Mr. Baker talked about the dynamics of the senate, the relationship chewing former senator bob dole and president nixon, and is on roll on the Senate Watergate committee and as president reagans chief of staff. This is just under an hour. You are in the senate and the house . Lets know, that was my father. The senate that you came into, how does that compare to the senate today . I was avoided answering that question has i try not to secondguess those who followed me. In all fairness, you do not know the Senate Unless youre there. You could lose the touch. It would appear that from outside, things are tougher now than they were and more personal, and more confrontational. But i cannot say that because im not there. Described the senate that you walked into. The senate that i walked into in 1967 was still a senate populated by large measure by the grand girls of dukes. Grand dukes. And those that have gone and made such a name for themselves, fulbright. I approached the matter as the youngest member at that time and the second most junior person in the senate. Mark hatfield was number 100. I was 99 and the reason was mark stayed back for two days to continue to complete his service. I jumped him. Day, we referred to each other as 99 and 100. These people had been there long. And in looking back on it, honestly, i must tell you, that has a retarding effect on the new senators ability to jump into the mainstream. I think that is probably less so now than it was then. That was pretty reverential. I dont remember. If i made my maiden speech on the floor. That is what they are destined to do. I went there fully prepared, extensively prepared, carefully not so on the floor. Except one democrat and my father and law, who is a republican leader. He was there, out of curiosity. I spoke for 40 minutes. Said, dirksen came over and sat down beside me and his careful deliberative way. Future, youhe should guard against speaking more clearly than you think. That was my introduction into the senate. That was the hazing. Bob dole comes in later. Younger members look out for the still younger members . Not really. Dole was not outside of the fold. We all knew who he was. Many were surprised that he was elected. I was pleased that he was elected, got acquainted with him first off and then we established it early and a pretty warm friendship. But, no, the older members. More like a sophomore, freshman relationship than anything else. As you recall, sophomores were full of themselves. Is essentially a Homogenous Group and notwithstanding seniority or age or rest each, it wasnt very long before everyone is swimming in the same straight. They developed it early. They developed an early understanding that we are part of this group. We are part of the senate and that is something very special. Think, until i i left, actually. I am not sure now. Once again, im not there. You are saying that this was a real kind of institutional loyalty to the senate. Recognition, it is not a family relationship. The commonality of interest and whatnot. Little of this protecting your younger brother. The Republican Caucus was very different. Andarly in 1967 until mike 69, you had a significant number of moderate and liberal senators. Thats right. How did that work question mark at work for a well. It never dawned on me that it would not be that way. And when i got there, i was not there wasto find that a significant number of liberal senators. An even greater number of moderates and the other side of the road senators. I would say that when i went there, the two, that is the liberal and the senators, the republican senators, were probably in the majority. But, that gradually eroded and began to go away in the space of the next elections. By the time i left, moderate republicans were almost a vanishing breed. Not going to stay. That will not be the way it is. If the twoparty system survives, as i think it will, you will see a resurgence of this complex of different points of view. And i think that is good. Arrives, does he have rough edges . That he was very much a man of his place, of his culture, of western kansas, very conservative, house voting record. How does that over time involved in the senate. Well, you make an interesting point. When dole arrived, he had a reputation. Be verytation was to tough, very republican. I guess very conservative i dont recall that was one of the hallmarks of his early career in the senate. And that began to wane. He began to establish friendships and relationships in the senate and all of those things, that previous image by hiso be subsumed newer relationships with members, he fit in. He did not have any trouble fitting into that group. Easily andit very very effectively. At some point in this interview, i want to tell you a true story about the republicans regaining control of the senate. And that was in 1980. And i was minority leader about to be majority leader and we were all full of enthusiasm. As the resultsht came in, i called bob, who was in kansas, i dont remember where in kansas but he was and i said, bob, just think, we have the majority. You are going to be chairman of the finance committee. Dole said for a minute, who is going to tell russell . Told were days when nobody russell. He went right in to the role of chairman of one of the prime committees of the senate, so with ease, doing it so effectively. That just raises questions. I have heard him talk about. This is governed by press release. And then all of a sudden, realized that it was possible. Thats right. Him, also for someone like the opportunity to disprove the doubters and prove what theyre capable of doing. It is really a remarkable transformation and republicans have big problem with that in the senate because they havent been in the majority since 1954 or 56. There was not a Single Person in the Republican Caucus in the senate who had ever been a Committee Chair at bedtime except tom thurman tom. Hurman there was a high level of cooperation. Thatthe sudden realization only are we in the majority but we are responsible for the agenda, the timing. What thefocus on senate will be concerned about. Just as important, what they wont, and that is a big deal. Afterr a while, clearly, a matter of weeks, it is clear that the republican senate, the majority in the senate had if not equal role of the president , evil to be president but a significant role in setting the national agenda. At a time when we. Irst gained the majority 82, that i think that things were different. We thought of ourselves as equal partners. Deals anderted those we would visit with the president , the leadership would. The viceuld invite president to policy lunches on tuesday. And maybe assist them. Who seem to me that there was a cooperation between the branches at the two times. They had a sobering effect on the republicans because they suddenly realized that this is our game. We get to run the show and we have to decide what to do or what not to do and we are going to be responsible for it. Suggest is seem to that kind of relationship could only have worked because you had a president that was willing to buy into that. Thats true. Maybe it would not have worked if it wasnt for Ronald Reagan. What was it about reagan . I dont know. Except he never look down on the congress. He never ignored the senate. He was always willing and then seemed to be anxious to see what they had to say. And it was a remarkable relationship. Leadership. Blican dole was chairman of the finance committee involved in these things. Ted stevens, me, dole, one or two other. And we would talk frankly about the agenda and i also seem to recall that the candor between the congressional types of the white house were remarkable. I wonder if that is still so. Reagans that personality made that possible. Agreed on thehey regional tax cuts, budget cuts. That was viewed by bob dole. Notou are kindly person for recalling amendment to the white house the president outlined his i unwiselyudget, went outside and was asked about it and i said to the press, well, he hear it, we understand it, we will support it but it is a riverboat gamble. The truth of the matter is that it was a riverboat gamble and the truth is that it worked. It is to the top of the list of things i shouldve never said. Dole agreed with you. I know that he agreed with me. As a matter fact, we talked about it. In all fairness, i have to say that a good part about valuation was based on what dole and i had talked about. He was an important influential person not only in the senate but to me. Because there is one other thing you should know and i dont know whether this happens or not but i had a meeting on the Committee Chairmen and the Leadership Office of the which i preside. The chairman of the Standing Committees came. And then we invited one fresh man to each meeting. Who, hopefully just sat there. That was a nextdoor nearly important thing to me because those opportunities for chairman to say what they had on their plate, what they wanted to do and to have more time on the senate schedule. That is where i got insights in what was going on and what might go on and that is where i first came to have such a high regard for bob old possibility. Bob doles ability. Lucid andtation was prompt. And it worked out well. What qualities made dole a successful chairman of the finance . I dont know. I was not a member of financing sector. But, it is undeniably so that the personality has a lot to do with the success or failure of a senator and certainly Committee Chairman. And dole from the very beginning was highly successful chairman. Not only in administering the staff and providing for the housekeeping details in the committee and also in terms of deciding on the agenda of the senate. But, the people respected his point of view. Not everybody agreed with his point of view but they respected it and i continue to. The 81 tax cuts, the budget cuts were, not that they were easy, but relatively easy. I imagine easy to pass then subsequent tax increase. How did that happen . How did the white house feel about taking a step back . By that time, a little of the luster had gone out of the new Republican Leadership in the majority of the senate and they were flexing their muscles here and there and the white house is a little less reluctant to have an issue and that is a long way of saying that the potential for controversy between white house and the senate was greater. Disagreeillingness to with the president or the ministration was a little greater. Not aen so, it was hostile relationship. The white house and the residents and the senate and our descendents would , even withse matters great enthusiasm sometimes. Helped to reduce the prospects of great controversy within the customs. One of the things we are trying to get at on one level is what is it that dole did behind the scenes that made him dole. I have never really seen it spelled out. Beyond that, there is this whole question about what are the tools at the disposal of the majority leader to get the desired results . The majority leader is not a it isory position, certainly not a constitutional position. By the device created andte itself to bring order dispatch to the operations. It had to be. And im told that early on before the majority leader was so designated that the chairman of the finance committee or the chair of the appropriations committee, but in any event, by now, the majority leader, takingcan or democrat is the special opportunities and responsibilities, but, the power of the majority leader is actually only two things. Tradition, the president that in the case that more than one senator is seeking recognition on the floor, the chair is obligated to first recognize the leader. It does not sound like much but it is a lot. It means that you get a chance to speak first, it means you have a chance that Everything Else fails, you will adjourn or if you have a quorum call, you will try to reason with them. That is a powerful thing. The other is purely by example. I guess it goes back to the human condition that everybody has to lead, has to have a leader someplace. And even though it is not statutory or constitutional, that role follows the majority leader. And to the degree, the minority leader. I was the minority leader the same length of time i was majority leader. As minor league the leader, there was a special opportunity like mikehe aisle mansfield or later to mike byrd, i know what youre doing and i understand it. I understand it but that will not work. At least 39 votes. That you could stop it. Both leaders have an important role. Recognizing the importance of both of these. When i was first elected majority leader, i first went on the floor that day, the first thing i did was go over to bob byrd. I said, i will never know the rules of the senate way you do , i i will make you a deal will never surprise you if you wont surprise me. He thought about it and said, let me think about it. He came back later that afternoon and said, ok, and we never did. I think that tradition has carried on. I think that dole adopted that point of view as well and it is even if i didn, first advocated. The system itself and the rules of the southerners as such that there is plenty of room for disagreement, plenty of room for controversy and to do so within the framework of the organization about speaking out. I think that dole learned some things from watching how you operated. Im wondering, did you learn from watching him . Im sure i did. Reallya great man, he really was. Im sure i did, but i would be hard put. The one thing i would say is that i have a grant a great admiration for him. Betweenationship though fatherinlaw and soninlaw was perpetually very delicate. , i dont know, ive not run the records, i believe i may be the only person in the senate that dirksen never asked to vote one way or the other. Think that was in recognition of the sensitivity of that relationship. We discussed it freely. I sought his advice, which he gave freely. That he never tried to convince me. I dont think it was rebelling on my part, but it was the and it works very well. How does this contrast. All of the things about johnson were true. But it is interesting to me that dirksen and johnson were not only a minority leader but they were very close friends. And i think that that facilitated the operation of the senate. The fact that they would talk freely and im sure agree and disagree freely. But what did i learn from dirksen . I will choose the one thing to tell you. I remember i was grumpy about some foreign policy, ive forgotten what it was. And i also number i was with a very senior democrat. We were traveling in the middle east. We were last in egypt. And we got on the plane. I approached the plane. The press was out there. I made some smart remark about some item of Administration Policy and we got on the plane and he said, howard, ive discovered over the years that if i say safe microsystem of the administration until i get home, both i and the country are better off. I always remember that. I always followed that. Andsen in the same vein die. He says the president is arriving at andrews and i would like you to go and greet him. I said, really . I dont want to do that. He said, well you should. Well, i did. The president is the embodiment of our national sovereignty, he is returning from overseas and expressd be there to our support. Not of his issues necessarily worse positions, but of his role dirksendent or his would say, as chief magistrate. Let me ask you something. The whole relationship between dole, which is really pivotal and which mystifies a lot of people, given the way that dole was treated. If yet, i am often wondering there wasnt an element in the background of calm. That dole and nixon saw this was not ad that natural but who through sheer work and effort forced himself. O be what he wasnt obviously, economically overcame great odds. Whether there was some kind of identification, cultural identification that he had with nixon . Im sure he did. Ive never discussed that with dole but as you bring it up, i agree with every word you just said. Hadstly, dole and nixon that and other things in common. Both ended nixons case great patriots. Guess iell you that i am thought of as being issue mental because of the role on the senate. The truth of the matter is that i continue to have admiration for nixon as president. Ways, he was a great senator, even moderate president. Error ande one fatal theres this theory that he did not do a thing about that before it occurred. A few found out about it hours after it occurred. He was in california. The fatal error was that he came back instead of liquidating a problem, lining up those folks and firing on live television. He decided to contain it. I think in most cases, it proved to be fatal. Know if nixon ever thought those thoughts. It was a great loss. It was a great, to the country am a we lost a great talent and nixon. But it was the right result because he made a fatal political mistake. Unfolded, did you ,ave a sense of astonishment that these revelations kept coming . Daily. And dole and i talked about that. He was closer to nixon than i ever was. And i can remember the conversations between us about that. And the amazement of the things that came in. I believe it. I know i was. Just one after the other. Never ended. It was a terrible time. Are a psalmist there was a taping system . Actually, i wasnt. I think every president before him had had some sort of taping system. Kennedy did, johnson did, franklin, roosevelt. I wasnt outraged at that. No. But it proved to be the ultimate downfall. That interested to see now Ronald Reagans diaries would be released. But, i am astonished that Ronald Reagan cap that diary daily. I saw those. He never let me read them except for one case. They were written in longhand in leather bound books. They were not loose leaf. A were leather bound books. And there were rows and rows and dozens of them. Someday, they will all be published and it must be the most important and throw and contemporaneous record of the president that ever existed. That he was notion lazy or undisciplined because clearly he was the opposite. He was the most disciplined person i ever knew. Up every morning at 9 00 on the button. In the oval office. The chief of staff, i used to meet with them at 9 00. When he finished, he expected me to have a funny little story. That was his stock in trade. I treasure that. Dole also has that same talent. He can put things in perspective. Effectively, most philosophers can do it with serious dissertation. Do think that is a real weapon in making the senate work . A tool. As valuable, extraordinary. Sometimes, dole had been criticized for a rate here like wait, i dont think it was a rapier like wit. A quick mind was able to put things in perspective. Not everybody appr