played a huge influence in getting her husband nominated. >> in the late 19th century, you had some new campaign techniques. one was the front porch campaign which had not been used in the earlier part of the 19th century. and you had a whistle stop campaign. the early front porch campaigns were garfield and harrison. what you find is that type of campaigning brings up the party's base full to the home -- brings the parties faithful up to the home. the wife becomes invisible partner on the ongoing campaign, even though at that point she, herself, did not become politicized. she is very much in her home. she was very much a part of her husband's campaign. you find a lot of women in the 20th century who were campaigning behind the scenes. certainly eleanor roosevelt was extremely active in the campaign. by the time you get to mamie eisenhower, she was the one who accompanied her husband to the west will stop -- to the whistle stop. that is a real watershed. after mamie, you cannot have a presidential wife who is not involved visibly in the campaign. >> harding had a front porch campaign, too. >> winded first ladies began to take platforms? the literacy campaign with barbara bush -- >> i would say ladybird johnson, "lets beautify america." >> and certainly jacqueline kennedy in raid -- in renovating the white house, which i thought was a brilliant stroke because she was still involved with the national home, so people are not in fear that she should be interfering with. it was so much based on scholarship and the decorative arts that after that it is very difficult to see a first lady without some kind of cause. >> about lady bird, i think "beautify america" was code for "look at the environment." just the white house. i think she was really on the cutting edge of modern day environmentalism. >> she gave more than two hundred speeches on preserving the environment and taking environmental responsibility for the nation and the world. >> thank you. >> i am with morgan state university. you mentioned you believe a lot of the first lady's reflected what was happening in the country at the time. i am wondering if any of the first lady's, aside from their humanitarian or civic and efforts, to time to champion when menopause liberation struggles or were they active in any form from within's struggles? >> certainly in the 20th- century. betty ford brought the feminist movement to the national forefront and was unapologetically a feminist. before that, i would say lucy hayes championed temperance, which was very much a feminist issue in the 1870's and 80 '80s. if you were married to someone who was an alcoholic, it devastated your family. at a time when most women did not work, if you had an alcoholic husband or sun, it devastated your family. she was a temperance advocate. if you go back to mary lincoln, who was very much in favor of abolition, probably more so than her husband. >> my favorite is abigail adams. >> remember lincoln said temperance was going to be his next cause after the imagination proclamation. -- the emancipation proclamation. >> their influence as first lady? >> pat nixon was one of those who greeted the white house. she really built the collection that was there now. she shuffled them in the, the antiques and paintings and things like that. she acquired them in very large numbers. she could be remembered for that. >> it is very interesting, jackie kennedy is the one who is known for beginning that -- refurbishing the white house. but it was pat nixon who brought in more arts and antiques than any other first lady. she is hardly known at all. it was very interesting when we put up the first lady of the -- i had put a section in it of what mrs. nixon had done. i received a wonderful letter from julie eisenhower saying she was glad her mother was being recognized for what she did to the white house. >> another behind-the-scenes kind of person, you do not know how much to give on international level. she travels on behalf of her husband to various countries throughout the world. she believes in public education. together the carters -- everybody was horrified by. it was the idea of bringing the common people's ideas to the board. it was ok to be a regular person whose child goes to public school. mrs. carter was quite active and is very rarely recognized for that. >> we conducted a poll, this is going to be very quick, i want to ask you a yes or no. should the first lady be paid? >> you are looking at me. i think not. i think she would come under all kinds of scrutiny. i do not know who would be her supervisor. i am sure somebody would. that would be very limiting to her role of being able to choose a cause or champion some particular avenues of approach to the first lady's role. >> i agree. >> the other question, should the first lady have a job outside of the white house? should they be able to hold a position. >> they can now. there are no rules. if you worked along with a husband and he or she became president, why would you do that? why would mrs. obama called back to the law firm or hospital in chicago? i do not think it is likely. >> i disagree. it depends on the situation. mrs. obama had already given up the law firm when she started having her children. that was a choice she already made. if she is already a professional woman, and i do not mean going to work in the local canteen, if she is already a professional woman and she wants to continue her professional activities she should have the option if she so chooses to continue to work in her profession. >> should be job of the first lady, the platform or roll, be a platform for politics? >> definitely. i think it already is. i do not think it to be married to a man for 20, 30, 40 years and have shared his career and his bed that she is not going to be involved. i cannot see how you can separate those. >> final question for each of you. if you could sit down with a former first lady and ask her one question, who would it be and what would you ask? >> you would do that. [laughter] i do not know. i cannot think of anyone. >> my favorite one of all time was lady bird johnson. i would have loved to have had a conversation with her. i would have asked why she didn't run for president. [laughter] >> i guess it would be jacqueline kennedy, for me. how did you stay married to that man with all that was going on in your marriage? [laughter] thank you very much. and the book is titled? >> what book? [laughter] it is called, "white house history." >> thank you all very much for being with us. [applause] >> thank you all for very much. we will take a moment to get our next group of panelists, situated on the stage. -- our next group of panelists situated on the stage. >>, so much. i would now like to introduce the moderator for our next panel. she will provide brief introductions of our panelists. for a more detailed biographical information, you will find those in the programs at your feet. martha joynt kumar is a professor at the towns of state university. -- at the towson state university. she is also director of the white house transition project, which is a non-partisan effort by presidency scholars to provide information on presidential transitions and white house operations to those that came into the white house in 2001 and 2009. she worked with the transition operations of presidential candidates barack obama and john mccain, and with a team representing george w. bush. i will reform the -- i will refer you to your programs for more information on her publications. proudly, i can say she is a proud member of the board of directors at the white house historical association. >> thank you. we have a wonderful panel here that represents people who have worked in the white house over several administrations in the residence staff and people who have come with particular presidents and first ladies. if through our discussions we will get a sense of the environment that a first lady operates in. it is a difficult place to be. in some ways it is as beautiful. as the white house is it has many different roles. it is a museum, it obviously is a residence, it is a park, and it is a workplace. all of those combined -- for the first lady it gives opportunity for her and her husband, and also some hazards as they live their lives in the white house. it is also a place for children, a place to raise a family. with a first lady who has received no compensation for what she does, it is a difficult thing to say exactly what her role is. we will talk about the environment and talk about particular first lady's. among our panelists, they have been in the white house since the. when betty ford was first lady. -- since the period when betty ford was first lady. she does a great deal about the operations and the comings and goings. gary walters worked as chief usher from 1986. he came from a time when betty ford was first lady. he worked into the bush administration. susan sher was chief of staff with michelle obama. and that he is curator at the white house, a position that came about as a result of the work jackie kennedy did. we are going to talk about state dinner and use that as an introduction for all of us and how they are put on, where the first lady comes into it, all of the various parts of the white house that get involved. it certainly is a big event and one that involves everybody. gary, can you start as off? as chief usher you handled the residence staff. >> i would be glad to. the first notice of a state dinner or state visit comes from the state department. it usually goes through the social secretary of the white house. soon after the socialists a cap -- after the social security -- social secretary had a conversation with the first lady, he would lay out who, when, where, and how it was going to be about. there was a lot of planning. usually these events are planned three, four, sometimes as much as a year into the future. sometimes a lot less time. the planning is intensive. i think one of the things people forget about state dinners is that they set a style for the white house from a social aspect and they also set a first lady's style. we deal with things like the flowers, the table settings, what color dress is the first lady going to wear at a state dinner? i can remember the chief florist at the white house getting together with the first ladies and actually having a sample of the fabric, the color and and how the table was going to be set, with what kind of decorations. but basically, the first lady has a tremendous responsibility to set the tone for a state visit. i wrote down a number of different things that the first lady gets involved in, first through the social secretary, and then things that should deal directly with. they include about eight different things, the flowers, the shoes, the decorations, not only the decorations at the table but what flowers are trees are plans will be put around the state floor for the official visit, what the decor room is going to be for the dinner, the kind of dress that is going to go forward. is it black tie, is a white tie, is a business? the color choices, i already went over that, with the dresses and colors of fabrics and tablecloths. but there are a couple of other things that usually fall under the first lady's aspect of what she is dealing with, and that deals with a great deal of how the service personnel are going to present themselves. quite frequently at these dinners we have in the visual aspects of a foreign country, the kind of foods they like, whether or not they all are -- there are allergies to certain food groups, and there are a myriad of details that the first ladies have to go through, burst -- both personally and with the novel with the chefs. the cheap floral designer has to be involved with choosing the entertainment with the social secretary. what music is going to be played at the state dinner, what music will be played for the dancing afterwards. there is a myriad amount of questions that have to be asked of higher and that she will have to make decisions upon to allow these dinners to proceed in a good manner. >> can you tell us about the menu? and make sure and talk about your dessert. [laughter] >> to be able to perform at the white house, to be involved with steak dinner or in the level better, it is really an honor, let me tell you. there is no better place to cook or bake in the world. you are having fun doing it, let me tell you. the involvement with the menu, it was quite an ordeal to come to a final menu, because we had many people who had their hand in this do, as they say. -- with their hand in these do, as they say. you would start with a basic menu, and then you would come back, people with allergies, and not only allergies, but people from different denominations, like if you have kosher people at the dinner. there are so many things you have to watch out for. some do not have shellfish and this kind of thing. it is amazing what you have to go through before the file menu. usually what i did, i waited until the chef and the condition -- in the shaft is in the kitchen and then i put the desert out. then it was a sure bet for me that all the kings had been worked out, so it was an easier way. -- all the kinks had been worked out. when you come to the white house, at first you don't know which way to go. when people come from hotels or places outside, and you want to continue what you have learned outside in the hotel business. in the white house, and to mrs. reagan's time, they pretty much had their menu and desert like you would have at a hotel. you can go back and look. you'd find pie, chocolate cake, good stuff there. i don't think mrs reagan cared for pipe or chocolate cake. she said to me once, we in california don't eat cheese cake. actually she did, but that is another story. [laughter] so i knew right away that she was looking for something else. can i deliver? i don't know, but i am surely going to try like hell. there was a head decorator at the white house and he was very close to the family. he had a good eye for food and everything, and colors. he did help me a lot, i must say. so you get your sources from wherever you can. i think this is windy deserts came, under mrs. reagan in the white house in those years. she definitely want to take a different approach. i am sorry to say after i left, it stopped. [laughter] if you want the truth, i am giving you the truth. but it was such a pleasure. mrs. reagan rarely told me a lot. she is a mentor for me. she told me that in the days of work, you don't have eight hours, you have 24. she did teach me that. on several occasions when she requested a special dessert, it was so tedious. in those years i was the only pasty person in the white house. she requested a special desert, and we had two days before the state dinner. i said mrs. reagan, the desert is wonderful, but i have only two days left. that is when she said, you have two days and two nights. [laughter] it sounds really harsh at first, but it is the best lesson i have been taught, because the sky is the limit if you push yourself, and you can make it happen. and if you do make it happen, you feel like the king of the hill. and she is the one who made that offer to me. >> can you tell us about a particular state dinner, or how the process work? >> sure. as gary was talking, i was thinking about what he said about the colors and matching the colors with the fabric and the flowers on the table. the first white tie state dinner that the bush and administration did, working closely with the team and the social secretary. one of the most fun calls i got to make was to the queen's dresser. i said what color is the queen wearing, because we certainly did not want the first lady of the house and queen elizabeth to be in the same color. so that was one of the little items. there are so many people in so many things that go into making this a beautiful event that is respectful of your guests and also reflective of the president and first lady, and we all want to put our best foot forward when we are working in the white house. this is the time to showcase everything that is perfect. >> did the first ladies talk about a state dinner as being an event that was showcasing america, what their goals were? can you tell us about that? >> certainly. the state dinners are really about diplomacy, and the role of the first lady and her office, with great help from the state department, there is a huge amount of protocol involved. there is no detail that is too small. whatever one does, one does not want to make a mistake that would be insulting in any way, so there are great number of details, but it is important to remember that it really is about diplomacy and enhancing the diplomacy between two countries. our second state dinner was with mexico. because of some of the personal touches, part of it was tablecloths that were mayan blue, and there were roses and prickly pears that were just stunningly beautiful. but my favorite little piece of it was that we had -- eastern was the dinner, and na 10th -- and then a tent for a wonderful, lovely entertainment which was by beyonce. there were moderate butterflies looking like they were floating down. the significance is that montmartre butterflies fly from rch butterflies fly down from canada and they land in the birthplace of president calderon. so that is meaningful, and these touches make a difference. one other thing i would add is that we had an outside chef, rick bayless, who is a very well known -- he is american but his food is mexican, and people at the time questioned why we would do such a thing, since obviously the best mexican food is in mexico. it is because we have had conversations -- the first lady had visited mexico and was with the president and his wife and they had heard about rick bayless and expressed an interest. >> betty, can you tell us about some of the research that goes into first setting up state dinners, and that first ladies might do? >> we do keep records and the curator's office, clipping files and information, historical information on entertainment over the years and the particular state dinners. we were were a resource for many ideas fort deserts for the particular countries that were being entertained at a state dinner. we worked with the first lady's office in terms of needing to order additional pieces of presidential china that would be used for state dinners as well. we had supplements made of the fdr service and the wilson service to fill out those services, because they had been depleted by breakage and so forth over the years. in the year 2000 when the white house historical association offered to fund a new state service, we work closely with mrs. clinton in deciding about the colors, the designs that would go on the service, how those particular colors would looked in the various settings in the state dining room are the east room. i do remember mrs. clinton's mother was living in the house at the time. she would come to some of these little meetings about showing samples from the porcelain factory. none of them seem to be satisfactory. she said of in the bathroom of my suite is a beautiful yellow color. she said i think we should try that yellow color. so we got a sample of the wallpaper and sent it off to lennox, and they did some samples, and it worked out beautifully. i think that was mrs. rodham's legacy in terms of state dinners. [laughter] looking at the transitions into the white house that a family makes and the transitions out as well. often, for a president, he has been running for office for a couple of years and he is a political person who has most likely been at the white house numerous times, but in coming into the white house, the first ladies really have not spent much time. we have an example with michelle obama, she was not familiar with the white house, where as laura bush was familiar coming in during the george h.w. bush presidency. tell us a little bit about michelle obama's transition in and how she prepared for it. >> michelle obama is a serious student, but i don't think there is any way one can be prepared in a sense to really know what is going to be like. her husband had been a u.s. senator for a few years, but she and the girls had stayed in chicago where her whole family and support work. the bush people were incredibly helpful and generous about what the office was like and the structure and all that. the bushes were as well, personally, when the obama is visited. but i have to say there's just no substitute for being there. mrs. obama and the family were first at the adams hotel and then the blair house and into the white house for coffee, as is the tradition on inauguration morning. and everyone went off to the inauguration, and then what the white house residence staff does is just unbelievable, where in that time when the inauguration is going on, in this case they move the bushes out and the obamas in. they walk in, and now they live in this new home. it is really quite startling, and i don't think there's any amount of preparation that can help one understand what this all means. >> can you tell us about the bush is coming in, and then gary can tell us from the viewpoint of running the whole operation how that transition works. >> i was not here working with her directly at that time, in 2001, but i had been part of the transition team, the one that was set up in virginia before the election was finally decided. once we were in the government's space, we were planning from the personnel side of it. one of the first visits that a president and incoming first lady get this from the chief usher with a list of things that they need to think about and be knowledgeable about when they come into the white house. i will let gary talk a little bit about that. but 2001 was a very different experience than some past transitions. we did not know for six weeks with the president was going to be, so not broke -- no real official conversation to be taking place to prepare for a transition. certainly very different than 2008-2009, when, in fact, mrs. bush had everything packed up and almost out of the white house well before january 2009. they are rich just a few little boxes in the china room that needed to be moved out. -- there were just a few little boxes. she was very prepared. but it is incredibly seem less -- seamless. the news burkett -- the new first family is really not aware of it, and is just so extraordinary. gary can talk a lot more about how the staff handles it. >> transitions are unique. there is a four-year transition, when a president is running for reelection, just as obama just did, and the staff has to start gathering information on those people who are in the opposition party, who are also expecting to be inaugurated on january 20. when i was there, i started six- eight months earlier, gathering information on the candidates who were running, and then once the political parties had their conventions and the selections were made, i became more intent on gathering information on the nominee. sometimes that is difficult. after four years, you have to be loyal to the family that is there. it is their home that we are talking about. luckily, i was involved in the home, not the political aspects of the white house. some people forget that at times. this is a family that is moving in and out of the white house, and replacing their home, or establishing a new home. but when you have a transition after four years, you are wearing two hats. you are loyal to look family that is there, and you want the staff who spend 100% of their time doing what has to be done for the family that lives there and the sitting president and first lady. but you also have to be preparing for what may happen in the future. on inaugural day, and luckily when you have a second term, there is not much going on on inaugural day. everybody kind of takes a deep breath and lets things proceed. but when you are doing a transition from one thing -- one family to another, after eight years, the family that is their nose they are leaving on january 20 four years in advance. that is plenty of time to prepare themselves both mentally, and to start moving their furnishings out. when you have a four-year term, it is an entirely different ball game. the family that is coming in, once you have the election, if the family that is moving out is not going to be there any longer, the incoming president -- there is a long conversation that goes on with both the first lady, first and foremost, but with the president also. not only there is a home transition on inaugural day, the west wing, which is very symbolic of the presidency, and one of the first things the press want to see on the inaugural day is the oval office. what desk did the president used, what paintings did he choose for the walls, but statues are in there? what went out from the previous administration? there is a tremendous amount that goes on on inaugural day. we have about five hours from the time the president-elect leaves the white house, goes down to the capital for the inaugural festivities, and comes back from the inaugural parade in front of the white house. one family has moved completely out and another family it is moved completely in. to the point of all their clothes are hung up, all their favorite foods are in the pantry, all their toiletries are in the bathrooms that they selected, all the rooms have been changed to their desire. it is done in five hours. i referred to it as organized chaos. we divide the staff up into different groups. a group that was responsible for moving things out, and the group that was responsible for moving things in. is thesident's elevator larger of the two. there is a lot of going up and down steps. there is a lot of the elevator traffic. luckily, i just got to be the maestro that gave directions, and the wonderful staff, including roland and the kitchen staff, were preparing for the events that are going to take place not only that evening but in the coming days, as the new president welcomes in and thanks those people who helped him get elected. >> rowland, i wonder if you can tell us about another aspect of it, and that is about the human relationships that form, that are close, when a president and his family leave, the impact that it have on the staff. >> yes, it is a very strong bond between the family and the staff, because we really get to know everybody, from the president and first lady on down, family, pets. the white house is a big family. that is what it is. everybody is there for one thing only, to please the family. whatever they want, whatever they like, anybody in the family. you don't really think about them leaving, even the day before or two days before, even though you know they are leaving. but then when it fits you, you feel bad, really odd, right here. for me, i always say it is like a funeral day. that is the closest thing i can describe it. i don't know about other staff and the white house, but for me, i have never been a party guy. i don't care what party you belong to. the president and first lady of the united states. that is what counts. that is too high surf. sup -- that is who i serve. so you really love those people. you would do anything for them. if you don't feel that way, i don't think you should be there. paying respect to the house is the same thing. everything goes hand in hand. so the morning of the departure of the family, we usually gather together in the state dining room. all the staff will be around the room, waiting for them to come in. the president, first lady, like chelsea, when they were in the white house she was part of it. and pets, too. when mrs. barbara bush, she did not go anywhere without millie. i called her the presidential bog. -- the presidential dog. she knew how to act, very presidential at all times. she was an amazing dog. she knew where she was at all times -- more than i did. let me tell you, it is those days, i cherish those days. even today, it brings the motion to me. -- brings the motion to me. -- emotion to me. there was a great finish. for the staff, it was very hard to see them go. when president bush sr. left, he had lost an election. that was super sad because of that. i never even thought that a president would cry. they are too big, they are too strong, but i have seen them cry, and really cry, and then it makes it doubly hard again. when i see president and mrs. bush coming into the room to say goodbye, and president bush could not speak. he just cried. >> as close as people who work in the residents are to the family, we also work very closely with their staff, particularly the first lady's staff. and all of a sudden, they are gone by noon on inauguration day. you have worked with these people for four or eight years, and many of them become your friends. some in the west wing as well, those that work more closely with. then all of a sudden, they are gone, and the next day, there is a whole group of strangers coming in. they don't know you, and you don't know them. it is a very difficult time, i think, saying goodbye to these families. it is like a whole new job sometimes when a new family comes in. >> the new people coming in sometimes scare the hell out of you, too. when the right ravens came in, i was making raspberry sauce in the blender, and the top came off and it was all over my clothes. i was going to my room to change and everything. the decorator i was working with happened to be here. he came and looked me up and down and said, things are surely going to change around here. [laughter] i got scared. i said that is it, i am cooked. >> i have been listening to betty and roland, it is so entertaining. it speaks to the resiliency of the white house. we have political staff that comes and goes, but they continue to support every president that comes in, and the staff around them. and they go through these adjustments as well. we don't often think about that, and when rowland was talking about how difficult this is on that morning when all the staff is gathered to say goodbye to the outgoing president, the first family, and there was a much happier time, years later, when president george h.w. bush and barbara bush were there with their son and daughter-in-law to say goodbye once again, under very different and happier circumstances after a successful eight years. that was a historic moment, and something i will never forget. i had to leave that room for a few minutes to compose myself as well. i salt and a longtime residents staff member taking care of presidential pets and he was a gardener. i said you were not upstairs, and he said i cannot do it. it was too emotional for him. he said not one time was there a departure of a presidential family that he would go up to that historic meeting to say goodbye, because it is so difficult. that really struck me, and i have never forgotten it. >> one thing we don't want to forget in this whole mix is the fact that the staff has done this time and again, for the most part. the majority of the resident staff that come stay their entire career at the white house. it does not soften the blow, as -- asn tell yourolan' you can tell from roland's reaction. we have about five minutes to accept it and move on. there is another president and family moving in, and we will meet them and be their staff in five minutes. so we have to turn that emotion around immediately, from this very sad departure -- and it is. on inaugural day when the clintons were leaving the white house, i was standing at the north portico as the light -- the last person to leave the white house was amy carter. everybody else had gotten in the cars and were waiting for the cars to be loaded to move out, and she came up to me and gave me a hug. it is a day i'll never forget. we have to turn that rider around immediately and get the new family moved in. and the family thinks they have to come in and adjust to the executive residence staff, and that is probably the greatest mantra that the resident staff has to live by. no, it is not the white house way, it is the family's way within the white house. and you need to adapt to the new family. that takes a while. i think the resident staff does it better, because they have been through it before, than the families do. these are people who work for the previous president. now you are working for me. how are you going to respond? how do i respond to you? and we note in the resident staff when that has taken place, because usually when you walk into the room, when there is a conversation going on among family members are the staff with the president's, conversation stops. they don't know whether you are going to hold the information that over here or not. we are behind the screen at the secret service puts up for security. we go past that. we are with the family all the time. so the family initially is very reluctant to speak openly. at some points, two weeks, six months, a year -- conversation continues when you walk into the room. there is a collective "ah, we have made it" that goes through the staff. >> betty, we had talked earlier about the get together so that residents staff have after the president and his family have left, when the presidential libraries are opened. if you could just briefly tell us about those. >> recent administrations have been very generous in inviting residents staff members to the opening of the library's, and many of them have taken advantage and gone to them. it is sort of like a family reunion. just recently, down at the national archives -- i actually started working there in the johnson administration. there was a wonderful reception, inviting all previous johnson administration staff to come. after all those years had gone by, 40 years, it was just absolutely wonderful to see people that you had worked with all those years ago. i think there is that camaraderie if you work closely with and administration, regardless of what position you held, that he worked for a seton -- i don't want to common cause, but a common sense, that you were in it together, and you went through all these crises, good times and bad times, and have very fond memories, particularly of the people that you worked with over the years. >> in looking at the white house, the organization has grown enormously that supports the president, but also the organization has gotten larger that supports the first lady. of anita -- of the need and susan served as chief of staff for laura bush and michelle obama. i wonder if you can tell us about the organization that the first lady needs, and why she needs it, and how you interact with the west wing, because you both had titles, not only as chief of staff for the first lady, but assistant to the president. how did those titles work together? >> there is no doubt that looking at the organization chart, which i know you have, the east wing staff is clearly rounded. that is indicative of how much more is expected of the first lady in what she chooses to do with her platform, which is a privilege to represent the people of the united states, both at home and around the world. there is an increased expectation, and with it, the pressure to do something with this opportunity. so the staff rose to support the initiatives. initiatives are selected by the first lady, with one fundamental in mind. how can a work that i do support the work of the administration and the work of the president? going to the point that they are not paid, and it removes their flexibility and their ability to pick and choose the causes they want to engage in and to really use their background and experience and bring authenticity to their work, but it is reflective of what the overall goals are of the administration. the first lady is not running a shadow government. as pat nixon said, it is the hardest unpaid job in the world, but it is an extraordinary opportunity and a privilege. the chief of staff is there to dissemble information in order to do this work, in addition to that social office and the importance of the diplomatic world, it is really the policy work. we have to thank rosalynn carter for being the first to establish the role of project director in the office of the first lady. >> do remember how laura bush came upon the initiative for afghan women? >> sure. laura bush came into the white house in 2001, and she had already been a little bit typecast as the shy, retiring library in teacher. she was asked who are you going to be, barbara bush or hillary clinton? she said i know barbara bush. well, so i am going to be heard. she was confident in their relationship as husband and wife and the partnership they had had through their life, in public life and private life. they came into the white house and she was going to take her interest from texas to washington, which is establishing the national book festival, which is now continuing in its 12th and 13th year. she had an interest in education. that was a major initiative of the administration, no job left behind -- she was an advocate. and then september 11 happen, and that changed everything. the pivot that not only our country had to make, but she had to make as well. having this role and this platform, and what would she do with it, and how could she be part of this effort? and she delivered a radio address in november 2001, the first first lady to deliver presidential radio address on the plight of afghan women. this had been exposed to the world as a brutal treatment of women. that became an important calls for higher -- an important cause for hurt. -- for her. she said what struck her after that radio address, she was visiting her daughter at the university of texas in austin, and she was at a department store. women at the makeup counter came up to her and said thank you so much for speaking out about afghan women. she realized she had this enormous platform that was not only domestic but it was global. from that point forward, and to this day, she is still deeply engaged in afghan women's issues. we were able to put forward an important desire that she had, which was to go to afghanistan, which would get within two months of the second term. >> susan, can you tell us about let's move, and the american military initiative? >> mrs. obama certainly knew that in theory, that being the first lady was an enormous opportunity for a platform. when she got to the white house, she was not sure exactly how that would play itself out in her case. however, during that first election campaign, she spent a lot of time with military families, and understood that these were extraordinarily resourceful people who would never ask for help. she thought that the country could do a lot more for them. she felt when she got to the white house that this was an area where she could make a difference. with respect to the let's move campaign, she started with the idea of the white house kitchen garden. she thought -- she thought this would be great to have a conversation with the country about children and health. i think she did not appreciate at first how this would resume, that the country was ready to have this conversation. at some point after a few months, she said to her staff, i would like this to be a campaign. this is going to be something i will be working on, and no doubt this is something she will be involved in for the rest of her life, as she will the issue of military families. so we worked for months, and i was just thinking about your related question about the west wing. the first lady's chief of staff is her representative in the west wing. one of the important roles is to coordinate them. we knew for months -- we came up with the name, let's move. the campaign started on february 9, which was supposed to be at a community center, but of course there was one of those snowstorms, so we had to move into the state dining room. things were well coordinated with the west wing until that morning. somehow we realize that the president was going to stop by the press briefing room at the exact time where she was going to launch let's move from the state dining room. that was one of those things that's, there was great effort from everybody's part and at the last minute we somehow realize that and were able to stay in the west wing. i do not think the president is going to want to step on the first lady's initiative, so they moved their time a little bit. >> the bush first ladies were very popular and they continue to be, whether it was through their campaigns, their personalities, or just a general way that people perceived them to be. they tended to have much star support even than their husbands, -- much stronger support even than their husbands. that leads in a reelection campaign for the first lady to then go out and campaign for her husband. how did both first ladies feel about that role of political support for their husbands? you could compare it with before they came into office, and then when they worked in the reelection campaigns. before they came into office, obviously they did not have a lot of political experience going out and speaking on behalf of the president, but they certainly did by the re- election. >> in terms of the popularity question, every problem in the world comes to the desk of the american president. by virtue of that reality, not everybody is going to be happy. your popularity is going to take big hits from time to time. the first lady does not have that pressure. she gets to pick and choose the thing she wants to work on. in terms of the political involvement, which is a slightly different question. laura bush, from the minute she got married or started dating george w. bush, he was from a political family and involved in politics. as much as she pleaded not to ever have to give a public speech, she became quite good at it, and over time, and through the different campaigns -- the campaign for governor, the campaign for congress. he famously talks about how they were coming back from a speech and he asked her how was my speech? she said well, it was horrible, and he proceeded to drive a car right through the garage. he was not at all happy with that response. the political spouse really is the one person who can be most honest with you, and they do get deeply engaged and deeply involved. it is important to the success of their spouse in these campaigns. in 2004, she was a pivotal person in the campaign. it was a very difficult time. the country was at two wars. she got out there, and to a great degree, her speech at the new york convention in 2004, where she spoke to the human side of being president of the united states, and watching the great struggle of this big, tough decision, including sending people to war and how painful that is, that none of this is taken lightly, i think it was an important moment. >> i agree with anita that one of the things the first lady can do that no one else can do is humanize the president. one of the things mrs. obama has always felt is that she was happy to campaign, but had to do it in a voice that was natural to her, and honest. she did not want to campaign for a candidate she did not know at all, because it did not feel real to our. on the other hand, she wanted to be helpful. when the president was working on health-care reform, she gave three different speeches on the subject. one of the speech she gave, and this was a campaign of a different sort, it was about breast cancer survivors and how continuing care is important and how health-care reform would help people get preventive care and continuing care. when it came to the actual reelection campaign, i think it was sort of a no-brainer. she has always felt her role was to support the administration in any way she could, and this was something she felt strongly about, our husbands reelection. so she was out there and gave many, many speeches. she is really a natural. she likes campaigning and really likes to get to go out and about, away from washington, and meet just normal people on the campaign trail. >> one of the things that we have talked about doing, i asked you all to come up with a question for one of your fellow panelists. i don't know what your questions are, or who you are going to ask them to, but let's go to it and everybody can chime and also with answers. betty, would you like to start us off? do you have a question for a fellow panelist about the role of the first lady? >> i will direct my question to both of the former chiefs of staff. there is such a great interest in first ladies today. my question for them is, in terms of respecting their privacy in their lives, how do you draw the line in terms of releasing information or protecting the privacy of the first lady and the family? >> that is a great question. it is one of the things that every first lady wrestles with. she is sort of the protector of the family sanctuary that surrounds the president, particularly when they live above the store, and you try to have a private life and the public eye. it is certainly not easy. you also recognize you are in a public role, and people want to know about you. they want to know about your family life. it is about striking a balance. it is difficult but important. working with the great secretary who can be honest with the first lady and let her know that sometimes she needs to put some nuggets out there. it is difficult when you have young children. >> that is the area mrs. obama feels most strongly about. mrs. clinton is a good example of someone who she felt was extremely effective at protecting chelsea clinton as best as she could, and this wonderful young woman who grew up in the white house. having small children in the white house, again, above the store, above the museum, above a place where there are reporters all the time. how do you handle it if the girls want to go ride their bikes on the south lawn, which is in the rose garden, which is where reporters find themselves. we have to come up with all kinds of rules. one of which was that the children could not be photographed unless they were with one of their parents. that was one of those compromises. i think for the most part, the fact that the girls were able to go to summer camp and go to school and have a more or less normal life is something that i think their friends, their friends' families are great about encouraging and supporting, but i think the tug- of-war with the press is something that is inevitable. the obamas know that people are genuinely interested in for the most part, in a nice and caring way, and yet these girls have a right to their privacy. >> i have a really tough question. how do you feel about guest chefs in the white house? do you agree to bring a certain guest chef to the white house because the first lady tells you so? or because you are in agreement with having a guest chef and the question -- in the kitchen? >> there were times over the years when they did bring in a guest chef to participate in some of the very big events on the lawn. the congressional review, for example. they brought their favorite texas barbeque shoved to work with the kitchen -- texas barbecue chef to work with the kitchen. i remember another time when they brought in a guest chef, and this was after hurricane katrina. mr. bush made about 25 visits down to the gulf coast during the redevelopment of the gulf coast. chef paul prud'hon an emerald lagasse renna guided. it was an important message that the gulf coast was coming back and restaurants reopening. there was an important reason to showcase these american chefs, and particular reasons why they would come. i think that as long as the staff, the household staff and the kitchen staff are comfortable and see it as an opportunity to share their experience with an outside chef, i think is fine, and it actually could be kind of fun to see it. [laughter] that is not the answer he wanted. >> the current white house chef s are fantastic, and the obamas very much appreciate what they do. part of it is particularly the state dinners, they showcase all aspects of american cooking. in every situation where there have been guest chefs, there is a collaboration, because the white house chefs know things that there is no way a guest chef knows about how things are done. i think these collaborations showcase the best of american cuisine, and real collaboration between the guest chefs and the white house chefs. >> it may add something to that? i need to. that is all fine and good. of course it did go ask christopher, who is one of the chefs, the down, what does she really feel? that is another story. probably this is where i think you don't know what she feels. i tell you differently, other chefs in the past, i think it is a slap in the face of being the white house chef. i am the chef of the white house that does everything for the family and the guests day in and day out. the day when i can shine, i am told that somebody else comes in. it is like me asking to be the president for one day. [laughter] why not? it is another job. let's put it this way. i don't believe in that, and i never will. because this is my job, and i would like to shine once in awhile, and this is my chance. because we know that the guest chef comes only for one day and one day only. you know why, to promote their establishment. that is the only reason they come. if you would tell those guys that they cannot publicize them being in the white house, how many do you think would show up? i needed to say that, but his -- because this is my feeling. [laughter] >> i would like to ask anita, what do you think is the most difficult aspect of the role of the first lady? >> there are a couple of things, and i will list them. i think one of the hardest things is seeing the person you love most in the world criticize. i think you have to be strong, and you have to be confident in your relationship as a family and as husband and wife to know who your husband is, and he knows who you are. i think that is one of the toughest. i think also balancing the time, private time and public requirements, can be difficult. and then i think that when it is over, whether it is the end of four years or the end of a, that you run out of time to do all the things you wanted to do. that would be my answer to that. >> i have a question for you, martha. in a transition project, what influence have you found that the transition of first ladies activities has had in the transition of the white house? >> the first lady is going to be responsible really for setting up the home, the family. there is so much that goes on in setting up the west wing and in concern with policy, that the president is not going to have time to be spending on how the home is going to be created. so i think that the first lady at the beginning has a very tough period of adjustment, because it is a whole new environment for her, and she has to learn how to bring her family in, particularly with young family, like michelle obama has. that is what they have to focus on. beforehand, they can start thinking about their issues, as both recent first ladies have done. they thought about it beforehand. but the whole physical move is something that they are the ones who will have to handle, because the president just simply is not going to have the time. he will be involved in the setting of the oval office. as george bush proudly talked about every item being procured for the white house and why he chose the pictures and it was not just his choosing. >> do we have time for questions? >> do i get to ask line? -- line? -- mind? -- mine? [laughter] of the five administration the work for, what was the one time that you felt you were able to shine your craft the most? the one favorite? >> it is quite difficult to go there. at the beginning i can dwell on everyone else learning to sing in the white house. i really could see what she wanted. she said that this is a private home. this is our home. we will showcase the best we can do. what better place to showcase the best? the best furniture, the best wallpaper, the best carpet. it is the people's home. this is why they embark into making those spectacular desert all the time. the funny thing is that after the reagans the part of the house, it continued. every a ministration after that gave me carte blanche to do that. they knew, somehow, i would produce a dessert that they could be proud of. also at the time we were already doing some diplomacy with the desert, by introducing the desert with design that reflected the inviting head of state. that is why they let me do all the way to transition of food. if you remember, the food way back, every course was served on a big platter, like a desert. but then that went away. it went more to the restaurant service. but the desert for never touched. during the clinton that change. mrs. clinton [indiscernible] there is a reason for that. she must have liked that, or she would have said no more of that. [laughter] i assumed. in -- i am very proud of that. it remained so until my last day. we made many desserts for the first family that touched them. i remember when george w. came to the white house, the first governors dinner that we were going to have, i wanted something texan. i wanted the governor to know who the president was, a texan. so, i came up with a design called tumbleweed. if you have been in texas, you have seen them. that is what the desert was, tumbleweed. mrs. bush did not care for it. [laughter] but president bush loved it. >> of course. >> i remember we were discussing these things and mrs. bush said go ahead. things like these make the family very proud. >> they had one problem with the first ladies and one problem with him, never do the same dessert twice. they were always different. >> i wanted something very interesting. we did not repeat, we did not. that was the entire shop. the head of state would come in and i would beg my staff to throw the ideas and to the basket. we said the best ones would flow and that is what we will do. i tell you what, i know that mrs. reagan sometimes said you cannot serve that. it will fall on the lap of a lady. i would tell her, it would not. [laughter] ear.member we had a giant pai i was on my knee, explaining the desert. when i explained to her that it would not fall, she grabbed it so that it stop shaking. i said -- ok, you win. [laughter] >> on that note, let's go to some questions. >> i am from the museum education program of george washington university as well. my question or comment is during my lifetime is possible that there will be a first gentleman. what are your thoughts on the influence of the first lady's of what that role would be? >> i will say the became close, we came very close in 2008, right? i think the white house is very resilient. although that would have been different, as that would have been a former president. a very different situation. but the fact that potentially a man was getting closer to that, i think the white house is a very resilient and flexible place that will adapt to all kinds of changes. just as staff is asked to renew family, i think that is the remarkable thing about the white house. >> i had a brief conversation with dennis thatcher when he came to the white house. he was wandering around the state floor, she was speaking to the president. i told him some of the history of the white house. i made very sure that he saw the area of the white house [indiscernible] [laughter] he was very engaging and i asked him what his role was. he says that his role is whenever she wanted. >> ok. i think that there are ways where it will have to change. i think that one of the issues is about working outside the home. >> chemistry professors, there are ways in which there are men who probably do not want to play the traditional first lady role. it is right that the white house is resilience. there will probably be a lot of questions asked. >> my name is heather and my question is for [indiscernible] the bride. the president bush library will be opening soon. i want to know how mrs. bush's legacy is being preserved? >> thank you for asking. the library is opening on the 25th of this year. mrs. bush has been share of the architecture committee, landscape design committee, interpretive planning committee. she has a great deal of influence on what it will look like. this will be their life's work for the rest of their lives for the bush presidential institute. we did a lot of working with other libraries. the first lady's role is generally relegated to a tiny area of the library. this will not be the case this time. her work will be integrated throughout from the moment that you step in to the moment you leave the library. she is very proud of that. he is very proud of that fact. thank you for asking. >> i would like to check -- i would like to thank our panelists. >> you can see here the wonderful support system that first ladies have, whether this is the resident staff or the staff that comes with them, they all former wonderful support structure. thank you. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] >> thank you, martha, and everyone for an and lightning section -- session. thank you -- and lightning ingsion -- enlighten session. on the way out there will be a bag that you do not want to forget. as the doctor already showed you -- [laughter] the most recent edition of white house history. you will find this interesting, it is tom whitehouse station. in cooperation with c-span and the association, a special edition for the first lady's series of book that was produced is in the bag out here. you are welcome on the way out to stop and play -- stop in the foyer and take a tour of the c- span bus and see all the wonderful high-tech things inside the bus and learn about first ladies. thank you again for making our inaugural session very special. thank you. [applause] >> we will be showing this introduction again tonight at 9:00 p.m. eastern. next week, the life and times of the nation's first first lady, martha washington and her life before meeting george washington, being a general's wife and setting the precedents. we will travel to the places that influence to life. that is first ladies, influence and image, next monday night live at 9:00 p.m. eastern. we are offering a special edition of the book, first ladies of the united states of america, presenting biographies and portraits, thoughts from michelle obama on the role of first ladies throughout history, now available with a discounted price at c-span.org/products. >> c-span, created in 1979, brought to you as a public service by your television provider. >> this is presidents day. c-span is that the fdr memorial, the section that betrays the president sitting in a wheelchair with his scottish terrier. he delivered an election speech in 1944 where we talk about republicans attacking him, his wife, his son, and his little dog. the speech was named after the dog. -- became known as t >> this is actually the second fdr memorial in washington. the first loan was builds with a marble block no larger than his desk. it stands on the grounds of the national archives. >> visiting the franklin roosevelt memorial on this president's day weekend. elected four times, he died in office in 1945. this memorial was dedicated 52 years later by president bill clinton. >> what worries me is i do not want to be sitting in the same place as a couple of years ago, going to the government and saying -- can we have more, please? i would like to see a process of better management so that things like incentive auction -- incentive options, with the secondary market working in a smoother way than now. >> in the usage from subscribers receiving anything from 40% to 50% cable rates on an annual basis. there is no slowing down. there is an insatiable hunger for full capacity. >> more from this year's ces international consumer electronics show. tonight, on "the communicator's." on c-span 2. >> in the citizens united case three years ago it was ruled that corporations have rights with the political campaigns. a former federal elections commission chairman look into >> john, i appreciate your kind words. i owe most of my career to cato, that is the real truth. not the other way. in any case, let's get back to business and talk about the post-citizens united world here. have things changed because of the decision? i encompassed within that the case of the [indiscernible] not only because i was one of the co-founders on that, but because it is technically the case that allows the superpac, which is a more important case, i think, than citizens united, although it did get to the supreme court first. i use citizens united to refer to both of those cases. the fact is, these cases did not change nearly so much as some people think or have been led to believe. prior to citizens united groups that we would call 527's could run ads pretty much any time prior to six days before the general election in which they could say almost anything they wanted about a candidate as long as they did not conclude by saying -- vote for this candidate or vote for his opponent. they could say that john sample is a dirty rotten scoundrels who kicks small dogs. call them and tell them that we do not need his agenda. people would be like -- that is upsetting. you can do that. now, with citizen united outside an election. prior to 2003, you could do that anytime. after the wisconsin right to life vs. sec, there were more ways to run those ads. the court took a narrow view. corporations and unions to pay for these ads, since the nature of the ads was a bit different. they could also be conducted and were conducted by nonprofit organizations. if you need an example, here is a real ad. this is from the naacp in 2000, featuring a great black-and- white film, chains dragging a black man to his death. the voice comes on and says "i am the daughter of james bird. my father was killed in texas. beaten and dragged 3 miles to his death because he was black. when governor george w. bush refused to support a crime legislation, it was like my father was killed all over again. call george w. bush and advise him to support hate crime legislation. we will not be dragged away from our future." that ad ran before the 2000 election. is that a radical change from where we are post-citizens united? i want to stress first that the changes not so great as some might think. moreover, it is not so great in an important way. i think that to the average citizen out there there are a lot of news stories trying to rile them up and talk about corporate plutocracies, but the campaign looked pretty much like any other campaign. there were lots and lots of television advertisements. we also know from political science research that it helps voters to make decisions. there were lots of negative ads. they claim to hate that, they have said that in every poll since i was born, although in fact they do respond to them. they think the campaign is too long and they have said that in every poll since i was born. it means candidates have to start raising money earlier. so, all of these things to the average voter, if you actually look there is nothing new, it is just what they have always complained about. like complaining about the weather or whenever it else it is that people complain about. having said that, citizens united and the other cases that have floated their way are in fact none the less important. tastes, it is important to be able to do express advocacy ads. sometimes you want to do that express advocacy. i think that in many ways express advocacy advertisements and the ability to fund those create a somewhat more honest system. they do not say to call george bush to support hate crime legislation. that is not really the issue. you're trying to get people to vote against him in the election. it has definitely increased the amount of political spending in the campaigns. i think it is probably safe to say that it is probably between 10% and 20% in the last election has come from liberal spending policies like citizens united. i will not argue unless they draw up some preposterous figure like 80%. whether you think this is good or bad depends on your tastes. there is good information a higher spending does and usually can lead to a better informed electorate, which can be used to depress voter turnout but also to increase voter turnout. certainly in the elections the fed from 2010 to 2012, turnout has not been a problem. the other thing that we often get is this idea that there is all of this undisclosed spending, where the point that people seem to agree upon is dark money. that seems to be the term that the liberal reform organizations and press were using, so i assumed they had a conference where they focus groups and tested that. that is a misleading label by itself. every political ad says who paid for it. it is the law in every political ad. what they mean to say is that we do not know enough about these groups as we would like to know. they are disclosed, we just wish we would know more. take the u.s. chamber of commerce for example, i am not sure that that comes into play much. if someone cannot figure out the basic agenda of the chamber of commerce, that is just voting. let everyone boat? we do not put that kind of test on people. is it really that important that we know exactly which companies gave money to their multimillion-dollar budget? any kind of dominant percentage? the problem might be low grade when you have groups called, for example, american commitment, which ran ads in the last cycle. people saying they cannot judge the message and do not know who the candidate might be thinking about or be beholden to in some way, but this is so overplayed, estimates i have taken are that about 7% of the spending in 2012 came from groups that did not disclose their donors. this is a decline from 2010. it is no surprise that this is a decline, the only glue -- the only groups that do not have to disclose their donors are non- profit trade organizations, unions, dollars in small amounts with nonprofit organizations, such as the sierra club or the nra. specifically for the idea that i want to do political activity, they had to realize that these groups were limited to spending something under half of what they do under political activity. it goes hand-in-hand with their legal status. so, these groups are spending something less than that. if you are a guy that wants to influence the election, if you do not want to have your name disclosed for the ad, you have to realize you're essentially paying a 50% tax on your political activity. that half the money that you give them will not be used in the campaign's the want them. that could be misleading as well. they might do it for things you might like, like at with a need to reduce deficit spending outside the context of candidate elections. but still, that is not an official way to do it. you would much rather give it to the superpac, which exposes all the donors if that is your goal. we should talk about how citizens united has actually affected the race. one of the things it has done is made races more fluid, making it possible to get money into a political race much more quickly than used to be the case. most incumbent politicians tend to be that as bad. why? incumbents usually start out with a big lead and are usually fairly comfortable. who is going to get the big influx of cash? almost always a challenger. the classic example being the 2010 race and a woman named rene eldridge. he had won easily in 2008. in 2010 they knew it would be a bad year for democrats. cuomo was raising some money and he was going to have to show up a bit to raise reelection. but he was on nobody's watch list. not even on the likely democrat but watch. he was a safe seat in every one of the major rankings that undertakes them until one day he is walking outside the capitol building and some of these guns of journalists jumped him and started asking hard questions he did not like and he eventually lost his temper. these young students, he was trying to grab the camera and throw a punch, or something like that. it looks really bad. the liberal was probably becoming more conservative. what made the difference was that it was possible to get $500,000 into the campaign in independent expenditures allowed by citizens united and speech now almost overnight. whereas in the past after a huge fund-raising advantage, they would have just written that out. as it is, etherege spent far more than elmhurst. even when you include the independent spending, he outspent her by about $600,000. like many incumbents, etherege complained that it was terribly unfair that these independent groups could come in and spend all this money. he was defeated in 2010 and went back to his seat in the 2012. $500,000 in independent spending, he was the target. he said that this cost him the election and it was terribly unfair. and he is almost certainly right because he lost the election by only a few hundred votes. it probably did swing the election. but what they did not seem to think was on affair was that he outspent his opponent in that race by 3.1 million to $840,000. even with the independent spending he outspent her by well over $1 million. perfectly fine, perfectly fair, the normal consequence of the ad. this is just fine and normal and the way it ought to be. let a group of citizens come in who are not controlled by a candidate and spend money? this is outrageous. this must be stopped. that was his position. we see it over and over again in these races. we see a candidate like pete defazio, who had never had a serious challenge, he actually had to break a sweat. he won his re-election fairly easily, but he had to at least run for the first time in years primarily because independent spending was made possible by a challenger. a couple of the of the things that occur -- we could go on and on with examples, but i will leave that as it is. one thing that we see is that i think citizens united has made an political parties -- has made political parties weaker. mccain fine gold tied soft money to parties. exclosure was totally disclosed. there was an intermediary in which the might be spent. it did not have to spend a lot of time raising money, another big complaint that we hear about the system. in some ways seem to be the best money in the system. but it looked bad. it looked bad. it was large amounts of money, large amounts of money. they went into hysterics and it looked bad. the cases that have come since, they now allow independent spenders and allow people to pool their resources to make independent expenditures without prohibitions on the source. the end result is that groups such as crossroads gps or more traditional groups, like the chamber or planned parenthood can spend large amounts of money in many ways much more easily than the parties can. this reduces the importance of parties and increases the importance of single interest groups and individual candidates. i would note that that can be resolved primarily by simply making it easier for parties and candidates to raise money directly rather than try to the citizens united back in the box. which do nothing is possible, as it is a constitutional decision. i think that what we should be looking for in future efforts for reform is deregulating the system with restoration of parties to greater significance, making it so the candidates have some of the same advantages and lack of disadvantages that the independent spending groups do. i also think we should quit calling them outside spending, as if they are somehow outside the pale. it always seemed strange to me, this concept that and elections campaign should be just for the candidates. saying that they cannot control their own message? who says the you can control your own message? i do think that on the other hand it is silly to have candidates laboring under burdens that the independent spenders are not. i hope that will go away. i think that if you get past the hysterics, none of the dire predictions have come true. turnout remains strong with a healthy democracy and elections. the problems that people complain about, there is almost no evidence that those to be thrown against citizens united. those of the same complaints that we heard before. i think that i indienne and this has been good for democracy. -- i think that in the end this has been good for democracy. there are clearly limits on the ability of government to regulate political speech of its citizens. i think that that is one of the most important statements we can have. i just do not think that in the and heavy government regulation of campaign finance will exist and ultimately the content of the messages we have seen over the years, already there will be examples from q&a. it is a very important statement, we as the people have the right to speak out in the actions. thank you. [applause] >> thanks, brad. the second speaker today will be robert bauer, bob returned to the four -- returned to the firm after a period of service as white house counsel from december 2009 until june of 2011. he is now general counsel for the president's reelection committee for obama for america and general counsel for the democratic national committee. he has served as co-counsel to the new hampshire state senate in the trial of the hon. chief justice david lee broke. counsel to the democratic leaders on trial of jefferson clinton in 1999. the author of several books, united states federal election law, from 1984, so -- the guide to the new campaign of finance law in 2002, more soft money and hard law, the definition of new finance laws in 2004, and many articles about campaign finance and laws. he is other was one of the leading experts and most experienced people in this area. we set out -- we certainly welcome him back to the institute as a commentary today. -- commentator today. >> thank you very much. john said something overly helpful about his own role in the field in his opening remarks. he has written a book on campaign finance, which whether you agree with it or not is untitled "the fallacy of campaign finance reform." some may not agree that there's a fallacy there, but it is a provocative analysis and careful methodology that is well written and always arresting. i think it is a book that every practitioner in the field believes is superior contribution to literature. let me say that on this panel, i am in private practice and want to clarify that the opinions i am expressing are entirely my own. i always give clients the opportunity to disavow and of necessary terminate me. i want to make it clear that i am only speaking for myself. let me go directly to the question at hand. by the way, i will swing a little bit from the question of how and whether citizens united affected election 2012. also the larger significance for campaign finance regulation in the united states. first of all, the first question, how did it affect the election? a couple of quick points of light to make. it depends on what we need. citizens united has come to represent something larger than itself. it is quite significant. it is true that to understand citizens united and its impact your up to understand the context of the field of campaign finance. of course, it is very closely associated in the public with the rise of the superpac, but it is not the sole sponsor of that phenomenon. it does interact with other developments. there was a background to it that has to be considered a part of and not the sole actor. i do believe that in the public debate it is solely responsible for the trend and the apotheosis of the trend, it is the trend that people frequently mean when they refer to citizens united. i have called it a trend towards the liberal -- liberalization of the campaign finance fund, critics have called it a collapse of the conceivable connection -- collection of campaign finance laws, but one way or the other it has obtained significance and is a short and in many respects for that development. not very long ago a professor at the university of california in irvine had an exchange about citizens united. it began with an article in "the new york times" magazine where they challenged the notion that it had had a dramatic impact. they went back and forth and much of the debate was about whether citizens united had driven up campaign spending in the 2012 cycle. he said a few minutes ago that it was by some number, which we can debate, it may well have. others have said that since it opened up the oil -- opened up the opportunity practically speaking, others have taken the position that even though it has not yet spurned major corporate political actions, it has encouraged much more aggressive behavior. what i guess i would appeal for here in my remarks is some humility about the effects of citizens united. the practical fact that it had deserted difficult to judge on the basis of two election cycles. the midterm 2010 and the presidential election campaign of 2012. the effects playing out over extended period of time, often over one. that comes heated around one particular topic, it turns out to have been off the mark and misguided. a good example of that is the 1980's, 70's and 80's, there was an enormous amount of excitement and debate over the role of political action committees. subsisting on contributions solicited from corporate objections, they published a book entitled "what part -- what "?ice pac now considered a fairly tame vehicle for democratic participation, shifting completely away from them. over time we will see more about what citizens united actually means, whether it's burned the development of superpac's. generally it has really transform the landscape and mobilized direct corporate intervention in those campaigns. so, i would say but that a little bit of time will be required for us. i think that a reasonably of not conclusive and satisfying answer to question -- when i say it had interacted with other developments, which complicates the analysis and justifies the humility, i mean not just court and judicial developments, but regulatory developments, including the enforcement of the campaign act, largely a part of the election commission, is it an archaic institution developed in the 1970's the cannot deal with the problems of today? there were obvious the proposals to abolish and replace it. the federal election commission has had to address its actions or inactions, which have had significant impact some larger questions, like whether or not for example certain organizations that appear to be engaged in this activity through the kinds of activity referred to are or are not federally registered will political communities that should be registered to the government and disclosing that activity and complying with financing. so, there is a broad series of factors that accounts for what people frequently take it to be. without any doubt it has contributed in it's shorthand form to the view that times have really changed. we are not sure where it will go or what it will mean for the campaign finance regulatory system and is not in some way on the current model to rehabilitate it. in the minds of people certainly signifies that we are facing a set of large questions in the united states. now, the question comes -- white, more specifically, as the laws develop, what role will they have in those debates? this is more the issue of the second panel, but i would like to tease into it for just a second. john having given us permission to do so. so far think the debate has in some respects missed how they have moved the arguments and frankly the prospects of the current financial regulatory regime and the way it has been adjusted and altered. much of the discussion about the case has been doctrinal, what it has done with doctrine, the question of doctrine the constraints of government regulates political money. for example, citizens united fairly decisively-the hopes of those who in addition base the regulation on appearance and there would be some restoration of the attention to political equality as a sustainable rationale for government action. certainly, citizens united speaks to that issue. second, there was a hope that some more practical approaches would be taken on the part of critics -- and i am not taking a position one way or the other on this -- to the status of the expenditures. you will recall the supreme court actually took in cases that involve judicial campaign finance a critical view of what constituted a significant independent expenditure. there was hope that the court would loosen up the opportunity here to really look at whether or not these expenditures were truly corrupt, if you know the basic theory being, as alluded to a few minutes ago from 1976, they could not be corrupted because they were independent of the candidates, they may suffer from them but had no control over them and because they were independent, online contributions they could not be corrupt. there is obviously a school of thought that empirically that is not correct and congress had new ways to put down independent expenditures. it is a second doctrinal development in some ways. i also believe that the court of citizens united left a remarkable record here. a record on judicial skepticism for the lower supreme court of the united states. in a way that leads to real questions about where it can go from here. of course the baseline as the model established in the 1970's, a mixed regime of contribution limits and disclosure requirements. the court in citizens united along the way, justice kennedy writing for the court had this to say on a couple of points, really suggesting that the court at least is approaching this hire question of how government sorts out and controls campaign financing is very risky business and highly suspect. here are a few examples. in the opinion that it does not receive as much attention. justice kennedy, speaking about the complexity of campaign finance regulation, bearing in mind the enforcement schemes and opposition to those regulations , nonetheless obviously the fcc operates through rulemaking. campaign finance regulation is how we impose unique and complex rules subject to separate rules for 30 different types of federal speech. the sec has adopted pages of regulations. 1071 of advisory opinions since 1975. continuing from their, kennedy speaking -- this regulatory scheme may not the primary in the strict sense of that term as speakers are not compelled by law to seek it buys and from the sec before the speech takes place, but as a practical matter, however -- he goes on to write -- given the complexity shone through administrative determination, the speaker who wants to avoid the threat of liability and the heavy cost against the sec must ask a governmental agency for permission to speak. they must ask for leave of the government speak. in the segment i am giving you he concludes with the following -- these onerous restrictions function as a prior restraint, giving the sec power analysis to licensing the laws of 16th and 17th century england, the sort that they were drawn to prohibit because their business is to sensor and there is a danger that there may be less of a response in court to the constitutional expression. >> here is the fundamental from the court, the the very business of regulating politics, regulating campaign finance, which necessarily entails intervention through other ways by which the administrative agency is heard poses a fundamental threat of censorship. it adheres in the past that it is within their goals to the first amendment. that is one point he makes that raises the question of the 1970's regulatory model. another that he addresses is the question of the distinction on different kinds of speakers. in citizens united he was referring to the congressional expectation that corporations the spending directly. in that sense even though there was an action committee, they precluded from direct participation in a way that is not true of other entities. certainly true foreign contractors and other entities, but as i said on the regime actf contribution limits they were drawn differently from individuals based on legislative determinations from the balance that was, whole, not to mention in the specific determination, the least corrupt. on that he has this to say -- quite apart from the purpose of regulating contact -- content, if a lot is identified by preferred speakers, taking the right to speak for some and giving it to others, the government deprives this disadvantaged person or class of the speech that establishes worth and respect for the voice of the speaker. fundamentally again, speaking to the fundamental model -- i can do this -- he is saying that the distinction is inherently suspect. some people participate more than others and are constitutionally troubling. first, justice kennedy speaks about the fact that these funds are not terribly effective, because one way or another people will find a way around them. he does this in quotes. political speech is so ingrained in our culture, they found -- they find a way around it. you could draw it down to a much bolder statement, but it could not really work. last but not least on the subject of cost, obviously the subject of the back-and-forth between those and others who have commented on $1.2 billion in the campaign house race and senate races, the court does not seem inclined to revisit the 1976 suggestion the cost may be a concern, but is not concerned enough to justify heavy intervention in the process. kennedy quote from that court saying -- the cost of political campaign cannot sustain the governmental prohibition. he sets aside the cost as a basis for legislature lead. where does that fundamentally leave us? it is the court reverses the congress, the basic tasks and the desirability of the task of regulating political money in our system. the court seems to be reflecting, or at least that story does, a profound skepticism. i will close by citing to you a pioneering campaign finance scholarships for many years ago. cost democracy, published in 1962. he was a cautious scholar and did not have what by contemporary terms would be aggressive pro-regulatory views. he was very insistent on the data and what it showed in tracing the money to the facts. there were three requirements that he thought were necessary for a balanced campaign finance system. number one, and this is very important in terms of the driver of campaign finance and policy agenda since the 1920's, resources have to be sufficient to support the campaign. we have to have the resources for the actors in the political process to accomplish what they want to accomplish. affectively we need to have the way to have those resources that does not permit particular resources to so control financing that it drives the government in a particular direction. last but not least, the third requirement, the public in the system, they have to believe the system actually functions with integrity, intelligently, and surely also with of room for people to participate in the political process. fundamentally they have to have confidence in the process. since citizens united reflected a view, not the only case of the time interacting with other cases that go much to the same point, right now there were four justices on the court agreed on the resources but did not agree that there was anything the government could do on the other points about sources that could be made compatible with the goal protecting the integrity of the government and securing confidence in the political process. with that, thank you very much. [applause] >> as you may have noticed this morning, we have already discussed the issue of and experience. what actually happens. when i think about political science, many political scientists work in this area. when i think about the empirical work with in political science, i think about our third speaker this morning, whose work i always appreciate. ray is a political science professor at massachusetts amherst and the electronics show for him -- applied research. a good academic journal that would be of interest to people who are interested in politics. not necessarily so much about just academics. it is an academic journal that should be of interest everyone. it is a very fine journal. his offer two books released under michigan press. the first was "small change, the first was "small change,
the first u.s. woman president. from michelle in chile to angela in germany and ellen swearingn was held on the grounds of the capitol, which just a few years ago was a battle zone in presidents and heads of states? well, according to a new cbs poll, a phenomminally hig number of americans say the would vote for a qualified woman running for president. 92%. indeed, many believe the united states has alreadyge period of time have held presidential policy. so, is america now ready for u.s. president who say woman? >> we'll ask the author of the widely read and intriguing book, about the wives of american presidents, all of them titled rating the first lady's. john benjamin roberts th second. one-on-one is brought to you isy month. why don't we have a woman president in the unite states? why haven't we had one? >> i think the answer to that is simply that american women may not be ready for it. a majority of the voters ar fee may president we would probably have one. i'm being a little bit flip. the thuth is we are not a and women have not really focused on politics unti the last couple of decades so we haven't developed a team that can move up to theprey >> what do you make of the women occupy seats in the united states congress? compared to the rest of the pretty much near the bottom. something like number 6 around the world in terms of that women are not terribly for office when that changes, we'l >> you written a fascinating book here and it's hard to >> thank you >> i managed to put it down. because i wanted to take some notes. your central proposition o the book is that a lot of americans, perhaps most americans, by far most, regard first ladies as kind of glitzy devoted to charitable undertakings. involved in soft power issues like literacy. that they really are cunning. they are really cunning cats, so to speak. and they are knowledgeable about their husband's they are tactically profient. executive -- defacto executive power. is that trueal power >> i think the stereotype of out to debunk, the idea that house hostess. she sets fashion trends, she arrangements at stat she decides how to decorat the white house, what china to choose. stereotype that in looking at the historical research doesn't hold up. going back to the very first, first lady, martha washing tong and the second were involved in cabinet decisions, involved in campaigning. these women were political what i found in my book i that was pretty much true exceptions throughou history. >> who held executive power. >> i certainly edith wilson woodrow wilson was laid up with what was probably a country. walked into him where he was with him and would come out with documents or instructions she said were from him and tell the cabinet what to do. wisdoms. for example the league o nations. >> one of his most important priorities after world war one was to get the league of nations established so there would never again be a global conflict. unfortunately he botched the politics of it the speaker of the senat came to -- the senate majority leader came to hi and told him he needed to compromise with the republican isolationists i he wanted to get the leagu of nations treaty ratified. wilson didn't want to compromise but edith wilso did and she told him, yo need to do this if you want to get this treaty approved. unfortunately for him he didn't listen to her advic and the treaty failed t pass the senate. so his most important domestic priority internationa priority in the second term was lost. >> which one of the first ladies shared the power of the presidency so there was a distribution and a defacto sense of the power a copresident?e quite a few. the earliest one was sarah poke. sarah poke was james polk' wife he was a one term president. he deliberately intended t run for only one term in the 1840s. it was the period of manifest destiny whe werst. during the poke presidency and sarah poke was his political partner. they had a very unusual prenuptual agreement when he fro posed marriag she told him that she would agree to marry him if heale and you are not let their honeymoon interfere with his campaigning. she helped him write rallies. she was a partner all the way through. >> you instruct thursday rating of the first performance? >> it's an interesting pole. the sienna college has a research institute, wife of the one of the professors there came up with the idea of rating fir ladies. the research institute done ratings of presidents for number of years now and first ladies too. so they -- the professor there came up with a system, that range from a first ladies intellect and contribution to the nation, education, impact on of criteria are used t evaluate the first lady. >> including influence on >> y. and being a woman in her own write. >> 37 first ladies and the number of presidents. why is that? >> there have been deaths i >> who remarried? >> a number of them remarried. grover cleveland remarried in office. >> was that the 21-year-old? >> yes, for instancis cleveland. >> howeled was he? >> he was around 50 at the time. >> was that a successfu marriage? it stunned the nation. it was a absolutely spectacular secret marriag house. he courted her. she was the daughter of -- >> what do you mean by ward? >> he was her legal guardia from the time that she was she was the daughter of a law partner of his and whe the man died he ended up adopting her as it was >> yes president at the time. she grew up and he did. but he carried out the romance secretly >> was she a loving wife? >> they were in love all th way through to his death >> he eventually died of -- was he ill during the presidency >> he was. hoo he had cancer and had to have part of his jaw removed. >> how was that undertaken? made for him to go to was set up on a yacht of a friend and he was secretl taken to this yacht. the public was never informed he had cancer or the operation had happene engineer all that? >> she did. conceal it >> was he disfigured? >> no. prosthetic jaw that functioned perfectly well. >> not bad in those days. >> pretty extraordinari considering this is 1899. >> how is it that 37 place back edition of the book. by mary links on she was quite corrupt was she not? >> she was a piece of work she was extremely corrupt >> in what respect? >> money >> she was a spendaholic. the same way that amelda markose bought shoes, marry lincoln would by clothes, in one period about 3 months of glorfs. spending and in great debt as a result of that. >> was she suffering from any neurological disorde psychotic condition? >> delusionons of grandier. she believed she was destined to marry a she had two suitors, steven doug andlas abraham lincoln who were rivals. >> was she faith full to lincoln. >> as far as anyone knows. she appears to have been so en rappatured with the idea of becoming mrs. president which is the way she liked to breferredo anofte signed her name. >> you haven't reassigned reagan's position. is that under the basis o >> yes >> they are constantly updating the poles? >> they do update the poll. they don't update it academics? >> this is an expert poll >> you know that academics tilt to the sflest yes. >> you think they are taking a swipe at nancy by putting her in the 36 position out of 37? when i wrote the book, i argued her rating was wa low are than it ought to b and it was time to reevaluate how important she had been in the reaga presidency >> you worked for rornd what did you do for him? >> i started working in his before he ran for president and worked on the 80y and your campaigns and speech writing office >> how would you describ office and what? >> domestic policy. ideas to him? >> yes. international strategy -- politica consultant >> ie been a political now. >> and you do great production work for the mclaughlin group and othert? >> correct. >> now you know nancy reagan firsthand. >> yes. of her influ accomplishments of his administration >> you think she served also to strengthen his spine or do you think his spine was quite strong independently? the velvet glove. she needed to be. he would be the good cop she was the bad cop when it came to dealing with staff. >> do you think they ever had disagreements? something. >> sure. >> did she take any negative position on anything that he decision-making process an when they made a decisio they stuck with it jointly. she would make her views known. a good friend of mineaid fo about a four-year period and that gave me a real good window into the relationship between nancy, the way the white house is run, the schedule >> you think that her influence over ronald regan our current president? the -- this presidency, laura bush is very muc involved in the details of policy and decision-making in president bush's speeches >> there are differences o opinion at least their public expression of their opinion. for example in the matter of fetal tissue >> right stem-cell research is one we know as far as the public is concerned they differ takes a public position dictated by politics or by his perception that he must the people and maybe he's on that side of the issue polling. but let's assume he is. what's the question i want to ask as a result of that? is he as capable, they are both capable of -- he serves as a buffer in a sense to position on the on the usen poin of relatey >> it's true and often true that first ladies will tak a position publicly that differs from the president contrived and sometimes they do it for genuine sflen that was true with jimmy carter and roslyn? >> it was most true with betty ford and jerrold ford. outspoken on issues such as abortion, drug use, and she would take possessions tha to his policy positions. >> that was not sufficient protection for him to win the presidency >> no. i'm afraid the ford model doesn't stand scrutiny very you listed the first institute, eleanoroosevelt and you commented on her on a rather sensitive area. son, franklin, jr. in 1916 after 11 years of her congegal duties completed. longer wanted to have intimate relations witcer. it would last a lifetime. it was lucy mercer in fact, not eleanor roosevelt at nen 45. separately. it's been said that you have roosevelt was lesbian and that is also brought up a an assertion by you. are you sure of all thi data? >> i'm fairly confident. you know there was a eleanor roosevelt written b blaven cook and she was the evidence thattel by sexual orientation if no a lesbian one. >> letters >> based largeor upi. she was a wire reporter. and she began covering her when she was still in new york and later continued into the white house and in in the white house >> which came first? mercer the alleged by you roosevelt, or hick ocnating part of the early life i'm interested in perhaps doing something more on, prab book in and of itself, going a separate house which was the roosevelt family estate and lived with two other women in this house at a marriage and in fact fdr referred to the house as the honeymoon cottage and the love nest. happy living with these tw years. in her separate house at the family estate. >> that doesn't necessarily mean there was a karnal relationship among thein terms are necessarily carnal? >> some of the letters are are not. of children that were born of eleanor roosevelt contradicts in itself your thinking she had 5 children? >> i think as the movie >> i think as the movie all, in earlier air as who were gay or lesbian had to part might be to have rmal looking family and social pretenses do you think thank lin had an eye for the trim ankle before he saw some of trace of what you're talking about in eleanor to go back to that question? he was 36 by my calculation and mercer was 27.'r talking about 1916,1917,1918 >> very early. >> then you point out tha in 1945 when he died and you misincorrectly said he died in warm springs, west virginia where it was warm >> that's correct. >> that's an error in th book and it's a common erro because there are warm springs in west virginia. and i've seen that in any material. but just to ease the blo so you say that lucy merce was his mistress for life. from 1916 or thereabouts in warm springs from a >> yes. hemorrhage. >> and point of fact,he married ruth ford who was a bachelor in washington and quite well-to-do. believe that the mistress status was continue us because ruth ford died and she was a free agent fo about 3-4 years before roosevelt died am i correct? >> you are correct about that. >> what's to make you thin she was continuously serving as a mess tress to him? >> their relationshi several different phase that he did have polio and that was disabling in som sfloopts they kept in touch. >> absolutely. >> that's a strong -- >> that's a friendship. >> at least a friendship. bearing in mind this was an era when one could not easily have a relationshi especially in politics. everything had to be kept subterranean there is a lot of hidde history. wasn't at his side and the time of his death? >> i have no reason to doubt she loved him sin skerl i have no reason to doubt that at all but i do think they were two people who were driven to be in together because of their political commitment >> they each cheated on each other? >> yes. >> did any other president of first ladies cheat on each other >> really. >> absolutely. i mean with the johnson presidency, lin don johnson quite openly flaunted his mistresses where did he do that? >> beginning back -- >> where >> in text andas washington d.c. >> i thought it was an outlying about 65 miles from washington. wasn't that true >> some of their weekend get relationship that went o right under her nose their same social circles and with friends and kennedy is a great champ of this but i think this is -- >> you mean judith, marilyn and the harding presidenc is a great example of this. harding or his wife? >> warren harding for sure. his wife probably not. but warren harding had a blonde teenaged mistress wh her name was nan britain. way before that he had an affair with his next door neighbor's wife who his own wife was hospitalized for months with kidney disease. >> do you think this is a requisite to becom president or first lady to indulgences on the side? politics -- >> what about even befor that? what about libido of people who are character wise and vigorous? >> aren't they that way t get to left we go too far without saying things that ought to be said about eleanor roosevelt.ry together during th depression in part? vising work project administration sites and people came to be accustome to the fact that eleanor roosevelt would show up. a great story about her stopping at a site in california and walks acros people who are living in hooverville and they sit they acted like it was the most normal thing on earth after the people white house and the forma duties of quote/unquote a woman president. a woman first lady. a female >> right. what? >> social activists >> that would be eleanor roosevelt who by the way also used to visit the troops as you point out to >> she was fearless in world war 2. she flew into combat zones, places that were being bombed to visit the troops >> herbert hoover has a poor reputationecause of the depression. but maybe that is quite undeserved but his wife, >> i liked lou a lot. studied geeologiy and mining engineering at a tim when - >> did she go into the mountains to did herrifle headee air as >> we only have a few seconds. wasn't pat nixon a ver stronghe helped write speeche and craft papers and came from a very humbl background born in a minin town in were any of the first beuse she would go int fits at the time and for a long time people thought it was mental disorder. >> depression.e whole 4 years basically in depressio trying to contact the spirits of her dead children through sayances. quite a tragic figure. >> do you think that whe all is said and done we will have a female as president of the united stat? >> i think we ll i think we have got enough talented women in politics now who have got the requisite experience to be that they are ready to lead that hasn't been true until recently >> what is holding it back? back is that voters haveerne on the commander-in-chie are women ready to lead a performed like a general in the balkans crisis and similarly other women wh had the bomb under their >> correct >> isn't it time the american people dispel tha id pr >> absolutely. we have women in the military, women in secretary women in the senate and governorships. >> john roberts thank you very much for being my guest.
>> axelrod: good evening. i'm jim axelrod with a special western edition of the broadcast. we begin tonight with the brutal heat that's gripped much of the eastern half of the nation last week. it's about to break. the heat and humidity has claimed at least 15 lives in the last six days, including five in milwaukee. in the northeast, the average temperature this week was ten degrees higher than the normal average temperature in july. at least 75 record highs were set at airports east of the mississippi. and yesterday, it felt as hot in lakehurst, new jersey-- 123 degrees-- as it did in death valley, california. but this blast of heat is about to run its course. i'm joined now by meteorologist jeff berardelli of miami station wfor. jeff, millions of people waiting to hear about a break in the heat. are they going to get what they're looking for? >> they're going to be very happy, especially as we head into tomorrow. temperatures are going to drop by about 10 degrees, but the humidity is really going to drop and that is going to be music to the ears of a lot of folks in the northern half of the country. still to the today along the i-95 cordo, 90-95. look at what's happening across the great lakes. it's 70s and 80s there. because of the contrast between cold and hot, there's a severe thunderstorm watch in effect for the ohio valley and the northeast. now, tomorrow, temperatures drop a little bit but certainly this will be a relief. 86 degrees in new york city, that's nice. baltimore 87, and boston a refreshing 78 degrees. jim? >> axelrod: jeff berardelli, refreshing to say the least. thank you. and it's not just the east that's seen its share of extreme weather. look at the lightning over las vegas last night. the national weather system reports 741 lightning strikes there. the lightning was accompanied by rain that swamped streets around the strip. they need moisture to fight wildfires in southern california. since monday, firefighters have been battling a huge fire west of los angeles. so far, 42 square miles have burned. teresa garcia reports while thunderstorms might be part of the solution, they also present their own threat. >> reporter: the blaze is burning through dry, dense vegetation with such force, that it's pulled in an army of 3500 firefighters. >> you look up the mountain with the fire's been burning and it looks like a vol skeino and it just doesn't stop. >> reporter: dennis burns is a fire behavior expert. >> i've seen some fire behavior that i've never experience thtd early in the fire season. >> reporter: the steep front lines of the fire are only accessible by air, by foot, and today by a mountain tram. the hot shotses are working grueling 14-hour shifts. arroyo grande hot shot. >> it's probably the hardest way of fighting fires the old fashioned way. but you have to have the boots on the ground to get around the fire. >> reporter: tyler freeman spent the night building containment lines. >> it's a lot of loose dirt and a lot of slick rocks up there so it's easy to slip around around on stuff. >> reporter: scattered showers have brought much-needed moisture but the threat of thunderstorms and erratic winds have many on edge. dollar weather conditions killed 19 firefighters in arizona last month. >> it just kind of makes me go back maybe a second or a third time and make sure i've done the best job i possibly could. >> reporter: you carry quite a burden on your shoulders. >> i don't sleep well at night. >> reporter: due to all the aircraft needed to reach the blaze, jim, the cost of fighting this fire is now over $12 million, but fire official offie saying they're finally gaining the upper hand and they estimate it will be fully contained by friday. >> axelrod: theresa thank you. >> axelrod: one week after the george zimmerman verdict and one day after president president obama's very personal words on the case, supporters of trayvon martin rallied in more than 100 cities today. terrell brown has more on calls for action heard coast to coast. >> i am... >> i am... >> ...trayvon martin. >> ...trayvon martin. >> reporter: in a crowd of hundreds protesting the george zimmerman verdict, 25-year-old andre thomas was among those energized by president obama's remarks about trayvon martin. >> i feel like the president is really saying something that really meant a lot to people, and it gave an extra kick in the pants to this movement. >> no justice. >> no peace. >> reporter: thomas feels there's a double standard for justice when it comes to race. >> if trayvon martin had a gun and he stalked zimmerman, he'd be in jail. ( cheers and applause ) >> reporter: martin's manager spoke to the lower manhattan crowd. >> he was murdered. >> reporter: protesters turned out today in philadelphia and dozens of other cities across the country and in front of the white house. >> trayvon martin could have been me 35 years ago. >> reporter: following the president's comments on the divisive trials, demonstrator hilda clark said she was surprised he had been subjected to racial profiling. >> it is unfair. it is insulting. it is deadly, obviously. >> reporter: like mr. obama, clark said she viewed martin's death through a personal lens. >> trayvon died needlessly. he was an innocent child, and he could have been my grandchild. >> reporter: protesters want states like florida to reexamine the self-defense laws that exonerated george zimmerman, and the justice department to pursue civil rights charges. that's the aim of a petition that has nearly 600,000 signatures. it's backed by music superstars jay-z and beyonce. neither spoke, but beyonce said in a statement: at the rally here in new york, demonstrators were told to keep a date late in august in mind. there's another rally planned in washington about the same time as the 50th anniversary of the march on washington led by martin luther king, jr. >> axelrod: now to texas, where investigators are looking into a fatal roller coaster accident. a woman died at the six flags over texas amusement park in arlington. as vinita nair tells us, the focus now is on safety procedures at the park. >> reporter: an eyewitness who was next in line said the woman asked the attendant to double check her restraints before the ride began. >> one of the employees from the park, she asked them to click her more than once. and the guy was like, "as long as you heard a click, you're okay." >> reporter: carmen brown says the woman did not feel safe, but they let her go on the ride anyway. she was riding on the texas giant roller coaster, reportedly with her son, when she fell out of her seat and plummeted to her death. it happened last night at six flags in arlington, texas, where the coaster hits a high point of 153 feet. authorities are not commenting on where the woman may have fallen off. this woman and her daughter were also in line. >> they got in the air and started coming down. i don't know if she had a seizure or what, but she fell out of the cart and just fell out of the sky. >> reporter: six flags released a statement today saying: last year, attendance at amusement and theme parks was up from the year before. close to 132 million people visit annually. with about four injuries per one million guests. 59% of those 12 interest 4 injuries were roller coaster 59 of the 1204 injuries were roller coaster-related. a day after the woman's death, six flags was open as usual, but the texas giant will remain shut pending the results of a full investigation. local police say they are still looking into the possibility that the woman on the roller coaster had some sort of medical issue. in terms of national fatalities, the latest research shows there were four over the course of four years. >> axelrod: vanita, thank you. helen thomas died today at her home in washington at the age of 92. she was the trailblazing journalist who shattered the glass ceiling in the white house press room. our veteran white house correspondent, bill plante, knew helen thomas for many years and has this remembrance. >> do you know of any country in the middle east that has nuclear weapons? >> well, uh... >> reporter: helen thomas always wanted answers from the president of the united states. >> mr. president, when are you holding a news conference? >> reporter: as the white house correspondent for united press international for 40 years and then as a columnist, thomas confronted ten presidents with bulldog persistence. >> why did you really want to go to war? >> reporter: thomas was born of lebanese immigrants and grew up in michigan. after college, moved to washington and went to work as a writer for united press. her big break came in 1960 when she became the first woman reporter at the white house to cover the president, not just the first lady. >> mr. president, thank you. >> thank you, helen. ( laughter ) >> reporter: she went on to be the first female president of the white house correspondents' association and the first woman admitted to another washington institution, the gridiron club. president johnson once claimed he learned of his daughter's lucy's engagement from one of thomas' stories. but her own engagement to associated press reporter doug cornell was only revealed after pat nixon spilled the beans to a room full of their colleagues. she laughed easily with one president after another, but that never stopped her from asking them hard questions. >> do you know of any money that could have gone in? >> no. i have no knowledge of that. >> reporter: helen thomas was tough, cantankerous and opinionated. her opinion ultimately got her in trouble. >> these people are occupied. >> reporter: a lifelong champion of the palestinian cause, she said in 2010 that israel should get out of palestine. after apologizing for the remark, he retired. in a statement today, president obama said, "what made helen the dean of the white house press corps was not just the length of her tenure but her fierce belief that our democracy works best when we ask tough questions and hold our leaders to account." >> axelrod: later, san diego's mayor under fire for alleged sexual harassment. why are comic book heroes rubbing elbows with this civil rights pioneer? and she created a new way of diagnosing cancer right on her bedroom floor. those stories when the "cbs evening news" continues. continues. begins with arthritis pain... up to 6 tylenol in a day begins with arthritis pain... or just 2 aleve for all day relief. all aboard. ♪ [ crashing ] [ male announcer ] when your favorite food starts a fight, fight back fast with tums. trusted heartburn relief that goes to work in seconds. nothing works faster. ♪ tum, tum tum tum tums! ♪ the middle of this special moment and i need to run off to the bathroom. ♪ i'm fed up with always having to put my bladder's needs ahead of my daughter. ♪ so today, i'm finally talking to my doctor about overactive bladder symptoms. [ female announcer ] know that gotta go feeling? ask your doctor about prescription toviaz. one toviaz pill a day significantly reduces sudden urges and accidents, for 24 hours. if you have certain stomach problems or glaucoma, or can not empty your bladder, you should not take toviaz. get emergency medical help right away if your face, lips, throat or tongue swells. toviaz can cause blurred vision, dizziness, drowsiness and decreased sweating. do not drive, operate machinery or do unsafe tasks until you know how toviaz affects you. the most common side effects are dry mouth and constipation. talk to your doctor about toviaz. >> axelrod: today marks one year since a gunman opened fire in a movie theater in aurora, colorado, killing 12 people and wounding 70 others. several hundred people gathered outside city hall in aurora today to honor the victims, the survivors and first responders. people also left flowers outside the theater. there is a new effort under way in america's eighth largest city to recall the mayor. the city is san diego; the mayor, bob filner. he faces charges of sexual misconduct, and, as carter evans reports, he is digging in for what could be a very long fight. >> reporter: as the public outcry against mayor bob filner grows louder... >> we have the moral high ground! >> i think he's making san diego a laughing stock. >> reporter: ...voters like sherry lundine are growing frustrated. >> there are too many people that want him gone. and he may end up hanging on by his fingernails, but i just really don't think that he's doing the city any good. >> i'm clearly doing something wrong. >> reporter: filner has released a video response to allegations of sexual harassment, but more than a week after those allegations were first made public, he insists he will not resign. in his apology to the city, the mayor asked for forgiveness. >> i am embarrassed to admit that i have failed to fully respect the women who work for me and with me, and that at times i have intimidated them. >> bob filner is tragically unsafe for any woman to approach. >> reporter: former city council member donna fry was a longtime filner ally. now she, along with democrats in congress and environmental groups, are one by one demanding that filner step down. fry read accounts from unnamed accusers. >> "mayor filner grabbed me and kissed me. i was able to push myself away." >> reporter: but no formal complaints or criminal charges have been filed. what is the mayor's best move at this point? >> yeah. be quiet, hunker down, hope it all goes away. >> reporter: carl luna is a political science professor at san diego's mesa college. as far as republicans go, what's their best move here? >> get some popcorn, settle in and watch the show because it's all good for republicans. whether he's gone or not, democrats look bad. >> san diego wants to be known for other things, not a wayward mayor, a run amok mayor, if you will. >> ideally, what the entire democratic party would like to do is to take the mayor on a vacation some place and forget to buy his return ticket. >> reporter: the mayor has asked for due process but the political process may not wait. ( applause ) carter evans, cbs news, san diego. >> axelrod: a facebook page supporting massachusetts state police sergeant sean murphy has gone viral. murphy was relieved of duty for a day after releasing photo of boston bombing suspect dzhokar tsarnaev. murphy said he released the photo in response to the "rolling stone" cover photo that critics say glamorized tsarnaev. murphy faces a possible suspension. he's a congressman and legendary civil rights leader. so, why is john lewis signing comic books at a superhero event? that's next. super hero event? ♪ [ male announcer ] advair is clinically proven to help significantly improve lung function. unlike most copd medications, advair contains both an anti-inflammatory and a long-acting bronchodilator working together to help improve your lung function all day. advair won't replace fast-acting inhalers for sudden symptoms and should not be used more than twice a day. people with copd taking advair may have a higher chance of pneumonia. advair may increase your risk of osteoporosis and some eye problems. tell your doctor if you have a heart condition or high blood pressure before taking advair. ask your doctor if including advair could help improve your lung function. [ male announcer ] advair diskus fluticasone propionate and salmeterol inhalation powder. get your first prescription free and save on refills at advaircopd.com. little things anyone can do. it steals your memories. your independence. ensures support, a breakthrough. and sooner than you'd like. sooner than you'd think. you die from alzheimer's disease. we cure alzheimer's disease. every little click, call or donation adds up to something big. what are you guys doing? having some fiber! with new phillips' fiber good gummies. they're fruity delicious! just two gummies have 4 grams of fiber! to help support regularity! i want some... [ woman ] hop on over! [ marge ] fiber the fun way, from phillips'. >> axelrod: comic-con is an annual spectacle where costumed superheroes and celebrities mingle with more than 100,000 fans. but this year's event in southern california features a real-life hero who put his life on the line in the 1960s. jeff pegues has the story. >> reporter: they're raucous, bawdy and a bit nerdy. comic-con any year is full of memorable characters, but this year, among those turning heads is a man not in costume but a real-life member of the justice league: civil rights icon and georgia congressman john lewis. >> well, i think some people think it's strange that a guy like myself who seems to be so serious to take the time to write a comic book. >> reporter: the comic book is called "march," and it takes a colorful look at the country's segregated past. lewis is the main character. >> we traced my early beginning as the son of a sharecropper going to segregated schools. >> reporter: and in true comic book form, his character illustrates the battle for justice and equality half a century ago. it's not the first comic book written about the era. lewis was inspired by one edited by dr. martin luther king, jr., the montgomery story about rosa parks' refusal to give up her seat on a city bus. >> and i want to thank you for responding to the call. >> reporter: standing shoulder to shoulder with king, they rallied a nation. lewis almost died leading the historic 1965 march from selma to montgomery, alabama, after being brutally beaten by police. >> the only thing i did, i gave a little blood on the bridge in selma. >> reporter: it's captured in the pages of the comic book, right down to the words of the police who ultimately attacked the demonstrators. andrew aydin co-wrote the book. >> how do you write it in a way that would be new, that would be innovative, creative and exciting? >> reporter: lewis believes the message is timely. >> i think today many young people and people not so young tend to forget what happened in another period in our history. and they must never, ever forget. >> reporter: still on a mission, seeking justice for all. jeff pegues, cbs news, washington. >> axelrod: still ahead, she developed a new way of diagnosing cancer and won some presidential admiration, in addition to a lot of money. in addition to a lot of money thin with our careet careers ind within 6 months. so with this scholarship you could be on your way. now's the time. visit devry.edu and apply by august 29th. does your mouth often feel like it lacks enough saliva to keep it comfortably moist? losing saliva's natural protection can triple your risk of cavities, bad breath, or mouth infections. do more than just sip water. try number-one dentist recommended biotène. do more than just sip water. she's always been able it's just her way.day. but your erectile dysfunction - that could be a question of blood flow. cialis tadalafil for daily use helps you be ready anytime the moment's right. you can be more confident in your ability to be ready. and the same cialis is the only daily ed tablet approved to treat ed and symptoms of bph, like needing to go frequently or urgently. tell your doctor about all your medical conditions and medications, and ask if your heart is healthy enough for sexual activity. do not take cialis if you take nitrates for chest pain, as this may cause an unsafe drop in blood pressure. do not drink alcohol in excess with cialis. side effects may include headache, upset stomach, delayed backache or muscle ache. to avoid long-term injury, seek immediate medical help for an erection lasting more than four hours. if you have any sudden decrease or loss in hearing or vision, or if you have any allergic reactions such as rash, hives, swelling of the lips, tongue or throat, or difficulty breathing or swallowing, stop taking cialis and get medical help right away. ask your doctor about cialis for daily use and a 30-tablet free trial. i'm in my work van, having lunch, next minute i'm in the back of an ambulance having a heart attack. the emts gave me bayer aspirin. it helped save my life. i was in shape, fit. i did not see it coming. my doctor recommends i take bayer aspirin to help prevent another heart attack. [ male announcer ] aspirin is not appropriate for everyone so be sure to talk to your doctor before you begin an aspirin regimen. i've lived through a massive heart attack. i don't take life for granted. >> axelrod: patience has been a virtue at trinity college in dublin, ireland, where scientists have been waiting for this moment for nearly 70 years. that is asphalt you see there. the idea is to prove asphalt is not solid at room temperature but rather a very slow-moving liquid-- very slow. as you see, 20 billion times thicker than water. we end tonight with another young innovator. we've been featuring young people making precocious contributions to the world. tonight, we meet brittany wenger. like many teenagers, she's been holed up in her room with a computer, but what she produced there makes her unlike almost any teenager. it doesn't take a long conversation with brittany wenger to get a sense of her intellect. >> mine particularly works with cancer diagnostics. >> >> axelrod: she was in seventh grade when she wrote a computer program that mimics how the human brain makes decisions, an artificial neural network. her first application: how the brain thinks when playing soccer. just five years later, she developed a focus that was a bit more sophisticated. so, you have this artificial neural network, and the focus of this is to help fight breast cancer. >> breast cancer and leukemia, as well. so, i kind of worked on it from my bedroom for that two-and-a- half-year period, and i took it to the google science fair, which is the largest online science fair, and i ended up winning the grand prize. which was absolutely insane. >> reporter: the software she developed in her bedroom essentially crunches massive amounts of data collected worldwide. that allows breast cancer to be detected by a biopsy that is less invasive and more reliable, now 99% accurate. brittany took home a $50,000 scholarship and a unique trophy. they make it out of legos? >> yeah, it's really cool. >> axelrod: this recent high school graduate from sarasota, florida, is at the head of her generation's class. what do you think of your generation? >> ( laughs ) well, of course, no bias here, but, you know, i think we have a lot of potential. i mean, i know that older people definitely have their gripes with us, but our generation is really lucky to be living in the information age. we can literally learn whatever we want at our fingertips. we can type it into the internet and find an answer. >> axelrod: and what she wants to learn could help many generations to come. >> it's really exciting, and it gives me a lot of hope that my research can and will be out there some day helping real people. >> axelrod: and this fall, brittany will be continuing her research as a freshman at duke university. and that's the "cbs evening news" for tonight. later on cbs, two editions of "48 hours." for now, i'm jim axelrod in new york. for all of us here at cbs news, thanks for joining us and good night. captioning sponsored by cbs capt -- including oakland. what s this demonstration against e george zimmerman verdict --- different from the ones ear this week. she's been a leader in the national fight against aidse unique feature honoring nan pelosi at the aids memorial grove. sound of rain and rushing w the sound of rushing water replaces the sound of slot machines in las vegas. the damage caused by a freak thunderstorm. kpix 5 news is next. sofa... desk... you know what? why don't you go get some frozen yogurt. i got this. you're so sweet. you got this, right? i do got this. let us get everything off the shelf, and to your home. righsave hundreds onrain, beautyrest and posturepedic. choose $300 in free gifts with tempur-pedic. even choose 48 months interest-free financing on the new tempur-choice. the triple choice sale ends soon at sleep train. sofa... desk... you know what? why don't you go get some frozen yogurt. i got this. you're so sweet. you got this, right? i do got this. let us get everything off the shelf, and to your home. for trayvon martin. rallies held today i a nationwide show of force. tens of thousands demand justice for trayvon martin. rallies held today in more than 100 cities across the country demanding change.
social secretary of the white house. soon after the socialists a cap -- after the social security -- social secretary had a conversation with the first lady, he would lay out who, when, where, and how it was going to be about. there was a lot of planning. usually these events are planned three, four, sometimes as much as a year into the future. sometimes a lot less time. the planning is intensive. i think one of the things people forget about state dinners is that they set a style for the white house from a social aspect and they also set a first lady's style. we deal with things like the flowers, the table settings, what color dress is the first lady going to wear at a state dinner? i can remember the chief florist at the white house getting together with the first ladies and actually having a sample of the fabric, the color and texture, and planning flowers and the color of the tablecloths and how the tape was going to be set with what kind of decorations. but basically, the first lady has a tremendous responsibility to set the tone for a state visit. i wrote down a number of different things that the first lady gets involved in, first through the social secretary, and then things that should deal directly with. they include about eight different things, the flowers, the shoes, the decorations, not only the decorations at the table but what flowers are trees are plans will be put around the state floor for the official visit, what the decor room is going to be for the dinner, the kind of dress that is going to go forward. is it black tie, is a white tie, is a business? the color choices, i already went over that, with the dresses and colors of fabrics and tablecloths. but there are a couple of other things that usually fall under the first lady's aspect of what she is dealing with, and that deals with a great deal of how the service personnel are going to present themselves. quite frequently at these dinners we have in the visual aspects of a foreign country, the kind of foods they like, whether or not there are allergies to certain food groups, and there are a myriad of details that the first ladies have to go through, both personally and with the chefs. the cheap floral designer has to be involved with choosing the entertainment with the social secretary. what music is going to be played at the state dinner, what music will be played for the dancing afterwards. there is a myriad amount of questions that have to be asked of higher and that she will have to make decisions upon to allow these dinners to proceed in a good manner. >> can you tell us about the menu? and make sure and talk about your dessert. [laughter] >> to be able to perform at the white house, to be involved with steak dinner or in the level better, it is really an honor, let me tell you. there is no better place to cook or bake in the world. you are having fun doing it, let me tell you. the involvement with the menu, it was quite an ordeal to come to a final menu, because we had many people who had their hand in the stew, as they say. you would start with a basic menu, and then you would come back, people with allergies, and not only allergies, but people from different denominations, like if you have kosher people at the dinner. there are so many things you have to watch out for. some do not have shellfish and this kind of thing. it is amazing what you have to go through before the file menu. usually what i did, i waited until the chef is in the kitchen and then i put the dessert out. then it was a sure bet for me that all the kinks had been worked out, so it was an easier way. when you come to the white house, at first you don't know which way to go. when people come from hotels or places outside, and you want to continue what you have learned outside in the hotel business. in the white house, and to mrs. reagan's time, they pretty much had their menu and desert like you would have at a hotel. you can go back and look. you'd find pie, chocolate cake, good stuff there. i don't think mrs reagan cared for pipe or chocolate cake. she said to me once, we in california don't eat cheese cake. actually she did, but that is another story. [laughter] so i knew right away that she was looking for something else. can i deliver? i don't know, but i am surely going to try like hell. there was a head decorator at the white house and he was very close to the family. he had a good eye for food and everything, and colors. he did help me a lot, i must say. so you get your sources from wherever you can. i think this is windy deserts came, under mrs. reagan in the white house in those years. she definitely want to take a different approach. i am sorry to say after i left, it stopped. [laughter] if you want the truth, i am giving you the truth. but it was such a pleasure. mrs. reagan rarely told me a lot. she is a mentor for me. she told me that in the days of work, you don't have eight hours, you have 24. she did teach me that. on several occasions when she requested a special dessert, it was so tedious. in those years i was the only pasty person in the white house. she requested a special desert, and we had two days before the state dinner. i said mrs. reagan, the desert is wonderful, but i have only two days left. that is when she said, you have two days and two nights. [laughter] it sounds really harsh at first, but it is the best lesson i have been taught, because the sky is the limit if you push yourself, and you can make it happen. and if you do make it happen, you feel like the king of the hill. and she is the one who made that offer to me. >> can you tell us about a particular state dinner, or how the process work? >> sure. as gary was talking, i was thinking about what he said about the colors and matching the colors with the fabric and the flowers on the table. the first white tie state dinner that the bush and administration did, working closely with the team and the social secretary. one of the most fun calls i got to make was to the queen's dresser. i said what color is the queen wearing, because we certainly did not want the first lady of the house and queen elizabeth to be in the same color. so that was one of the little items. there are so many people in so many things that go into making this a beautiful event that is respectful of your guests and also reflective of the president and first lady, and we all want to put our best foot forward when we are working in the white house. this is the time to showcase everything that is perfect. >> did the first ladies talk about a state dinner as being an event that was showcasing america, what their goals were? can you tell us about that? >> certainly. the state dinners are really about diplomacy, and the role of the first lady and her office, with great help from the state department, there is a huge amount of protocol involved. there is no detail that is too small. whatever one does, one does not want to make a mistake that would be insulting in any way, so there are great number of details, but it is important to remember that it really is about diplomacy and enhancing the diplomacy between two countries. our second state dinner was with mexico. because of some of the personal touches, part of it was tablecloths that were mayan blue, and there were roses and prickly pears that were just stunningly beautiful. but my favorite little piece of it was that we had -- in the east room was the dinner, and then a tent for a wonderful, lovely entertainment which was by beyonce. there were monarch butterflies looking like they were floating down. the significance is that monarch butterflies fly down from canada and they land in the birthplace of president calderon. so that is meaningful, and these touches make a difference. one other thing i would add is that we had an outside chef, rick bayless, who is a very well known -- he is american but his food is mexican, and people at the time questioned why we would do such a thing, since obviously the best mexican food is in mexico. it is because we have had conversations -- the first lady had visited mexico and was with the president and his wife and they had heard about rick bayless and expressed an interest. >> betty, can you tell us about some of the research that goes into first setting up state dinners, and that first ladies might do? >> we do keep records and the curator's office, clipping files and information, historical information on entertainment over the years and the particular state dinners. we were were a resource for many ideas fort deserts for the particular countries that were being entertained at a state dinner. we worked with the first lady's office in terms of needing to order additional pieces of presidential china that would be used for state dinners as well. we had supplements made of the fdr service and the wilson service to fill out those services, because they had been depleted by breakage and so forth over the years. in the year 2000 when the white house historical association offered to fund a new state service, we work closely with mrs. clinton in deciding about the colors, the designs that would go on the service, how those particular colors would looked in the various settings in the state dining room are the east room. i do remember mrs. clinton's mother was living in the house at the time. she would come to some of these little meetings about showing samples from the porcelain factory. none of them seem to be satisfactory. she said of in the bathroom of my suite is a beautiful yellow color. she said i think we should try that yellow color. so we got a sample of the wallpaper and sent it off to lennox, and they did some samples, and it worked out beautifully. i think that was mrs. rodham's legacy in terms of state dinners. [laughter] >> let's go to looking at the transitions into the white house that a family makes and the transitions out as well. often, for a president, he has been running for office for a couple of years and he is a political person who has most likely been at the white house numerous times, but in coming into the white house, the first ladies really have not spent much time. we have an example with michelle obama, she was not familiar with the white house, where as laura bush was familiar coming in during the george h.w. bush presidency. tell us a little bit about michelle obama's transition in and how she prepared for it. >> michelle obama is a serious student, but i don't think there is any way one can be prepared in a sense to really know what is going to be like. her husband had been a u.s. senator for a few years, but she and the girls had stayed in chicago where her whole family and support work. the bush people were incredibly helpful and generous about what the office was like and the structure and all that. the bushes were as well, personally, when the obama is visited. but i have to say there's just no substitute for being there. mrs. obama and the family were first at the adams hotel and then the blair house and into the white house for coffee, as is the tradition on inauguration morning. and everyone went off to the inauguration, and then what the white house residence staff does is just unbelievable, where in that time when the inauguration is going on, in this case they move the bushes out and the obamas in. they walk in, and now they live in this new home. it is really quite startling, and i don't think there's any amount of preparation that can help one understand what this all means. >> can you tell us about the bush is coming in, and then gary can tell us from the viewpoint of running the whole operation how that transition works. >> i was not here working with her directly at that time, in 2001, but i had been part of the transition team, the one that was set up in virginia before the election was finally decided. once we were in the government's space, we were planning from the personnel side of it. one of the first visits that a president and incoming first lady get this from the chief usher with a list of things that they need to think about and be knowledgeable about when they come into the white house. i will let gary talk a little bit about that. but 2001 was a very different experience than some past transitions. we did not know for six weeks who the president was going to be, so no real official conversation could be taking place to prepare for a transition. certainly very different than 2008-2009, when, in fact, mrs. bush had everything packed up and almost out of the white house well before january 2009. there were just a few little boxes in the china room that needed to be moved out. she was very prepared. but it is incredibly seamless. the new first family is really not aware of it, and it is just so extraordinary. gary can talk a lot more about how the staff handles it. >> transitions are unique. there is a four-year transition, when a president is running for reelection, just as obama just did, and the staff has to start gathering information on those people who are in the opposition party, who are also expecting to be inaugurated on january 20. when i was there, i started six-eight months earlier, gathering information on the candidates who were running, and then once the political parties had their conventions and the selections were made, i became more intent on gathering information on the nominee. sometimes that is difficult. after four years, you have to be loyal to the family that is there. it is their home that we are talking about. luckily, i was involved in the home, not the political aspects of the white house. some people forget that at times. this is a family that is moving in and out of the white house, and replacing their home, or establishing a new home. but when you have a transition after four years, you are wearing two hats. you are loyal to look family that is there, and you want the staff who spend 100% of their time doing what has to be done for the family that lives there and the sitting president and first lady. but you also have to be preparing for what may happen in the future. on inaugural day, and luckily when you have a second term, there is not much going on on inaugural day. everybody kind of takes a deep breath and lets things proceed. but when you are doing a transition from one family to another, after eight years, the family that is there knows they are leaving on january 20 four years in advance. that is plenty of time to prepare themselves both mentally, and to start moving their furnishings out. when you have a four-year term, it is an entirely different ball game. the family that is coming in, once you have the election, if the family that is moving out is not going to be there any longer, the incoming president -- there is a long conversation that goes on with both the first lady, first and foremost, but with the president also. not only there is a home transition on inaugural day, the west wing, which is very symbolic of the presidency, and one of the first things the press want to see on the inaugural day is the oval office. what desk did the president used, what paintings did he choose for the walls, but statues are in there? what went out from the previous administration? there is a tremendous amount that goes on on inaugural day. we have about five hours from the time the president-elect leaves the white house, goes down to the capital for the inaugural festivities, and comes back from the inaugural parade in front of the white house. one family has moved completely out and another family it is moved completely in. to the point of all their clothes are hung up, all their favorite foods are in the pantry, all their toiletries are in the bathrooms that they selected, all the rooms have been changed to their desire. it is done in five hours. i referred to it as organized chaos. we divide the staff up into different groups. a group that was responsible for moving things out, and the group that was responsible for moving things in. the president's elevator is the larger of the two. there is a lot of going up and down steps. there is a lot of the elevator traffic. luckily, i just got to be the maestro that gave directions, and the wonderful staff, including roland and the kitchen staff, were preparing for the events that are going to take place not only that evening but in the coming days, as the new president welcomes in and thanks those people who helped him get elected. >> rowland, i wonder if you can tell us about another aspect of it, and that is about the human relationships that form, that are close, when a president and his family leave, the impact that it have on the staff. >> yes, it is a very strong bond between the family and the staff, because we really get to know everybody, from the president and first lady on down, family, pets. the white house is a big family. that is what it is. everybody is there for one thing only, to please the family. whatever they want, whatever they like, anybody in the family. you don't really think about them leaving, even the day before or two days before, even though you know they are leaving. but then when it fits you, you feel bad, really odd, right here. for me, i always say it is like a funeral day. that is the closest thing i can describe it. i don't know about other staff and the white house, but for me, i have never been a party guy. i don't care what party you belong to. the president and first lady of the united states. that is what counts. that is who i serve. so you really love those people. you would do anything for them. if you don't feel that way, i don't think you should be there. paying respect to the house is the same thing. everything goes hand in hand. so the morning of the departure of the family, we usually gather together in the state dining room. all the staff will be around the room, waiting for them to come in. the president, first lady, like chelsea, when they were in the white house she was part of it. and pets, too. when mrs. barbara bush, she did not go anywhere without millie. i called her the presidential dog. she knew how to act, very presidential at all times. she was an amazing dog. she knew where she was at all times -- more than i did. let me tell you, it is those days, i cherish those days. even today, it brings emotion to me. there was a great finish. for the staff, it was very hard to see them go. when president bush sr. left, he had lost an election. that was super sad because of that. i never even thought that a president would cry. they are too big, they are too strong, but i have seen them cry, and really cry, and then it makes it doubly hard again. when i see president and mrs. bush coming into the room to say goodbye, and president bush could not speak. he just cried. >> as close as people who work in the residents are to the family, we also work very closely with their staff, particularly the first lady's staff. and all of a sudden, they are gone by noon on inauguration day. you have worked with these people for four or eight years, and many of them become your friends. some in the west wing as well, those that work more closely with. then all of a sudden, they are gone, and the next day, there is a whole group of strangers coming in. they don't know you, and you don't know them. it is a very difficult time, i think, saying goodbye to these families. it is like a whole new job sometimes when a new family comes in. >> the new people coming in sometimes scare the hell out of you, too. when the right ravens came in, i was making raspberry sauce in the blender, and the top came off and it was all over my clothes. i was going to my room to change and everything. the decorator i was working with happened to be here. he came and looked me up and down and said, things are surely going to change around here. [laughter] i got scared. i said that is it, i am cooked. >> i have been listening to betty and roland, it is so entertaining. it speaks to the resiliency of the white house. we have political staff that comes and goes, but they continue to support every president that comes in, and the staff around them. and they go through these adjustments as well. we don't often think about that, and when rowland was talking about how difficult this is on that morning when all the staff is gathered to say goodbye to the outgoing president, the first family, and there was a much happier time, years later, when president george h.w. bush and barbara bush were there with their son and daughter-in- law to say goodbye once again, under very different and happier circumstances after a successful eight years. that was a historic moment, and something i will never forget. i had to leave that room for a few minutes to compose myself as well. i salt and a longtime residents staff member taking care of presidential pets and he was a gardener. i said you were not upstairs, and he said i cannot do it. it was too emotional for him. he said not one time was there a departure of a presidential family that he would go up to that historic meeting to say goodbye, because it is so difficult. that really struck me, and i have never forgotten it. >> one thing we don't want to forget in this whole mix is the fact that the staff has done this time and again, for the most part. the majority of the resident staff that come, stay their entire career at the white house. it does not soften the blow, as you can tell from roland's reaction. we have about five minutes to accept it and move on. there is another president and family moving in, and we will meet them and be their staff in five minutes. so we have to turn that emotion around immediately, from this very sad departure -- and it is. on inaugural day when the clintons were leaving the white house, i was standing at the north portico as the last person to leave the white house was amy carter. everybody else had gotten in the cars and were waiting for the cars to be loaded to move out, and she came up to me and gave me a hug. it is a day i'll never forget. we have to turn that rider around immediately and get the new family moved in. and the family thinks they have to come in and adjust to the executive residence staff, and that is probably the greatest mantra that the resident staff has to live by. no, it is not the white house way, it is the family's way within the white house. and you need to adapt to the new family. that takes a while. i think the resident staff does it better, because they have been through it before, than the families do. these are people who work for the previous president. now you are working for me. how are you going to respond? how do i respond to you? and we note in the resident staff when that has taken place, because usually when you walk into the room, when there is a conversation going on among family members are the staff with the president's, conversation stops. they don't know whether you are going to hold the information that over here or not. we are behind the screen at the secret service puts up for security. we go past that. we are with the family all the time. so the family initially is very reluctant to speak openly. at some points, two weeks, six months, a year -- conversation continues when you walk into the room. there is a collective "ah, we have made it" that goes through the staff. >> betty, we had talked earlier about the get together so that residents staff have after the president and his family have left, when the presidential libraries are opened. if you could just briefly tell us about those. >> recent administrations have been very generous in inviting residents staff members to the opening of the library's, and many of them have taken advantage and gone to them. it is sort of like a family reunion. just recently, down at the national archives -- i actually started working there in the johnson administration. there was a wonderful reception, inviting all previous johnson administration staff to come. after all those years had gone by, 40 years, it was just absolutely wonderful to see people that you had worked with all those years ago. i think there is that camaraderie if you work closely with and administration, regardless of what position you held, that he worked for a common -- i don't want to say a common cause, but a common sense, that you were in it together, and you went through all these crises, good times and bad times, and have very fond memories, particularly of the people that you worked with over the years. >> in looking at the white house, the organization has grown enormously that supports the president, but also the organization has gotten larger that supports the first lady. both anita and susan served as chief of staff for laura bush and michelle obama. i wonder if you can tell us about the organization that the first lady needs, and why she needs it, and how you interact with the west wing, because you both had titles, not only as chief of staff for the first lady, but assistant to the president. how did those titles work together? >> there is no doubt that looking at the organization chart, which i know you have, the east wing staff is clearly rounded. that is indicative of how much more is expected of the first lady in what she chooses to do with her platform, which is a privilege to represent the people of the united states, both at home and around the world. there is an increased expectation, and with it, the pressure to do something with this opportunity. so the staff rose to support the initiatives. initiatives are selected by the first lady, with one fundamental in mind. how can a work that i do support the work of the administration and the work of the president? going to the point that they are not paid, and it removes their flexibility and their ability to pick and choose the causes they want to engage in and to really use their background and experience and bring authenticity to their work, but it is reflective of what the overall goals are of the administration. the first lady is not running a shadow government. as pat nixon said, it is the hardest unpaid job in the world, but it is an extraordinary opportunity and a privilege. the chief of staff is there to dissemble information in order to do this work, in addition to that social office and the importance of the diplomatic world, it is really the policy work. we have to thank rosalynn carter for being the first to establish the role of project director in the office of the first lady. >> do remember how laura bush came upon the initiative for afghan women? >> sure. laura bush came into the white house in 2001, and she had already been a little bit typecast as the shy, retiring library in teacher. she was asked who are you going to be, barbara bush or hillary clinton? she said i know barbara bush. well, so i am going to be heard. she was confident in their relationship as husband and wife and the partnership they had had through their life, in public life and private life. they came into the white house and she was going to take her interest from texas to washington, which is establishing the national book festival, which is now continuing in its 12th and 13th year. she had an interest in education. that was a major initiative of the administration, no child left behind -- she was an advocate. and then september 11 happen, and that changed everything. the pivot that not only our country had to make, but she had to make as well. having this role and this platform, and what would she do with it, and how could she be part of this effort? and she delivered a radio address in november 2001, the first first lady to deliver presidential radio address on the plight of afghan women. this had been exposed to the world as a brutal treatment of women. that became an important cause for her. she said what struck her after that radio address, she was visiting her daughter at the university of texas in austin, and she was at a department store. women at the makeup counter came up to her and said, thank you so much for speaking out about afghan women. she realized she had this enormous platform that was not only domestic but it was global. from that point forward, and to this day, she is still deeply engaged in afghan women's issues. we were able to put forward an important desire that she had, which was to go to afghanistan, which would get within two months of the second term. >> susan, can you tell us about let's move, and the american military initiative? >> mrs. obama certainly knew that in theory, that being the first lady was an enormous opportunity for a platform. when she got to the white house, she was not sure exactly how that would play itself out in her case. however, during that first election campaign, she spent a lot of time with military families, and understood that these were extraordinarily resourceful people who would never ask for help. she thought that the country could do a lot more for them. she felt when she got to the white house that this was an area where she could make a difference. with respect to the let's move campaign, she started with the idea of the white house kitchen garden. she thought this would be great to have a conversation with the country about children and health. i think she did not appreciate at first how this would resume, that the country was ready to have this conversation. at some point after a few months, she said to her staff, i would like this to be a campaign. this is going to be something i will be working on, and no doubt this is something she will be involved in for the rest of her life, as she will the issue of military families. so we worked for months, and i was just thinking about your related question about the west wing. the first lady's chief of staff is her representative in the west wing. one of the important roles is to coordinate them. we knew for months -- we came up with the name, let's move. the campaign started on february 9, which was supposed to be at a community center, but of course there was one of those snowstorms, so we had to move into the state dining room. things were well coordinated with the west wing until that morning. somehow we realize that the president was going to stop by the press briefing room at the exact time where she was going to launch let's move from the state dining room. that was one of those things that's, there was great effort from everybody's part and at the last minute we somehow realize that and were able to stay in the west wing. i do not think the president is going to want to step on the first lady's initiative, so they moved their time a little bit. >> the bush first ladies were very popular and they continue to be, whether it was through their campaigns, their personalities, or just a general way that people perceived them to be. they tended to have much stronger support even than their husbands. that leads in a reelection campaign for the first lady to then go out and campaign for her husband. how did both first ladies feel about that role of political support for their husbands? you could compare it with before they came into office, and then when they worked in the reelection campaigns. before they came into office, obviously they did not have a lot of political experience going out and speaking on behalf of the president, but they certainly did by the re- election. >> in terms of the popularity question, every problem in the world comes to the desk of the american president. by virtue of that reality, not everybody is going to be happy. your popularity is going to take big hits from time to time. the first lady does not have that pressure. she gets to pick and choose the thing she wants to work on. in terms of the political involvement, which is a slightly different question. laura bush, from the minute she got married or started dating george w. bush, he was from a political family and involved in politics. as much as she pleaded not to ever have to give a public speech, she became quite good at it, and over time, and through the different campaigns -- the campaign for governor, the campaign for congress. he famously talks about how they were coming back from a speech and he asked her how was my speech? she said well, it was horrible, and he proceeded to drive a car right through the garage. he was not at all happy with that response. the political spouse really is the one person who can be most honest with you, and they do get deeply engaged and deeply involved. it is important to the success of their spouse in these campaigns. in 2004, she was a pivotal person in the campaign. it was a very difficult time. the country was at two wars. she got out there, and to a great degree, her speech at the new york convention in 2004, where she spoke to the human side of being president of the united states, and watching the great struggle of this big, tough decision, including sending people to war and how painful that is, that none of this is taken lightly, i think it was an important moment. >> i agree with anita that one of the things the first lady can do that no one else can do is humanize the president. one of the things mrs. obama has always felt is that she was happy to campaign, but had to do it in a voice that was natural to her, and honest. she did not want to campaign for a candidate she did not know at all, because it did not feel real to our. on the other hand, she wanted to be helpful. when the president was working on health-care reform, she gave three different speeches on the subject. one of the speech she gave, and this was a campaign of a different sort, it was about breast cancer survivors and how continuing care is important and how health-care reform would help people get preventive care and continuing care. when it came to the actual reelection campaign, i think it was sort of a no-brainer. she has always felt her role was to support the administration in any way she could, and this was something she felt strongly about, our husbands reelection. so she was out there and gave many, many speeches. she is really a natural. she likes campaigning and really likes to get to go out and about, away from washington, and meet just normal people on the campaign trail. >> one of the things that we have talked about doing, i asked you all to come up with a question for one of your fellow panelists. i don't know what your questions are, or who you are going to ask them to, but let's go to it and everybody can chime and also with answers. betty, would you like to start us off? do you have a question for a fellow panelist about the role of the first lady? >> i will direct my question to both of the former chiefs of staff. there is such a great interest in first ladies today. my question for them is, in terms of respecting their privacy in their lives, how do you draw the line in terms of releasing information or protecting the privacy of the first lady and the family? >> that is a great question. it is one of the things that every first lady wrestles with. she is sort of the protector of the family sanctuary that surrounds the president, particularly when they live above the store, and you try to have a private life and the public eye. it is certainly not easy. you also recognize you are in a public role, and people want to know about you. they want to know about your family life. it is about striking a balance. it is difficult but important. working with the great secretary who can be honest with the first lady and let her know that sometimes she needs to put some nuggets out there. it is difficult when you have young children. >> that is the area mrs. obama feels most strongly about. mrs. clinton is a good example of someone who she felt was extremely effective at protecting chelsea clinton as best as she could, and this wonderful young woman who grew up in the white house. having small children in the white house, again, above the store, above the museum, above a place where there are reporters all the time. how do you handle it if the girls want to go ride their bikes on the south lawn, which is in the rose garden, which is where reporters find themselves. we have to come up with all kinds of rules. one of which was that the children could not be photographed unless they were with one of their parents. that was one of those compromises. i think for the most part, the fact that the girls were able to go to summer camp and go to school and have a more or less normal life is something that i think their friends, their friends' families are great about encouraging and supporting, but i think the tug-of-war with the press is something that is inevitable. the obamas know that people are genuinely interested in for the most part, in a nice and caring way, and yet these girls have a right to their privacy. >> i have a really tough question. how do you feel about guest chefs in the white house? do you agree to bring a certain guest chef to the white house because the first lady tells you so? or because you are in agreement with having a guest chef in the kitchen? >> there were times over the years when they did bring in a guest chef to participate in some of the very big events on the lawn. the congressional review, for example. -- barbeque, for example. they brought their favorite texas barbecue chef to work with the kitchen. i remember another time when they brought in a guest chef, and this was after hurricane katrina. mr. bush made about 25 visits down to the gulf coast during the redevelopment of the gulf coast. chef paul prudhomme and emeril lagasse were invited. it was an important message that the gulf coast was coming back and restaurants reopening. there was an important reason to showcase these american chefs, and particular reasons why they would come. i think that as long as the staff, the household staff and the kitchen staff are comfortable and see it as an opportunity to share their experience with an outside chef, i think it is fine, and it actually could be kind of fun to see it. [laughter] that is not the answer he wanted. >> the current white house chefs are fantastic, and the obamas very much appreciate what they do. part of it is particularly the state dinners, they showcase all aspects of american cooking. in every situation where there have been guest chefs, there is a collaboration, because the white house chefs know things that there is no way a guest chef knows about how things are done. i think these collaborations showcase the best of american cuisine, and real collaboration between the guest chefs and the white house chefs. >> may i add something to that? i need to. that is all fine and good. of course i fyou go ask christa, who is one of the chefs, what does she really feel? that is another story. probably this is where i think you don't know what she feels. i tell you differently, other chefs in the past, i think it is a slap in the face of being the white house chef. i am the chef of the white house that does everything for the family and the guests day in and day out. the day when i can shine, i am told that somebody else comes in. it is like me asking to be the president for one day. [laughter] why not? it is another job. let's put it this way. i don't believe in that, and i never will. because this is my job, and i would like to shine once in awhile, and this is my chance. because we know that the guest chef comes only for one day, and for one thing only. you know why, to promote their establishment. that is the only reason they come. if you would tell those guys that they cannot publicize them being in the white house, how many do you think would show up? i needed to say that, because this is my feeling. [laughter] >> i would like to ask anita, what do you think is the most difficult aspect of the role of the first lady? >> there are a couple of things, and i will list them. i think one of the hardest things is seeing the person you love most in the world criticize. i think you have to be strong, and you have to be confident in your relationship as a family and as husband and wife to know who your husband is, and he knows who you are. i think that is one ofi think a, private time the public requirements. that can be difficult. the night think when it is over, when it -- when it is the end of four years or eight, that you ran out of time to do all the things that one to do. that would be my answer. >> i have a question for you, martha. in the transition project, what influence heavy found that a transition that first ladies have had in the transition process? >> the first lady is going to be responsible for setting up the home, the family, that there is so much that goes on in setting up the west wing, concerning appointments and policy, that president is not going to have time to be spending and how the home is going to be created. i think that a first lady has got a very tough. of a job, because it is a whole new environment for her. she has to learn how to bring her family in, particularly with the young family, like michelle obama. that is what she has to focus on. before hand, they can start thinking about their issues, as both recent first ladies have done -- they thought about it before hand. the whole physical moves is something that they are the ones that are going to have to handle, because the president is simply not going to have the time. maybe he is going to be involved in the oval office, setting up the oval office, as george bush proudly talked about every item in the tour of the white house, why he chose particular things. >> do we have time for questions? >> do we get to ask mine? >> i am sorry. [laughter] >> my question -- [laughter] >> the administration's you work for, 5, what was the one you felt you were able to shine your craft the most? the one favorite? >> you know, it is quite difficult to go there because when i came to the white house, i was learning. when i went working and i could see what she wanted, she would say, this is a private home, our home, and we will showcase the best we can do. what better place to showcase it? we want the best furniture, the best wallpaper, the best cards. everything the best. it is the people's home. i understood that. this is why i embark into making those spectacular desserts all the time. after the reagans and departed the house, it continued. they knew, somehow, it would be something they could be a part of. at the time, we were already doing some diplomacy. introducing with a design that reflected the head of states. that is why they let me do all the way to changes in the food. if you remember, the food way back, it was served on a big platter like desserts. that went away. the dessert was never touched. there is a reason she never asked me to change it. [laughter] so yes, that is what i would assume. i am very proud of that. my six years in the white house have really influenced the dessert made in the white house. they were one-of-a-kind. they remained so until my last days. we also made many desserts for the first family. i remember when george w. came to the white house. the first dinner, i said i really needed to have something. i needed something texan. i came up with a design, tumbleweed. you have seen those things in texas. [laughter] that is what the dessert was. tumbleweed. mrs. bush did not care for it. [laughter] but president bush loved it. [laughter] we were discussing this, saying, we should go ahead because he loves it. go ahead. [laughter] little things like this makes the family very proud. >> he had one problem with the first lady and they had one problem with him. never did the same dessert twice. they were always different. >> i wanted to keep them very interested. [laughter] i did not want them to say, we will have this cake again. the head of states would be coming. i would beg my staff to throw any ideas in. the best one would float and that is what we would do. it was quite bold. mrs. reagan said, you cannot serve that. i remember one day doing something giant. she was having lunch. i was on my knee explaining the dessert. when i say to her, she grabbed it and started shaking it. i say, you win. [laughter] >> let's go to some questions on that note. >> hello. my comment is, during my time, perhaps it will be possible to have a first tenement. what the influence of the first ladies is on how that role would be? >> we came close in 2008. that would have been different because it would have been a former president. it would have been a very different situation. we are getting closer. it will happen. the white house is a very resilient and flexible place. it will adapt to all kinds of changes, just as the resident staff adapts to a new family. i think that is the remarkable thing about the white house. >> i had a very brief conversation with dennis thatcher. when he came to the white house. she was in, speaking with the president. he was wandering around the state for, literally wondering. i engaged him and told him some history of the white house and made very sure he's all the area. but he was a very engaging. i asked him what his role was. he said, my role is whatever she wants. [laughter] >> good. >> there are ways in which it will have to change. i think one of the issues is about working outside the home. chancellor merkle is a chemistry professor. there are ways in which there are men who probably do not want to play the traditional first lady role. anita is right that the white house is resilient. there will probably be a lot of questions asked and a lot of rethinking when that happens. >> my question is for anita. president bush's library will be opening soon. i just wanted to know how mrs. bush's legacy is being preserved with her influence and image in the library. >> it is a great question. it opens april 25 of this year. mrs. bush has been share of the architecture committee and chair of the landscape design committee and the planning committee. she has a great deal of influence on what the place will look like. this will be her life's work for the rest of her life. we did a lot of looking at other libraries. the first lady's part was relegated to a little part of the library. that will not be the case this time. her work with the president will be integrated throughout from the moment you step into the moment you walk out of the library. she is very proud of that. he is very proud of that fact. they looked at it as a partnership for up their public life. they give are asking. >> i would like to thank our panelists. you can see from our discussion at the wonderful support system first ladies and presidents have that make their lives in the white house so much easier, whether is the resident staff, or whether it is the political staff. they all support a wonderful support structure. thank you very much. >> thank you. [applause] >> thank you, guys. that was fun. >> thank you everyone for and enlightening session. on your way out, there will be a bag you do not want to forget. if you were not already shown, the most recent addition of white house history. [laughter] it is on white house fashion. it was timely dealing with first ladies. a special edition for the first lady's original series of the book was produced. that is in the bag out here. you are welcome on the way out to take a tour of the c-span bus and see all the wonderful, high-tech things on the bus. thank you again for making our session on this series very special. thank you. [applause] >> next week, watched the life and times of the nation's first first lady, martha washington. her life before meeting george washington, her general life, and setting precedents for the role for sleep. we will travel to the places that influenced her life, including colonial williamsburg, valley forge, and philadelphia. at 9:00 p.m. on c-span, c-span radio, and sees bad -- c-span.org. a special edition of the book "first ladies of the united states of america." presenting a portrait and biography of each first lady. thoughts from michelle obama on the role of first ladies throughout history. now available for the discounted price of $12.95, plus shipping and handling. at c-span.org/products. >> c-span, created by america's cable companies in 1979, brought to you as a public service by your television provider. >> now, the ceo of you have who talks about new technology. at age 37, morris the mayor is the youngest ceo of a fortune 500 company. this world economic forum event held in davos, switzerland last month is 30 minutes. >> the good morning. my name is eric shocker. i am an anchor an editor at large at bloomberg television. >> welcome to "insight and ideas with marissa mayer." the c.e.o. of yahoo! if i am not mistaken, this is the first such conversation since becoming ceo. >> that's right. >> well, it is an honor for both me and the economic forum. we're here to talk about the future of technology. let's begin with the one nut that no one seems to be able to crack. the platform shift from desktop to mobile. how do you crack that nut? >> it is really important. if you look at what is happening in terms of the shift to mobile, the number of mobile phones has tripled in five years. tablet sales will out-sell laptops this year if predictions hold true. it is really incredibly important. a lot of consumers are making the shift. one is understanding how this works, what this provides. and how we can benefit user expectations. the other piece is monetization. whenever you see a consumer shift of this type, there will be an interesting value added for -- to create modernization around it. >> where does that confidence come from? >> the bane of my existence from 1999 to 2004, i was at google, and every time i would interact with anyone externally, the one question they would ask me, search is wonderful, it is great to be able to find everything, how is anyone going to make any money from this? now that seems almost absurd, because search is the giant moneymaker online. that said, whenever you see consumers adopting a technology platform, a particular application like search with this much volume, you know that advertisers will want to participate. there's usually a way where you can introduce advertising such that it is not intrusive, that it adds value, that enhances the experience. that's what we need to work on. >> we can look back and see how that was done with search. everybody gets to play monday morning quarterback and feel smart about it. can you tell yet what some of the shifts will be in mobile that will allow mobile to duplicate the success of search as a money maker? it has to make money or else at some point innovation will grind to a halt. >> well, i think people already are. for example, the application stores, a lot of people sell applications. i think the main thing is, search is a daily habit. what people do on their phones often becomes a daily habit. when i thought about the strategy for yahoo!, i pulled the list of what people do on their phones in rank order frequency. if you ignore a few exceptions, and maps because it was really expensive and hard to do right, the list looks like, e-mail, weather, news, financial quotes, sports scores, photos. you get the idea. it was funny. because phil and i would recite that list on account of my being the new c.e.o. at yahoo! i would say what am i doing? my friends and family would say, you are describing yahoo! business. i would say, no, i am listing in frequency order what people do on their phones. the nice thing is at yahoo!, we have all the content that people have on their phones. >> search remains one of the defining experiences for most internet users. it seems to me that it will remain fundamental to what we do. how do you see it evolving? >> all of the innovations you will see in search will be in the user interface layer. if you look at the past few years, there has been universal search, search will not always be text based. when you are typing, it is responsive. voice search, a third of searches are done by voice on the phone. all of those types of things are what we will see in the future. i also think that there is a huge opportunity in the future around search personalization. what do i know already? what are my preferences? and how to present the information? we can go about how we shape the internet and order it for you. there are all of these news feeds all over the web. twitter, facebook. the question is, what order should people read these in the morning? what should they look at? how should they do that? to really do that, you need terrific personalization. >> personalization replaces search? once the computer figures out what it is we like to look for, it will look for it on our behalf? and we won't have to go and do it any longer? >> i think the right way to look at it is not that it replaces search, but that it becomes a critical part of the search. one provocative way of thinking about it is in terms of the logic, that is your query. in the future, you become the query. it is what you type, it is your background, it is where you are, it is your preferences, it is what you looked at yesterday. the search box can take all that input and create something that is customized for you. the nice thing is, if you are the query, you could possibly type in search terms. or you could be the query passively. this is the notion that we can pick up your contacts, who you are talking to, where you are. we can provide useful information or a series of links, pictures, videos more useful than your current context. >> right now for most of us, the web is still a very managed curated experience. how long does it take before we get there? >> i think it will happen in the next three to five years. a lot of what we have seen happen, image recognition, voice recognition, translation, these are backbone technologies. it is a matter of being able to take personalized notions, what articles to click on, taking all of those signals and mapping it to understand that when i like clean energy on facebook and i tweet out something about green energy, that is a same interest of mine. >> are different companies go to do it differently, is this something that everyone will have to move in the same direction on? >> howard things named? how're they organized into hierarchies? for example, you need to know wisconsin is a state in their cities from there. if i say i like wisconsin, there are a whole bunch of interests that cascade off of that. you need to understand the hierarchy of objects. you also need to be able to understand how they relate to each other, synonyms, duplication. >> does this personalization large internet companies has you have to understand what the ontology of entities is. does that create a new paradigm? the most recent thing that any of the large internet companies have come out with is this social search that facebook has introduced. it is that a stepping stone? >> there is the social graph. what i am talking about, it will give way to the interest graph. you know this set of things i am interested in, you know the other set of things other people are interested in. they aren't just based on, did they go to the same school, do they work in the same place, they are based on, are they interested in the same things? we can create personalization technologies because you can see what people are doing and provide you with information. there's also a very powerful social component because we can show you interests you may have in common with people you did not realize. i recently found out that the founder of linkedin and i both had the same major at stanford. symbolic systems. so you can find these kinds of things in the interest graph. you can also find people who you may have never met who you should know because you have things in common with them. >> it would seem to me a pretty high bar to entry. you have to have a platform that is fairly broad and a huge level of user engagement. right? >> that's right. and we are lucky at yahoo! because we also have finance and sports and games and things like omg! celebrity news. there are a lot of different verticals. it has broad applications like search and mail. >> does the interest graph have the potential to disrupt the paradigm for tech power that was, in some way, set by your old boss, the four horsemen, could the interest or something else change that order of the universe? >> i think all four of those players do a terrific job, providing a lot of great experiences. all four of those people will become major players. the analogy misses that there are other players in the space. twitter is very exciting and interesting. technology is not stagnant. it is amazing to think about different waves of the internet and technology. the first wave was yahoo! itself. the directory. there are these pages out there, how do you organize them? then that got so large, the directory model broke down and gave way to search. the next wave came with social. now we're on the mobile wave. that has all happened in about 15 years. we have gone through four major technology shifts in terms of who the players are. there are always opportunities for a new disruption. i think a lot of this will be around interest, but that's just my prediction. >> so we shouldn't, as consumers or in any other role that we may occupy, worry about the control that certain companies may exercise over the internet itself and the information that it contains? >> well, i think that privacy will always be something that users should consider. i also think privacy is always a trade-off. when you give up some of your personal information, you get something in return. it is about making those trade- offs. how the information, allowing them to control the information you have, and choice. did you want to use the services in a personalized way or not? those are the big three components of privacy online. i also fundamentally believe that user data belongs to the end user. >> the question of control is the one that gets people most exercise. how do you ensure -- how does any company that participates in the space, this industry, guarantee that remains the case and provides users with enough confidence that the information they share is not being abused? >> the second part is all about transparency. what searches do you have and how are they being used? that is something that is really important. there will be industry standards in terms of providing users an account statement. some of these primary platforms, what they show you it is what data you have stored there. one of the key pieces that also provides user choice is making sure the data is portable. it allows your barrier to switching carriers to be lower. one of the analogies i use, the papers you wrote in college, are they yours? absolutely. >> i feel that they are. nobody else is interested in them. >> but nothing else you have done over the past 10 years is not nearly as coherent and structured, but just as insightful in terms as they were your words expressed your way. and it tells a lot about what you learned. i do believe fundamentally they are yours. if you can take that history and pick it up and move to a different search provider and take that as an interest graph and use it in a different application, that should fundamentally belong to you. you are allowing the service to access it to get better information and better results. either they deliver on that promise or you take your data and go elsewhere. >> well, that raises an interesting question. should you be able to take all of that data? it sounds to me that it could be a great deal to move into one platform or another. is that possible? i can see a platform being resistant to that. >> it is technologically possible. a lot of the players are providing for something like that. it is not something that is generally something that people think about doing every day. but it is an option. i think it is an important one. it can give users a lot of confidence in terms of how things are handled. >> and described how one of your employees asked how yahoo! is going to compete if it doesn't have one of these four key distribution technologies. there is the mobile operating system, hardware, the brother, and social. i do not know that we got an answer. >> one of our employees as that. given that we do not have mobile hardware or a social network, how are we going to compete? >> it is a question for every company that seeks to compete with those others that have those technologies. >> of the four horsemen of the internet, almost all of them are playing in one, if not several, of those mediums. i think the big piece here is that it really allows us to partner. yahoo! has been a friendly company. it ultimately means there is an opportunity for strong partnerships. that is what we will be focused on. we work with apple and google in terms of the operating system. we have a strong partnership with facebook. ofre able to work with some these players in order to bolster our user experiences. >> is that diecast? you talk about this new graph, the interest graph. is that the kind of technology that will become key to distribution? >> with the web becoming so vast, there is so much context and so much social context, and now there is so much location context, how do you pull all that together? your personalization comes in to make sense of the content. it is the internet ordered for you. it brings yahoo! back to its roots. you cannot just categorize anymore. a feed of information that is ordered for you. it is also available on your mobile phone. >> some of those technologies remain -- there is competition in the browser world, in the mobile hardware world, and in the operating system world. what about social? >> facebook provides an amazing platform. now what happens with social is what you do with it. it will be the predominant platform. what happens in social is what you do with it. it is taking that and finding useful context. you are in davos right now, do you know who else is? and be able to offer me the opportunity to meet up with someone who i did not know would be here. >> there is a natural conflict in the world of technology between innovation and execution. we have seen many companies struggling with this. can both be done well at the same time? >> it was pointed out to me a few years ago. one hypothesis is what is the opposite of innovation? a lot of people would say the status quo. there is another school of thought that says the opposite of innovation is execution. if you have to be in execution mode, it is hard to find a space to innovate. for us, there is a great period of execution. can we take these products and revitalize them for the web and make the transition to mobile? will there be room to innovate? to say this is how yahoo! groups worked on the web, but now there are these new opportunities. can we spot some of those innovative ideas? >> is size a barrier to innovation? >> i do not think so. you can innovate at scale and with large size. if you have 10 engineers and you are going to grow that to be 20 or 30, do you want to do the same set of things two or three times better, or do you want to be doing two to three times the things? interestingly because of execution, because there's so much the opposite, if you wanted to execute perfectly, get the design exactly right, work through the details, you would invest two to three times as many people per project. if you want to find those new ideas, it wants to take those same people and put them on something that is far flung that you have never thought about. it really is this tension. you can innovate at scale but you need to save room to have small teams working on those ideas. >> share with us your experience over the past few months. >> you arrived to an innovative company, but perhaps there was too much going on. what have you focused on? what are you most excited about? particularly the ones you have the most control over. >> i was genuinely pleased. i knew there had to be great people at yahoo!. the same way that when you look at art, you can tell if it was created by a nice person or not. or a depressed person or not. you can tell with yahoo! products that there are really nice, smart people there that have a great time. it is a great company overall that has a very fun culture. my first few months, my focus -- technology companies live and die by talent. we talk about the talent wars. it is not that people in talent wars are not competitive with each other, it is just that when you start to see the best people migrating from one company to the next, it means the next wave is starting. i believe that really strong companies all have very strong cultures. yahoo! is no exception. they have been a strong company for a long time. they have a strong culture. they are different from every other corporate culture. i want to find a way to amplify it. amplifying it is how you find the energy, and energy is what you can harness. if we have people and they are excited about what they're working on every day and they realize the next big hurdle is mobile, you can take that energy around the culture and find fun ways to apply it that can be really impactful. >> what are some of the things you found that we will see over the next few months? >> i do not like to talk about things before we do them. i do think a lot of the keys is what i have already talked about. there is a real opportunity to help guide people's daily habits in terms of the content they read. that is something we're really working on. all these daily habits, these -- news, sports, games, answers, groups -- these are the types of things where we have been underinvested in them. a little love will go a long way. yahoo! groups has not been refreshed in 11 years. it will go a long way if we start to modernize some of these products. >> when people get excited about technology, they forget about the role of design. -- now people think about user- generated content in video. now saying, social allows everybody to be a publisher, to find topics where you a domain expert, and for your friends to know, i do think there is something powerful we can unleash there. >> howabotu elsewhere? what other innovations? >> there are so many things. the one answer you never want to give is, there is nothing. there are amazing things you get to see all the time. all kinds of amazing technolgies on mobiel. -- on mobile. location sensitvity -- all kinds of terrific technologies. check-in, but if you know where people are, there are other sophiosticated things you can do with that. branching out from mobile, there are terrific things happening in nalysis, doing dna a helping infertile couples selecting children,. there is amazing wireless power. this is like "atlas shrugged." they actually think you can send energy with waves. you might need to get close enough to a router for power. for advertising, the sign at the bus stop has wireless power, you can charge and use your device. >> >> going back to some of those routes and saying, now that -- important is designed to what you're doing? >> the design should fall away. a lot of these interactions technologies become really powerful when they fall away. the amazing thing about tablets, that you can flick and get rid of things and switch to page, these are so into it that you can see small children begin to use a tablets -- a tablet. there is a video of proud parents uploading, before children and no hope to talk, they know how to use a tablet. they can navigate videos. they cannot even express it, but they know how to get their use in adjusters on the tablet. what is powerful is that it uses a natural paradigms' that people already have imbedded in their minds, that are in eight to us. they allow us to be the way that we use the technology -- use the technology. that is incredibly powerful. that is overall what you really want to have happen, to be able to whittle away the technology, such that all the complication lies in the use. it is like a nice perk. the single layer you interact with -- that is why voice recognition has taken off to the degree it has and why siri is so interesting, this notion that you can talk, you can see what you're thinking, transcribe an e-mail, transcribe a text or research. that is the way you navigate and have every day of your life. there is a whole set of technology in supercomputers that with your voice, you can do them -- you can do with them what you want to do. >> is something akin to a walled garden, to ration, is that not such a bad thing? >> the application system that exists in apple is very curated, but absolutely beautiful. the reason why i do not think that is a bad thing is because it has raised user's expectations for design. people did not used to think about design or appreciate it. the fact that when you see something that is really beautiful, it does create a lot of respect for it, and one of the reasons why apple has garnered so much praise for its design is that it has made sure that the entire ecosystem of applications on a platform. >> in his state of the union address, president obama proposed raising the minimum wage to $9 an hour. but the next "washington journal," a look at how that will affect the economy. more about the president's economic proposals with jennifer eric sent from the center for american progress. we will take questions on the president's proposals for immigration, education, and manufacturing. a representative of the american indian congress talks about tribal relationships with the federal government and cultural issues within the native american community. "washington journal" is live every day on c-span at 7:00 a.m. eastern. >> china is communism in name only today. the preserve the power of the members of the communist party. they basically through most of the the ideology aside when the country was opened up, and it is now capitalist haven. condi is now in china, they talked at great lengths about marxism, leninism, but it is all about preserving the power -- the party's power economically as the country grows. they threw aside most vestiges of communism long ago. in north korea, it is all about preserving the power of the military and the kim dynasty. it has nothing to do with what karl marx's vision of communism. somebody could do a fascinating book on how coming this summer, when it moved into asia, diverged into something different in china, north korea, vietnam, then, is an upper -- that. in -- that appeared in europe. >> 34 years of reporting around the world -- with keith richards on c-span's "q&a." >> and now, discussion on campaign finance law following the 2009 s citizens united case. the supreme court ruling allows unlimited spending on political advertising from outside groups. from the cato institute, this is just under three hours. >> we will continue the love fest later. let's get down to business and talk about post-citizens united. the question we have been asked to address is, have elections changed because of the citizens united decision? when i talk about it, the typically encompass within that the case that john mentioned, not only because i was one of the co-counsels on that, along with the institute for justice, but because it is technically the case that allows the super pacs. it is a more important case of the citizens united, except for the fact that citizens united got to the supreme court first. i use the term citizens united to retreat -- to refer to both of those cases. the fact is, these cases did not change nearly so much as some people think. for example, prior to citizens united, groups that we called 527s could run ads, any time prior to 60 days -- 60 days for the general election, in which they could say anything wanted about a candidate as long as they did not conclude by saying, vote for this candidate, or vote against this candidate, or words that are known as expressed advocacy. the could say, john sample is a dirty rotten scoundrels who steals social security checks from social -- from senior citizens. tell them we do not need his agenda in washington. people would say, that is upsetting. you could do that before citizens united, out of those windows near an election. furthermore, after -- prior to 2003, you could do that any time, prior to mccain-sign -- fine gold -- mccain-a fine gold. there was even more -- mccain- feingold. corporations and unions to pay for these ads, just as they could post-citizens united. the nature of the ads were a little bit different. these ads could be conducted by nonprofit organizations. to give you an example, here is a real ad -- this was run by the naacp in 2000. it features images of a battered pickup truck and chains, dragging an individual, a black man to his death. the voice-over says, i am at james birds daughter. my father was killed in texas. he was beaten and dragged 3 miles to his death, all because he was black. when gov. george w. bush refused to support hate crime legislation, it was like my father was killed all over again. call george w. bush and tell them to support it, legislation. we will not be dragged away from our future. that ad was wrong in the week before the 2000 presidential election. it was by a corporation. is that a radical change from where we are post-citizens united? it might be better ago we did not have that ad, but i wanted to stress, the change is not so great as some might think. moreover, the change is not so great in an important way. to the average citizen, he notices the difference in the the campaign. there are a lot of news stories trying to rile him up and trying to talk about the corporate meritocracy. the campaign pretty much look like any other campaign. there were lots of tv ads, which we know people hate. we also know from political science research that tv ads are formative for report -- for voters. voters claim they hate that. they have said that in every poll that has been taken since i was born. it is shown that negative tv ads can make voters moved considerably. the think the campaign is too long. the have said that in every poll since i was born. it has gone too long. candidates have to start raising money earlier because it is hard for candidates to raise money because they're subject to limits, limits that have not kept up with inflation. all these things to the average voter, while the boehner content -- complaints about them -- these are the things that voters have always complained about, like the weather or whatever else it is that people just talk about as a day-to-day thing. having said that, citizens united and the other cases that have came in its wake are in fact, nonetheless, important cases. i think it is an important difference to be able to express advocacy ads. i think there is ed -- evidence that express advocacy ads can be affected. you might want to do an issue ad where you do not ask somebody to vote for somebody, but sometimes, you do want that expressed advocacy. expressed advocacy ads, and the ability of corporations and unions and nonprofits to fund those, creates a more honest system. people say what they mean. they do not say, call george bush, and tell them to support eight crimes legislation. that is not really an issue. your tried to get people to vote against him in the election. it has definitely increased the amount of spending in political campaigns. it is tough to get an exact amount, but it is safe to say that somewhere between 10%-20% of the spending in the last election was probably due to the liberalization of campaign finance laws that has taken place. if somebody wants to claim it is more or less, i will not release argue, unless they for -- unless they throw out on a rigid a preposterous figure. again, there is good information that higher spending can lead to a more informed and better informed electorate. it can be used to suppress voter turnout, but it can also be used to increase voter turnout. in the two elections we have had, 2010, 2012, turnout has not been a problem. it has been pretty good for the midterm in 2010 and the general in 2012. the other thing that we have often said is that this idea of an undisclosed spending -- or the term that groups have agreed on, dark money -- that seems to be the term that all liberal reform organizations are talking about, they probably focus group that -- that is a misnomer. when they say ads are undisclosed, every political ad says who paid for it. it is in every political ad. it is the law. what they need to say is, we do not know enough about these groups, or as much about these groups, as we would like to know. we wish we knew more about them. if you take the chamber of commerce, the u.s. chamber of commerce, i'm not sure that comes into play. if there is somebody who cannot figure out what the basic agenda of the u.s. chamber of commerce is, i would say, there were not even voting. it is not that hard to know what the chamber of commerce agenda is. is it really that important that we know exactly what companies gave to a many million-dollar budget, which many company is not a dominant percentage? the problem might be greater when you have groups with names -- there was one group called american commitment, that ran ads in the last cycle. people say, i cannot judge that message. i do not know who that candidate might be beholden to. this has been so overplayed. the estimates i have taken, from the center for responsive politics, about 7% of the spending in 2012 came from groups that did not disclose their donors, the donors to those groups. this is a decline from 2010. it is not surprising that this has been a decline, because the only groups that do not have to disclose donors are non-profit trade organizations, unions, and this is generally dollars in small amounts. anybody who would give to these groups specifically with the idea, i want to do political activity, has to realize that these groups are limited under the irs code to spending -- the irs has never defined it well -- it is clearly under half of what they do on political activity. that goes hand-in-hand with their legal status. if they do more than that, they are violating their legal status. these groups are spending less than that. if you are a guy who wants to influence an election, you give your money to one of these groups because you do not want your name disclosed, you have to realize that your paying about a 50% tax and your political activity. that is about half the money you give them will not be used in the campaigns that you want it used in. that can be misleading. they might do it for other things you like. they might run a nice ads talking about the need for more deficit spending, or the need to reduce the deficit or something like that, outside the context of the -- the context of elections. if you want to effect an election, that is not the way to do it. you'd rather give it to super pac, which has to expose -- disclose all of its donors and expenditures. we should also talk about, how has citizen united actually affected the races? as one of the biggest things it has done is that it has made race is more fluid. it is possible to get money into a political race much more quickly than it used to be the case. one can view that as good or bad. most incumbent politicians tend to view that is bad. why? most incumbents would start with a big lead in name recognition and fund-raising. the used to be pretty comfortable. would get the big influx of cash? the classic example would be the 2010 race between bob average, a blue dog democrat in north carolina, and a woman named rene elders. etheridge had one election -- won election pretty easily. in 2008, he had token opposition. 2010 was known to be a bad year for democrats. he was going after joggle but to run reelection. he was on nobody's watch list, not even on the likely democratic to watch. he was a safe seat in every one of the major rankings, until one day, he is walking outside the capitol building, and sunland -- some of these journalists asked him hard questions he did not like, and he lost his temper, and these young student journalists, he was trying to grab the camera or throw a punch. it looked really bad. he was probably going out of step with his district anyway, in the sense his voting record was becoming more liberal. the district was becoming more conservative. this provided the opening -- the -- for for elmer's elmers. . . . it has been successful, as i mentioned earlier in my comments. giving in a little bit of leaves to a set of problems. what i want to ask is, is that the future? is that the way to go? what remains to be done? what kind of restrictions are there still on speech? i want to start with incremental things that will be discussed and tried to integrate things about larry's comments and then go to non-incremental outcomes before finishing. let's start with the incremental. prohibition should be of the greatest concern to people concerned about freedom of speech or liberty in general. what provisions are there on financing political activity? in terms of prohibitions, the one that sticks out is the prohibition on foreign nationals being involved. the decision has been made here. we can go on about that. you can actually argue about it. probably not as solid as most, but i do not see the point. arguing for a foreign national participation is an idea that is so heavily weighted with negativity that there is nothing worth the cost of bringing that about. i think that will probably be not at the center of concern, at least in the near future. in terms of restraint, contribution limits within the system are going to continue. heaven and earth was moved in mccain-feingold, part of a big deal to get contributions raised inside the system, contributions raised to a point where there were still below the inflation rate of 1974 so we still have not recovered the real value of them. if you want to go outside contribution limits, there is likely to be vehicles, organizations, and the ability to do so will be guaranteed after citizens united. do you want to go down this stage, put a lot of effort in trying to get rid of contribution efforts when they can be, if you want to get more than that, there is a possibility. if not, giving directly to candidates of parties. there was the coordination limits network -- that was mentioned earlier today. there is a good chance of that falling, but it has not fallen yet. they may loosen those limits. that will be something that we can focus on and mention a few are concerned about these issues. i do think there is an issue that was not raised earlier today in talking about parties. libertarianism is particularly sensitive, even if they're not associated with a party. the sense that the parties have a central, controlling role and they do not like outside forces. there for enhancing the party rules and the party role is something that has downside, too. i suspect the answer is the people who are outside the system, i do not know this but i suspect it is the case, that if the rules of the game were different, that much of the money that would go to outside groups would go to parties. the soft money era found its way to the party. i would not suspected to be so. in that sense, the libertarians should reject it. you are not preventing an outside source from having a role. there is some demand for that, but not a great deal. that brings us to public financing. that is what professor lessig reads us in the current system. his indictment, what i would say about it, a lot of the assertions that exist are probably quite weak. it is not conclusive literature. i want to mention that. still, the idea that it weakens trust in the congress, the perception of corruption weakens trust in congress, weakens participation. there are a host of other variables and causes that have been explored and shown to have stronger effects. that leads to non-voting or the poor perception of congress. the studies of congress have shown that you can explain the poor perception of congress by looking at the economy and the fact that most americans do not like conflict, confrontation, fighting with one another, all the stuff that goes on in democracy and compromise has a big effect in driving down congressional approval ratings. another empirical issue that i know something about was the medicare. the money argument has been it is a single variable, a single explanation of all the things that go on in the world. the doc fix, why did it happen? the refusal to cut provider payments in the medicare system. you have contributions and so on. in the 1997 period, when there was a cut in providers, they always go after provider's first. what went into effect and what happened? people stopped providing medicare to the recipients of medicare. that is politically active people over 65. they went directly to their representatives and, sure enough, you ended up with a doc fix, which i suspect is fixed only with a fiscal cliff. there is another explanation. it always does not have to be a small group of people controlling everything. which leads me to my next question before i get back to public financing. professor lessig's understanding of corruption is dependent on the phrase by james madison that any kind of motor or effort that is driven by anything other than the people along, and a general understanding of what the republic was in federalist 10. it talks about how complicated the problem of who the people are and what they do and how you have a system that is a stable and lasting republic. the concern, as you may recall is that medicine is concerned with factions. he is concerned with minority factions and majority factions. he is particularly concerned with majority factions and the effect they would have on the rights of the minority and the permanent interest of the community. as far as i know, if you look at the first amendment, it does not say that congress shall not abridge freedom of speech unless they're talking about a small number of people in the primaries. in fact, people have the right to do that. that is part of the federalist number 10 idea, that people have the right to fund a candidate to make their case. i contend that the notion of the people alone is an ambiguous idea. it is a horrible strategy because everybody knows what the people want. the only problem is, everyone has a different perception of what they wanted in their own head, they know what the people would do and the things that happen are different. therefore, we have corruption. the federalist no. 10 is more complicated than that. if you are trying to have a system in which people -- now, professor lessig's response would be that the primaries are controlled by a small number of funders. if that is true and these people are individuals, why is it the case that during the big money era, 1996 and after, both parties have become much more physiologically sorted. the democrats have become much more liberal. republicans controlled by their small number of contributors in the primaries. the democratic party is much more to the left than it was in 1996 or even 2000. during this period, how does that square with a bunch of rich people control everything? it does not square very well. the answer is, despite the fact that private money is about to destroy us, their answer is not getting rid of it, at least not in the first instance, in part because it is unconstitutional. the answer is public financing, a voucher system. the problem with public financing is, from a libertarian or liberty perspective it is, you're going to have to coerce people to give up tax money to spend on public financing. you have to ask yourself, where does the coercion come in and why does it? most public financing campaigns are not like that. it was very unpopular with most people. the problem of public financing, even if i were to agree with it or be open to it, is that people do not want it. that is one of the incumbent concerns, another reason why you do not have it. the other problem is what might be called a slippery slope argument. the idea is to get public financing, public financing will then have great advantages or turn out to be a great idea. at the end of the day, without banning private financing, you can crowd it out. whether people or to give money now cannot give because of public financing and so on. the idea is to set up a system so that, without forcing people, i am not going to distort what he is saying, he is not saying to ban public financing or make it illegal, but it is interesting to me that the central ethics endorsed the notion from a central campaign that the candidate they take financing from, and they pledge, legally they may be required to, to take only public funds. if you could get everyone to take only public funds, then you have gotten rid of private financing. the private financing act is a real constraint on government, at least potentially so. it also can expand government. we have to be honest about these things. some of it, in some measure, without getting out of hand about this, some of it is caused by, mediated by campaign contributions. however, if you have an all voluntary system, including money coming from people voluntarily, you have the problem that this might be an attempt to crowd out or eliminate public financing. private financing, you want people to run campaigns on the government. you want them to be able to constrain the government. that is why it is important. other things can be said. many things can be said about what central ethics said. public financing does strike me as, depending on how it is done, if it is done on a voluntary basis, it is certainly much less objectionable to a system in which you have restrictions and prohibitions, like we have had for about 30-40 years. tax credits also, we probably want to talk about it. they have some of the same issues. i want to talk about disclosure real quickly. disclosure is going to be what most people are talking about for the next couple of years. we have a disclosure system for many years in the united states. consider this. once you are outside the system and, according to citizens united, you are outside the sphere of corruption as a legal matter. that means disclosure, which has been approved by the supreme court, has basically two justifications. one was to prevent corruption. if you are outside that kind of rationale, the rationale for disclosing these kinds of post- citizens united spending is gone. the other is that disclosure helps voters, informs them, educates them, helps them cast votes more sensibly and more in accord with their own concerns. it does this by telling people they are supposed to look around and see how people they know contributed. that could be their neighbors. it could also be nationally renowned figures, endorsements. it is this cue taking that it helps voters and gives them more information. this is the political science idea. political science has shown, maybe it is the only thing that political science has shown. voters, for the most part, do not have very much information at all about candidates, elections, and politics. they need a great deal of information. one of the things going on is a collective action problem. somebody has to pay for informing voters. i would come back to the public financing issue, which is it is pretty clear that citizens do not want to, which could be seen as a problem. it is also a long-term fact. disclosure -- my point being, about the information, disclosure of corporate heads and these people, voters most in need of some sort of disclosure are not going to have information about these people. they will not have any useful information of -- out of most of the things that are forced to be disclosed about citizens united. they are not going to get any good -- they may or may not know who the rep is. how are they going to know what it means for some individuals name or job or whatever is going to give them information? what we need to do is come up with better alternatives. at this point, the just say no strategy has been one of saying no. i have illustrated why i think it has been fantastically successful. with disclosure, we need to think about alternatives to disclosure, which has also the effect, probably, of tilling some speech, which is a first amendment value. could we have a plan of disclosure that neither chills speech and informs voters better? if you have these two things, it is something that would not be particularly problematic from a liberty point of view. from a general point of view, a win-win situation. this is the idea that bruce has about semi-disclosure. that advertisements of the independent source would be identified not in relation to people but in a chord with the interest that is involved. in the end, the kind of information that you would get from people, voters want the intermission and assess the information according to the kind of interest. they are worried about unrest affecting the truth or falsity. that kind of argument has a constitutional status in the supreme court doctrine. that is why it semi-disclosure would answer that. it would give better information and since the individuals would remain not disclosed directly to the voter, the chill would presumably be lessened. it is also true, there would be a lot of disclosure about individuals in the pages of the new york times and elsewhere as we have seen. still, the official system would not be that way. it seems to be something we can be behind on the liberty side and something that would point us toward other alternatives. i want to close with this -- i guess i am naturally pessimistic because i started by saying what a great success all of this have been. i have come to think that a possibility of citizens united and speech now is directly linked to citizens united. if citizens united were overturned, it is likely that speech now would go quickly thereafter. i have come to think that it is more likely that it might be overturned. it will not be through constitutional amendment or a bill, it would be done by one of the five members of the majority leaving the court. let's leave it at that. what would happen thereafter is president obama would insist that whoever he nominated, among other things, one of his priorities would be a person who would overturn citizens united. you would have a big fight and you could end up with a five- person majority. for a while, it would not matter much because ultimately, you still have to pass a law through congress. but you do not. the vermont legislature could simply pass a state law and that could go to the supreme court pretty quickly and get citizens united overturned. to have some kind of actionable federal effect, it would have to go through congress. there would have to be a lot to reinstate the status quo pre- citizens united. that might be very hard to do. but it is possible. what i'm saying is that there is risk. i think the risk is probably greater than people think about citizens united. it is not yet stable. it is unfortunate that there is not a great deal of evidence that we have won the battle of public opinion. citizens united is not a popular decision. i would be concerned about that. in that sense, i would think that it would make sense to begin to look for possibilities of the settlement that incorporates particularly speech now but also citizens united. perhaps better alternatives on disclosure and other things. a settlement in which we can all agree to find some basis going forward. in part, because, in the end, we waste a lot of time and it poisons the well of our discourse. with that, i am over my time and i shall sit down. thank you very much. [applause] >> thanks. when john asked me to moderate, he also invited me to step out of the world of moderator for a couple of minutes to make some comments. so i will do so and i will be very brief. it turns out that a fair amount of what i wanted to say, john has already said. the morning has been framed by two questions. one is, what did change with citizens united or the cluster of events that we label as citizens united? the other is, what should change next? first, what has changed? something has changed, in fact. previous vehicles have spoken to that, presented different perspectives. in law, we have heard and both bob bauer and the panel and france smith noted that it was a culmination of a long series of developments which ultimately lead to a point to use a phrase that we have used at the campaign finance institute and other publications to a point where you can see limits on what accomplished. it does not mean citizens united has done away with what one could possibly accomplished through limits. that is to say i do believe that contribution limits do relate to and prevent plenty of examples of the extortion and actual corruption in that direction. both contributions to parties and candidates. but limits or restrictions do not and cannot alter the fundamental dependency issues. or promote greater equality and participation, which i would be very frank in talking about. more -- nor do i think it appropriate to promote equality for restrictions, but i do think it is appropriate to promote it. when i shift to what should change, when you focus everything around citizens united, what you are focusing the discussion on is on what is present in the system. instead, i think professor lessig's remarks, and the campaign finance institute has talked about it in its research, they have focused on what is absent. you cannot have an effect on what is absent by restricting what is present. rather, you get that by focusing on matters that would build up rather than squeeze out. will that happen? will that approach be part of the public's action agenda? it has already become part of the conversation agenda, an important part of the public agenda. people who are identified with the reform community are very different from those six years ago. these will be talked about. talking is the prelude to action. do i think there will be action in the next two-four years? no. pass a bill at the federal, not directly, but these are at the state level. it is on the conversation agenda and the research agenda. is it appropriate to look at a possible use of tax money if the money is steered through donor actions? we could debate that. i would argue yes. there is no way that such an agenda can or would crowd out independent spending. that i do not think is an issue. that is the way i would frame the discussion. it is a conversation-changer as well as a conversation-starters. let me tell you what we will do for questions and answers. there are microphones. please wait for the microphones. announce yourself, direct your questions to one of the three speakers or all. where is the microphone now? we can start. the microphone is already situated in the middle ear. put your hand up if you would like the microphone. you may choose where you will go. we have some people to have not asked yet. we have one here, one there. >> my name is david. i could describe myself as a democratic political operative. i would like to direct my question to mr. samples and take issue with your contention that public financing is not popular. i would point to the voters in maine and arizona, the ballot of public financing laws. the people who do not like public financing are many incumbent politicians. i am from massachusetts. in 1996, people in massachusetts overwhelmingly approved public financing only to have the law repealed in the legislature. my question to you is, what is your basis for concluding that people do not want public financing? >> i agree with you about the incumbents. that is part of the problem. the problem to overcome if the work problem. seeing that incumbents are able to deal with it as they do, there is not an overwhelming urge for it. the reason is in my book that i wrote. i looked at polling going back to 1938. one thing i did notice is the general trend. while campaign finance reform generally gets a 60-40 majority from people, for a long time, with the exception of 1973-1979, you have anywhere from 65 to 60 against public financing. the campaign institute did extensive polling where they would talk about it. mike would say they probably got a different result. in general, i think that people do not see it that way. i think the incumbent resistance is not surprising, but, at the same time -- i would add one thing. the next 10 years, the discretionary spending at the federal level will come under heavy pressure, precisely because of the polling data. >> the question was also directed to professor lessig. >> one of the most troubling things about the polls, a confounding factor about americans, which is, there was a poll last summer that 80% of americans believe that every campaign finance change has been designed with the purpose of protecting incumbents. when you say congress has an idea and the idea is public financing, when the public says they do not like it, is that because of the attitude 80% of us have or is there something about the particular poll? i have seen scads of polling. depending on how things are framed, you can get the answer you want and i want, which is a very strong support for public funding. everybody knows this but nobody says it. why do we trust what the polls say? it is a terrible way of understanding what americans would agree about. if we had a deliberative poll, where people had the chance to understand the issues and were given the information, what would they say? i would bet one month's salary that people would say they supported change that would remove the corrupting influence inside politics. fortunately, nobody took me up on that bet. [laughter] >> this gentleman had a hand up for a while. >> thank you. you talked a bit about the papers. madison did not disclose he wrote them at that time. is that a bad idea? >> there are a couple of different forms of that. mandated disclosure, you would probably be anonymous. there is a proposal that instead of trying to have restrictions, you have forced anonymity of donors. my problem there is i think it is interesting, but i do not think you can sustain that kind of anonymity. a student of congress made this argument. i think that is probably correct. anonymous speech has its role to play. it is certainly true and it is primarily because of the chill. chilling disclosure can lead to anonymity. it is hard to measure that and see how that generally happens. comes from the situation itself. which is that, if you are giving money to get someone out of office, and if you are giving large sums of it, remember you are attacking or trying to get out of office, they may not seek retribution against you, but that does not mean you have to believe that going in. people might not fund kinds. it is also true there is a lot of funding where people find hundreds of millions of dollars. in those situations, i think anonymity is good. being anonymous and at the same time helping voters. a lot is about trying to control the other side's contributions. if you believe that, my proposal will not work. but i think my proposal for anonymous and yet informative disclosure beats all the problems we have talked about. >> start here and go back there. >> the world you have described where there are special interests that thrive on good luck and where we have the dependents who have created their own self perpetuating dependency, what do you see, assuming there is nothing on the horizon to change the course we are on, what you see that is down the road. what is the worst possible imaginable outcome you see? >> well, it is a very, very, very dark story. there is not a single important issue we face that we will get a sensible answer on, except for the ones that get exploded. for example, there might be something around guns that gets pushed because of the tragedy. the republican party might think it is about to be extinct if it does not deal with immigration. those issues get pushed in a political way to get resolved. inconsistent from the theory. but climate change, tax policy, a health care system that is actually efficient and rational, financial reform, none of these issues can be addressed in a rational and sensible way. i do not mean liberal only. i am talking about conservative issues, too. so my book is a dark story about this. i think we have to confront the fact that we have lost the capacity to govern in some important way. it is on top of a constitutional scheme that is already set up to facilitate a lot of checks on the government doing anything. separation of power is much harder to govern with already. lay this on top of it and you make it not governable. one small quibble with something john said. the dependency line i point to is dependency on the people alone. this is not because madison thought there was an interesting way people wanted. that is insanely difficult. what he is talking about is the dependency. the government is to avoid the wrong dependencies. we want an executive that cannot by congress, so we have all sorts of separation to make sure the right dependencies to congress exist. they were obsessed with dependency the way with jane austen was, and the dependency reduces the independent that is so important. the part that is optimistic and i want to emphasize this point, john and i have been on a number of channels. enormous respect. he is unique in recognizing the way the debate has moved. what michael has been doing for ever, and what some of us have been trying to insist on is the old debate. whether people were saying, stop talking, we want to silence you. that is not the debate today. it is about what the alternative ways of funding might reduce the kind of pressure we think exists in the system. systems are just another way of funding that makes it so the kind of dependency i am talking about is easier. >> i want to have a brief comment. we are supposed to fight. but this is a more positive comment. i remember sitting in a house administration committee and i was testifying about the act, which i had studied since 2005, and the way of larry had become involved. i came in at the end of the story. i would sit there and listen and think, wow, he has had a big effect on these people and it has been very positive because it has taken out most of the restrictions. he had brought something like, he would give people $1.50 million. i was thinking, this would never pass because the members do not want it and republicans will not be behind it. but i did think larry had a positive effect, definitely. we will fight later, if you want. >> one more. this gentleman's hand is up. >> i want to say i think the idea of not personally identifying disclosure does have interesting opportunities to solve some of the disclosure issues. getting back to the public financing issue, i agree it will not happen on the federal level. the state incubators, we could see proposals going on in the states. my question is what do you do about the issue of independent expenditures in a public financing environment? everybody agrees you cannot just than independent expenditures if in fact they are truly independent. what do you do about them in that kind of circumstance? and is there something on the regulatory basis to redefine independent expenditures in a way where they are more truly independent as opposed to link to the candidates speaking? >> who is this directed at? >> professor lessig, but to anyone who wants to tackle coronation. >> i think people have read too much into the court's decision. the reason i think that is related to the question roger asked in the first panel. people in this field i think the world of corruption as far as the court thinks about his distinguished between quid pro quo corruption and this equality corruption. in that world, there is no corruption. what i have tried to suggest, and there was a brief that pushed this idea, is that there is another conception of corruption that is much more attuned to what the framers cared about. this dependency corruption. while i do not think there is a constitutional way to stop the coke brothers from writing a check for $10 million and spending it on a particular ad, i do think it is moved too quickly in that independent cannot possibly be regulated under this conception of dependency corruption. the reason that is true is because a dependency corruption does not reverse citizens united. i agree with the results of citizens united. they should have upheld the right of the non-profit filmmaker to spend the money to promote their films. if the first amendment means anything, it has to mean that. that is a separate question of whether it extends to every kind of structure. the broader perspective of what corruption is not distinct conception of what corruption gives you for thinking about that. there is legislation that will specifically build on that. let me add one more footnote about your anonymous donation point. bruce sets out a voucher system and really sets out a scheme for facilitating anonymous donations. it is a really brilliant scheme. florida tried it for judges. judicial races, the only way to give money to the campaign was to do it anonymously. nobody gave any money. once it was anonymous, all contributions dried up. even though i agree with an analytic point, this does solve a problem, but we are still left with a problem. how do you fund a campaign? all you have is $300 million. >> a conversation with justice ruth bader ginsburg. later, from the us chamber of congress a4, -- a form on education. on c-span2, simpson and erskine bowles will discuss a federal budget, federal spending and the automatic cuts that will take place on march 1. then at 10:00, we will hear from former ambassador dickinson. last courage from the brookings institution also on c-span2. >>, minnesota and in china is communist in name only. -- communism in china is, less -- communism in china only. it is about preserving the powers party as it continues to grow. in north korea, it is about preserving the power of the military and the kim dynasty as you have there. it has nothing to do with what karl marx envisioned. they get you a book on how communism when it moved into asia diverged into something different in vietnam and other areas than the communism in europe. >> former washington post correspondent keith richburg on 34 years of reporting and insights from around the world. sunday at 8:00. >> now a conversation with ruth bader ginsburg. this is one hour and 10 minutes. >> can we all be seated? can we all be seated? we have an interesting question and answer session with three of our thomas jefferson school of law professors and students and justice ruth bader ginsburg of the united states supreme court. to maximize the question and answer time, i am going to minimize the introductions. if we do not know who ginsburg is now, i think we should not be in law school. ruth and i are very old friends. i have known her for 20 years. we met through a law program which she attended four times. i had the honor of getting to know her every time she came. it is not only an honor and privilege but a pleasure to be with such a wonderful, warm, intelligent, caring, and sensitive woman. it is wonderful. i now want to introduce rebecca lee, one of our professors. she is one of the interesting -- one of the interesting things about this panel is we are all connected to harvard. she has a degree in public policy from harvard kennedy school of government and a law degree and is very involved in law and ken vanderbilt -- we do not need any introduction for him. he is the reason i am here. he hired me. he was our former dean. he is a brilliant scholar of harvard law school. he now has a phd in history. he is a funny, wonderful, sensitive guy who is also a great teacher. jennifer i was reading her cd. i want to be her. i love this woman. she is a native texan and a graduate of the united states naval academy. she has not stopped helping people all of her life. she is an exceptional cross- country missionary. it goes on and on. this is a person who if you are in trouble, you want her on your team. i want to be her when i grow up. but we are going to do for the session is have rebecca lee start with her questions and then ken vanderbilt the second in china for the third. we will proceed in that auto -- order until all 15 questions are answered. ruth bader ginsburg will come to the podium to answer the questions. we will have this dialogue. >> i learned that your dean was the honesty. i would like to begin by quoting a line from a famous translation of the odyssey. this is the story of a man never at a loss. when i met 20 years ago a woman who is never at a loss. that is susan. whatever the job is, give it to susan. she will do it. we will begin with the first question. >> it is such an honor and pleasure to be here with justice ginsburg. i think that justice for her service as well as for spending some time with us and for her willingness to answer our questions. justice ginsburg, you are in your 20th year on the supreme court. after having served 13 years on the dc circuit. you had an equally important career as a lawyer before becoming a judge. you wait a cofounder of the woman's right project at the aclu where you were general counsel and in that role, you litigated many important sex discrimination cases including six arguments in the supreme court of which you 15. as a law professor at columbia, you were the first tenured woman at the law school. you have been a leader throughout your career. do judges see themselves as leaders in some sense based on your observations? if yes, in what ways? if not, why? >> judges are reactive institutions. we do not have an agenda. we do not create the problems that come to us. there was a great judge that said, judges are like firefighters. they do not make the situation but they do their best to put them out. being on a court with a wide array of views -- i cannot project my views. i cannot try to be queen because if i acted that way i would not be affected. you have to be able to work together with the team, have respect for your fellow members, be sensitive to their concerns, so there is a going toward the middle and a way from the extremes. well that is just? -- will that adjust? >> we will try to adjust that. >> what we can do is win a case comes to us, one can try to teach the audience. i spoke about the lilly ledbetter case. that was one where i could to create a better understanding of what lily ledbetter's problem was. i hope that answers your question in part. >> thank you. >> at me start off by thanking you for your appearance here today. welcome back to thomas jefferson school of law. it is great to see you. we are honored to have you. in keeping with the fame of the conference, i will like to start with a two-part question. the first part is this -- what qualities do you think a president should seek in a supreme court justice, particularly in our history? secondly, what do you think of the practice that has been prevalent in recent years of appointing easily comfortable justices without a track record that may invite controversy? >> someone who thrives in the study of the law, someone who is able to read and inform quickly mass amounts of material. someone who likes the life of thinking. speaking, writing. i think those are the qualities the president should seek. it is the best and hardest job i have ever had. the one thing that as i grow old, it is not as easy for me to do. i could extend my hours. they could last until i was finished. now, i have to let loose every now and then and sleep, as i did before. [laughter]i slept through three alarms. someone had to wake me up. the second part of your question -- [no audio]-- >> about appointing an easley appointed. >> my most recent colleagues or not that easily confirmed. they should have been. i hope for the day when we will get back to where the system was when i was dominated under stephen breyer. i was nominated in 1993, justice breyer in 1994. there was a bipartisan spirit prevailing in our congress. i was confirmed 96-3. i wonder if the president would even nominate me because of my long affiliation with the american civil liberties union. in 1993, not one question was asked about my aclu connection and among the people who voted for me was strom thurmond, who had opposed my nomination in 1980 two the d.c. circuit but was in my corner or the supreme court nomination. i hope people will see that the way we are headed now is wrong. we should reverse it and go back to the way it was when it was bipartisan support for the president's nominees. >> thank you for being here. someday when i grow up, i would like to be like you. [laughter]when you are a law school sitting in my shoes, did you expect to see a time when women would be appointed to the supreme court? would you think you would be one of them? >> in the ancient days, women were three percent of lawyers in this country. on the bench, they were barely there. the first woman appointed to a federal apple a court -- appellate court was appointed by franklin delano roosevelt. she served on the sixth circuit. when she retired there were none until president johnson appointed shirley hostettler. she became the first secretary of education. then there were none again. there was a president who changed the way things were. he deserves credit for that and that is president jimmy carter. he never had a supreme court nomination to make, but he literally changed the complexion of the us judiciary. he looked around at the judges and said they all look like me. [laughter]that is not the great usa. i am going to look for judicial appointees in places where no one looked before. i am going to appoint members of minority groups and women in numbers. president carter did that on the whole. the american bar association ranked his appointees high year ranked his appointees high year than his predecessor
the beginning, from 2006 when the national archives hired me to do this, i was very straightforward about what i was going to do. so there is no debate in switching. the archives came to me. but it was a very interesting conflict of different events because the head of the nixon foundation at that point was john taylor, rev. john taylor. and john taylor is an intellectual. he is very complicated. he is a bit torn about nixon. and he admired nixon's mind. and he wanted nixon's library to be credible. now, i don't believe that every member of the nixon foundation shared john's intellectual goal. he really wanted the cold war historian. he knew who i was because i had worked on the project with pda. i just let the materials speak for themselves. i write books, but on different subjects. john taylor wanted me, too. he was hired by then-president george w. bush. my first book is about the cuban missile crisis. both of them wanted me. they came to me. i did not apply for the job. from the beginning, i said, look, i am a historian. we have to have a place where history is so comfortable. i am not a member of the republican party. i am not partisan crowd i am now going to become a member of the republican party. and that is aside from the fact that i was gay. i told them come if you want this, this is what you will get. i was very straightforward. i spoke with julie nixon eisenhower and tricia nixon carps. i told them, i'm going to create space where there will be a debate about your father, but i promise to be respectful and it will be intellectual and your father was an intellectual. and that is what i promised. the fact that the foundation later would make a big deal out of this was politics. because they knew what they're getting from the beginning. and it becomes politics -- i will tell you what happened. the foundation paid lip service. john was a complicated figure, but most of the members paid lip service. they thought that washington would bring me in. the work -- would reign me in. they assumed, regardless of my big talking or whatever i believe, that ultimately they would reign me in. albert weinstein was very nervous about having a nixon library that would be viewed like a cover-up. and john taylor says he wanted me just as much as alan one stop. -- alan weinstock. they both came to me in 2006 and said, would you do this? >> where were you then? >> i was in the university of virginia. i was doing some teaching. i had worked on the nixon tapes a little bit appeared mostly on the kennedy and johnson takes. i knew what nixon sat on the tapes. i recognize the problem with the federal government. how does the federal government paper over some one who makes racist and anti-semitic comments on tape that can be played over and over again? the answers you don't paper it over. that means that the library cannot be a legacy factor. >> we can at least read the transcripts. >> this is the achievement of part of the nixon project. before there was a library, there was a group of very dedicated archivist's working for the national archives. there was a legal professor who pushed hard for this period of the first opening was at the end of the 1990's. so there's a lot of very bad material that was available. >> have all of that been transcribed? >> know, that takes forever. very little is transcribed. even that is only about 15% of the abuse of power takes. long story short, here's the problem for the federal government. we have a habit in this country coming if i may say this now, of glossing over presidents. we have decided that they all have to be treated as if they are symbols of the country. what that means is that you have a smoothing over of the rough edges. and there is a feeling among modern presidents the they have a right to a certain veneration and it will be located in that presidential library. and even if they're gone, their children in some cases and former allies, other lieutenants who live longer than presidents because they're younger, they continue this. in fact, in many ways, they are even more ferocious to preserve this legacy, because the old man is gone and want to show their loyalty. this is difficult when you have a flawed president. >> you had some controversy over watergate. >> yes. >> have you been to the clinton library? >> i was going to ask you how they dealt with all the problems he had with impeachment and if they had been fair. >> i was told that he was really impressed with the watergate exhibit. i was told that would inspire him to do some -- to make some changes to the museum. one of the things that allen weinstein was hoping was that the nixon library to be a new start. some of the libraries are much too much like shrines. this is public money. you don't get to take off on your tax return with your money goes to a public entity or a public library. it goes to every library. >> george w. bush's library opened in the early part of 2013. how much of the building was paid for by the federal government? >> the building is pay full -- is before by his private foundation. the deal is that they build the building and they have to meet national archives specifications, federal government specification. >> only certain amount of feet? >> i would like to be a debate. i think americans up to decide what they want occurred but i don't think they know they have a choice. right now, congress is reducing the amount of money that is going to these libraries. the result is that the libraries will be more and more like shrines did you ask the private ally of a president to cough up a lot of money, what do they want in return? of course, they expect a certain slant. not only will you build a building, but they will create an endowment to pay for them build in -- the building in perpetuity. so these buildings are more and more pay for with private funds. she billed the building. the federal government gets the keys, the handover the day they open the building. the the government is there, but the federal government is the pauper. it is an amazing thing. you have directors took no money. the money they have is to pay for salaries and it is delightful. >> but the nixon library started the family. >> the nixon library is the only one started this way. it started as a private facility. that was because of watergate. gerald ford signed a law in 1974 called the presidential recording of materials preservation act. i was the only director whose work was governed by a single law. there are differing laws that govern the libraries that print only the nixon materials. by law, richard nixon's materials could not leave 20 miles outside of the district of columbia because it was felt that richard nixon was not a trustworthy conservator of his material. so they couldn't have a library. by law, he couldn't have a live repaired and that is because richard nixon had cut a deal and congress found out about it. he cut a deal with one of his appointees who was the head of the gao. i'm sorry, the gsa. it is the government services administration appeared at those -- in those days, they ran the national archives. the deal was that richard nixon would have the tapes in five years and could destroy whatever he wanted. whatever was not presented for truck, he could destroy and he could have his papers and destroy them appeared richard nixon cut this deal before he left the white house. congress found out about it, went crazy and seized his materials. that meant that the nixon materials were like a crime scene. i am telling you, running the nixon library is one of the most phenomenal experiences one could have. because what happened was nixon overplayed his hand and the government responded in a very tough way. so everything was scooped up, absolutely everything, including separate -- super 8s. those were films back then. it was on government time. people used to take their super eight cameras, and videotaped their birthday parties, their kids' birthday parties. and then they would use the white house labs to develop them. so they had these birthday party reels in their offices and they were all seized. everything was seized, unless somebody destroyed something. the federal government, if they were not that heavy handed, they would give them back. my point simply is that nixes materials were handled differently. now his family and his friends felt he deserved a place of reflection and ultimately a place where he and pat nixon were buried. so they opened a library with no papers. i described it to folks at the roger nixon library. >> were his vice-presidential papers there? >> there were not because he deeded them to the federal government. all he had were his pre- presidential papers, not including the vice presidential papers, and his post- presidential papers i was not around at that time, but the family decided this isn't right. our father wanted a library like every other president. and they lobby congress in the first bush term to change that law so that the materials could be sent to california. but the tradition was that they would have to be sent to a national archive facility i was the director. i oversaw the move. >> and now john taylor, an episcopal priest, was running the nixon library before the federal government took over. >> yes. and he desperately wanted an expert to have impaired my sense is that not everybody in the foundation wanted it to happen -- to have it. my sense is that not everyone in the foundation wanted it to happen. we didn't do it in person. we did it by letter. but bruce herschensohn who ran for senate in california was a nixon speechwriter. i think he was also a speechwriter for ronald reagan. he was also in the u.s. ia, the united states information agency, and he wrote the screenplay for the memorial film about jfk, the man who fought a lot about american history. he disagreed with my approach from the get go. well before the controversies of bringing in john d.. he said every president has a right to a watering hole. there are all those who admires him who can go and speak and not have to worry about the judgment of history. i believe that's true if it is a private facility. but the minute you make it public, i think it can't be published--- cannot be governed by those rules. again, i don't think the public recognizes that it has a choice. if you go to the different presidential libraries, you'll find this among them are shrines and others are places of serious discussion. the harry truman, for example, is a place of serious discussion. the johnson library is redoing its museum. i haven't seen it yet, but i suspect it will be a place for serious discussion. and there are others that are not. i think the public needs to figure out what they want. " your office is and what -- >> your office is in what relationship to the foundation? >> i chemical war historian. i had this discussion. when john taylor was encouraging me to take the job, i said, john, one of the conditions i have was that i would like to run all public programming in the building because i don't want to run berlin. i had steadied divided berlin. i don't want to do that. it would be terrible. but in the end, that is what we got, berlin. my office is one area. the foundation is looking very far from us. relations get very tense and cool. as i said, the shutdown of funding for the library. >> are they required to fund anything? >> i am not a lawyer, but let me put it this way. in the transfer agreement, one of their objectives is supposed to be assisting the library, but there's no set amount that they're supposed to provide a will tell you, when i started, they promised a two hundred $50,000 a year for public programming. that never happened. it a very tense. >> one is -- when was it the most tense and why? >> it didn't take that long. a lot of the fights were actually over little things. they were supposed to setup assistance. when you are a federal museum, you're supposed to maintain certain levels of humidity and temperature control. with the had purchased for the museum was not good enough. they knew they were supposed to fix that. they wouldn't. they were using the deadline and they were trying to use that against us so that we would pay for it. and i did not want the american people to pay for something that they were supposed to pay for. so that was tense. i remember an argument because they turned to me and said, you are supposed to be on our side. why are you on washington's side? because the taxpayer should not be paying for this. so we had fights over logistical issues. but the intellectual fight started when i invited elizabeth drew in 2007. she is a longtime journalist, observer of the nixon scene, wrote a small biography of richard nixon, a study of his presidency for the american presence series. >> she would not have been a supporter of his. >> but she is a serious person. i made it clear -- look, i have already overseen events with al haig, a number of events. the nixon foundation let me come even though i was not yet fully director, i moderated a lot of events. i worked with them on who we would invite good all i said is i want balance. just give me balance. i would be happy to have people who revere richard nixon, but also have people raise questions. otherwise, this is not a national facility. it is an extension of the white house. i invited elizabeth drew. at that point, they said, that's it. and they shut down funding. we had already set up a whole bunch of events for six months. we plan six months ahead. they stopped funding that. in terms of the role history project, there were a number people on the list and said, okay, we promised we would fund the interview with senator dole. afterwards, no more. so the funding for the world history is stopped. it stopped when i invited elizabeth drew. they assumed that washington would still -- that washington would stop me. they felt that they could put pressure on washington. what they did not understand is that, by saving money so i can run this on my own if they tried to interfere. >> but before they became part of the padilla government, they could decide all of those things. -- part of the federal government, they could decide all of those things. >> of course. we give them six months -- elizabeth drew with june 2007. i was at the facility starting in october 2006. i was meeting with them all the time. i said over and over again, we have to have balance here. please -- not pleased because it was my decision but i was preparing them for that. >> what would you want to put yourself through this? >> -- why would you want to put yourself through this? >> i had just become a u.s. citizen. i cared deeply about history. my dad died pretty young. when i became a u.s. citizen, alan escorted my mom to the funeral. >> are you from quebec? >> from west field. and i knew a lot about the fights over the knicks and materials. -- over the nixon materials. there was supposed to be a watergate conference where the nixon foundation was supposed to be receiving things. maybe it is just too much self- confidence, but since both sides wanted me, i thought i had a unique opportunity and i care deeply about this. >> the oral [indiscernible] >> part of my job was overseeing the release of the white house tapes. so i thought i had a remarkable opportunity to do some good as an american citizen. so it was a great challenge. >> let me say what they would say -- my guess -- i can put -- i cannot put words in their mouths. i have talked with some of them before. the would say we didn't want that nixon-hating liberals canadian gays in here that they hired to run the show. >> this is the problem appeared they were convinced -- this is the problem. they were convinced that washington would either restrain your fire me. and washington would do it. >> meeting allen weinstein. >> and his replacement, the acting director. we were supposed to do -- can you believe this? i managed to recapture -- even after elizabeth drew, a year later, we tried to do some -- we try to find some public programs, some exhibits -- we have a temporary exhibits gallery. you don't just have a permanent gallery. i thought what can i do with them? i believe that you find mutual interest. so i can look with some ideas. for example, let's do something on the moon landing. president nixon was president for all of the apollo moon landings. isn't that a non-partisan wonderful thing to do? 1969, 2009 -- let's do that together. i wanted to do -- and the council funding because they were so angry about john been. >> explain that. -- john dean. >> expo in that. >> i invited john dean to speak of the library about his books. i told the nixon foundation in advance. i said, i'm going to have john been here -- john dean here. i think it would be a good thing for us to work on this together. but they split on it. the acting executive director for the foundation, kathy o'connor, who worked recklessly with me and i got along very well with her in 2009, she said, i am understand why you're doing this. john taylor had already left on his blog and publicly supported when i was doing. he recognized that i meant what i said and i said what i meant and lead this -- that my agenda was what i said it was. and he supported me. but the foundation at that point was shifting and christening and they were very unhappy. lemme -- let me read this to you. >> ron walker called john dean a rat. what do you say to that? do you have the sense that there were just throwing this in their face further calling john dean? >> i had said from the beginning that this would not be a credible institution -- which was one of their objectives -- until john dean and other spheres critics of the president in that era came. i made it clear. they could have so easily turned this into a success for themselves. what if they had done nothing rather than go public about it? they sent a letter to every former president -- i mean, i think it may surprise some of the viewers. i have never met president clinton. well, i shook his hand, but i did not meet him really. president clinton said who is this tim naftali. they sent a letter to all of the former presidents complain about my decision to invite john dean, saying that i had somehow violated the basic spirit of the provincial library by doing this. they are the ones who made it to grow case out of it and i think it was a big mistake on their -- made a federal case out of it, and i think it was a big mistake on their part. what would it have hurt them to make this non-partisan ground? he was our guest, not theirs. have him come in. let it happen. not make something out of it. and then just test whether i was a man of my word. how was i going to use -- they were always concerned about how will this be used to hurt richard nixon. but they didn't. they made a big fuss about it. they made more out of it than they had to. >> did you fill the auditorium? >> yes. we had an overflow. and they learn from that. because when i invited george mcgovern -- by the way, we had celebrated visitor. when george mcgovern came, they recognize the mistake they had made. then we had a joint event. the nixon foundation and the national archives, the nixon library, we had 506 hundred people. the nixon foundation let us use the facility for that. >> i don't want to put words in your mouth, but isn't this a dysfunctional system where you have these libraries and these museums and then you have the foundation and the federal government? the foundation has to raise money for people loved the president. >> you are not putting words in my mouth. it is a dysfunctional system. and that is why i want the public to know what they're getting. there are a lot of great people working in the system. i ed maier most of my colleagues, fellow directors. most of them are -- i admire most of my colleagues, fellow directors. most of them are trying to do what i am trying to do. but most of them did not have the unique circumstances that gave me the independence that i have. i told my mother. i told my friends. i told the people i had in the beginning that i would not stay very long. i had a kennedy book to finish. i have a career as a writer to continue. i have other things i want to do with my life. i want to do some public service. i expected to be in and out of there in three years. i promised that i would move the materials. i promised that i would hire the staff. i promised that i would have the first legitimate academic conference there. it took five years to do it when i finish what was on my list, i left. i think that my job was to be a catalyst. i believe, from this experience that, if you want to change things in government, you have to be prepared to stay for short periods. you cannot stay for long because then you begin to compromise. but if you want to be a catalyst, go win, do the job and leave. i looked at with james polk did. he decided one term would do what he wanted to do. i am not saying i and james polk, but i had this mindset and i did what i needed to do and i would leave. that give me a lot of support. i knew in my soul i was not staying long. i just felt i had an obligation to finish what i started. the oral history program is a not unexpected joy. i had that in mind when i started. -- is an unexpected joy. i had that in mind when i started. >> i want to go back to the oral history program in a moment. but i heard somewhere that the replica of the eastern in the white house is built on the campus of the nixon library -- the east room in the white house is built on the campus of the nixon library and run by the foundation. they built it. >> this is true of all the modern libraries. there is a map. i believe it is public information or it should be anyway. there is the foundation space and the national archives space. it is so complicated because -- i can give you an illustration. the reagan library has political speeches in the area around your force one. the audience may have seen presidential campaigns and you might ask yourself how can you have a republican debate in a federal building? you cannot. the air force one pavilion is run by the reagan foundation. it is not federal space. and the clinton library, i believe that the clinton foundation controls part of it. there are some libraries that are totally federal. they are owned completely by the federal government. but the new ones, and the nixon library because it joined the system as one of the new ones, there is a tree between the foundation and the federal government. there is a demarcation mark. in the nixon more--- in the nixon library, you can see the mark. the foundation did not like the map that i selected. they did not like the logo i had selected. so when you go into the library, you have the national archives logo. and they have mats in front of the doors for the foundation and different colored ones for the national archives. that's why i say that i was running west berlin. it is working this way because congress and i guess the executive branch decided that there is only so much the federal government should spend money on. look, i am not a big government person. i am progressive, but mainly on social issues. let me tell you what i want people to think about. do you want your children, because i care most about the high schools and the elementary school kids to come through these libraries -- how much do you want them to learn history as opposed to cant, to spin that white house as produce. if you don't congress appropriates funds for public programming in these libraries, then they will tend to be shrines. there will be people who will fight that. i did and some of my colleagues do. we fight and we don't have a lot of tools and our disposal and we do not have money to do it, but why make it so hard? >> how much federal money would go into the nixon library every year? >> the budget was roughly -- the library has some staff here to this day in washington. the tapes are done here. at college park. so there are two different budgets. that is to run the building and salary and equipment. there is not a cent for public programming. so if i were to go to an organization and ask money from them and then say but leave intellectual content to me, i recognize that this is a problem. in the end, it proved impossible because they wanted to place such limits on freedom of speech in our programs that i couldn't except it. >> robert curls books were not welcome in the johnson library for years -- robert carroll's books were not welcome in the johnson library for years. >> and then they turned around. i can tell you the that was a great achievement for the system. i participated in the jfk library on a discussion of the bay of pigs. they didn't do that until a few years ago. the oral history, 149 interviews, when you think back on those interviews, 300 hours, what are the highlights for you? where did you sit there and go, i did not know this? >> the delight achievement and everywhere he talks about president -- the dwight shafeman interview. robert bork's recollection of tension in the white house and in the justice department. he is a good storyteller. listen to lyn harmen. he was a partner in nixon's law firm. he is still with us. i interviewed him twice for the library. he knew nixon through the wilderness period. he knew john mitchell. john mitchell would become attorney general of the united states, would lead the -- would leave that post to run nixon's campaign and would end up in jail. to listen to him talk about richard nixon, the late-night calls -- nixon was an insomniac, i guess -- so he would call people like garmin just to talk, just to wind down. nixon would fall asleep and he would drop the phone. so the person on the other end of the phone would hear it thud against the ground. but to hear that on tapes -- his description of nixon talking to loretta scott king after the assassination of martin luther king. he decided he should speak with king's widow, but he does not call her when her husband was in jail in birmingham. to listen to fred malek talk about why he made the order to make a list of jews. >> who didn't give you good answers? that's not fair. who didn't give you what you thought was not honest answers? >> first of all, i want to make it clear, even though i am free to say whatever i want and i am free to say what ever want, it is very hard for me to know for sure who is telling the truth or not. so it is a feeling. i have done enough of these interviews. my feeling is that chuck colson was not being straightforward with me. the evidence was overwhelming evidence that linked him to certain things that even the washington -- that even the watergate special prosecutors could not make sense of. >> what was his job? >> he was special counsel to the president. he was basically the president's boyd for political activities and special things -- president boy for political activities and special things. >> he wanted me to fire all the people in the labor statistics. i called george. i said, he wants to fire the head of the bureau of labor statistics. he says they're all against him. he says, don't do anything until i come back. he flew back and dealt directly with the president. there were many times that i didn't do what he said. there were on awful lot of things that he would ask you that you knew that you couldn't do and shouldn't do. >> the interview with george shultz was very powerful. it is only an hour. he only had time for an interview of an hour. he is still reasonably fit. in a few days, he will be 92. that was a moving interview. the interview with robert stockists, the student at the time who met nixon. the student. talking with the special prosecutors, jill [indiscernible] her story is remarkable. i was just about to leave, the summer 2011, and by closest friends knew that i was about to announce -- the watergate exhibit opened in 2011. it was time for me to go. so i was wrapping things up in my mind. and some veterans of the watergate at the house judiciary committee called me and said we would like to interview us. john door had given permission, when he was still alive, but would not be interviewed for the project. he does not do interviews, apparently. he had already started to show these on c-span. they saw them. they wanted this done and they felt that their story should be preserved, too. i had the fbi, the head of the fbi investigation. i did 18 of those interviews before i left. in the last few weeks working for the federal government. i realized this was a once-in- a-lifetime opportunity. and there was a cumulative effect. i was a much better interviewer at the end of this process than in the beginning because i could make connections in my own mind because i had sat through so many of these. for people interested in how this country dealt with impeachment for the first time in the modern era, these interviews are rather interesting. of course, these people would later be involved in the clinton impeachment issue, although on the different side, and they talk about that. so you have an opportunity in listening to people like evan davis and bernie nussbaum. you can hear them talk about two impeachment's in different stages of their lives. i felt so grateful that they had called and that i was around to do that. i did shivers because you can sit there and be transported not simply to 1974, but to 1998 and 1999. and you learn something about our country because people who do public service do it for a long time and they cover many administrations. and they carry both institutional memory and baggage from one era to another. as these folks talk about impeachment, you can see both institutional memory and baggage played out before your eyes. i felt privileged to be an eye witness to those. >> here is another robert bork tape. what is the smoking gun? >> this is important. ok, president nixon i believe understood that the tapes would be his undoing -- i would say unraveling, but that is a bad pun. so he fought tooth and nail to prevent the tapes from being released. this goes to the supreme court. the case is u.s. v nixon. it is decided in august of 1974. he must turn over the tapes. the executive powers and privilege to not cover a criminal trial. as a result, the president gives the special prosecutor a set of tapes that leon dorsey who had been the special prosecutor. before giving them, president nixon ordered transcripts be made before they are turned over and he knows which ones are problematic. so he gets that transcript and he shows them to people. there is an interview that we did with trent lott, then member of congress from mississippi, famous senator, majority leader, i think. he gets a bootleg copy, if you will. but the tape is not released, only the transcript. in the transcript, you can read the president ordering the cia to disrupt an fbi investigation and to lie to the fbi, that the fbi should not look into the sources of funding that was later used by the watergate burglars for national security reasons. don't look into it because it would open a cia operation. it is not true, but the president wanted to use the cia to protect a political shenanigan, a political crime, and use the national security exemption as a cover-up. >> your interview was done in 2008. robert bork was still alive. here he is talking about the smoking gun tape. >> what was your reaction when you heard of the smoking gun tape? >> dismay, but not surprised. >> could you develop that a little? >> i was sorry to see the last nail hammered into the coffin. but i was not so terribly surprised there was a smoking gun. george called me and said, look, we're going into court in about five minutes. i want to tell you that there is an 18 and 1/2 minute gap in the tape. that surprised me and dismayed me. you cannot show up with an 18 1/2 minute gap. that would suspect something. >> how would that affect being on the supreme court? >> i don't remember. i am quite sure -- i haven't looked at that whole interview -- i guess it has been four years since i did it. we talked about the consequences of it. i suspect it is there, but i don't swear to it because i'm not sure. what i did in these interviews -- there is sort of a standard approach. i started well before the nixon period because i wanted to situate them in time and space. a number of them were world war ii veterans. i felt that it would be wonderful to have some vets recollections. i brought them through the nixon period and always would afterwards. i wouldn't be surprised if we talked about afterwards. i know he felt that he was -- he suffered for what he did. the treatment of him later on was the product of the decisions he made in 1970. >> when your time at the library was up and when your time and doing all of these interviews were up, how did you change your mind? >> welle -- >> about richard nixon. >> my mind changed in a strong wave. -- in a strong way. i didn't like richard nixon when i started. but i don't think you have to like the president to respect them. i am among those who feel -- i am not among those who feel that the president has to be a nice person. i am interested in a president who leads and whose administration does good things for the country, including defending american liberties. but i didn't like compared i couldn't possibly like him because i had heard him on the tapes at the miller center. and by the way, the people who were hiring me knew my background. anybody who's job it was to familiarize themselves with presidential tapes would know very well richard nixon's comments. because a lot of those things that come out. over the time i was there, we've been least another 630 hours of the tapes because there were still takes to be released and there are still more to be released. i'm sorry, i couldn't like a man who said things like that about other people. and it's not just once. it is repeated and it is clear that it was a mindset. but that is irrelevant, whether you like somebody. it is whether you respect them. i have to tell you that my respect for our richard nixon plummeted -- for richard nixon plummeted as i got to know more about him, as i oversaw the archives, and come in the 1990's, the national archives, under a lot of pressure from the nixon foundation, withheld some materials which i had a need to know about because i was working on the watergate exhibit. i went into the vaults. these are not classified materials. there were closed for other reasons. i went through the materials. i said why these closed? we put them on the web site, the key ones, about watergate. they shouldn't have been withheld. and it was not the fault of the archives working the nixon project. they were under enormous political pressure. it is a very sad story. there are some very be heroes in the late 1980's and 1990's. anyway, that material, coupled with what i learned from the oral histories and the tapes that we released left me for the dismayed. a lot of what the good that the nixon administration did on domestic policy is the achievement of a lot of good government republicans who worked for him. there are some real heroes that i did not know about who my greatly admire and even went on to work in the george herbert walker bush administration. those are the people who deserve credit. on the tape, richard nixon often wants to dismantle these things. he is embarrassed that he is involved. if he had had a second term, some of the things that he is now credited with, some of the environmental policies, he would dismantle them. in terms of his approach to government, i believe that you should never use government to hurt people. and he sought to use government to actually hurt people. the fact that he did not do more of it is because a real heroes within the administration stopped him. and these are self-serving people who said this on tape for their own legacy. but this is what the documents and the white house tapes show. i must say that my opinion of richard nixon dropped dramatically. i think the country was very fortunate that things didn't turn out worse because they could have turned out much worse. >> are there people who think richard nixon got a raw deal? >> allot. -- a lot. most of the volunteers feel that way. i wasn't planning to change their minds. i wanted to open their minds to the possibility that the critics of richard nixon might not just be partisan attacks. and i hope -- partisan hacks. and i hope that the oral history explains that there is a line you have to draw and the president shouldn't cross it. and on occasion, richard nixon crossed it. i know i am naive, but you cannot be a teacher if you're not an idealist in some way. it didn't work. and there are people in and around the library who believe that he got a raw deal. i remember summit coming up to me when we had one of our tapes openings who was a volunteer at the library say to me, we understand that you can create the states and washington and the you are actually able to manipulate them to make richard nixon sound worse. is that true? they thought i could somehow create richard nixon's anti- semitic comments. they did not want to believe that that was the historical record. oh, no, it is remarkable. i would say i learned so much about the -- about how hard it is to persuade people to have an open mind. and how partisan some people can be. nixon's story is a great story. if you're looking for a great republican story, this is a great story. it is not richard nixon. it is schultz and paul o'neill. you don't have to be partisan about this. but if your goal is to defend richard nixon, then misinformation is troubling. and i found people whose solitary objective was to disprove any critic of richard nixon because they needed him to be the saint who was wronged. >> tim naftali, former director of the nixon library. thank you so much. >> for a dvd copy of this program call 1-877-662-776. for free transcript or to give us your comments, visit us at qanda.org. >> the communism of china that is basically communism enabled me these days. it does preserve the power of the members of the communist power -- city but they threw it aside when he opened the country of and now has become -- now has become a capitalist haven. they talk a great we about to this, but it is all about preserving the party's power economically as the country continues to grow, because they threw aside most aspects of communism to a great time ago. north korea is all about preserving the power of the military and the kim dynasty. again, it really has nothing to do with what karl marx it visited as communism way back. someone could do a fascinating book about how and a move to agent it diverged. it is an absolutely fascinating split that occurred. >> harvard fellow keith richard burke of 34 years of reporting and insights from around the world. next sunday at 8:00 on c-span q&a. >> next, your calls and comments. live at 2:00, c-span begins its new series. first ladies, influence and image with a discussion about the influence of women who served as the first lady. >> what worries me is i do not want to be sitting in the same place i was a couple of years ago going to the government to say can we have more spectrum, please. i would like to see spectrum management that is much more market-driven so that things like incentive options will continue to work. the commission gives more flexibility. the secondary market works it a little bit of a smoother way that it does now. >> you look at the growth rate in data usage from cable data services. anywhere from 30-40% rate on an annual basis. there is an insatiable hunger for capacity. there is a long future to be able to be the provider of choice for the services. >> or from the consumer electronics show with the future of cable, specter views, and research and development tonight at 8:00 eastern on c-span to. take of the sporting -- >> this take of the sporting -- >> this morning, dougl
presidential policy. so, is america now ready for u.s. president who say woman? >> we'll ask the author of the widely read and intriguing book, about the wives of american presidents, all of them titled rating the first lady's. john benjamin roberts th second. one-on-one is brought to you isy month. why don't we have a woman president in the unite states? why haven't we had one? >> i think the answer to that is simply that american women may not be ready for it. a majority of the voters ar fee may president we would probably have one. i'm being a little bit flip. the thuth is we are not a and women have not really focused on politics unti the last couple of decades so we haven't developed a team that can move up to theprey >> what do you make of the women occupy seats in the united states congress? compared to the rest of the pretty much near the bottom. something like number 6 around the world in terms of that women are not terribly for office when that changes, we'l >> you written a fascinating book here and it's hard to >> thank you >> i managed to put it down. because i wanted to take some notes. your central proposition o the book is that a lot of americans, perhaps most americans, by far most, regard first ladies as kind of glitzy devoted to charitable undertakings. involved in soft power issues like literacy. that they really are cunning. they are really cunning cats, so to speak. and they are knowledgeable about their husband's they are tactically proficient. executive -- defacto executive power. is that trueal power >> i think the stereotype of out to debunk, the idea that house hostess. she sets fashion trends, she arrangements at stat she decides how to decorat the white house, what china to choose. stereotype that in looking at the historical research doesn't hold up. going back to the very first, first lady, martha washing tong and the second were involved in cabinet decisions, involved in campaigning. these women were political what i found in my book i that was pretty much true exceptions throughou history. >> who held executive power. >> i certainly edith wilson woodrow wilson was laid up with what was probably a country. walked into him where he was with him and would come out with documents or instructions she said were from him and tell the cabinet what to do. wisdoms. for example the league o nations. >> one of his most important priorities after world war one was to get the league of nations established so there would never again be a global conflict. unfortunately he botched the politics of it the speaker of the senat came to -- the senate majority leader came to hi and told him he needed to compromise with the republican isolationists i he wanted to get the leagu of nations treaty ratified. wilson didn't want to compromise but edith wilso did and she told him, yo need to do this if you want to get this treaty approved. unfortunately for him he didn't listen to her advic and the treaty failed t pass the senate. so his most important domestic priority international priority in the second term was lost. >> which one of the first ladies shared the power of the presidency so there was a distribution and a defacto sense of the power a copresident?e quite a few. the earliest one was sarah poke. sarah poke was james polk' wife he was a one term president. he deliberately intended t run for only one term in the 1840s. it was the period of manifest destiny whe werst. during the poke presidency and sarah poke was his political partner. they had a very unusual prenuptual agreement when he fro posed marriag she told him that she would agree to marry him if heale and you are not let their honeymoon interfere with his campaigning. she helped him write rallies. she was a partner all the way through. >> you instruct thursday rating of the first performance? >> it's an interesting pole. the sienna college has a research institute, wife of the one of the professors there came up with the idea of rating fir ladies. the research institute done ratings of presidents for number of years now and first ladies too. so they -- the professor there came up with a system, that range from a first ladies intellect and contribution to the nation, education, impact on of criteria are used t evaluate the first lady. >> including influence on >> yes. and being a woman in her own write. >> 37 first ladies and the number of presidents. why is that? >> there have been deaths i >> who remarried? >> a number of them remarried. grover cleveland remarried in office. >> was that the 21-year-old? >> yes, for instancis cleveland. >> howeled was he? >> he was around 50 at the time. >> was that a successfu marriage? it stunned the nation. it was a absolutely spectacular secret marriag house. he courted her. she was the daughter of -- >> what do you mean by ward? >> he was her legal guardia from the time that she was she was the daughter of a law partner of his and whe the man died he ended up adopting her as it was >> yes president at the time. she grew up and he did. but he carried out the romance secretly >> was she a loving wife? >> they were in love all th way through to his death >> he eventually died of -- was he ill during the presidency >> he was. hoo he had cancer and had to have part of his jaw removed. >> how was that undertaken? made for him to go to was set up on a yacht of a friend and he was secretl taken to this yacht. the public was never informed he had cancer or the operation had happene engineer all that? >> she did. conceal it >> was he disfigured? >> no. prosthetic jaw that functioned perfectly well. >> not bad in those days. >> pretty extraordinari considering this is 1899. >> how is it that 37 place back edition of the book. by mary links on she was quite corrupt was she not? >> she was a piece of work she was extremely corrupt >> in what respect? >> money >> she was a spendaholic. the same way that amelda markose bought shoes, marry lincoln would by clothes, in one period about 3 months of glorfs. spending and in great debt as a result of that. >> was she suffering from any neurological disorde psychotic condition? >> delusionons of grandier. she believed she was destined to marry a she had two suitors, steven doug andlas abraham lincoln who were rivals. >> was she faith full to lincoln. >> as far as anyone knows. she appears to have been so en rappatured with the idea of becoming mrs. president which is the way she liked to be referred to and ofte signed her name. >> you haven't reassigned reagan's position. is that under the basis o >> yes >> they are constantly updating the poles? >> they do update the poll. they don't update it academics? >> this is an expert poll >> you know that academics tilt to the sflest yes. >> you think they are taking a swipe at nancy by putting her in the 36 position out of 37? when i wrote the book, i argued her rating was wa low are than it ought to b and it was time to reevaluate how important she had been in the reaga presidency >> you worked for rornd what did you do for him? >> i started working in his before he ran for president and worked on the 80y and your campaigns and speech writing office >> how would you describ office and what? >> domestic policy. ideas to him? >> yes. international strategy -- politica consultant >> i've been a political now. >> and you do great production work for the mclaughlin group and othert? >> correct. >> now you know nancy reagan firsthand. >> yes. of her influ accomplishments of his administration >> you think she served also to strengthen his spine or do you think his spine was quite strong independently? the velvet glove. she needed to be. he would be the good cop she was the bad cop when it came to dealing with staff. >> do you think they ever had disagreements? something. >> sure. >> did she take any negative position on anything that he decision-making process an when they made a decisio they stuck with it jointly. she would make her views known. a good friend of mineaid fo about a four-year period and that gave me a real good window into the relationship between nancy, the way the white house is run, the schedule >> you think that her influence over ronald regan our current president? the -- this presidency, laura bush is very muc involved in the details of policy and decision-making in president bush's speeches >> there are differences o opinion at least their public expression of their opinion. for example in the matter of fetal tissue >> right stem-cell research is one we know as far as the public is concerned they differ takes a public position dictated by politics or by his perception that he must the people and maybe he's on that side of the issue polling. but let's assume he is. what's the question i want to ask as a result of that? is he as capable, they are both capable of -- he serves as a buffer in a sense to position on the on the usen poin of relatey >> it's true and often true that first ladies will tak a position publicly that differs from the president contrived and sometimes they do it for genuine sflen that was true with jimmy carter and roslyn? >> it was most true with betty ford and jerrold ford. outspoken on issues such as abortion, drug use, and she would take possessions tha to his policy positions. >> that was not sufficient protection for him to win the presidency >> no. i'm afraid the ford model doesn't stand scrutiny very you listed the first institute, eleanor roosevelt and you commented on her on a rather sensitive area. son, franklin, jr. in 1916 after 11 years of her congegal duties completed. longer wanted to have intimate relations witcer. it would last a lifetime. it was lucy mercer in fact, not eleanor roosevelt at nen 45. separately. it's been said that you have roosevelt was lesbian and that is also brought up a an assertion by you. are you sure of all thi data? >> i'm fairly confident. you know there was a eleanor roosevelt written b blaven cook and she was the evidence thattel by sexual orientation if no a lesbian one. >> letters >> based largeor upi. she was a wire reporter. and she began covering her when she was still in new york and later continued into the white house and in in the white house >> which came first? mercer the alleged by you roosevelt, or hick ocnating part of the early life i'm interested in perhaps doing something more on, prab book in and of itself, going a separate house which was the roosevelt family estate and lived with two other women in this house at a marriage and in fact fdr referred to the house as the honeymoon cottage and the love nest. happy living with these tw years. in her separate house at the family estate. >> that doesn't necessarily mean there was a karnal relationship among thein terms are necessarily carnal? >> some of the letters are are not. of children that were born of eleanor roosevelt contradicts in itself your thinking she had 5 children? >> i think as the movie >> i think as the movie all, in earlier air as who were gay or lesbian had to part might be to have normal looking family and social pretenses do you think thank lin had an eye for the trim ankle before he saw some of trace of what you're talking about in eleanor to go back to that question? he was 36 by my calculation and mercer was 27.'r talking about 1916,1917,1918 >> very early. >> then you point out tha in 1945 when he died and you misincorrectly said he died in warm springs, west virginia where it was warm >> that's correct. >> that's an error in th book and it's a common erro because there are warm springs in west virginia. and i've seen that in any material. but just to ease the blo so you say that lucy merce was his mistress for life. from 1916 or thereabouts in warm springs from a >> yes. hemorrhage. >> and point of fact, she married ruth ford who was a bachelor in washington and quite well-to-do. believe that the mistress status was continue us because ruth ford died and she was a free agent fo about 3-4 years before roosevelt died am i correct? >> you are correct about that. >> what's to make you thin she was continuously serving as a mess tress to him? >> their relationshi several different phase that he did have polio and that was disabling in som sfloopts they kept in touch. >> absolutely. >> that's a strong -- >> that's a friendship. >> at least a friendship. bearing in mind this was an era when one could not easily have a relationshi especially in politics. everything had to be kept subterranean there is a lot of hidde history. wasn't at his side and the time of his death? >> i have no reason to doubt she loved him sin skerly. i have no reason to doubt that at all but i do think they were two people who were driven to be in together because of their political commitment >> they each cheated on each other? >> yes. >> did any other president of first ladies cheat on each other >> really. >> absolutely. i mean with the johnson presidency, lin don johnson quite openly flaunted his mistresses where did he do that? >> beginning back -- >> where >> in text andas washington d.c. >> i thought it was an outlying about 65 miles from washington. wasn't that true >> some of their weekend get relationship that went o their same social circles and with friends and kennedy is a great champ of this but i think this is -- >> you mean judith, marilyn and the harding presidenc is a great example of this. harding or his wife? >> warren harding for sure. his wife probably not. but warren harding had a blonde teenaged mistress wh her name was nan britain. way before that he had an affair with his next door neighbor's wife who his own wife was hospitalized for months with kidney disease. >> do you think this is a requisite to becom president or first lady to indulgences on the side? politics -- >> what about even befor that? what about libido of people who are character wise and vigorous? >> aren't they that way t get to left we go too far without saying things that ought to be said about eleanor roosevelt.ry together during th depression in part? visiting work project administration sites and people came to be accustome to the fact that eleanor roosevelt would show up. a great story about her stopping at a site in california and walks acros people who are living in hooverville and they sit they acted like it was the most normal thing on earth after the people white house and the forma duties of quote/unquote a woman president. a woman first lady. a female >> right. what? >> social activists >> that would be eleanor roosevelt who by the way also used to visit the troops as you point out to >> she was fearless in world war 2. she flew into combat zones, places that were being bombed to visit the troops >> herbert hoover has a poor reputation because of the depression. but maybe that is quite undeserved but his wife, >> i liked lou a lot. studied geeologiy and mining engineering at a tim when - >> did she go into the mountains to did herrifle headee air as >> we only have a few seconds. wasn't pat nixon a ver stronghe helped write speeche and craft papers and came from a very humbl background born in a minin town in were any of the first because she would go int fits at the time and for a long time people thought it was mental disorder. >> depression.e whole 4 years basically in depressio trying to contact the spirits of her dead children through sayances. quite a tragic figure. >> do you think that whe all is said and done we will have a female as president of the united states? >> i think we will i think we have got enough talented women in politics now who have got the requisite experience to be that they are ready to lead that hasn't been true until recently >> what is holding it back? back is that voters haveerne on the commander-in-chie are women ready to lead a performed like a general in the balkans crisis and similarly other women wh had the bomb under their >> correct >> isn't it time the american people dispel tha id pr >> absolutely. we have women in the military, women in secretary women in the senate and governorships. >> john roberts thank you very much for being my guest.