Transcripts For CSPAN2 After Words 20131215 : vimarsana.com

Worked at a catfish restaurant. And that was sort of a part of my life and i paid my way and pay my way through high school. And yes, these were part of the inspiration for the research that i do right now. So my last job were going to graduate school was in a pepsi plant and holds up. And it sort of went from nine to a phd program in Political Science at princeton. And it was a night and day difference. And that contrasts when i came from. That brought up the a lot of the issues and focusing on how people who have worked in labor jobs in the Service Industry jobs see the world. So the question i asked is a bit about this. What about politicians from different classes and do they see the problems facing this country differently from politicians and never have had those experiences in their first job out of it was part of it. Overtime you look at it. Not of a micro data will 2008. Sort of the postwar forward, it has been a steady increase over time in millionaires in the senate and the presidency and is that about right . Yes, that is exactly right. Its a rare constant for american political life. If you look at the congress, less than 2 of members came from workingclass backgrounds and then eventually ran to the present day. The average member spent less than 2 of their career dealing with Service Industry jobs. And so this is one thing that really has not changed. A lot of different aspects and cable news, big money, politics, all this has happened and while all of this is happening, it is going on during the last hundred years or so. Workingclass people are not getting elected to Political Office mackey talk about the Founding Fathers and you mentioned Andrew Hamilton and his view that the merchant is probably going to be representing the worker with the best interests at heart. It sounds like from your data in the studies you have looked at, you dont think that is the case. And so was there another founding father that you didnt mention that had have the opposite view . Im glad that you found us out. And brought this up as well. So does it matter that workingclass people are part of this Political Institution . Does it matter that they have a real experience in workingclass . And so yes, they weigh in in the federalist papers and the argument is one that stuck around and basically boils down to this. And they know that it is prosperity and growth in the modern version is because of it. Whats good for this is good for the country and vice versa. Because we all want the same thing. And so this is part of one old school of political thoughts and theres another school of political thought as well with the antifederalists and the founding and its light, no, we dont want the same things. If the government we set up only involves a political Decision Maker and they come from a whitecollar profession, that will seriously till the policies they have created and make it part of it. And so this is sort of, you know, its a longstanding debate. The reason i wanted to write this book is because these debates have been going on since the founding and people have brought anecdotes speculation to these debates. What interested me was when i started there was not any hard evidence on this point. So we point to a whitecollar profession who really cares about people. And the other side would point to a workingclass candidate who understands the needs of working people. And what i want to know is that we stop looking at individual cases and look across the large samples of politicians as a whole, and many of them are calling the shots. And so i really wanted to take this debate and try to bring the best date i could do on the question. And i think there are various bits of data you have looked at 783 lawmakers. That is right. From 1999 through 2008. And i think that you found many of those have spent their time in a bluecollar job. Any talk about what defines this and then well talk about doesnt matter what income versus socioeconomic status. Absolutely. One of the challenges in doing this research is that there isnt a good database. If you decide what percent of the average number is part of it. So when i started i couldnt really find any sort of database to have this information. And so the first task for me was just too actually create that and go through with the help of research that is part of this was served in this. So 1999 through 2008 in the question i asked was what did you do for a living before you got into a Political Office. So for each of them we pulled together from a halfdozen different almanacs. About the jobs that they did before they got into the Political Office and that was a interesting product to find out all these different facts. So orrin hatch that i had always known, i knew you was i found out that he spent eight a percentage of the time before he was a lawyer during manual labor jobs and he was a deception is doing workingclass jobs to pay his way through law school. And we pulled together sort of every piece that we could find about this 783 modern members of congress and i also came across the data sets that have been compiled by other people and when trying to do in the book is really look at all of them. But used every available piece of information. And the thing is really striking to me is the same answer was given every time whether we are looking at modern surveys, called the american representation study, it was conducted in 1958. And its a sample of the u. S. House members may have really detailed information about what they do for a living what they thought about the issues and how they voted and what committees they were on. Once i got access to that, about that in as well. And i got the same answer every single time. This was the striking thing to me was that every day, every level of government, i always got the same answer. And that is politicians really do bring a different twist that is to the Political Office and especially politicians who did this and the private sector. And that seems to be a major dividing line in our Political Institutions, they tend to be more coworker including whitecollar jobs to be less coworker and more probusiness and whether we are looking at the 1950s were the present day. So how do you define us as proworker and probusiness . I try to use part of this and the aflcio, every year they rank members of congress and give them a score and they never voted the way that some wanted to. And whether you are looking at this cio score or the chamber, and score, legislators tend to be more liberal and closer to what they want, farther from what the chamber of commerce wants. They spent more of their careers in business with the private sector and they tend to be more conservative and further from what the nfl wants and closer to what the chamber once. I mentioned earlier the sanchez example. And why not look at education or income level. Can you talk about that . Including occupation . Sumac yes, i talked about this and they were the first sisters, in 2003 they became the first sisters to ever simultaneously serve in congress. What makes them an interesting case study is for you have a situation where the gender is the same and they are approximately the same age and have the same families and they grew up in the same places. And they represent us with congressional districts in california. And so you have these politicians who look at similar and Linda Sanchez worked as a labor lawyer in the reddest sanchez worked in the financial sector. So the two have been, they are pretty similar than they do become a part of it. And so they are more, this is just one case as part of congress. The differences are representing this as i look across hundreds of members of congress when i look at data from lots of different time frames. This includes all of these things that are extremely important when a politician tries to decide how to vote on a bill or part of it. So all of these things matter and there is an important difference over and above those things between a politician who has real experience in workingclass jobs and a politician who doesnt. And so what is classed . This is something that the scholars and sociologists have been debating for decades. And we will probably go on debating it for a long time. The book i sort of say that i come down on the side of saying that the right way to think about a persons place in our society and economy is to ask the question that people always ask at cocktail parties, which is what you do for a living. And you meet someone for the first time. And you say, what was your income last year . What was the highest degree you werent . Once your Socio Economic status . And its like, what you do. And that is essentially the research i ask. Would you do before you got into congress . And i think its interesting to know how much money they made in the process and i think its interesting to know how much formal education they have. Those things dont seem to really divide politicians awaited their previous occupations did. And its not so much about the exact dollar amount in a politicians bank account. But what is really seeming to distinguish this and the politicians ideologically and how to think about the issues. Its not how much money they made, but how they made it. And somebody who made it big is a law professor and wrote a successful book. And this includes someone who is just into investment banking. You talk about orrin hatch and the 13 situations of the time. Doing something more. I think there were former public and the nine democrats. Did you study them and how they voted and compared and we reached across the aisle. Chuck grassley is on that list. And did you look at that quantitatively . Yes, this is something we see similar patterns with. And i think the message you can take away someone you can take away from. And very often he votes the way you would expect a republican from a conservative state to vote. He votes with his party and lots of conservative votes. But every now and again. Senator orin hatch will reach across the aisle in ways you wouldnt expect is that he is a republican from a conservative state. For you and i were talking about this. He would reach across the aisle and 10 kennedy had an important bill to give Health Insurance to lowincome people. And a lot of political observers struggled to make sense of the fact that orin hatch, who ordinarily votes republican and this from a conservative state, a lot of them would struggle to make sense of why he was so sympathetic when it came to issues of Health Insurance. And i think you can really understand and his access to Health Insurance was by no means guaranteed and he understands what its like, orrin hatch understands what its like, to not have Health Insurance. And that is not by any of this. And he is a very progressive senator and that its so important to keep in mind. There is a difference between orin hatch and if you imagine the version of him or he hadnt made his whole life and have never had an experience. My Research Says that he probably wouldnt see him reaching across the aisle even during the times that he did. Would probably be farther to the right than he really is. Mackey talk about manual labor. How do you define the workingclass . And waitresses would qualify for that. So where did the teachers they dont fit into manual labor. Can you talk about this . Absolutely. In the book i define workingclass is doing this as part of the Service Industry jobs, cashier, perception is, restaurant server. And i do that for a couple different reasons. It would be interesting to break this down even further. They look different than the ones who were restaurant servers. But there just are not enough alterations to break that down in this group. But what about teachers and social workers. And so i put those into a category of servicebased professionals. So this is a professional job and this is a whitecollar job. But it is also not the same as a ceo of a Large Corporation and i really try to break this and i try not to say lets have a one onesizefitsall part of this, although you and i talked about the whitecollar workingclass and it goes a little further into the weeds and includes occupations into 10 different categories. In the group those into three loose categories, workingclass jobs and profit oriented white collar jobs. Were you run a business. And you are part of a business in the third car glory i have is not for profit professions. And these are jobs where the person is doing a whitecollar job and enjoy material and security than if they were doing manual labor jobs. But they do not have the ability to turn a profit for your business. The servicebased professional tend to be less class working people. So the average tend to be those who are part of the job the most progressive tend to be politicians in this includes those who did notforprofit whitecollar jobs. And they tend to be pretty similar and you kind of talked about. But not as liberal economically. Which is surprising to me. Because this is part of the workingclass and it is sometimes this has to do with social issues and i think you talk about that in the book. There is of you out there that workingclass people are really conservative on social issues. And this is more hype and speculation than actual research. And in my research has focused primarily on Economic Issues. And whether you are looking up public data or data on how members of congress know, on Economic Issues and get the same answer every time, and that is that workingclass people tend to have more progressive attitudes attitude from whitecollar professionals, especially the whitecollar professionals who are profit oriented. So with Economic Issues, theres a lot of hype of how there is something wrong. Something in my home state that i would love in this includes the claims are made in a book when you look at the data on how ordinary americans vote on Economic Issues and how they vote. It is a big difference and there are big differences between workingclass people, they tend to be more progressive on workingclass issues and they tend to be more more similar than workingclass folks. And they tend to be more conservative on Economic Issues. In the book i briefly talk about the social issues that are not strictly Economic Issues and so in some analysis we look at how the and a healthy eye out look at this. And this is how the aclu rates as well. Especially in light of all this stuff but what is the matter with kansas. And there are no meaningful issues between a member of congress from the workingclass and on social issues there are really nothing to write home about in the research ive done and working class seems to matter is when youre voting on a moral or religious issue and its only fitting the tax rate and how generous is our social safety and that is when he sees hooked into different classes really burdening off in different directions. And we dont have the gaps are we we expected we believe there is something about that. And if you use the chamber ranking system and the sponsorship of bills and how intense the word is in terms of members who had a workingclass background and can you just sort of talk about what he found there . Absolutely. Many are crystal clear, and we have whitecollar politicians tend to be more conservative. So what happens if we shift gears and focus on the prevote stages of the legislative process . A lot of people would say that that is really where the action is. Its not a floor vote. And all of them behind the savings. In the book i looked at data on three things. And how hard they work to see the past and how likely they are to succeed. And when i look at what they pursue, i find the same differences if you look at how they vote. Legislators from the workingclass tend to cast more proworker votes and introduced bills that are more proworkers. What is interesting is that they tend to work significantly harder and how many cosponsors and this is a rough measure of how hard they are working to pass a bill. And i found that a legislator from the workingclass has introduced the bread and butter economic bill. And they approved twice as many cosponsors and legislators from the workingclass are investing more energy to try to pass the kinds of economic policies that most americans really care about. And the surprise finding that chapter is that although they work twice as hard, legislators from the workingclass only has about the same number of economic bills as any other legislators. And this is the sort of disturbing factor in many have known for a long time that people from historically underrepresented groups often have a harder time moving builds forward in our legislative process. And it looks like that is what is happening to legislators from the workingclass. And they have proposals that are weeded out of the legislative process at a higher rate than the proposals introduced by whitecollar professionals. So they have to work twice as hard on economic bills and there are many that are introducing bills. And there are a few who gained office in the proposals they introduce get screened out faster. So that is really kind of part of this in terms of the legislative process and they are not being heard in the first place. And they are getting filtered out at a high rate. Talking about this, we are about to take a break. I. Are you on the go . After words is available through itunes and xml. Visit us click on podcast on the upper left side of the page. And listen to after words when you travel. We are back talking about whitecollar government. We have talked about the workingclass and a small number of people who are now in congress, they work twice as hard, trying to get the bills passed. And when we switch a little bit and talk about the role of ideology. You have made the contrast in the book you have made the contrast in the book that our people out of touch from people . Or are they out of step . And i think you found that they are not out of touch but out of step. Can you talk about that . Absolutely. If you look at how politicians from different classes though, they tend to be more proworking. And you might look at that result and say, well, it is just a whitecollar professional and they are out of touch. They dont know what the the facts on the ground. They dont know what its like to be workingclass person. If we just got them and educated them, they would, you know, they would think differently and that is one story that we can tell about why politicians cant have this conservative view. We can also talk about politicians from whitecollar jobs have more conservative views and workingclass people tend to have a more progressive perspective on Economic Issues and we know that from decades of Public Opinion research. Maybe the same thing as true for politicians. If that is the case, then just educating them about the reality is workingclass people isnt going to do much. And its not that they need to be taught how the economy works, its just that they dont their view is more conservative in a view. And this seems to be the most important for helping us and it is so different when it gets into office. The one that seems to carry much more weight is the explanation. They think different about the issues. And, you know, a member of congress has all the informational resources that they could possibly need and possibly too much information. They have lobbyists, they have their own staff, they have gao, ceos, there is no shortage of information. If a politician who had never done a bluecollar job wanted to know what it was like, they could find out in a heartbeat. And so what i find is that its not really the case that politicians are out of touch or that they dont know what workingclass people want. Its that they want something different. In their views are more probusiness. So if you look at surveys of politicians. And occasionally people have surveyed members of the state legislators and what positions you take publicly. But what is your own view about this . If it was up to you, you think you would be more involved are less involved in the economy . And they have tested this again, it is their own views that are more probusiness or conservative. These lawmakers that have their opinions, they would probably call themselves proworker about the minimum wage and and whether it past a certain point. And are you making this is what is good for the worker . I look at differences in how many habits. Many are part of minimum wage and we know that the whitecollar professionals tend to be less supportive. So i kind of take that as my starting point and after we see the same patterns. And we do. The message there is that this is not a book about if this is good for the economy but about whose views are represented in power. I cant tell you what the optimal minimum wages. But i can tell you that they wanted to be higher. And they are the ones running our Political Institutions and that is part of what why it is so hard to raise the minimum wage. You talked about hypotheticals in the book you looked at this and in some of the big votes in the last decade or so and the bailout during a financial crisis to push tax cuts before that. Can you talk about the banks and other institutions and the tax cuts that go along with that and we have benefited from not proportionately more . And what wouldve been different if congress was doing this according to the population . One of the questions im interested in is it matters on the margin wouldve politicians did these jobs. It doesnt matter and what the final result be a part of this bill looks different . Are we just talking about moving a the vote around and it doesnt really matter . Is one thing that i do is to see a couple of economic policies from a list of important enactments are totally unrelated projects. So taking the list from the years 1999 and 2008, i have really good data on what members of congress did for a living. And this includes the 15 that are directly related and i said, okay. On these 15 landmark economic bills, with the outcome of the final passage have been different if congress had looked at the country as a whole . If they had not been massively skewed in favor of the favor of whitecollar professionals . That is a tough question to answer. We have never seen a congress in terms of its occupational backgrounds. But what i do see is members of congress, just like if you were to have a Public Opinion survey. And you would redo the individual participants of the survey. And i do the same thing with members of congress. And so lawyers are about 50 times more numerous than they are in the general public. And they get one 50th of the vote. And they get 50 votes. And so we really wait lists and then tallied up and see what the passage would be. And what we find is the example of the 2001 bush tax cuts. A bill that didnt get a single vote from someone with real experience in the workingclass. You get this that part of a theme mix of occupations as the United States. This includes several landmark policies and looking like the country as a whole. Including what most people know is pretty aggressive as revisions in the federal tax code. And so they take him from that is that it is all a simulation. And i cant tell you what Class Balance would have done. In this has worked to be a part of it. You cannot pass the bush tax cuts or other conservative economic policies. Why are there so few workingclass people in congress historically . Well, i think that that is thats the milliondollar question. Politicians are incredibly rare. Im saying in this book but thats really important than the obvious question is it so important. So what is keeping them out and down in the first place . And that is a question where Political Science still has some research. And we cant say definitively what is keeping the workingclass people out of office. So i try to reveal popular explanations. So when you get one of two different types of answers . One that i hear about is there arent many in the Political Office because that is what voters want. This is a democracy and of working people and getting the congress that they want, its because theyre not winning elections. This is about voters for filling things with whitecollar professionals. And the argument is that there just are not very many qualified workingclass people out there. And there arent that many bluecollar workers be a successful politician. In the book i take that seriously and look at the data. And i find that neither one really lines of what we actually know about u. S. Politics. So there are few that do run for Political Office and they tend to do well is politicians who come from the whitecollar professions and i talk about them in the book. And what merritt has done is National Representative surveys or she has given them a hypothetical candidate. And the whole biography is the same, except she changes it from a whitecollar professional to bluecollar worker and Everything Else is the same. And she finds the same thing now that i do, which is and they seem to work just fine and there doesnt seem to be this huge dropoff that you would expect. Voters seem perfectly happy casting mess. But its not that they are part of this, its that they arent running in the first place. So they actually went through the top of the ballot and looked at every single politician for every office down to the General Assembly and the state legislator and there was not hardly any candidates who were from a working class occupation. If the day arent running in the first place. It becomes the case but are they not running because theyre not qualified workingclass people to throw this on the ballot . And so what we are trying to do is get this on the ballot and its hard to know who is qualified to run for office. But we do have a sort of national or systematic data with who is interested in who feels like they can make a difference in participating in this process . And there arent these huge gaps between the workingclass and everyone else. And the statistic that i often talk about is that if even half a percent of workingclass americans had what it takes or how this qualification. If even half of them are qualified, that would be enough people to fill every seat in congress in every state legislator 40 times over with enough qualified bluecollar workers to fill a few thousand City Councils and this is a big selling situation. It just does not add up. One thing i have heard is that the practical thing. Like they are working a lot of hours. And i guess the other thing is related to education. And they just didnt think it was something that they could do. So my hunch, and i will be the first to admit that you need to do more Hard Research on this. But my hunch is that its not a lack of qualifications but discouraging circumstances like the high cost of running a campaign and instructions associated. My hunch and what the data shows, although it is preliminary, is that there are lots of qualified workingclass people out there and they are being screened out by the practical hurdles that are really in front of anyone who wants to run for Political Office. In running for office is not easy for anyone who does it. But i do think that that is probably going to be a much more important part of the explanation rather than workingclass people just dont have what it takes. And i cant say definitively what is keeping them out of the Political Office. We can take those explanations off the table. Especially if we get hung up on these ideas are workingclass people are no better than voters dont like them. So youre saying that they are likely working harder in terms of cosponsors. And that is because they are not representative of the public at large in terms of working class versus other nonworkingclass people . Yes, i think that that is one possibility. And you know from the experiences its really important for workingclass people. If everyone around her is from the whitecollar professions. And i think that that is one possible explanation. You also talk about a Tipping Point. And i thought about this analogy to women. There has been a talk about women and how there is a Tipping Point in so many that the committee has there were lot of women in the senate. And can you talk about this . A Tipping Point for the workingclass. Im not sure that they have talked about this . Yes, this is sort of a challenge. And so in the 70s and 80s there was an early line of research of a shortage of women in Political Office. And what they really found was that once you got a political mass of women in the legislature, then you started to see real policy change and they started passing this. But it wasnt just adding one female legislator, it was really strength in numbers in a kind of situation. My guess is that you will see something similar with workingclass people and adding one or two might affect the Public Policy. It would probably affect Public Policy a lot more. So yes, i think that there is a strength in numbers and its important for people in highranking leadership positions. Because it takes time and experience. There are more numbers and were you able to talking about this between the differences between the local city council and its challenging to make direct comparisons between the congress and others. Because they are fundamentally different policy making environments. And this is part of congress in the fight, okay, it really is the workingclass members of congress and there are some part of this with the workingclass City Councils and we should see policy outcomes changing. And that is exactly what we see. Including what percentage of eight bigger budget is part of it. Like you would expect, the congressional level, cities have more workingclass people and they tend to spend a social Safety Net Program and part of the exact Tipping Point. And even at the city level, theres a severe shortage of politicians and workingclass. And i think the important takehome is that we do see what you expect. Which is when you add more workingclass people to a legislature, in this case a city council, policy moves in this direction towards the outcome that workingclass people are supporting. Is there a history when there was a peak . And during the 70s . During the Civil Rights Movement . Okay, so this is an interesting thing. Theres essentially no change at the congressional level. And finally come he cant fall off the floor. Congress had no workingclass people are very few workingclass people in it. And every congress have less than 2 of the workingclass people. This was about 5 of the workingclass. If you fastforward through today, its more like two or 3 . And if anyone, itd getting harder for people to work in the political operatives. For a lot of reasons that you might expect. Unions are declining, elections are getting more expensive. In the data we have below this doesnt go back very far. And if there is a trend, it is downward. Its hard for people to get an office and this is not a problem that will solve itself. Its not a phenomenon that will go away on its own. Can you talk about this . More people are aware that they have been declining. Are there other groups out there that would take on this role . Giving the example of this list, really going out there, weve heard about people from the workingclass and who else would be . Well, this is about the research. There are programs on the ground right now. Some of them are designed to recruit and train and support to the workingclass. The ones that i know about are all union based. And it runs a school where they identify with hundreds of workingclass people to run for office. And they are graduates of over 700 elections and up to the United States legislature. And so there is sort of a model out there that works and it doesnt seem to be very expensive. And this includes having a successful political career. The big question is can that model travel to a place where unions are not as strong as they are in new jersey. So could you have a candidate school or a labor candidate school for workingclass people in a state where unions or they have less institutional power . And i dont see any reason why you couldnt. There are lots of progressive grassroots organizations in every state they care about working people, even about states and the legal environment, its very hostile to unions and these are organizations that stick up for the little guy. And those are the kinds of organizations that might have the potential to take up this challenge of supporting candidates from the workingclass. Even in places where unions are not doing that work right now. Dont talk about the party in the book that you talk about controlling the party. Is this this is almost a mantra for the Democratic Party to bring out people who might vote progressive . Reviews that term many times. And working for the little guy and the workingclass. Including democratic policies. And could you just talk about this . Absolutely. So if you look at this. Lets just take the democrats out of the picture for a moment completely. Lets just look at the republicans nationwide. There are differences and it is the case that you see the same thing among politicians and its going to be a little bit less fall to the right white collar jobs and so the things that i am describing in the book is not limited to one party. But there is a huge difference between republicans and democrats in congress. But within each party there are important differences that republicans bring. And that is going to be closer to workingclass republicans than a republican who did this with whitecollar jobs. And its not that democrats are the only people that should care about this. This is a pretty important difference that both parties really have and it really involves an effects political parties. The average democrat in congress, they spent about 1 in occur during workingclass jobs and the average democrat spent about 2 . So this isnt this is not an issue that one party sort of pounds. We havent really talked about this. And i know youve talked about it. But again, we are talking about the hispanic population that republicans need to get on board with that. But since both people are probably in this, a lot of people are in the workingclass and could that be an area . I mean, how does that have you thought about how this would fit into workingclass framework that you talk about . So in this book, i take race and ethnicity and gender and party seriously. But they are background characters and i am making sure that they are accounted for in a statistical work that i do. I am really focusing on the differences between social class and that is in part because political scientists have done this to be between men and women in congress and between legislators and other races and ethnic backgrounds. So in the book what is new about this is that theres never been a study that looks at the differences between politicians from different social classes in a systematic way taking up hard data. That is why his important questions are very important. And there are so few women in congress. Doesnt matter that they are as a country and a whole. These are important questions. They have got a lot of really good attention of Political Science and im trying to focus on this question that we paid less attention to. Which is does it matter that there are so few workingclass people. Okay, i think that we have just one minute left. And i just want to ask you about the tea party. This research ended in 2008. But it seems to me that theres a lot of class issues that come out with the tea party. I think adequately illustrate is really how difficult it is, or can be difficult to talk about class and a precise way. So its kind of like im speaking on behalf of working people and im really conservative. It turns out hes not actually part of this, hes pretty welloff financially and he is a business owner. And so i think the challenge. Im not an expert on the tea party. But what i do know is that lots of Tea Party People who speak on behalf of the working class are actually wealthy and whitecollar professionals themselves. And i think its important to keep that in mind. And that is exactly consistent with how i find the whitecollar government. The most consistent and conservative, sort of most probusiness lawmakers, they are sort of wealthy professionals in that way. Thank you for taking the time. Thank you so much. The other thing we could do to test whether roosevelt made a difference or not to the way history turned out is use my counterfactual test. Suppose a plausible alternative had been present not Wendell Willkie who was the moderate internationalist who ran against roosevelt in 1940 but suppose the republicans had nominated charles lindbergh, who was a great aviation hero who was very isolationist and quite sympathetic to germany. If you had a president lindbergh instead of a president roosevelt i think history would have turned out quite differently. I doubt that it would have made preparations that roosevelt made a and b i doubt that after japan attacked the United States that he would have