[inaudible] our guest today is eric holder. Thank you so much for coming [inaudible] [laughter] the son of an earlier era. That was one of the favorite judges. I will note that mr. Holder was 82nd attorney general. Serving six years under president obama. From 2009 until 2015. He continues to collaborate with the president obama today and his advocacy on redistricting. We are also joined by kelly ward, to the right of i yield executive director of the redistricting committee. Thank you for joining us. Ground rules. We are on the record. Please, no tweeting, no filing of any kind while this is underway. No embargo when we finish at 10 am. Email pictures of the session to all reporters here as soon as the breakfast is over. As you know, from a predecessor, dave kloke, if you like to ask a question, please send me a subtle nonthreatening signal. I will happily call on many of you as time permits. Do you say that, nonthreatening . It is the times. A big crowd today. Is that you limit yourself to one question. If everyone gets a question that we can go for a second round. Now, mr. Holder, the floor is yours. Thank you for inviting us to spend time with a few people that i know and a lot of people who i do not personally know but i have seen on television or whose stories i have read. I would like to thank you all for the job that you are doing. Actually i will say that i think the job you all are doing now maybe more important than it has ever been. I think that is really incumbent upon you all for your reporting any fact acquisitions for the american people, you bring the truth for the situation that we face in a number of context. I applaud you for the job that youve done and i hope as a citizen for this great country that you will continue in the way that you have shown these past few months. This midterm is expected to be most expensive in history. There will be a Record Number of candidates, and Interest Groups who will be spending unprecedented amounts of resources. Much of the focus will be here in washington dc. About four congress whether they will be anything 2010 but there are key gubernatorial and senate races, state senate races that will decide who controls the redistricting process that will occur after the census in 2021. 2020 redistricting process and 2021. We have all of this activity. The National Redistricting committee is the only organization looking at this years electoral map. Strictly through a redistricting lens. It is very important. During the redistricting process that occurred in 2011, republicans use new technology to pick gerrymandering which is what i would say was unprecedented levels by creating districts they lock themselves into power in the past decade and shut out i believe, voters from the electoral process. In many cases, it has been communities of color, africanamericans, latinos that have been the most adversely affected by gerrymandering. It is not a coincidence. Clearly see the greatest gerrymandering during the last round of redistricting in texas, wisconsin and north carolina. You also see those states pass some of the most oppressive and unnecessary voter id laws. The first and only strategic hub focused on redistricting. No two are the same. We looked at each of the states so we are executing a comprehensive four prong approach to influence the redistricting process that is tailored to what we have found in our each of the states. This will enable us to tailor our work so we can be most effective. Lets go through the four ways in which we will do our work. First, we will support the reform efforts. Including Ballot Initiatives and states that would create a favor redistricting process. Second, we are building a very aggressive Advocacy Campaign to achieve their outcomes in the redistricting process. Including raising Public Awareness, engaging with activists and building stateoftheart infrastructure. We have established a relationship with organizing for action which is the, im say the, committed and grew out of the obama campaign. Third, we have a robust litigation strategy in places where maps were drawn unconstitutionally. We have lawsuits and considering filing lawsuits in several states but will also focusing on electing democrats who are committed to fairness and redistricting. And we will focus on positions that play a role in the next round of redistricting. We will continue to execute all four prongs of the strategy this year and for years to come. I want to focus in the last prong. That is the electoral efforts. We will focus on switching the balance of power on redistricting by electing democrats committed to redistricting. Redistricting and will have an impact on that process. This will help for new fair maps in 2021. New maps are drawn every, following the census every 10 years. And the officials elected to a fouryear term in 2018, will be the people sitting at the table when it comes to 2021. These are the people who will be responsible for drawing the maps. It makes elections in 2018 very vital. These are in some ways the first critical steps for putting in place people who will take power back from politicians and give it to the people. There is a system now were politicians are picking their voters as opposed to citizens choosing with their representatives will be. It is a fundamental of our democracy. We have identified 12 k states that represent, we believe, the best opportunities to unring the gerrymandering in this country and bring about fair maps that respect and reflect the will of the people. And we have a watchlist. I believe everyone has a copy of those maps. Within those 12 k states our targets include nine gubernatorial races, 20 legislative chambers, several key down ballot races. Our targets include the seven states at the the most extreme partisan bias in the congressional maps and account for the republicans getting what they termed, a quote durable majority. Of 16 to 17 seats in the house of representatives. The other states are opportunities for democrats to protect against republican gerrymandering. Michigan is a state where republicans have gained a trifecta for that is a governor as well as both houses of legislature. They gained trifecta control of this and 2011 and regular maps of the control 10 of the 14 congressional seats. Though it is a swing state. Our electoral targets include the governor state, the state senate as well as the statehouse. There also can be an opportunity to support a Citizen Movement to put a Ballot Initiative on the ballot with regard to how redistricting should be done. Georgia is another example where democrats have the potential to make gains that could protect against partisan gerrymandering. There electoral work will focus on the governor seat in the state senate. And National Redistricting foundation, there is active litigation that is challenging the midcycle. The midcycle redistricting that was done by the statehouse in 2015. Arizona is an example of a state that is on the watchlist. They currently have a nonpartisan commission. Some ways i would hold on arizona and california. Those are good examples of places that have these nonpartisan commissions. Republicans in the state legislature there have put forward potential changes that can weaken the process that is in place and make it more political. Wisconsin is also a state that we will be looking at. Republicans have doubtless been 15 percent of the vote in the last cycle and get controlled two thirds of the state legislative seats. Two thirds of the congressional delegation. That is one of the cases that is before the Supreme Court now. And the fact i think there is good is that they could for those of us who are in support of reform in this process. And they will be investing time and resources into these places focusing energy into the races to ensure that all redistricting targets are covered and to engage young people, africanamericans, people of color in these areas and this is election. I personally plan on traveling to many of our targeted states to campaign for individual candidates and to continue raising awareness around the issue of gerrymandering. In particular i will be focusing on making sure africanamericans, people of color understand the longterm implications of these elections so that they are organized and energized to get out and vote come november. Earlier this week i sat down with president obama for a couple of hours. It is something hannah had been talking about a great many months. Actually before i left the department. But had a meeting with him this week to brief him on our plans and strategy and expect that later this year, you will see them campaigning. He will be focused on the races that will matter for redistricting. He was identified that this is his chief political activity postpresidency. While they are strong indications that this will be a good year for democrats, im a little concerned. We talked about this wave that we expect for democrats. As we saw in virginia this last fall, democrats are at a distinct structural disadvantage in many houses. The statehouses even after what i would call a democratic landslide in virginia. A democratic wave peer republic is only 51 49 advantage in the health of delegates. Well see where we can be most effective in using our resources in each of the states and drive far into the map as possible. As i said, we have the foreclosed on strategy. One of them is supporting Democratic Candidates in the overall strategy. Will continue to monitor Ballot Initiative. Both litigate and also for litigation against unconstitutional gerrymandering and build infrastructure we need to have a fair redistricting process and 2021. I want to emphasize that we are looking for a fair process. We do not want to have time we do not define success as electing democrats to in 2021 will do what republicans did in 2011. It is gerrymandering on behalf of democrats. If we have a fair redistricting process and make this a battle between republican ideas and democratic ideas between conservative ideas and progressive ideas, democrats and conservatives will do absolutely fine and there is no need for us to replicate what the republicans did in 2011. Some ways i think of this effort as a partisan effort in government. We are trying to get back i think with the framers intended. As i said earlier, have the people of the representatives instead of having politicians picking the voters. Thank you very much. I will start with a question in them will take it around the room. In your list of the most gerrymandered states he did not mention maryland, right next door. Which of course, has gerrymandering case before the Supreme Court. Im curious if you can comment on marylands republican governor, has a longstanding proposal to set up a nonpartisan redistricting commission. Im wondering, why is that not better than having a district that is gerrymandered at least according to the plaintiffs in the case. They say this happened by the dates democrats. And then, the second part, i will break my own rule. [laughter] the one question rule. And john delaney this morning have visited a member who represents that district. The sixth district of maryland. He has a bill to end in congress, to end by partisan gerrymandering, to end partisan gerrymandering by require all states the commission for congressional redistricting. So i would like you to address the whole question for maryland in the plans. I think the first part of your question really is correct. We are focused on looking at the states that are most gerrymandered. Maryland is not one of the states. We can argue about what happened in that one district in maryland. Supreme court has taken up the case and it will render a decision there. Also, they will render a decision when they look at wisconsin. If you compare what is going on in wisconsin to what has happened in maryland and compare it to wisconsin, pennsylvania, ohio, north carolina, texas. Your comparing apples and oranges. You can talk about that one district but we are focusing on states that have had substantial gerrymandering problems. I have not had a chance to read the article but i actually think that a Movement Towards nonpartisan commissions is in some ways the purest way to do this. There are some state constitutions that do not allow for that to occur. In some instances citizens dont have the ability to go straight to the ballot. As you can for instance in michigan where it is now being considered in texas you have to go through the state legislature. And the gerrymandered state legislature will not allow that to happen. In a theoretical sense i think that is in some ways probably the best way to do it. But i go with reality. Between now and 2021 we will not get commissions in only the states and so we are trying to use all of the techniques that we have. Lawsuits, advocacy work, supporting commissions where it is possible in them putting in place people who will commit themselves as norton did in virginia. He said he would not sign the bill a redistricting bill that did not come from a commission that was not fairly drawn. Thank you. Do you have anything you bothered with the way the lines were drawn in maryland . I think what i think should be applied to republicans should be applied to democrats. I think it would be a mistake to look at one district and think that that is in some way equivalent to what we have seen done on a statewide basis i would say in some ways a nationwide basis by one of our political parties. Steve from the washington times. My comment is on a couple of decisions at the Current Justice Department has made. First of all the pardon having looked for a number of pardons yourself over there what you make of that. What you make of the decisionmaking process on and they apologized for the irs targeting and came to completely opposite conclusion here Justice Department on i am wearing what you make of that decision . With regard to transfer the case that was im in the president s powers to pardon, is absolute. And i cannot criticize the process that was ultimately the presence decision but i think it is instructive that the power that is used relatively sparingly, was used by this president to grant some relief to a person who i think is fundamentally undeserving of it. The case that we brought there was appropriate. The finding of the court with regards to how arapayo conducted himself in the course of the process was appropriate. I think it was a misuse of the pardon process in that regard. The apology when it comes to irs, is typical of what we see in this administration. Not giving support to people in the department, and the investigative agencies within the department. His do a good job and make tough calls. Sometimes those calls do not satisfy people on one side of the political spectrum or the other but i think at the end of the day they are to be respected and certainly ought to be respected of the people have the responsibility to run these departments. The notion that the Justice Department needed to apologize for what career people made determinations career people made in the irs case, that apology was unnecessary, unfounded. And inconsistent it seems to me with responsibilities that somebody would seek to leave the great Justice Department would have done. Thank you. My question is twopart. One actually about your successor. There are a lot of rules you will not prosecute. [laughter] i still have friends general sessions, your successor, once you take a very hard line on marijuana. In addition, senator grassley has a Prison Reform bill that people have praised on both sides of the political spectrum. The general sessions does not seem to want to embrace Prison Reform. Your thoughts on his position on marijuana and on Prison Reform, particular with regard to the grassley bill. I think with marijuana we got it right. The Justice Department has limited resources. And when youre trying to decide how you will deploy those resources, what places are you going to place emphasis, the memorandum that is called is as essentially we will let the states experiment but we will put up guardrails. And it was very explicit. He said that when it came to dealing marijuana, dealing to minors, transportation marijuana across state lines, there were eight or nine factors in the memo. If you cross those eight or nine factors then there will be federal and government intervention. I remember talking to the governors of colorado and wisconsin. Sharing with them whatever concerns were. Getting the assurances that they will put in place serious regulatory systems. And i think the approach that we took was appropriate. When it comes to use a Prison Reform. I would call criminal Justice Reform. That was an issue where i think we had a rare opportunity at a significant bipartisan reform effort. I remember having a meeting in my conference room. We had representatives from the tea party, from center for American Progress in the aclu. Sitting down to talk about what was a shared goal. The notion of criminal Justice Reform. Again, with limited resources we have, the need to bridge the trust gap that exists between people in Law Enforcement and certain communities in this nation. Communities of color in particular. Criminal Justice Reform is something that i think should occur. I have not read the grassley bill with any great extent but i think what was being considered during the time, during the end of my time i guess as attorney general, i thought was a good way in which we ought to be reforming our processes. And i think if you look at the statistics after i noticed this smart on Crime Initiative in 2013 or 2014, the numbers show that we had seen a decline in crime. We had seen the Justice Department bringing cases where it ought to be against kingpins as opposed to when it comes to drugs, as opposed to people that are couriers. More serious cases. Fewer people getting these harsh sentences. You know being held accountable. Being given sentences that would commence with their conduct. And so i would hope that this administration would get back on that train. It was a bipartisan