headlines on c-span radio. host: we're joined mary frances berry book? guest: the book is a history of the civil-rights commission. it played a role in getting the civil-rights laws and change america. that has largely been not understood and minimize. the civil rights commission was established by president eisenhower and congress. it was eisenhower's idea.

in 1957, he said we needed a commission to but the facts in order. i was told he would always pound the table when he said something like that. i looked back. and went to the white house files. i interviewed people. the lots of interviews with the important people in this. i found out that day worked with people at the grassroots level and the civil rights leaders to shine a spotlight on what was going on. they did it as an official government commission with subpoena power. they could call and officials who did not want to come. the mainly focused on the south. the also subpoenaed everybody so that if there were black folks who said they had been abused or salted and were afraid to come, they would have to come because they were subpoenaed and would get the protection of the marshals.

they made a record that was used by congress when at last -- when it passed the major civil rights laws. all of the major pieces of the civil rights legislation, at the commission played a larger role in that that was understood. the book as interviews with people. it focuses on the people who came to the commission and not the officials. anybody can write about the bureaucrats and officials. it is about the ordinary people who came with their grievances. host: when president eisenhower created the commission in the 1950's, the focus was largely on african-americans. how did that evolve over the years? guest: i have been there since 1980. i was not the chair until 1993. i served until 2004. i served for all of those administrations from jimmy carter for george w. bush, his

first term. i became chairman clinton made me chair. here is how it changed. when the law passed with the big pieces of legislation, the commission monitor the government to see if it was in force in. it may reports on it. it caused fights with different presidents who did not like being monitored. it then turned its attention to the low is happening in the north -- then it turned its attention to what was happening in the north, then the movement for age discrimination legislation. all of the gender legislation, the commission held hearings. they made a factual record for that. they also did that for the americans with disabilities act. it went out to look at the latinos in the west to see how they were discriminated against in terms of their language and culture. it looked at issues of police

abuse. it looked at issues of asian- americans and how they were successful in some cases and how they would have been more successful if they had not and asian-americans. it looked at a broad scope and recommended new legislation. the book has lots of photographs in it. it is about the ordinary folks who the commission listened to until the reagan years. host: there is a picture of the commission meeting with president kennedy in november of 1961. during your tenure as chair, who was the easiest president to have access with? guest: i have lots of access with clinton. -- i have lots of x's with clinton. the commission have lots of meetings with carter. it was not easy to deal with republican presidents. by the time i came, they were not the same republicans as eisenhower. their views had shifted.

as i explained in the book, as we changed in terms of reorienting civil rights which nixon and the reagan revolution, the commission would often be at odds with the presidents. there was not the easy relationship. host: we have a telephone call from st. louis. we have marty on the democrats' line. caller: thank you for accepting my call. this is my first time to get on the air. i have been trying for years. my father was in a car accident. he passed away because he could not get in a hospital. it would not accept him because he was black. he had to go to another hospital further away. there is no statute of limitations on what i feel was murder.

how can people looked into these things and try to resolve these things? how can they find out what they can do to get some kind of -- i don't want to say reparations. but how can they get justice for these things? guest: for a situation like years, the proper place to go for that would be wherever the u.s. attorney's office is in that jurisdiction. you can try the local prosecutor. but if you feel his civil rights were violated in the course of what happened, the u.s. attorney's office would be the place to go. the story about your father reminds me of a story i tell in the book about a man who was a war veteran. he was shot in the back alongside the road like many people were in those days alonin

alabama. he was doing nothing. his car was stopped by the police. they told them to get out. the guy shot him in the back. he left him on the side of the road. he was paralyzed. he was a war veteran. he already had the disability pension. he recovered, but he was in a wheelchair for the rest of his life. he tried to get his pension increased. the va turned down the pension on the grounds that he had been an altercation with the police. it was the civil rights commission that he went to when he could not go anywhere else. the civil rights commission with the justice department and the congress got his pension back. in case you are talking about, the proper place to go locally is to who every year u.s. attorney is. tell them the facts. see what they can do. host: here is dug from lincoln, neb. you are on the air. -- here is doug from lincoln,

nebraska. caller: during the civil rights movement, several groups popped up. the panthers came out of that in the 1960's and 1970's. i am wondering why. colder dropped the charges against the black panthers -- i am wondering why the charges were dropped against the black panthers in pennsylvania. guest: i have no idea what the black panthers are doing in pennsylvania. i have not heard about that intimidation case. i know about the black panthers in the days that they were organized. we talk about some of the altercations with the police in the book and some later things. but i am not aware of that. host: what is your current view of the civil rights commission and how they are performing? how are they different? what should they be doing?

guest: since the reagan years, the civil rights commission legislation was changed after a fight with the administration. i ended up suing president reagan in federal district court because he fired commissioners for criticizing his policies. in any case, under the new legislation passed as a compromise them, the commission has been ruined, in my opinion. it no longer has senate confirmation for people who are appointed. congress appoints half. the president appoints half. there is no confirmation. when personnel director at the white house told me was that you could appoint an ax murderer and no one would know it. we tried hard to make it work. it is hard work in terms of how the terms operate. the commission has not come out to try to shed a spotlight on some of the issues we have today like immigration.

that is highly contentious, as we know. there are the issues of lbgt people and same-sex marriage. these issues seem they would be proper for the commission did instead, it has done things like being against the voting rights act being authorized when it was voted for by the congress. i have proposed that there should be a change in the law. congress should create a new rights human commission on civil and human rights. get rid of what is there. start over. have the president nominate the appointees and have them confirmed by the senate. that way the public will know who they are. when i went on the commission, i had to be confirmed by the senate. people knew who i was and had a chance to say something about it. i think they ought to change it. they should broaden what it does so that it looks at issues like

poverty, the economy in terms of economic opportunities, as well as issues of race, gender, age, and disability discrimination treate. guest: there are eight members now on the commission. half are appointed by the contras. half are appointed by the president. the chairman is designated from among those people by the president. host: new hampshire, good morning. this is frank. caller: eric holder will not appoint a special prosecutor to investigate war criminals. how can we trust him and his justice department? guest: i happen to think that he is doing a good job in trying to

clean out that retz nest, if i might put it that way, that was the justice department. we all know thine terrible thins that happened with the dollars as the attorney general. the civil service was corrupted. the various offices over there were so politicized. he has his hands full doing that. if there are war criminals or alleged war criminals, i think that holder will prosecute them. i think we can rely on him to do it. host: we have andrew on the democrats' line. caller: i am from jacksonville, fla. i wanted to ask if she still thinks the naacp today is still necessary to fight for african- american rights.

is it still required? guest: that is a good question. i think something is required i think the naacp with its history and 100th anniversary this year, some of the bridges do fantastic work. i think it is probably the way to go. here is wide. we have just had recent reports that the employment discrimination complaints at the eeoc have increased exponentially. most of them have to do with race discrimination. many of them have been found that should be pursued. the eeoc will not sue them, but you will get a right to sue a letter to sue them yourselves. we have found that the unemployment rate for african- americans is now twice that of

whites. the latino unemployment rate is up exponentially. there are many claims of age discrimination and the like. i think the naacp is better positioned to because of its history in experience to deal with these issues. yes, i do think it is important. host: how much pressure was there from groups like that to take action on specific issues? guest: the commission was always asked by advocacy groups. not just the naacp, there were women's groups and all kinds of organizations. they were asked to deal with their issues. the commission is supposed to investigate, have hearings, find the facts. some of you may remember in 2000 after the disputed election, the commission went to