15 million houses with 6 million illegals with 1% interest in the countries in debt. >> host: okay can we talk a little bit about iraq already in this roundtable, but we haven't talked about immigration. >> guest: he does and i think julian has mentioned this. george w. bush has made -- and i think this is where his phrase, the passionate conservatism really does describe him and his days. he is very much a humanist. he is somebody who actually wants to help people. and he does see, whether it's talking about what he did in africa or whether what he was doing with regard to immigration, he felt that one of the things that is vitally important is that people be treated with dignity and have essentially equal opportunity. he wasn't interested in equal

outcomes. he wasn't interested in sort of a situation where the input and wasn't measured in terms of the results. but he certainly wanted to make people's lives better. >> host: julian zelizer, is the presidential biography a relatively new phenomenon? did herbert hoover port chestera arthur wright presidential biographies? >> guest: looks, we've had them for over 100 years now, dating back to the late 19th century. so we've had them for many presidents. some were successful, some unsuccessful. it's really since harry truman that they take off in terms of sale and in terms of being almost a normal part of the post-presidency. jimmy carter msa has taken it beyond anyone. i can't remember the number of books he's written at this point beyond his memoirs, but it's now well over 100 years that we've been having us. if i can just get back to the

collar, there is a really interesting point in the book, where president bush says, you know, he regrets he didn't go for immigration reform before social security reform and he says it in that interview as well after the 2004 reelection. i think that choice of timing and sequence is really kind of interesting and you can imagine a very different outcome, not just on this presidency and immigration policy can about republican party had he made that decision. >> host: tevi troy come you were chair of the department of health and human services. >> guest: actually, is that the white house and very involved in domestic policy council. we agreed on the issue. and julian is right that we didn't get it through. president bush reminds us how close they got. i mean, this past the house and they have more of the majority in the senate. and since president bush said in this book is that harry reid had extended the debate a little longer, they would've got it

done. instead, read when i'm a session of the boats go home to the home districts on the hunt districts have a lot of anger and visceral responses. by that point he was too late to go back and put it back in the bottle. but they were really close to getting it on immigration. lara is right on how this is a compassionate issue. he would tell stories in her briefing on immigration of people here in texas have been there for 30 years, is a mecca for school and i are going to tell them to go home. and they would say go home to what? >> host: tevi troy, president bush is rather critical of harry reid and "decision points" in a couple different places. what was it like to be in the white house at that point during some of those debates? >> guest: that's really good question. i remember seeing it in one session with the bipartisan members know house and senate. were talking about immigration. but i noticed was that the members who had been in the senate longer, whether they be

democrat or republican were much more interested in comedy and getting along and trying to come to an agreement. the members have been there and much shorter period of time were much more interested in scoring on both sides of the aisle. i remember at one point, late senator kennedy and john mccain who were the leaders of getting something done noted to the president they were embarrassed by the fact to call their for making and sniping at the meeting with the president which was held in the cabinet room, which is a very prestigious term that can only host meetings that are hosted by the president. only meeting hosted by the president there in that room. the senators were sniping at each other, especially newer ones. other ones were saying let's make a deal. so i found that a very interesting insight to what's going on in the senate. >> guest: the one thing i want to bring up is something that transfixed just mentioned about the timing issue. actually recollected for me how and president clinton spoke he talked about wishing he had done welfare reform prior to doing health care.

and i think what we see in both of these examples is both of these presidents thinking and believing that perhaps the more partisan issues would have been easier if they had had a bipartisan base on which to work. >> host: julian zelizer, can senator henry craig, harry reid, bob byrd affect a presidency? >> guest: absolutely. i think, you know, every president learns from the perspective of the white house, capitol hill looks pretty powerful, much more than it does on the campaign trail. i think as senate majority leader speaker and an older year of committee chairs have enormous power. you know, president john f. kennedy, when he came in office, one of the people he was worried about was wilbur mill, was the chairman of the house ways and means committee and before a famous camel control some of the

most powerful issues, medicare for 65, social security. before that, taxation. and kennedy said cohen also chairman before he got here. also the chairman for my presidency and when i leave. he understood just how much power legislators had. and i think president bush, you know, some of the frustration comes to the realization that the legislative branch has an enormous role in katie and the kind of presidency you have in both your success and failure. >> host: tevi troy and lara brown, i don't know if you had a chance to analyze the pictures and "decision points." there's a picture of president kennedy, family pictures a nice lady and all that. and there's some crowd pictures throughout this period some katrina pictures, action photos. there is no picture in here of nancy pelosi. there is a picture of senator kennedy and couple leaders, but no cheery read. are these pictures on purpose?

>> guest: i think so. when you look at these pictures, one of the things that was interesting that i did, what most people do as i look at the pictures first and read the book. in doing that, it was interesting because as he would talk about something, i think back to the picture i'd seen. he very much includes pictures from the moment that he is referring to or discussing. so, my favorite picture is the one where he's sitting there with his entire family and because he's sitting on the sofa, you can see the presidential seals on his boot. >> host: there is that picture as we take the next call from las vegas. go ahead, just in. for holding. >> caller: not a problem. as someone who voted for president bush in 2000, and the fact that his presidency would disappointment and anger. at the same time, i think he did do some good things. i think he kept the country safe

with his antiterrorism policy. i think he really went awry when it came to the war in iraq between the years to 2003 in 2007. i think he does understand how much that affected a good chunk of the country like me who voted for him and supported him in the disappointment that came about from those years where he changed course in iraq. i do want to really get into that to much because i made has it been talking about that a lot. i think he did very well with the search. i think i made a huge difference. and if iraq can be salvaged in the years to come, i hope that i was wrong about his decision. it just really bothers me that all those lives were lost for a premise that turned out to be false. >> host: just then, and did you buy or have you bought "decision points"? >> guest: i have not yet. i've been thinking about doing it. having seen some of the interviews president bush has been doing over the airwaves and i have not bought the book.

i'm thinking about it. i think you'll do me some good to read it because i am someone who doesn't have anger towards president bush. it still bothers me to this day that we see president obama now. i do not like that. i did not vote for president bush in 2004 because of the war in iraq. but at the same time i believe he did the best that he could. i just looked up on that fateful decision to invade iraq as the wrong decision. i just hope that i'm wrong. when it came to get involved with the tire bailout, surge and his policies when it came to fighting antiterrorism, i am someone who goes back to policy. but i just really think he felt the most fundamental obligation when it came to a president decided to go to war. i hope i'm wrong and i hope you meant well. >> host: thanks, justin peered lara brown. >> guest: have to say one thing not necessarily about

president bush, but something i tell my students frequently which is either living in a good democracy if you're offended on a daily basis and you have the right to voice that offense. i think we live in a vital democracy. i am offended often. and everyday i sort of thing the good lord that i am offended. it means that i'm very fortunate as well. >> host: julian zelizer. >> guest: yeah, i mean, look, with iraq is going to be the big question in terms of what to do policy accomplish or fail to accomplish? another will be how it affected his presidency. there's many people who will feel like a scholar, and how do you stay the course on counterterrorism and other aspects of that agenda, even though they would certainly be partisanship. it was weeks after 9/11 that he was on stronger political footing and that once he ran into iraq, even if today you could see kind of some of the potential benefit of the war. i think those are really open to

question. i think he really got himself in a huge political mass. i think there's many republicans who feel that way in addition to democrats. and i think the chapter on the freedom agenda, which ultimately is the justification for iraq, is not going to be sufficient to the earlier chapter, where he admits that the reason we went in was not correct. and i think it's hard to get around that when you're looking at his presidency. >> host: a couple points. i think the caller is trying to suggest president bush didn't feel there was a political constants here there was a political risk to iraq in the book that talks about it frequently are also about the famous mission accomplished benefit. so he talks about the political cost to him. in terms of freedom agenda, it was interesting how he was influenced by current books and movies in terms of it he talks about the country have come a case for democracy and who not only read but, but also gave it

to a number of people. i'm also a fantastic movie says he saw that includes the lives of others. these german movie about the stasi in how influential they were infecting every part never parted east german society and that really has an impact in shaping this notion of freedom agenda. >> host: i did not see the picture of mission accomplished in this book. i wasn't included i don't think. we've got time for a couple more calls. markets in cuba, hawaii. >> caller: hello there. just a couple of comments. i always voted who i thought would be best for the nation. i think bush set up more when it comes to the economy. but i'm going to buy this book. i'm going downtown today to order it. just two questions. one, does he have anything in the book about why he had is people file a brief, just to try to stop an execution in the state of texas? him when he became aware of the

condition of freddie mac and fannie mae, why didn't he pull an andrew jackson? >> host: lara brown. >> guest: well he does refer to fannie mae and freddie mac. those are certainly issues he talks about and puts out there that he had been employed essentially the house banking committee to sort of act on the issue and deal with the banking reform. i don't recall anything about the execution and the book because he talked very little about his time. >> guest: >> host: we've got a few minutes left. what we haven't talked about that you wanted to bring up from the boat. so think about that for just a minute as we take this last call from san jose california. go ahead, patrick. >> caller: i want to thank you for being there, c-span is a service to the american people to educate and intimate them informed on these matters of

great importance, such as the lives of presidents. i feel though that in this recent panel discussion, you have done a disservice to c-span two show the president being interviewed and selling his book, only to have a follow-up show, where the representatives that you have it, the three panelists all seem to be apologists for the policies, positions and the dvds of the president been sold prior to this program. and as an informed citizen, i'd like to ask, from this point on, that this not be used as a foreign for propagandizing the policies of a man. instead, for equal commentary from both sides, to explore --

>> host: patrick, you think all three of these historians are pro-president george w. bush? >> caller: my experience in listening to each one speak is that even though they're willing to trade him for small things, the real -- the subjects of real importance are not questioned. >> host: all right, very much. perfect their julian zelizer of princeton, why don't we start with you? >> guest: well, i don't agree with the caller. i think we've raised many issues that are small, you know, the potential of manipulating data and evidence, which is the rationale of war. failures in katrina and economic policy. those are small potatoes. and so we've dealt with i think a lot of the big issues. and i think there's probably disagreement on this panel in terms of evaluating the presidency. i think this is one of the

challenges of studying presidency is in a polarized age. i think many of the people listening, many of the people interacting in conversations kind of read into comments then they read into what they see instantly, their own politics. i'm often i find it difficult to have really thoughtful discussions in that environment. we have to. we have to because i think this is a crucial part of our democracy to study, to evaluate, to debate would have been during different presidencies in our history. >> host: tevi troy come you did work for president bush. >> guest: i think we've had a healthy disagreement and i've been critical at times and the other people prays that sometimes. one thing i say about the book is just so funny it is. there's one story tell very quickly about my friend jim toohey who was mother teresa's lawyer before coming to work in the white house. president bush said in a litigious litigious society would mother theresa needs a

lawyer. >> guest: i agree with julianne on this. i actually think when you get into trying to assess the whole president, you do end up really with whether there's some good, some bad, some pretty horrific, some i wish i could change. but i think a fair assessment, some are historical on academic perspectives really does try to take the full measure of the man, not just one aspect or one decision. >> host: very quickly, what haven't we talked about you would want to bring up? >> guest: the thing we didn't talk about with all this work in africa, you know, what she was involved with at hhs. >> host: she writes about in "decision points," julian zelizer. >> guest: the line where he says that mitch mcconnell, the senate republican leader in

2006 -- 182,006 was saying that troops should come back from iraq and this is that a moment the republican party is really going to go out for the democrats for proposals for withdraws, deadlines. i found that an amazing offenses, the difference between what some republicans say privately what they say publicly. >> host: julian zelizer at princeton, thank you. lara of villanova and tevi t