fbi. >> the most recent book by ronald kessler, "the secrets of the fbi". >> now on booktv, the creation of the bill of rights and the election that enabled it. ..

>> you know, as important as this project has become to my life, i can scarcely remember the first time i learned about this historic congressional race between two future presidents in 1789. but what i do remember is reading about it in a book, and it was treated with the typical one or two sentences that you would see about this congressional race. and i thought to myself, way to bury the lead. all of a sudden we're in this race between two future presidents, james madison, james monroe, they're debating the most important issues we have ever talked about as a country, whether we should have a bill of rights, what kind of union we should have, and all of a sudden you're on the next page, and they're in the first congress. and i said, way to bury the lead. so i decided i would read everything i could about this 1789 election, and when i found that no one had written about it before, i decided i was going to tell the story. at the inauguration of george washington, what many people

don't know is when he took the oath of office, two of the 13 states were outside the union; north carolina and rhode island did not ratify the constitution because of their concerns that it was missing a bill of rights, a guarantee of fundamental liberties. this was common for the anti-federalists throughout the continent. the common denominator among the anti-federalists -- of which james monroe was one -- was that they opposed the constitution. some of them genuinely believed you could not have a union that covered all these different and diverse states. they believed in independents or perhaps regional confederacies. james monroe represented the majority of anti-federal opinion in that his objection to the constitution was centered around it's missing a bill of rights. while washington took the oath of office, two states -- new york and virginia -- were agitating for a new constitutional convention.

in the words of james madison and george washington, they were terrified of this prospect. they believed that it would be infiltrated by enemies of the new government and that the constitution would be scrapped and done away with and that our union would be fractured, never, ever to come together again. the book then goes into the french and indian world which was a conflict in the new world and europe, perhaps the first true world war we've ever had, between the french, the english and their allies. the english expelled their opponents from continent, but aa consequence what they did was a check that kept their colonists in terror. free from the threat of the french, the american colonists were not so reliant on great britain. great britain also tried to shoulder some of the enormous costs of this onto the colonies. what followed was a rising cycle of taxation, resistance, followed by oppression where we

ended up in a revolution against great britain. both madison and monroe played important roles in the revolution. james monroe was a student at the college of william and mary when hostilities began. as a student, he wasn't excited by latin or grammar, he was out drilling on the college queen at william and mary with his compatriots. the governor of virginia, lord dunmore, the royal appointee, seized the gun powder. nobody bought his excuse which was that he was fearing a slave revolt. that ratcheted up hostilities to the point where james monroe and his compatriots raided the governor's mansion which is still there today. monroe was then sent north to new york to join with george washington's army, and he would serve with washington in many theaters of the war, places like valley forge, germantown, the philadelphia campaign, and most importantly, the battle of trenton. we all know this famous portrait

of george washington crossing the delaware and going over to face the hessians who were not expecting it. monroe led a vanguard of men across the river in that important battle. their job on the morning before the war was to secure the street heading into town so that no one would be able to alert the british and their allies as to what was about to happen. it was christmas, there'd been some revelry, they thought the hostilities had ceased for the season, and they were unprepared for the attacks. in the process, james monroe and his men alerted a doctor, they woke him up, he started cursing at them because he thought they were british. when he realized they were patriots, he told them, i, too, am a patriot, and it seems something is going to happen tomorrow, and i'm going to go with you because i may be able to save some poor soul. well, that poor soul turned out to be james monroe. he charged the cannons, was struck down by a bullet and would have bled out right there in the street before trenton had

it not been for the doctor. this is one of two incidents in the book where james monroe narrowly escapes death. one of the things i focused on was just how precarious everything that happened really was and how seemingly small and minor and unrelated events conspire to make great events happen on the stage of history. during the revolutionary war, james madison served in the u.s. congress. when he arrived in congress, he found an absolutely ruinous state of affairs. i know it's nothing like you could imagine today, but -- [laughter] the congress had already taken an enormous, crippling national debt. when congress had exhausted its revenue and sources of credit, they simply started printing money and giving it out to people. [laughter] thank goodness our leaders today are too wise to do this. [laughter] i think it's really telling that madison served on something called the board of admiralty. this is the committee that ran the naval affairs of the united states during the war.

one of the first things they do is to deny a three-month-old request for a sea captain for bread and flour. it was not that this request was unreasonable per se, it was simply that they had no bread or flour or means to plo cure it to give him. they did sell him a note, however, telling him to keep up the good work. [laughter] an 18-gun boat named the saratoga was sitting in the dock for a want of simple rigging. the triumph l, ready to go to sea and fight the british, was waiting on a few more cannons and a little bit more food before it could be deployed. perhaps worth -- worst of all, they had to deal with the issue of several common criminals breaking into a warehouse. perhaps they were inspired by george washington's daring christmas raid because one christmas night they broke in, they stole the -- [inaudible] congress had already directed them to distribute this canvas to the places where it was

needed, and the letters to the board of admiralty are actually pretty humorous if it wasn't so serious. the men in charge of the warehouse said we've killed tree of the men responsible, we think we know where to find the fourth. congress wrote back saying, well, that's nice, but we just want our canvas back. [laughter] so madison and monroe begin a lifelong correspondence that'll stretch over five decades. and by this point madison was back in the virginia legislature, and monroe had gone to congress and dealt with many of the same frustrations that madison had. talking about the articles of confederation. in 1777 the continental congress put together a plan to try to unify the states. before that the continental congress basically existed to air grievances against great britain. now they had to conduct a war against the most powerful country in the world, so in 1777 they sent the articles of confederation to the states. the letter that accompanied it almost sounds like an apology and with good reason.

it says, this was the best that could be adapted to the circumstances of all. not very promising. [laughter] under the articles of confederation, the hapless league of friendship was unable to raise revenue on its own, unable to raise troops on its own. it was unable to conduct any sort of rational trade policy. so even after the war, the european powers would punish our merchants, our producers, hit our producers with heavy taxes and tariffs. because the national government had no capacity to create a revenue, a trade policy, they would be able to play the 13 states against each other. if 12 states were to respond in kind to great britain, at least one state would look around and say, you know what? we're going to lower our tariff and have all these british goods come in through our state. so it was impossible for the congress to do anything. it was totally unequal to the task. the idea of some sort of north american union actually started in 1754 with something called the albany congress. that was benjamin franklin's

idea, and it was not created with the idea of independence in mind, it was created in response to the fears generated by the french and indian war. and it was to be a body that could coordinate the response to the impending war. this was attended by 17 delegates from seven colonies and one lobbyist. and the meeting broke up inconclusively, but that general framework was later adopted into our articles of confederation. the national goth was so weak at -- government was so weak at one point, it was completely laid low by the greedy sheriff of chester county, pennsylvania. george washington issued a passport to the british to bring in supplies to feed and clothe their prisoners of war. so they're bringing the wagons in to go to the prisoner of war camps, and the sheriff of chester county stops them and says, you know what? under the pretext of saying that they brought in too much and planned to sell it on the black market, he seized all of their

merchandise, and congress was powerless to stand up to the greedy sheriff of chester county. one county sheriff standing up to the national government of the united states. totally, totally unequipped to govern a country like ours. at one point congress has to deal with a mutiny. with no revenue to pay soldiers, the soldiers lose their patience, and as the war comes to a conclusion, they're not feeling any better about their chances of getting paid. once the hostilities are done, they weren't very optimistic about what might happen. so they went to philadelphia, a group of soldiers went to philadelphia, and they're pointing guns in the windows of congress, and they're menacing members of congress. and congress is inside trying the to figure out what to do. all they can do is appeal to the governor of pennsylvania who tells them, hey, it's not my problem. [laughter] just one of the reasons philadelphia lost the capitol and would only get it back for a temporary period under the new government. so john dickenson, the governor, wasn't willing to help them out.

so what congress decided to do was they would flee like a group of common debtors to princeton, new jersey, and they reconvened in james madison's old dorm at princeton. [laughter] one of the most important issues that both madison and monroe had to deal with during their time both in the virginia legislature and in congress was the question of the mississippi. the spanish were of a belief because they controlled new orleans and the port of new orleans that they were entitled to the mississippi river. james madison pointed out that under the international law that existed at the time that a free and peaceful people could move across international boundaries without impunity, so why should the american people who were not at war with spain be more restricted than in any other place? and imagine what losing the mississippi would have done to the united states and westward expansion and ports of entry that we have, the growth of the american west. it's unimaginable that had we given it to spain, you know, we probably never would have gotten it back. but there was a northern confederacy led by john jay who

was the minister to spain and at different times during this debate the foreign affairs minister for the congress under the articles of confederation. and john jay thought as follows. he thought -- he was a northerner, the mississippi river was a far off place. who had ever heard of it? who needs this far off river? we're going to risk a war we can't win for a river that we can't use. and so he was firmly of a mind that he was going to try to give this river away to the spanish. and really this gets at the heart of the problem, that the continental congress and the congress under the articles of confederation had no capacity to bring the military might of the nation. and if it had, the spanish would have never dared to provoke us into a war. but it's the quick thinking of madison and monroe and founding rivals that prevents the mississippi from being lost to the united states forever. well, we all know about the problems of congress under the articles of confederation. madison and monroe worked very,

very hard to try to alter them. they tried to do two measures principally. number one, to pass an end post so that trade that comes into the united states could be taxed and the national government would have a steady source of revenue and be able to stand on its feet and pay its war debts, particularly its war debts for the brave soldiers who won our resolution. it never passed the requisite 13 states. it had to be man unanimous. the second thing they wanted to do was regulate trade policy. we've already talked a little bit about that. because the european powers were belligerent towards united states merchants and producers, and they wanted congress to be able to respond in kind. another serious issue, there are 13 states, at least 13 different forms of currency used, at least 13 different standards for weights and measures, currency was subject to dramatic fluctuation. and the courts, there was no national judiciary. so if you were a new yorker

trying to buy something in virginia, you didn't know what you were buying, and you could be sure you would get hometowned if deal went south and you had to file a lawsuit. so they were trying to unleash this economic engine to create not only a military union, but also an economic one that could unleash the prosperity of the american people and, indeed, something that has allowed us to be the most prosperous country in the world. so what they tried to do was create a convention. and it's the virginia legislature that is the first to call for some sort of national convention of the states to look at amending the articles of confederation. james madison gives this off to john tyler, the father of the future president, to pass. james madison is a member of congress, former member of congress, was suspected of having gone federal. and john tyler who'd never served in congress had more credibility to call for this new national convention. so that's what happened. unfortunately, when the delegates met in annapolis, maryland, the states didn't send the best people that they had.

some states didn't send anybody. nobody sent their full delegation. and so they meet for a few days in mann's tavern and decide, you know, the best we can do is to write up a long letter of all the problems we see with the confederation, distribute it to the states and agree to meet in philadelphia may next. well, that gathering, we all know, is the constitutional convention. james madison goes there as a delegate, james monroe does not. madison earns his soak ri cay as the father of the constitution. once again, he uses someone else to bro deuce his policies which is something he always did throughout his career if he thought it was more likely to succeed coming from somebody else other than him. imagine leaders like that today who don't don't care about the credit, but they care about getting results for america. that was james madison. so he had edmund randolph introduce what was called the

virginia plan, and it is the basic framework for our government today. the executive and the two branches of the legislature and the judiciary and all of the characteristics and all of the powers that we associate with our national government today. there are some serious fights in the constitutional convention, both sides nearly walk out at different points. the biggest issue that they have to con tend with is actually one of representation. in the congress of the confederation, every state had one vote. the bigger states got to send a bigger delegation, but all that delegation could do was cast one vote at the end of the day. virginia has over 700,000 people, and delaware hasless than 50. and the virginians, not surprisingly, didn't understand why someone in delaware had a right to so much more representation. so this is a big problem. but the southern states -- not the southern states, but the smaller states will not yield on this point. so it's a question of yielding to them in the spirit of accommodation or scrapping the whole enterprise and going back. fortunately, they did agree the house of representatives would

be based on population, and the senate would be based on equal representation among the states. from philadelphia comes the constitution, and i think in history books we tend to gloss over this period in history. and it goes straight from the constitutional convention in philadelphia to george washington taking the oath on the balcony of federal hall. but what really transpires in between is a nearly two-year knock down, drag out fight all across the continent over to ratify the constitution. each state elects a constitution to sit in -- a constitutional convention to sit in judgment of the constitution of philadelphia. i focus two chapters of this book on the virginia ratification convention as the largest, most culturally important, most commercially important state in the country. it is critical that virginia ratifies the constitution. the opponents of the constitution try a plan, but it completely backfired on them.

they decide they're going to hold the debate in june. what they figured, some states would approve it, some states wouldn't, and there would be virginia to broker some kind of compromise. that was what they thought was going to happen. the problem was they created a third party in the virginia constitutional convention. not anti-federalist, not federalist, but people who were so concerned ab preserving the union that they were able to vote for ratification. none was more important than edmund randolph. randolph was one of only several dell bait gates in philadelphia to refuse to sign the constitution. and there's a lot of suspension around what he's going to say when he first stands up in richmond in the virginia ratification convention and what side he's going to come down on. and he says, you know, these objections to the constitution haven't changed. my principles, my positions on this haven't changed. i have my doubts, but at this point seven states have ratified the constitution -- eight states had ratified the constitution, excuse me, and i'm not going to be the ones to separate us from

our sister states. and so at the end of the day there's a lot of debate, fascinating, some of the leading names in american history, patrick henry along with james monroe who decides that despite his frustrations with the current government, this constitution was too potentially dangerous. it was missing the bill of rights, he couldn't get behind it. he could get behind something that increased the powers of congress, specifically over revenue and trade, but there had to be a bill of rights, and so he reluctantly comes out, but comes out full force against the constitution. george mason's also in the constitutional convention, richard henry lee, some of the most important people in american history are all in this room in richmond. at the end of the day, the anti-federalists try a gambit. they say why don't we stop what we're doing here, recommend some amendments to the other states and pick it up later? this would have had the effect of completely ending the process. the momentum would have stopped there. the vote in new york was going to be so close that alexander

hamilton kept writing madison saying all is lost if you don't pass this constitution in virginia. no pressure. [laughter] but everything is lost. and, in fact, new york only ratifies the constitution a month after virginia and only then by three votes. and only because the federalists agree to this unanimous declaration that they're going to call for a new constitutional convention unless and until there's a bill of rights that comes out of the first congress. so what the anti-federalists do is let's set this aside. that measure fail bed by 88- failed by 88-80 votes. james madison didn't even know if he was going to participate in the ratification convention. indeed, if anti-federalists had simply scheduled it earlier, madison probably wouldn't have been able to make it. in fact, he gives his first speech in a long career in public service, gives his first speech in support of his candidacy to be a part of this

ratification convention, and aren't we glad that he decided to participate? because the constitution gets out of their alive by eight votes. all seems inevitable to us today, but that's how close it was. well, following the virginia ratification convention is a legislative session that is dominated by patrick henry and his anti-federalist allies. it's a chapter in my book called "the terrible session," and if you were a federalist, that's exactly how you would have seen it. first of all, virginia calls for a new constitutional convention. second, patrick henry who could be very petty and personal in his politics took a supporter of james madison's, came up with a pretense for him not to be eligible to be a legislator, and then it was referred to the committee on privileges and elections. the committee said of course he's eligible to be a legislator. this doesn't make any sense. it was reported to the floor that he was eligible. patrick henry offered an amendment said was not eligible and invade against the constitution for a long, windy,

ponderous speech. i don't know what that has to do with edward carrington's eligibility, but patrick henry thought an awful lot. now, carrington wins a special election three days later, but this is what you were dealing with if you were an anti-federalist -- if you were a federalist, excuse me, and one of the problems and the reason they were so outmatched is because the leading federalists of virginia, people like john marshall and james madison weren't part of the legislation church, but patrick henry who demanded his -- commanded his majority with absolute obedience was able to get these measures through the legislature. at the end of the session, james madison went and sang, and his colleagues thought it was becauseav h the anti-federalist backlash. enough to drive you crazy.

two other very important things happened in this session. first of all, this is back when under our original constitution the state legislators elected senators. so james madison is offered up by the federalists as a senator. and patrick henry talks about rev you lets of -- rivulets of blood in the land, there's going to be this great turmoil if we elect a federalist to congress, and he'll never, ever support your rights. and james madison loses to two anti-federalists by a narrow majority. you know, the issue of redistricting is on a lot of people's mind right now perhaps, no more so than here in arizona. the virginia legislature at this time perpetrated the first act of gerrymandering in american history, and as one other author point out, it is patrick henry's luck that they didn't think to call it henrymandering.

[laughter] he did have the results of the virginia ratification convention. two delegates were selected from every county. because of the late day of the virginia convention, delegates were more or less on the record with their positions on the constitution. so he created a district for madison that was probably three to one anti-federalist to federalist. not a great start. a lot of madison's supporters asked him if he would consider run anything another district. the only district that he probably could have lost in virginia was the one that was created by his enemies to defeat him. and they even passed something called the residency law which said, oh, by the way, you have to live in your congressional district for a year before you can run. targeted at one man. the federalists and anti-federalists on a party line vote had a fight over whether to strike the residency law, and the federalists were outgunned, and they lost. so madison decides, you know, i don't want my election being called into question in the first congress. i don't want this to become an issue in a different district.

remember, at that time the virginia legislature was one of the oldest institutions on the continent. it had a lot more credibility than this new constitution. the constitution says you only have to live in your state if you want to run for congress. in fact, there's a number of house of representatives members right now who don't actually live in their district. madison decides, no, he's going to stand and fight for his corner, and he's going to fight in the district that he lives in and the district he's always lived in. so the anti-federalists start shopping around for a candidate to take on james madison. and reluctantly, they're able to convince his friend, james monroe, to carry the anti-federalist banner. james monroe was a decorated combat veteran, former member of congress, member of the virginia legislature, extremely experienced and probably would have stood out head and shoulders above any opponent other than his friend madison who also had a long tenure in office. when monroe gets into the race, though, however reluctantly, he gets into it full force.

while monroe was in congress, he lost an election in virginia for the legislature by a mere four votes which his campaign manager kept writing him and telling him, come back and campaign in person. he ended up losing by four votes. if you work for politicians long enough, you realize their losses are seared on to them, and monroe remembered what it was like to lose that race. so he was busy writing letters to important people in the district. then, as now, the candidates relied on local supporters in the various counties of the district to give them advice about the lay of the land, important people to reach out to, when to come to the court day and meet with people. and that's what they did. james madison would -- or james monroe would write these letters, to governor to one of the supporters in the county, and the supporter would distribute them. newspapers were a critical source of information at the time. some of them, we'll call these

essays, the historical antishe dent to the anonymous blog commenter. they were anonymous essays, they were written in the newspapers. one of the enduring myths which i hope to dispel in "founding rivals" is you hear it every election, this is the messiest campaign ever. [laughter] so i challenge you, i challenge you to read about the election of james madison and james monroe which featured false and even negative communication. the anti-federalists, and i should be very clear, james monroe had no part in this. but his supporters said james madison has said that not a word of the constitution can be spared, and he will not get you your amendments. well, james madison realized, look, he represented the federalist opinion. he thought a bill of rights was dangerous. he said we have a government of enumerated powers. if we didn't give the government, for instance, the right to regulate speech, why would we need a free speech amendment to prevent the government from doing that? you might list some rights and forget others and thereby omit

those rights to people, and it was premature. we just -- this is a vessel just launched, this new government. let's take it for a test drive, see what happens. see whether or not we really need these amendments. but james madison realized as a result of his contest with anti-federalists in the virginia ratification convention and in the election in the fifth congressional district that there was a significant sentiment in the country, and these people would never, ever be satisfied until a bill of rights was passed and adopted. so in order to gain the confidence of his countrymen in this new constitutional government which he saw as the last best chance for creating some sort of union that could work for the state, he acquiesces in the spirit of accommodation. he first announces his support for a bill of rights as part of a campaign promise to a man by the name of george eve. george eve is the most prominent baptist minister in the fifth congressional district. the baptists and other religious minorities were a very important

political group. they were created, like many political groups since time immemorial because the government persecuted them. baptists were arrested in private residences for prayer as we were declaring all men are created equal, people were being arrested in church, being arrested for preaching the gospel. and these folks were extremely concerned about this new national government. in fact, there was a unanimous resolution among the baptists in the fifth congressional district, unanimous resolution that says that the constitution does not sufficiently protect our religious liberties. they actually deadlocked on a resolution as to whether the yoke of slavery should be made lighter. they knew that -- they believed it didn't. madison writes this letter, you can imagine this is rural virginia, this is 1789, and there's one baptist minister that goes to many different churches. so eve had quite a few

congregations. and he was in tune with madison's true sentiments on religious freedom. it was madison who passed the virginia statute of religious freedom. so madison had always been a friend to the free exercise of religion, and they knew that. madison wrote this letter and said if i am elected, i will support a bill of rights, and among that bill of rights will be a free -- freedom of religion. when they were gathering deciding who to endorse, eve was able to pull out his letters and rebut the anti-federalist liars who were distorting his opinion for the benefit of all, and eve did great damage to their cause in the words of one observe every. so james madison and james monroe, i've talked about some of the things that were similar in this election to elections today, one of the things we don't see enough of is james madison and james monroe maintained an extremely high level of civility toward one another in the course of the campaign. they traveled together, they stayed in the same hotel room,

they engaged in long, very heated debates. one of those debates in a church that's still there in culpepper, virginia, which is the oldest lutheran church in the united states. they stood out there for hours in the freezing cold, in fact, madison got frostbite on his way back. he used to point to it as his only war injury he'd ever had and regale youngsters with stories about that campaign. so james madison and james monroe would both report to their mutual friend, thomas jefferson, after the election that their friendship never abated, that they remained friends throughout. even while they disagreed passionately, they were civil to one another. even if sometimes their most zealous supporters weren't civil to each other, they were always civil to one another, and that's reflected in their numerous debates and public appearances they had throughout the fifth congressional district. so james madison by co-opting the issue that james monroe has really takes the win out of his sails, and he wins the election.

one of james madison's biggest supporters wrote him and told him if this had happened a fortnight sooner, i think you would have lost. so what are the consequences of this election? besides being interesting for featuring two future presidents for the first and last time in american history, what's important? well, we have already talked about the federalist opposition to bill of rights. in the first congress the federalists win lopsided majorities. virginia and new york are agitating for a new convention. the anti-federalists are coordinating up and down the continent getting ready to sweep the fall's legislative elections in order to cause their state to call for a convention. only james madison seemed to appreciate the threat posed by the anti-federal movement, and so what he did right in the beginning of congress he notices there are going to be a bill of rights considered this election, and i plan to introduce them, and we are going to consider

them. so in a nixon goes to china moment where only that strong anti-communist could have gone to that country and opened it up to the west, james madison is able to bring the federal majority over to his side and pass the bill of rights. and it was remarked among madison's many supporters in virginia that the antis have a new hero, and it was an unlikely hero, james madison. and it was because of the bill of 1789 that we are all here today in the freest, most prosperous, greatest country in the history of the world. and this was set against a very unpromising context. try to imagine, if you will, a crippling national debt, a government that was intensely paralyzed by partisanship, a government that seemed wholly inadequate, leaders that seemed inadequate to the exigencies of the day. i know, you can't imagine it, right? [laughter] it's impossible to think about. in one of my favorite quotes, mark twain history says it doesn't repeat itself, but it rhymes.

[laughter] madison and monroe found themselves trying to make this work against the most unfavorable context that i think maybe any body of decision makers has ever faced. but they rose to the occasion. every generation in american history has faced challenges. the first generation did, and every subsequent generation did whether that be pestilence or war or economic calamity or all three, the trifecta. but each generation rose to the occasion and passed on to the next generation in our great american tradition, a country that was better, stronger, freer and more prosperous than the one before. we're in trouble right now as a country, but "founding rivals "is an optimistic note from history, how a previous generation rose to face many of the same challenges we face today and how we as a nation can go forward. we have to get out of this mess. we have to work together to do it. the final line of the book which i know is not something you get to hear very often at these book readings, is "remember."

remember how things looked in the past when things looked unor difficult, america has always risen to the occasion, and i hope you'll have some optimism about the way we're going as well. i'd be happy to take questions. [applause] >> are there any questions from anybody? danny. >> besides, um, the creation of the bill of rights, what's another consequence of the 1789 elections? >> well, there are two very important additional consequences in addition to the bill of rights being passed. as if that wasn't enough, the bill of rights had cemented our union, there were two other significant events that happened only because madison was there instead of monroe. if madison had not been there, the country may still have faltered on the tarmac. the first of these is the question -- it's called the decision of 1789. when they, when they introduced

cabinet legislation to create the president's cabinet positions, there's a phrase in there that says there'll be a secretary to be removed by the president, and james madison didn't think there was anything controversial there, but he touched off the greatest constitutional debate of the first congress. people say, well, the constitution's silent on this, so congress could grant this removal power, but they don't have to. other people thought, well, i think you need to use the impeachment method. that's the only method we have in there. so some thought you could grant it to congress, some thought you could only use impeachment, and others believed that you would remove these people the same way you appointed them, with the advice and concurrence of the senate. any one of these scenarios would have been a dramatic blow to the separation of powers that we've created, you know, and these are so critical to our government. madison called the constitution a sublime commentary on human nature. he knew that the tendency of people in power was to coalesce

and get more power. and so we created three branches of government, executive, legislative and judiciary, the greatest of these, the legislative, is broken up into two houses, and they're all pitted against each other with checks and balances. and it's important to maintain that system to avoid tyranny. and so madison engages in a long debate on the floor of the house. it's very uncertain as to what's going to happen. the first salvo fired by the other side was an amendment to strike the language saying to be removable by the president. later on madison will win this debate by getting behind that very same amendment, but not for the same reason that its offererrers put it forward. he struck that language to be removable by the president, and then he added language that said there shall be a clerk to the department which shall serve as secretary. in the event that the secretary is removed by the president or for any other reason. [laughter] so it's such an offhand reference that no one would ever

mistake it for a grant of power for congress, yet it makes it clear that the president can remove his subordinates at will, and it would be unimaginable to think of a president who couldn't remove a cabinet official who wasn't implementing the agenda that they were elected to work on. the second important consequence in addition to the bill of rights is the location, the debate over the nation's capitol in washington, d.c. and the assumption of the national debt. for those of you watching in washington, d.c., you are there because of this debate and because james madison won this election by 336 votes over james monroe. madison emerged as the focal point of the opposition in the first congress to secretary of the treasury alexander hamilton's plan for the states, for the federal government to assume the debt of the states. see, hamilton realized this would get every state off to a good footing, it would restore the public credit of the states, it would cement the union and tie the union together.

well, the southern states had more or less paid off their bills. the northern states more or less had not. the southern states wanted to know why they should pay twice for their war debts when they had been frugal. the northern states cite if you won't come to our aid, what's the point of being in a union with you at all? people were talking about secession. a bout of influenza hit washington, d.c., nearly killed george washington. it's a very precarious time for the country. thomas jefferson runs into alexander hamilton who was usually very polished, very well dressed, clean shaven looking none of those things in front of his house. jefferson says, what's wrong? i'm going nuts, worried the public sector's going to fail. so thomas jefferson brokered a deal over wine and food at his house between james madison and alexander hamilton. madison wasn't going to vote for the plan, but he would not be

too strenuous in his opposition. there's some speculation that he and jefferson found the votes needed to put hamilton over the top. hamilton would turn around and use his influence to select the potomac site for the nation's capital. this is referred to as the first of three great compromises, and this kept the country together. what would have been different if monroe had been there instead of madison? well, number one, monroe's biggest objection to the constitution was the power of the executive. he wasn't about to vote for a new tyrant under a different name. he was very concerned about the power of the presidency. he would not have carried the banner madison had. indeed, he probably would have voted differencely. on the executive question, it's my belief that the people who believed the president didn't have the power to remove his subordinates, i think they would have carried it today, and i think the country would have crashed on the tarmac.

what can you do with a president who's beholden to every employee in the executive branch? monroe also was opposed like everyone from the south, but he couldn't have emerged the way madison did. madison was the leader of the federalist party in congress. it's important to note the difference between then and now. now the speaker of the house is the leader of his party, he's the most powerful member, but in the first congress the speaker of the house was largely confined to a ceremonial role, kind of like the british house of commons. they weren't the leader of their party. james madison's the leader of the federalist party in the first congress. and so with the leader opposing the plan of hamilton, the federalist, he was able to effectively block this legislation in a way james monroe would not have been able to. so i think these three critical things -- the bill of rights, the first great compromise and the executive question -- were all decided differently because it's 336 votes in 1789 in the fifth congressional district of virginia. >> where did you do your

research, which libraries, museums? give some examples. >> yeah. i spent a lot of time in what was called the madison reading room. named after james madison. so it was fun to be able to research james madison in a room named after him. they let me check out books and take home books that i had absolutely no business -- [laughter] being able to check out and take home. my primary source for "founding rivals" is the letters of the founding fathers themselves. i tried to let them speak for themself whenever possible. and madison was very meticulous. he cataloged every letter he ever wrote or received. james monroe, not as much, but also there was a lot i could use to get a sense of who he was and how he interacted with his compatriots. so arizona state university was an excellent resource, the library of congress was a great resource. i tried to go to the lutheran

church just to see what it would have been like when madison and monroe sat out there and debated the constitution in the snow for hours. so i got to spend a lot of time in virginia because i was working on an election there. and it was wonderful to be able to retrace the same steps and even work an election in what used to be the fifth congressional district in virginia, work to support candidates there in the footsteps of madison and monroe. so those are the two sources i looked for this research. any other questions? if. >> why do you think that this race was so overlooked by other historians? >> that's such a great question, and i get it a lot. it immediately jumped out to me as being historically significant. so if i have to make excuses for everyone -- [laughter] fall first of all, thank you for not appreciating the significance of this race or writing about things you think were more important. i think because the bookended by such consequential events on east side of it.

washington's taking the oath of office and all is well. and one of the things i try to point out in this book is that nothing's inevitable. the things you do have consequences, the actions you take in public life. the thing that is definitely within your power is to never give up. you know, madison and monroe despaired. they despaired of ever getting a government that was equal to these unionist states. after annapolis where barely anybody shows up, in philadelphia where it looks like both sides are going to walk out, when it looks like the ratification convention might not approve the constitution. it was desperate, and it was close, but they didn't give up. and so that is such an important thing that we don't consider. the steady march of history from the colonial area to independence where we knew off the bonds of the most powerful empire the world had ever seen and established unlike other revolutions, we established an orderly government. not a monarchy, not tyranny, not anarchy, but an orderly, free republican goth, and that just

was without precedent in the history of human activity. and so this is important, and it is badly overlooked by history. you know, when i first started just to read about this and not write about it, i went to the comprehensive three-volume life of madison written by reeves who was a contemporary of madison, a little bit younger than him. i thought surely this would be a great firsthand account of the election of 1789. four pages over three volumes for the most important congressional election in history. we think of congressional elections as part of trends, reactions to financial panics, to wars, rebukes to unpopular presidents. so we think of them as trends with the exception between the race of abraham lincoln and steven douglas, that is one race that we do know about, we do talk about. the places where they debated are popular tourist attractions in illinois, but if you go somewhere -- anyone here been to virginia? you can't go anywhere without seeing one of those gray and black signs to denote someone famous who lived there, some famous battle that happened

there. my favorite is the church of the blind preacher, i think it's great that they are -- take their history so seriously. but you will never find anything to denote one of the spots where madison and monroe debated each other, and hopefully some day we can change that. >> two questions. are you able, are we able to tease out any, what parts of the ticket, of the fifth congressional district of virginia, were supported one or the other candidate? were there certain segments of society that one was more or less popular with? and then secondarily, what was any role at all of thomas jefferson and george washington, two big virginians of the age? >> those are great questions. to the first, that's a great question, why did some people fall on the federalist side of things, why some people on the anti-federalist side of things. well, to generalize, federalists were people engaged in the mercantile trade, people who could see the benefit of having the same currency when i go two

miles north into maryland. i can see the benefit of having a fair judicial system when a deal goes sour in delaware. i can see the benefit of having a government with national trade policies so the british stop taxing by goods and i can open up a worldwide market. some of those folks were, you know, they said i don't know about this new government. i think it's going to invade my liberties, and i don't want see any consequence to the confederacy staying the way it is. so to generalize, that is sort of neatly why they fall in one place or another. and sometimes it isn't that neat, it's just the conclusions people drew. they were in totally unchartered territory, it was a government unlike the world had ever seen, and james madison and james monroe who were both descended from 17th century, early inhas been about thes of the -- inhabitants, both very well educated, monroe at william and mary and madison at princeton,

and they came to different conclusions. even though their service actually mirrored each other. they served on the council of state which there was a plural executive, the the colonists, once they became free americans werer the terrified of the executives. he could exercise his executive power jointly. madison and monroe both served with the governor of virginia. they came to two totally different conclusions about this, and that was true for a lot of their countrymen as well. and then the second question -- >> [inaudible] >> thomas jefferson's in paris as a minister to france during this time. he does receive the most complete postelection analysis from both madison and monroe. thomas jefferson was their dear, mutual friend. thomas jefferson once referred to madison and monroe as the twin pillars of my happiness. in fact, thomas jefferson spends

some time in trying to convince madison to move next to him. i've already got monroe. we could just hang out and retire from private life and be really happy. reading books, talking about books, talking about the big ideas of the day. so he called them the twin pillars of his happiness, so he was please today get messages from both of them saying our friendship was never set aside no matter how passionate the debate went. i felt bad about having to run against my friend. this is what happened, but we're still friends. so jefferson is over in france, but george washington very much wanted madison to win this race. and one of the first letters of congratulations that madison receives is from george washington. it was nothing that washington had against monroe. washington was responsible for promoting monroe through the ranks in the continental army. and who that lived with someone else during the winter at valley forge could ever help but see that person as a dear friend and a kinsman? i think i quote a different book where it talks about valley forge, a name associated with misery since the 18th century.

and, indeed, it was. and they lived through some of the worst fighting of the war together. but it was because washington relied on madison, his advice, his counsel. madison is really the principle adviser to washington in at least the first year of his presidency. i think to some degree that role shifts to alexander hamilton. but in the beginning it's james madison, and one of the first letters of congratulations he gets, congratulations on a majority of a respectable number of your peers, now help me write my inaugural address. he's the first author of washington's first inaugural address. congress asks madison to draft the response to washington, and madison writes this response, and he's like, wow, that was such a good speech, i don't even know how to respond. [laughter] and then washington says, well, i have to send a reply to

congress, will you help me write it? and, of course, madison was happy to oblige him. and i offer that in "founding rivals" because it is a test to the high standing that james madison

>> we were going to focus on fundamental liberties. madison here is trying to take the wind out of the sails of the anti-federal movement, so he's trying to calculate exactly what kind of measures are going to do that. first, you can look to the rights of free englishmen, the great traditions in english history that people had, the freedom that people had as englishmen. one of the great things about living under a tyrant, they had all been subject to king george iii, so you pretty much have a good idea if you had a mad tyrant governing over you, what are all the things they would try to do if they could get away with it? so, for instance, when they were trying to tax the colonists in the aftermath of the french and indian war, one of the things, you know, smuggling went through the roof, and to catch these smugglers, they decided we're

going to be able to send soldiers into your house without warning, notice, sanction from the judiciary. they're going to be able to go into your house and search to their heart's content. so people knew what they needed to protect against in the event there was a mad tyrant again. that example is fresh in your mind, so madison selects from these fundamental liberties that had a long tradition in the united states and be some of the most grievous offenses that great britain had inflicted on its colonists, and that's more or less how he introduces it. the bill of rights was originally 12 amendments, and 11 of them passed, and one of them passed in the 1990s. so you've got the first ten, you've got the bill of rights. in the 1990s, finally enough states ratified an amendment that says the following: if congress wants to increase its pay, that's fine, but the pay increase won't go into effect until there's been an election for the house of representatives in between so that people couldn't just vote themselves a

lavish salary and then retire. you're not going to touch a nickel until the voters have had their say at least on the entire house of representatives and a third of the senate. what happened was there was a student, i believe, in the 1970s at the university of texas who wrote a paper about this, and he says this is still out there, states could pass this. and his teacher gave him a failing grade. [laughter] this is the worst idea ever -- [laughter] you know, never underestimate the power of spike. he went and in those preinternet days to every legislature in america saying in case you want to, you can still do this, and why wouldn't you? it's always a winning issue to go after congress, so why wouldn't you want to pass this? so in the 1990s, finally enough states go ahead and ratify this. the 12th amendment, thank goodness we never passed this. would have guaranteed one representative, one member of the house for every 10,000 citizens. so we would be -- you think congress can't get anything done now, wait until there's 10,000

members of the house of representatives. >> what did monroe go on to do after losing the election? >> that's a great question. well, a happy ending for monroe. not at first. you know, you may be able to sense some familiar sentiments. james monroe was a very frustrated attorney. he didn't necessarily -- [laughter] didn't necessarily enjoy the practice of law. at one point, you know, early on he says i'm getting a law degree so i can run for office, it's going to be helpful in my political career, i'm never going to practice. and james monroe is winning an indictment against a man for stealing a dunbay mare from his neighbor. some things never, ever change. [laughter] what happens is there is a dret, and one of the two senators from virginia dies, and monroe is chosen to fill the vacancy. so he goes on to a fantastic

career. he is ambassador to france, he helps negotiate the louisiana purchase along with james monroe -- or james madison who was the secretary of state for thomas jefferson. the two of them will have a little bit of a falling out again over who should succeed jefferson as president. some of the opponents of thomas jefferson coalesce behind monroe as a possible candidate to go up against jefferson's chosing successor who is madison. the two of them preside over the war of 1812 together. and they will go on to be the best of friends in retirement when their public careers are over. they will serve at the end of their lives, toward the end of their lives in a state constitutional convention in virginia. those two and john marshall. and all these young hotheads. and what they're fighting over is representation in virginia. you know, there were very few slaves west of a certain line in virginia, so western virginia didn't have the reputation that eastern virginia did.

similar to a debate we had at the constitutional convention. madison and monroe tried everything. they said, well, how about one branch, maybe the senate, could be base withed on, it could be equal and maybe the house it could be, you know, we're not going to take slaves into account. they say you guys don't know what you're talking about. this is the danger of bringing old men into public life. [laughter] at first they're so excited to have them there, they elect madison to chair the convention, then you're all wet, old man. you don't know what you're talking about. and, of course, they didn't appreciate the fact that the union had once been so perilous, and they knew what it was like to live in a time when it was an open question whether america could live as one country. and if only they had listened, those old men had someless cons to seep -- lessons to teach them yet. >> did madison remain in the federalist camp, or did his time with jefferson and monroe switch him over to the democratic republicans?

>> there's a lot of discussion, i think it's clear that madison moves out of what had been traditionally the federalist orbit. you see, the two parties were roughly defined by theirings position on the constitution -- their position on the constitution. you've really removed the source of the, the source that divided the anti-federalists and the federalists. so now that the constitution, the question of whether to keep the constitution is out of the way, they find new issues to fight about. and so the new parties sort of fall on different lines. and i think buck see a split -- you can see a split between jefferson and hamilton, i think you'll find james madison was firmly on jefferson's side of that split. all right, looks like no more questions. thank you, everybody. [applause] >> for more information visit the publisher's web site, regnery.com/regnery history.

>> we'd like to hear from you. tweet us your feedback, twitter.com/booktv. >> and now on booktv, lori sandell recounts the fallout from bernie madoff's ponzi scheme and the effect it had on his family. the author was given access to all members of the madoff family and reports how mr. madoff's two sons -- andrew and mark and his wife ruth -- react today bernie madoff's illegal activities. this is about half an hour. ..

victims, we started seeing what happened to some of the people who invested with the madoffs. i started -- no shakespeare has done this. this is only shakespeare could write this. well, now, sometime later, three

years later, here we are, and i came across a book, and i want to say that it's utterly fascinating. we thought we knew everything, but we didn't, and just reading about the family and finding out that, even though bernie madoff is kind of absent from the book because you didn't interview him, but at least i as the reader, i would say, i realize this man was bully, and he bullied his wife and sons, and so they got to the point that they were afraid to ask him questions. they certainly -- he didn't answer their questions. and so there's a whole psychological element that lori managed to get into this book

that just was never in the newspapers. and i want to say that i think the madoff family was incredibly lucky to pick lori sundel because of all the possible journalists that could have written this book, because she herself grew up with a con man in her life. so i now present to you, someone who really knows what she is talking about, lori sundell. [applause] >> thank you so much for that very generous and wonderful introduction, and thank you to diesel book store for having me today. i want to tell you how the book came to be, and then i'm going read chapter from the book in

2009, i back i had written about my own father and his cons and deceptions came out. and i was reading at another book store like this one, and a woman approached me and said, you know, i can't believe you're here. i can't believe you're story, and introduced herself as the fiancee of andrew madoff. my you dropped. it was a year after the scandal and i had been finding it like everybody else, and i came to know the family over the course of two years. like so many people that have been following the story, thought andrew was most likely involved. he and his brother had known all about his father's fraud, and i was convinced ruth had to have known, and it was curiosity that got me to this story. i was a journalist, and wanted to get to the story, like most of the people in the public. and when it came time they were

ready to write a book and i was taken into the heart of their story, i was astonished to finding in thought i knew was true. so i'm going to read to you of the chapter of the confession. >> the confession. at 6:50 a.m., andrew and mark were once again pitched perched in the conference room. they one thing they knew, something was terribly wrong. by 8:00 a.m., peter had not arrived. ruth, according to court filings, had taken out some 15 million in two separate withdrawals from her brokage account in the prior three peeks. bernie asked her to move the money into heir bank account so he could use it to cover redemptions. the did his bidding

unquestioningly, the media used as proof of her involvement but the family moves money around all the time. making wire transfers. had ruth questioned bernie's directive, bernie would have bark at her and that would have been the end of the conversation. it wasn't until 9:20 a.m. that andrew spotted peter making his way across the trading floor. peter is bernie's brother. he signaled to mark and they hurried into the conference room. andrew felt the back of his neck grow hot with anticipation. peter stood by the door. i talked to your father. it's bad. he wants to talk to you himself, he said. andrew's stomach drops. he knew his uncle tended to put a positive spin on things. the brotherses followed their uncle on to the trading floor. passed their colleagues, to a large conference room. when they arrived at bernie's

office they found him sitting behind his desk, leaning back in his chair, staring at a television set. he didn't greet them or even acknowledge their arrival. andrew and peter took the two chairs facing bernie. mark sat on the couch to the left of his desk. for a few minutes they sat in tense silence don't know where to start, bernie began. his voice caught and tears welled up in his eyes. andrew felt a river of alarm. he glanced at mark. what's -- let move to the table in the corner. the four gathered it around a table where a wall provided more privacy. bernie started to talk and cooperate continue. andrew watched his father struggle for words. i can't do this here, bernie finally said. an dry looked at his father, feeling as he entered the world of surreal.

what could be so bad? why don't we go to your paper? are we all going up there? bernie said, no. peeler, you stay here and run the show. peter nodded and left the office. the coat closet was right outside bernie's office. bernie said to his secretary, have lee bring the car around. where are you going? the market is still open, eleanor jobbed, -- joked, mine you're own business, bernie snapped,; they waited for lee, watching the rain streak across the revolving doors. there was no small talk. andrew tried to blend in his surroundings, wishing he could get whatever was going to happen over with. the anticipation was unbearable. the call pulled up.

bernie was in the back seat, struggling to hold is together as though he already received bad news and was trying to cope with it. andrew stared out the window, his brain a dead zone e zone. they were dropped off in front of the entrance to the penthouse apartment. the three rode up to the 11th 11th floor entrance, and removed their shoes. they laid their coats across the bannister of the starecase, taking care not to drip water on the floor. ruth greeted them, looking grim. she had no idea why her husband rushed home but she suspected the news was bad. somehow connected to the may hem on wall street. bernie called her from the office and said, i have something to tell you. i can't tell you on the phone. i'm coming home with the boys. she had waited for them in the kitchen. together the family entered the sitting room, forbidding room that andrew never liked.

dark green walls, khaki carpeting. ruth sat in a chair next to the couch. andrew took the ottoman and andrew the difficult chair. i don't know where to start, bernie began again. he started to sob. the firm is insolvent. i'm broke. how is that possible, andrew asked in i don't understand. >> the money is gone. it's over. >> i don't understand, andrew repeated in how can that be. we're having an company year. is this about the redemptions? then bernie said something more terrible than they could have imagined. out all been one big lie. it's a giant ponzi scheme and it's been going on for year skis can't keep it going anymore. i can't do it. andrew stared at his father, a mind of jumbled disconnected thoughts and phrases. trying to piece together what his father was staying. ruth lit a cigarette.

her hand shook. what's a ponzi scheme. it means the asset management business was a fake, andrew said. i've been lying to all of you for years, i've been lying to your mother to you to the customers, i've been lying to myself. i have an appointment on monday the lawyer, and am probably going to jail. he broke down then, sobbing. andrew put his arm around his father. at that andrew started to cry, too. he got up and returned to the chair. he said, there but there was all this money? where did it go? the money is gone. i've got 50 billion in -- >> andrew glassed at his brother. he recognized the look. mark's face was red his jaw clenched. a vein worked in his temple. i still don't understand. how is this going to unfold?

andrew asked. his mind racing to process what was going to happen. i've got 100 million in cash left. i'm -- i have a large redemption coming next week. it's going to unravel. andrew asked, what about all these people? what about roger's widow, jen, are they going to get their money back? >> i'm doing my best. i have a list of people -- wait, andrew interimmed. how can you do that? they're got knowing going to keep that money. they will-bernie explained, and patiently started to outline other situations where firms failed and investors were made hold. andrew stopped him, sickened, not wanting to hear more. how long it's been going on? it's been going on for years. much has been made of when it start but the truth is no one knows. bernie started in the 60s when computers weren't used, and

record were thin. bernie claimed the scheme ban in 18992 -- 1992. and there's evidence he executed actual trades into the 80s. but whether the original ponzi scheme started when he said it i did or earlier, only bernie knows. what about me and my family dad, what's going to happen to us? i've been doing the math, bernie said. at the end of the day, the amount of money i have taken in and paid out over the years is a wash. mark spit out, this is bullshit, he yelled, and stormed out of the room. andrew went after his brother. mark would yanking his coat over his arms. i'm leaving. >> kerrick let's go, andrew said. he followed his brother into the elevator out into the fall drizzle. clyde stuck his head out of the window. what am i doing? the andrew shouted. the old man is still upstairs.

you're waiting for him. mark stepped off the curb and caught a cab. andrew step in as well. the cab driver said, where to? andrew said, just drive. andrew felt grateful. he could think. mark said, we need a lawyer right now? how, what do we do walk into the lobby and scream help? no, we need a real lawyer. a criminal defense one. let's call marty. he'll know what to do. marty london was a retired senior litigator at paul white. he represented spiro agnew and jackie kennedy in her lawsuit. he and his wife, pink, were staying at a hotel while they're apartment was being rennovated. marked leaped into he partition. take to us 49th street and first avenue. the cab turned left. stephanie, what are you doing

right now? he listened, his face going red. make an excuse. just get her out of there. mark and andrew rode the rest of the way in silence, each in his own world of fear. ruth sat at the bank head in her kitchen, smoking one cigarette after another. bernie had returned to the office. there had been no agonizing embraces or recriminations. he told her he had two more checks to deposit and he was lonning to go to the office in the morning to pay the traders. she nodded, yes, yes, okay. after he left, she sat there, a complete zombie. eventually she rose and made her way into the bedroom to dress for the office christmas party which was scheduled for that night. for the occasion she bought a black shirt with silver detailing on the collar. as she fumbled with the small buttons, she had the thought,'ll never wear this again. she paired it with a black skirt

and pair of tall suede boots with a heel. the thought of not attending the christmas party didn't cross ruth's mind. of course she and beie -- bernie were going. bernie said, we have to show up and act like everything is fine. yes, she movedded again numbly, yes. it was noon when andrew and mark entered marty's office. a pile of suitcases was by the front door. marty greeted them. what is going on? it was mark's turn to do the talking. my father just confessed to a huge crime. he said his whole business is a pop si scheme, the firm is insolvent and 50 billion is missing. 50 million? marty asked. no, 50 billion, he said. marty paused, oh, boy, i need to sit down. my entire retirement fun is with him. but that not important.

tell me everything he said andrew and mark repeat everything they could remember about the conversation they had with their father. >> do you think he is sane in do you think he was telling you the truth? >> yeah, andrew said. he wasn't having a psychotic break. marty sank into a chair. this is incredible. we need the firm's senior litigator and the only guy you want to talk to in this situation. he has a ton of experience. he picked up the phone and called his firm. get me pflumenbaum, and then he heard pflumenbaum answer and he launched into a description of the events. i have my son-in-law and his brother here and they have given me an incredible story. i need to see you right now. pflumen balm asked for more details. his father just confessed to a huge crime and we need to talk about it right away, he urged. >> okay, can be there by 3:00 p.m.

marty turned to mark and andrew, who were looking at him as their savior. okay. he's going to come with his associate, andrew. he is the firm's newest partner, rising star in the litigation area. the two of them are perfect. do what you have to do and meet back here at 3:00 p.m. andrew and mark left the hotel room and stood on the street, feeling lost. they had two hours to kill. finally mark said, i'm going to home. i tea to talk to stephanie. all right, andrew said. i'm going back to the office. he walked back to the building. as he passed through the trading room he saw his colleagues on the trading side of the floor working the phones. some were yelling, others joking around. on the market side, traders withfounding, absorbs numbers. andrew stared at the unfamiliar landscape of their desks. he entered his office. hi days had always been spent at his difficult on the trading floor and his private office wasn't a place he spent lots of time. he might go in the morning, put

his brief case down and take a call. now he just sat down and stared into face. peter popped his head into the door. how okay? no, i'm not okay. this is awful. what are you doing? mark and i are meeting with an attorney at 3:00 p.m. okay. peter slipped away. andrew stat staring at the pictures of his kids and his awards and honors he received. drained, frightened and exhausted, more than anything he was trying to understand what happened 50. billion. the number didn't register. were it true it would make the asset business one of the biggest -- he turned at the events over and over in his head, playing and replaying the conversations. his phone rang. it was katherine. fiancee. should i get mr. hair done or not, she asked, sounding as if she war a million miles away. an andrew had no idea what she was talking about.

>> for the party. are we going? oh, yes, we're going, i think. i have to run. he walk out of his office without knowing the next time he would return would be six months later, accompanied by his attorneys and the fbi so he could recover his personal effects. marty's pflumen balm and andy arrived at 3:00 p.m. start. pflumenbaum was in his 50s. the lawyers were both wearing suits and ties. marty started to recap the story for his colleagues. are you familiar with bernie madoff? the boys toll me he is running a ponzi scheme to the tune of 50 bill -- billion? 50 million? 50 billion, w a before. no one could wrap their ahead around the figure. it would anyone bernie madoff

committed the biggest financial fraud in history. over the next hour, pflumenbaum asked andrew and mark to describe in department who they were, their jobs at the firm, their relationship their parents and their wives and asked them repeatedly if they were involved the in the fraud. we had no idea. we were completely blind-sided. they wrapped up the story and pflumenbaum closed his notebook. we need to report that and i'm not sure how to do that. we have a new partner from the sec. the clock was ticking. it was already 5:00 p.m. soon the secs'ss would closed. they had to get someone on the phone bit had to be the right person. are you comfortable doing this, he asked in a clear sense that pflumenbaum was in charge. he one going to give them any other option but to do the right thing. yes, let's do it, andrew said, let's do it, mark repeated. andrew look at his brother,

we're doing the right thing. mark nodded. reflecting on the moment andrew says i would love to say that mark and i war waving the flag of justice in the air but we were terrified. we knew what we were doing was going to send our father to jail and it was awful, absolutely awful. give me a minute, andrew said. he walk out into their bedroom, feeling his knees crumble. sinking to the ground, holding on to a radiator, he let out a sob that tore through his chest and burned his throat. doubling over, he clenched his stomach, trying not to vomit. when the sob subsided he wipedway the tears and stood up. he returned the living room and sat down. he sent katherine a text. we're not going tonight. then he turn to pflumenbaum. make the call, he said. with instructions to share nothing with their wives, andrew and mark left the hotel suite.

they got into separate cabs. andrew headed to the apartment he moved into two days earlier. he walked in the front door. turn into his bedroom and hey down on half of the bed. he was still wearing his overcoat, suit, and shoes. for four hours he lay there complete completely numb while a live feed rap across his brain. my entire family is invested with him. every friend, many employees, everybody i know. who knows how many others. i just turned my father in for securities fraud. he's going to go to jail. as andrew stared at the ceiling he wracked his brain for some inning long to see this coming. how could he miss something this big? but nothing came, other than an image of his father rotting in jail because he and his brother turned him in. he had no idea how much time passed before katherine slipped into the bed. a beautiful woman who brought so

much joy into his life. she waited. her huge blue eyes searching his. her last moment of not knowing. he couldn't bear the thought of living if she left. he couldn't ask her to stay. andrew sat up. leaned over and turned on the light. you need to decide whether or not you want to stay with me. he doesn't remember what he said after that. but when andrew and katherine crawled under the covers at the conclusion of the longest, most painful day of his life, katherine said something that would be seared into his enemy rhythm listen, i'm not going anywhere. wake me up if you need. my will be here all night. she wrapped her armed around him, in that moment, he says, those words saved his life. he wouldn't have to face this alone. he had said those same words back to her every night since. weeks later bernie and ruing celebrated their anniversary and they went to the christmas party. ruth smiled, had a glass of wine and left. beyond that she doesn't remember

a thing. the evening is filled with trauma and terror. the only memory she cannot rerace is the image of her son mark fleeing her home, the mama's boy who called her every day from college, who had given her three grandchildren and with one of the way. it is the -- last image she would have of her son. she never saw him again. [applause] >> and i'm happy to take questions if anybody has questions about absolutely anything. >> i'll start with the obvious. [inaudible] >> bernie madoff is serving 150 years in prison, and andrew has vowed never to speak to his father again, and has no knowledge. also, ruth changed her number so

beie couldn't get in touch with her and we have no knowledge whether he has read the book. we assume he has read the book and will read the book because he has been very involved in anything that comes out about him. so we'll see. >> i'm pursuing an interview with him, actually. >> a new book. >> well, a magazine article. >> can you tell us any interesting things that have happened as you mow promoted the book or people came up to you or anything like that? >> that's a great question. basically it has been a very interesting experience since the book came out. i wasn't sure -- obviously this is an unauthorized biography. i would not put my name on the book if i didn't believe entirely in its content but it's

sympathetic to the relatives of bernie madoff, and to the extent to which people's lives were destroyed, there's so much anger so much hatred so much sadness so much wrapped around this story, that a lot of people have been unable to separate bernie's family from bernie himself, and i thought there would probably be a lot of outcry, and there has been. i haven't personally been accosted or anything like that. there's also been very interestingly a lot of people that have had their minds changed. the night before my book came out, "60 minutes" did a piece on the book and on andrew and ruth madoff, and a lot of people had their minds changed as a result of that "60 minutes" piece, and andrew and katherine have gotten hundreds of letters from people saying, that happened to me, too. so, there's been a surprising kind of amount of that as well. and they have had literally,

from the general public at large, from the media, there's been no support, you know, leading up to this because people automatically assumed they were involved. i assumed until i really spent significant time with them. >> when you were approached to write the book, what was your initial reaction? >> well, i wasn't actually approached to write the book. it happened much more organically than that. i read from a book i had wherein about my own impostor father. the fiancee of andrew was at my reading and wanted to spend time with me, and the first couple of dinners i had with him, spent the first thanksgiving after the scandal, and i'm estranged from my own father for similar reasons and they invite mid to thanksgiving, and as a journalist i was curious what it would be like, and it was very interesting, and there were lot of new friends they made since the scandal.

mark was is not there. that is a huge rift between the brothers i go into in great detail that i had no idea about until i got to know them. after two years they were finally ready to tell their story, and finally allowed to tell their story because there's been settlementsings and have been muzzled by lawyers and at that point it was obvious i would sit down with them. even two years into my acquaintanceship with them it was not convinced of andrew's innocence, and it really wasn't until i sat down with him and he gave me such a detailed explanation about the way the businesses were separate. the fact that they were completely investigated by the government. their files, every single computer file. everything was taken apart. they were never indicted. the people that are ready -- in jail or awaiting trial would have every reason in the world to turn in the brothers or ruth if they were able to, to get a reduction in their own sentence and weren't able to do so. so there were many mitigating factors and the psychological

component that come vinceed me. -- convinced me. >> you need the microphone. >> i may be confused about this. there is a book coming out that is going to be written by the fiancee? >> no, no. the fiancee of andrew madoff? >> yes. no she participate in this book. >> this is the book she is connected with. >> andrew -- she was instrumental in giving me access to the family. the family was completely muzzled, quiet, not speak fog any press whatsoever. i was really the first person they spoke to and that was a result of my enter enterinteractions with cathry. questions? >> i'm just curious, as you

explored the story, how did you -- did it change how you thought about your own father? i read your other book. and that was so great. and just wondering what the tie is between the two? >> that's such a great question. you know, i have not spoken to my father -- my father has not spoken to me since 2003. when i wrote a piece for esquire. i wrote the piece anonymously and that led to a graphic memoir i wrote in el. and it's about a betrayal and in the beginning i had feelings about my mother and my father, and it was really interesting for me to sort of -- watch them at the beginning of that process themselves to see how much anger andrew has against his father and against his mother, which is starting to abate through the process of time, what she went

through during the whole thing. andrew and his brother left after the confession and didn't speak to their parents again until mark killed himself. so andrew had no contact with his mother for two years. so, to watch him do that, puts my own story into perspective, and while i'm -- the anger towards my father has long since abated and i would speak to my father if he wanted to speak to me, i feel like it's a process and i'm seven years into the process and andrew is right at the beginning of it. so i've been able to sort of talk to him about what my experience was, but you just have to go through it and it takes time. >> anyone have any other questions? no? okay. thank you very much for having me. [applause]

policy not to discuss the films i'm making while i'm making them for all the obvious reasons. >> are you currently working on one? >> maybe. i just don't talk about it. they just appear when they appear, and i just -- it's not in the best interests of the film to give a heads up. before i made cycle, i made the mistake of saying i was making a film about the healthcare industry, and the health care industry went on high alert and the pharmaceutical companies really went on high alert, and even though it was really about the insurance industry, they spend hundreds of thousand office dollars preparing for me.

i had all these internal memos sent to me from people who work at different pharmaceuticals who said, we had an in-service where they had a michael moore actor to come in case mockal moore shows up pfizer had a hotline, if i show up at an office to call this number in new york. and they went to potter, the executive of sigma health insurance, and when he was the vice president, he talk about hundreds of thousands -- millions of dollars they spent helping to discredit me to attack me, to -- if necessary, figuratively, not literally, i hope, push me off a cliff. so they -- so i learned my lesson there, that it's not a good idea to give them advance notice what i'm working on. >> and booktv interviewed

wendell potter on the book. you can go to booktv.org. just use the search function. this e-mail: as an iranian american i'm concerned about rumors you may be planning a trip to iran. the progovernment press has written more than once that you have been invited to come to iran and you have accepted. they would consider that a coup if it happens. >> guest: i have been invited for many years. one of my films won the top prize at the tehran film festival in iran a number of years ago, and the prize was a beautiful persian rug they sent me. i'm not going iran to the film festival. i don't know if it's really -- the thing is, with iran, i've been very active in the last

year -- they've had a couple of filmmakers that have essentially been under house arrest, and i've been active with other filmmakers in the country to try to convince the iranian government to leave them alone, let them make their films. some of the greatest filmmakers in iran right now. they're really, really good. so there's definitely a country that loves the movies. and i think -- we saw through the green movement here a year or two ago there's huge, a huge sent independent the -- sentiment in the country to be free of the dictates of those who would want to run the country. iran is a democracy on a certain level. they actually do have free elections. anyone can run. and there's been a couple documentaries about this i've

seen, really incredible. so i try to avoid any sort of evil axis of evil discussion because i know that there are people in our government, now now that we have had our way with iraq, want to move on to the next boogieman, and iran seems to be it, and certain forces want us to go to war or bomb iran or things like that. so i try to avoid any kind of -- i don't want to be associated with anything to do with my government attacking anybody else again on this planet. so, i think we leave it to the iranian people. i think the iranian people are going stand up and get the country they want, and i'm hopeful for that. >> host: this this michael moore's most recent book, here comes trouble. stories from the life. john in portland, oregon, you're on the air. >> guest: hey, michael. i have seen a few of your propaganda films and you try to

edit thing so people think something that happened that didn't. and i wanted to ask about fahrenheit 911. you have a section where you're asking congressmen to send their kids to iraq and run congressmen said he had two nephews in afghanistan and you edited that he doesn't respond and walks off and that's not what happened. i want to know why you didn't clue his actual response if you're a documentarian. >> guest: thank you for the question. first of all in that particular scene, i asked a very specific question, and i asked it of every congressman i ran into, republican or democrat would you send your son, your son our daughter to iraq? he wouldn't answer the question. instead he tried to -- and a number of others did this, too i have a nephew, i've god an uncle. i've got a cousin, i got

somebody down the block that's in iraq right now. and it's like, no, don't think you understand my question. would you send your son or your daughter -- not your sister's son or daughter -- your son or your daughter. he wouldn't answer the question. they don't want to answer that question because at that time when i made the film, it was only, i think, one member of congress who actually had a son or daughter in iraq. and i just thought, wow, that's interesting. 535 members of congress, a majority of them voted for the war. but they don't seem to want to be willing to sacrifice someone from their own family. send kids from the other families, those that live on the side of the tracks. let them do that. that was the point of that and he was giving me a politician dodge answer, saying he had some relative over there.

that wasn't my question. i wanted to know -- i still think it's a relevant question. if you're going to vote for war, would you be willing to send your son or daughter there? i was over -- i had not seen the world war ii memorial until yesterday. and i went over there. and when you walk in, on the very first stone as you walk into the memorial, it says world war 2 memorial, big letters, and then big letters, it says george w. bush, and it really kind of shocked me for a second. i'm think, oh, it's because he was president when it opened. i'm thinking, i don't see that on the washington monument who was president. i don't see a plaque on the jefferson memorial who was president when that opened. what is his name specifically doing on the world war ii? here aguy who supported the vietnam war but wouldn't go. i mean, at least clinton dodged

it, too. but he was opposed to the war. so that's a consistent position. he didn't like the war, so he didn't want to go. get that. okay. but bush, he was for the war back then, and he thought other people should go, not him. so strings are pulled and he is in the national guard, and his name is on the very first stone as you enter the world war 2 enemy -- world war ii memorial, a war that americans died in and your name is on this? it took me back. so this caller's question about, yes, they're really got at supporting war, getting us into wars, but if they had to die or their kid had to die, hey, i don't know about that. let somebody else's kid die. it's just abhorrent to me. >> host: there's a story in hero here comes trouble" curt father and his world war ii experience

and also a story in n there about you taking a trial run to canada. >> guest: yes mitchell dad was in the first mao -- first marine division in world war ii, island battles, on the beaches and horrific stuff. and i tell the story about the christmas day of 1943 and he was in a battle in new guinea, and it was a friendly fire incident where he and his unit had taken a hill, and the american planes comeing in thought they were japanese on the hill and they strafed the hill, and i think every guy in my dad's unit was shot. one was killed. 13 were wounded. everyone was shot but my dad. the only one that didn't get shot by the planes coming in, thinking they're were japanese. he told me growing up, eave

christmas day he remembers, he was grateful for being alive, that somehow he survived that incident. and i tell a longer story of it in the book. my incident with -- of course i was opposed to the vietnam war, as i said earlier, and as i became near draft age, i'm thinking, what am i going to do. >> i'm not going to kill vietnamese, and so i and some buddies decided -- we were like 16 or 17 years old -- we weren't going to go to jail. we weren't going to go do service some other service. you could do that for the government. we decided we were going to move to canada if we had to. and so we knew nothing about canada. and one day we took a car and a boat over to port huron, michigan to do a dry run to see how we would escape to canada if we had to. we got over there and we forgot

the motor to the boat. so we couldn't take that. so we decided to try to take the car across the bridge and we thought we would be met with he military and we were all scared and the other guys were smoking a joint so they could relax, and i didn't do any drugs so i was the designated driver, and i tell the story about getting across the blue water bridge and into canada and our great escape. of course, the next year there was a draft lottery and my number came up like number 273 or something like that, so i wasn't drafted. >> host: richard, thanks for holding. you're on. >> guest: mr. moore, an absolute pleasure to be speaking with you this afternoon. how are you doing? >> guest: thank you, sir. i'm doing well. >> caller: i have a question to ask. i contacted my local american cancer society concerning an event they're going to be holding.

i suffer from a brain injury and some other illnesses. and your piece on -- was absolutely beautiful. i loved it. my question, sir, is how do i approach or how would i go about approaching the american cancer society concerning a study they did in 1974 with thc shrinking tumors in mice and them not wanting to go that direction. >> guest: i do have some memory of something about that. i can't speak to it. i will say this with thc, which is an active ingredient in marijuana.

our drug laws in this country -- this is another whole show -- just so out of whack, and things like that, where medical marijuana, things have been trying to use it to help people. i think years from now historians are going to wonder why we did so many things we do. i would say for you and -- i get questions like this all the time, actually, from people who -- they see my movie and they need help because of a medical problem, or their hmo won't pay for them to see a specialist. these insurance companies want to provide as little care as possible because that's how they make a profit, and so i would say to you, sir, that definitely get behind -- there's organizations that are trying to free up the studies, use these

drugs. there are people who have been fighting the fda for a long time because they take so long when treatments that are being used in europe and other places aren't being used here. but remember, the fda, of course, is controlled essentially by the lobbyists so the pharmaceutical companies and others who have a vested interest in making a profit in sicko, i told the story of jonas salk, who invented the polio vaccine. and people were shocked he didn't want to trademark it, didn't want to copyright it. he decided to just give it away for free to the american people, for the world, and he said he thought it would be immoral if he were to own that or to make a profit. he said, i'm a doctor,

researcher, i get a great salary, i live in a big house. what more do i need? i did this for the people. where is that? where is that sense of -- i mean, talk about patriotism? not just for america but for the world. we don't have that much these days, and i sure would like to see more of it. >> you-watch this and other programs online at booktv.org. >> a short author interview from the campaign 2012 bus as it travels the country. >> you work in different communities with several professors to talk with people about democracy. tell us how you decided to do you research and why. >> trying to understand the relationship between globalization and democracy. the end of the 20th century in

the united states was full of changes that really changed people's lives in a lot of ways. and so we wanted to understand, what does that mean for local democracy? for people's everyday capacity to make a difference in their communes? to participate in the governance of their communities? to make things better? and so the seven of us chose five different communities in north carolina that have experienceed globalization differently. there will two communities that we chose that include durham county, north carolina, and they're landscapes of consumption. the economy is dominatedded be the consumption of something, whether it's educational services or medical services or the tourism economy that is vital.

communities dominated by what we -- there's an -- refers to finances, insurance and real estate. those are institutes of consumption. we also chose two minutes that were characterized as landscapes of production and those are economies that are dominated by manufacturing, agriculture, resource based economies, and those were in eastern north carolina and chatham county, north carolina. the third economic landscape we looked at was a landscape of the state. and these are communities, maybe state capitols or maybe communities that host military bases, and the fortunes of those communities are determined by much broader economic -- broader political decisions made either in the state capital or in washington, dc or something like that. so, by looking at these five

different communities with these three very different kinds of economic bases, we got to see how people's lives are impacted differently by the broad global economic changes of the mid-20th century. >> you talked with people about political participation and a lot of people sometimes think of that just as voting. what were you looking for? what is democratic political partition look like? >> we're anthropologists, socialow cultural anthropologist we're interested in talking to people about what they do, rather than giving to much emphasis on something like voting and saying, voting is up or down. rather than thinking about what people are or are not doing, as many other pundits and scholars have done, we went out to talk with people, to sit in their living rooms, to participate in

civic organizations, to follow along with nonprofit organizations or community groups or neighborhood watch groups. we sat in all these different environments. reading the newspaper. following people around, trying to figure out what are people doing? if they're not participating in bowling leagues north american, what are -- anymore, what are other ways people are doing to improve their communities, and we found in spite of pretty dramatic obstacles of social inequality, obstacles of intense burdens on time, that families are working more and more, many families have multiple jobs and are struggling with things like child care and the political system is becoming more and more confusing to navigate. in spite of all that, there's this enormous creativity and people doing interesting things. >> how did you conduct your a

research? >> well, we had in each of our five communities we had a group of staff who were there full time more than 12 months, and with research prior 12 months and followup research for six months and have followed up over the years since then. the primary research period was an intense 12 months, working more than 40-hour work weeks, whenever public meetings are taking place, whenever a particular controversy happens. we interview people in in-department interviews, numerous times when, anymore you want to interview, they're busy so you follow them along and say, you don't have time for an interview but do you mind if i take this road trip and you talk to them along the way to

understand their lives and the things that are important to them. we meticulously documented public meetings and public debates. so we got a really sort of on the ground look at the ways that people participate in local governance. >> where did you learn about the ways media effect about how people think about democracy? you wrote about how they put is in categories, some people are apathetic or angry. dot that have an effect on people's participation? >> it does have an effect on people's participation. i think when we interviewed people about that, we did a number of lifetime participation in local politics interviews of people. and we found certain themes people feel guilty about not participating more than they do. they're sometimes afraid of participating, and that ads to the additional feeling of --

obstacles. but we have taken our eye have the ball and where we're striking out when it comes to understanding american politics, and where key decisions are made, how they're made and how people are participate, by focusing on as many pundits do or as many scholars do or -- in the media in general, i think that we just -- the whole conversation is just off. it just doesn't match up with people's lives. that we're -- perhaps we're using outdated terms. perhaps we're reflecting on -- perhaps we're missing the boat because society has changed and our way of understanding has not kept pace. i think what our book has done has allowed us to see new forms,

that nonprofit organizations have become increasingly important to governance at the local and regional and federal level and people's participation in nonprofit organizations in a variety of ways needs to be understood as part of american democracy. we need to look at the ways that people are cabbing -- carving out new spaces for themselves, rather than looking bat to what people did 50 years ago and say, this is something -- participation in this old form is increasing or decreasing, we need to ask the question, well, what are people doing today? and how does that matter and what is the opportunities and obstacles that exist that people are finding, and the work they're doing. >> have you seen -- do you think since you have done your research, we're on the path to getting people more meaningfully involved in political partition?

>> yes, but it's mixed. it's mixed because many new opportunities have developed for direct civic engagement, and it can be very meaningle -- meaningful engagement. we don't write about this in the book but i like to think about the way so many other aspect of american democracy voters -- citizens are often responding to the actions of others. so if you're voting, you're responding to the candidates that you're presented with. if you're writing a letter to a political leader, then you're responding to something they have done or something that has happened, or if you take up a protest, you're responding to something that has you smite. but win you form a nonprofit group, it's a uniquely pro-active space where you have an opportunity to create a mission statement and create something that didn't exist

before and that's a new space in american democracy that wasn't so relevant in the middle of the 20th century but it's important now. the challenge is that's really complicated. when you take an increasingly complicated political system that we have in the united states, and you recognize that it takes enormous business acumen and takes enormous political literacy, takes enormous amount of time to be fully engaged in this, then it starts to raise red flags. and consider also that many scholars, many people have reported that there's a growing divide between rich and poor in the united states. we have a shrinking middle class. and this is fairly well documented shift in american demographic. but what we have looked at is

the way that that social and economic inequality that exists in the united states impacts and contributes to a broad political divide, and there's a parallel story to be told alongside this growing trend and a growing divide between rich and poor, we have a growing divide between civic engagement. >> you work on a college campus so as a professor do you see more involvement by student who are in college compared to people in north carolina? do people need to get involved earlier? >> what i see is with students that i see is they're finding new ways to get engaged, and they're redefining what it means to be politically active. social media is part of that. there's t