actually gain more by standing up to his presidents than by agreeing to what he wanted. and indeed the famous moment when he upgraded the president the white house, he went up 10 points in the israeli public opinion, which is unheard of in the relationship that israeli to american presidents because they know they depend on the american president for their security at the end of the day. so essentially, what happened was he lost the israeli parliament -- and he thereby failed to deliver on the israeli side and he? the republicans but because they don't want the u.s. president to distance himself from israel. they want the u.s. president to deliver israel.

and when he didn't do either, i mean, they turned their backs on him, too. so we ended up with the worst of both worlds. his support in the arab world today notwithstanding everything he did is also down in the double digits. >> do you want to and at 10:20? more questions? gas commissary. great there in the middle. >> martin, following up on that question. how was it the president got himself in the framework of andy noted there is a key obstacle they've decided that of the freezer doing nothing about, having a backup plan if the israelis should feasted. how did that come about? >> is a long story.

essentially, i is a different view about the settlements freeze and conventional wisdom. i don't think it was a mistake to go for a settlements freeze. it was important in the context of the time was settlements have been particularly deleterious in the effort to try to achieve a breakthrough, where palestinian authority had been doing a credible job on their commitments under the road map to find terrorists and israel had an obligation under the roadmap to freeze all seven minute twiki. the problem lies in making that, turning it in a sensitive precondition and then when the president was giving his special middle east envoy, george mitchell, the ability of the instructions to go and negotiate something less than a full settlement freeze with netanyahu, which took 10 months and in the end they came up with what was important moratorium on

all settlement activity in the west bank. that was quite an itchy red. but failing to adjust from the rhetoric of a full settlement freeze to the actual sediments moratoria and that they ended up achieving created a situation in which they came out this committee or say is that? that is now chief thomas says. they say you promised us a full settlement. and that there again you have this highlight between the expectations generated by the rhetoric of the president and these pragmatism involving the deal that leads to a gap between what he promised and what he deliver. and that i think is the problem in the way that impacts a negative than the chance is getting negotiation. >> looking for a non-middle east peace process questioning.

so only if you have your hand up for a non-middle east peace process question. yes, commissary, gentlemen right there in the third row. >> thanks. i reported the afp news agency. this is something you addressed more than the others, but did any of the americans decline. is this something you've seen evolve in obama's first term, trying to address the perceptions are somehow china, for example that the united states is something that is involved in how cannot change in a second term? >> i think my idea changed when i read bob kagan's article. he was focused more on highlighting that america will play a leadership role globally for the long-term future as this administration has gone along, as he is kind of gotten his

footing. potentially i don't know this from personal contacts, potentially became more appreciative of the reality that if you don't convey optimism and dynamism about the future, if we can do in the president. the shadow of the future is large and certainly at this point, he points i think, by the way, absolutely right to the reality that in most dimensions of power and the thinks you look at to project future power, america remains utterly extraordinary. what is screwed up by two things. one is our national politics, ability to make tough decisions and the reality that would in the coming decade have fiscal problems if we don't take steps now to change the truetype jury. and so, those are the two achilles heels.

and if we can't and the second obviously is if we can't change the jury on the national politics and therefore the national compact and who are going to address our fiscal problems, frankly are enormous advantages are going to erode over time the rapidly than anyone can see. i think he is stressing the positive and he recognizes full well in the wake of this election, he is got to be able to develop a capacity to take very tough decisions on everything from entitlements to security that is realistic about the future or were going to be in serious trouble. >> i think that's a great answer. it's a lot of strengths to talk about in the book, but no getting away from the urgency of this task.

>> is thought to be the last question. >> american service committee. do cuba, chavez and venezuela towards a failed state south of our border matter at all in relation to the things you've been discussing? >> we do a just a couple things about africa or latin america but you relatively put on the book of this matters because obama has had relatively little as president in those areas. on chavez and castro to get castro to give them an a+ for future at the right policy was to ignore these guys any made one after a piece of the shadows as though i recall from presidency and basically otherwise has allowed these policies to be tertiary, priorities at best. there's a few things to be a little more proactive vis-à-vis our friends and ignoring castro

and chavez is the right thing to do on what is basically his policy. i think auteurs mexico and colombia, with dave pilate to problems in recent years. it has not been nearly as distinctive as either of his two predecessors so far. i don't have the right policy in mind for what he should do in either place. colombia is at a point redesignate is much american authors of the one state. obama didn't need to do as much as clinton or bush. i'm mexico obviously he needs to figure out a way to do more. but we haven't yet come up with that proposal and it's an interconnected policy tied into things like immigration reformers had difficult going tied into issues like trade agreements birdies had a tough go. so i think i will simply say on this issue he's been so far distant as for what he hasn't done. there are a lot of policies in

the world for a two-year president can make a big mark but this is a bit overdue to brace going to have to do more for his successor will have to do more. >> with that, let me just say if you've gotten a flavor of the depth and breadth of wisdom here about this administration about these policies in general, it is just a small taste of what is in this vote, which i really commend to you is the only book of its kind out there right now that relate to is this kind very sober of the obama administration. i hope you will join in congratulating and thinking our panelists here. [applause] >> often asked, lee stout recounts the nixon administration success of promoting women to executive

situations. the initiative is led by barbara hackman franklin who was hired in 1971 to enlist enough candidates to fill high-level positions. this is about an hour and a half. >> good evening. i am david courier, are pervasive in the united states and its a pleasure to welcome you to the theater. a special welcome to a c-span viewers. tonight we had the distinguished panel and will take a look at it that'll discussed topic, the role of women in the administration of president richard m. nixon. our panelist will discuss how the tenure of the nixon appointed women shaved opportunities for later generations of women as presidential as distant and advisors enhancing agents seized and departments. i want to extend a banks to

barbara hackman franklin and the richard nixon foundation for their roles in making today's program possible. ron walker who is chairman of the foundation is with us tonight. where are you, ron? was with us tonight. a special thanks to him for making this event possible also. ron was in the nixon white house view is the very first rector of the white house office of presidential at hand and he is the one responsible for a very important advance in the trip to china. >> before we begin the program and like to mention two programs that will take place during the mcallen teetered this month. tuesday march 27:00 p.m. the charles guggenheim center presents the film california state of lines the legacy of pat around synthetic into political power in california in the 1960s takes a new significance now that pat brown's son, jerry

was with then governor. the film is followed by a panel discussion led by historian michael bash lost. on sunday, march 25 at 2:00 p.m. a preview of the forthcoming pbs films that dustbowl will be showed and tells the story of an ecological disaster and the limits of government and her perseverance that the people affected. it's sponsored by the guggenheim center in partnership with the 2012 environmental film festival in washington. to learn more about these programs that offer a public programs, consult our calendar of monthly events. there are copies in the lobby a or you can receive this by mail, physical mail or virtual mail. also find brochures about other national archives come activities and events. another way to get more involved in the national archives is to become a member of the foundation for the national archives. to support the education act entities and their applications

outside in the lobby. if you have the visitor gets up recently, please do so. physically or virtually. a wonderful array for the records of the government and the most popular record, especially significant tonight is the photograph of richard nixon and elvis presley. tonight's program is titled a matter of simple justice. it's a subject largely discussed today at the nixon administration more than any previous presidency by the opportunities for women in government. the panel took a look at the aspect of the nixon presidency. our moderator is judy woodruff, coanchor of "pbs newshour" and veteran journalist has covered politics and other news from within three decades and cnn, nbc and pbs. previously woodruff served as an

curve and senior correspondent for cnn hosting the political program inside politics and other major news coverage. early in her career she covered the white house for nbc news. and she doesn't think she was visiting professor at duke university sanford institute of public policy or she was an undergraduate and where i in rabid librarian. after serving as a visiting fellow at harvard university's center on the best politics public policy. currently she also hosts a monthly programs for bloomberg television as judy was great. then they turn the program now to you, judy. welcome. >> thank you very much. [applause] i am delighted to be here for so many reasons because this is a wonderful book that my friend, barbara franklin has produced. i urge all of you to read if you

haven't already. i'm delighted to be here because this is international women's day, so the timing is perfect. it is a day when we celebrate the accomplishments of women not just in this country, but around the world at the same time we considered in many regards, in many respects how far women have yet to go. i know this has been a day to think about that as we showed every day. but of course today in particular. but the timing, barbara for this program could not be more special, more fortuitous. i have to say as i thought about what we are going to be talking about tonight, but about the day we celebrate women and i was reminded of what the comedian writer, charlotte whitten famously said she wrote in order -- is that in order to be thought half as talented as men, women have to be twice as good. and she said luckily this is not

difficult. [laughter] so i thought that was an appropriate that trap for a conversation this evening. as you just heard, this is about what happened with faster in the nixon administration with regard to women. i would argue that it really does have to do with the progress of women in this country ever since because what happens in the late 1960s in the early 1970s set the stage for so much of the progress in so many opportunities that have taken place for women in the united states since then. so this is really in my mind a pivotal moment for women in the united states. so that is why it is incredibly important to consider what is in this book. so let's begin by meeting the panelists. there's an extensive biology in the program. let's say to immediate right

there is a congresswoman, former chairman of the maritime commission, representative helen notley. but spoke of representative play. [applause] and the santerre, barbara hackman franklin about whom the book is. barbara will be talking a lot about you tonight. barbara. [applause] and finally, lee stout with pittsburg state university. i'm sorry, penn state. forgive me. penn state and pittsburgh pennsylvania. i'm sorry. i got this tape right. penn state. but the most important reason we have here is because this is his a.

"a matter of simple justice" the untold story of barbara hackman franklin and accused good women. so now that i've completely mangled your credentials, i'm going to start with you and ask you to tell us, to remind all of us why you wrote this book. what was said? was the impetus behind it? >> the impetus was really barbara. there's no question about that. the penn state university archives has a program where we try to collect papers that distinguished alumni and one of our distinguished alumni was barbara and nancy eaton had made contact with her and our predecessors i came to washington to meet with her and we talked after she has served as secretary of commerce in utah about the possibility of her papers coming to penn state. she agreed that would be acceptable to her.

we talked about her experiences in government. of course they knew she was secretary of conquerors and she had an extensive career before that and in the course of conversation i asked her, how did she get started in this? she said i started in the nixon administration and recruited women for executive positions in the government and has kind of taken aback beard i didn't know they'd been such a program. as it turns out, very few people seem to know there have been such a program. i kind of made a mental note that maybe this would be something we wanted to spend a little more time on later and we proceeded to take barbara's papers out of her storage locker in the basement of the watergate welding. i was that it is wonderfully ironic the retaking nixon's administration records out of the basement of watergate. and from her home in connecticut and offices in washington. as he began to go through them,

we saw -- at least i thought that this is quite later the other very significant neck dvd and effort for tinnitus and i came back to barbara and said we need to really do something more here. i think an oral history project with you the best approach. she agreed and she took it from there. >> sawicki was that? >> that was 95. >> middle 90s. >> what did she think when he came to from your alma mater and said, this is what you should think about? >> well, i didn't know what oral history voice. i now know a lot. lee has been our guide and teacher. he convinced me this to be a good way to capture what really happened back then. and by then it was late 60s, early 70s and we better get started because we are going to lose the people who redhaired

and we wanted their stories. the woman as well as the men. i want to say that a lot of people made this chapter of reality. i was on that point in the white house and the personnel shot but i malik and i became a household name because there wasn't anybody else there. but a lot of people were engaged in this. in my papers -- anyway, they convinced me this was a good thing to do. in my papers was a list of the women appointees. and he said okay, we are going to a project. helen was there too at the outset and we had to find the people and then she granny was the one who interviewed and did most of the nearly 50 interviews in this collection and penn state archives now has a very nice collection, but it was quite a journey. on a wing and a prayer we started it 16 years ago. >> callan, i want you to set the stage, to because he reappointed

chair of the maritime commission in 1969. >> i was appointed chair only after a big title, okay? i worked on the campaign for the nixon 68 and i did this the power statement because maritime was my background and job i wanted was maritime it is straighter. let us offer that on february 4th 1969. ambassador 11 of 1969 i lost it. why? because i was told that labour had to support me. i said that's not a problem. and the man that i spent 10 hours of his office the day before talking to is the one who

liked me because he was not given the opportunity to make the offer to me and he felt he couldn't control me. >> callan is not controllable. >> the second one was assistant secretary of transportation for communication. the number two person transportation wanted to meet and the number three person wanted me, but john bolton, secretary of transportation said a woman cannot handle that job and i didn't get it. the man he hired had to be fired three months later. >> and there you were. >> there i was. so he came to the federal maritime commission. >> one was a commission. they offered me the commissions he. i refuse to.

ssl take the chairmanship or not dean. i fortunately had for republic congresswomen who had gone to the white house the day after i turned it down to talk to the president about you got to get someone in an office. and he said, go talk to helen bentley. we need here in the maritime. so picky heckler called me up. i told her the story. i said i'll take chairman. i'm not going to take the commission see. i'm not going to make that pilot. he's never been on a ship. [laughter] said this battle went on for three weeks. there are back and forth. >> this is still 1969.

>> in june, july. >> at one point when they said that job has got to go to this man from tiny town in ohio. so i said to congresswomen heckler, the chairmanship of this eap is open. i'll take that. because i have been covering the airports and air travel and all of that for this on paper. my whole background was writing about labor and transportation with us on paper. >> white house came back inside a woman can't handle that. it wanted to handle that. so i said to the congresswomen, there is discrimination. you can tell all of them they can have it. and i wasn't that nice. [laughter] at the same time i was fighting

but stanley humble a lot about taking a trip to the northwest passage on the tinker. they said they didn't have state or a woman. >> you are actually going to be on the tinker. i sat on the best reporter there is in this business. i didn't have much of myself. i said i've got to go. on the morning of july 1, 1969 and about 10 in the morning, humble oil came up and said we found a cabin for you. i said thank you very much. i'll be there. at 3:00 in the afternoon, gives peter flanagan from the the white house called me and said, do you want to be chairman of the federal maritime commission? said peter i will, but only after inmate a trip i'm in manhattan. last back

[laughter] then i realized there was nobody around. and i put together an 11 page single spaced memorandum to the white house. about the need for women. >> you mean throughout the administration? >> well, what we needs in the government. and barbara knows the memo. >> i want you to talk about this because how few women -- it's not that there were no good men, but they were not in positions of responsibility. is that right? >> that is right. i would say the women in leadership policymaking decisions were very, very few and not very visible. and really what happened was bob

finch -- an outcome of a need to go back because there is a question asked at the press conference that's really important as one of the catalyst here. >> shortly after -- >> bear classic on his second press conference. it was all meant and if anyone knew herb is very attractive and well spoken and she got up and asked the question. i'm going to paraphrase it, but i'm going to get the last part of their prey. mr. president, i'm if your first 200 appointments, only three of gone to amend. can we expect some more equitable recognition of women's abilities are they going to be made a sex? i can imagine what kind of a ripple of my word, was created in a briefing with or maybe even laughter or whatever else. and the president according to her we have a oral history in this collection. at first wasn't quite sure what to do at that paper than it has

serious and said i didn't know it will have to do something about it. there was a bunch of events that happened after that is documented in part 1 of me spoke. one thing that happened was a task for someone his rights and was appointed as a tussle in the white house about what kind of people and those people who not wanted progressives -- the progressives won out in the recommendations that came out were really scary foreword looking. one of them was my job. the title of that task force report ways, and not a symbol just is. that is what the title of this book has come from. >> who is behind a progressive argument in the white house quiet spin actually, a man named charlie whose an outlet pass, was working for arthur mark.

a lot of people were involved in this in one way or another. arthur burns was one. pat moynihan was another. any tactic that some some of the peep of who wanted to go the other way. i must say a phyllis schlafly kind of group on this task force. and i think what would have emerged had that happened would've been quite different from what did the marriage. >> said that move early on made a difference. >> absolutely. and in his world history interviewee talked about the fact that we needed to get some republican women who could be -- who could get some reputation out there for fighting the women's fight. he said so far he said it felt like the democrats had been in control of this issue. that president kennedy at the presidents commission on the status of women, which had

equivocal result, but resulted in the creation of the state commissions on women. ..

>> to get more women, and i was after the vera glaser question, right? >> yes. her question was in favor of 69. this task force came into being later that year. a report i think at the end of 69, and it was released, the results were released, came out in 1970. and really then helen's memo came in 70. bob, who had been, the secretary of what's now hhs, and was a longtime confidant and friend of the president came over to the white house as counselor to the president. and everybody believed that things picked up when bob finch got there. he received your mail. we have been some of our papers a decision memo that he put together for the president, as

presidents yes, do this, do that. >> i think it's important identify the individuals all along the way who made key decisions that been moved forward. >> pat was working very closely with bob finch. >> a very early a point he also. >> remind everyone who she was. >> assistant secretary at h.e.w. them. hhs. health education and welfare. >> longtime california supporter of president nixon, and bob finch. >> so that task force report was 1970. helens memo was 1970, but it didn't happen immediately. is still took a little time. >> it took some termination. and there was some tugging and pulling inside. not everybody thought this was the best idea in the world. one of the other recommendations in that task force was more

women in policymaking positions. and then we had that one decision memo copy of that where the president did get some of the wheels in motion that bob finch had drafted. then what emerged from that in early 71, or let's say in april, was a three-pronged strategy to attack the appointment of women problem, the lack. and the first thing was a memo that the president said -- sent to the every cabinet and agency head that required an action plan about how the secretaries and agency heads were going to appoint more women, trained more women. this went into the career service, too. >> this was before you came on board? >> i am the second part of the three prongs, i think. the thing about this memo, this

wasn't just a memo -- it had in it some teeth. he had a date, i wanted these back buy me something. and he wanted to know who in these departments was going to be the person in charge. so that there was a managerial aspect to this. second prong was me coming to the white house, personnel shop, to recruit women for policymaking jobs, and to monitor the action plans of the departments. that turned out to be fascinating. and the third one was to bring james baker spain who had been, a businesswoman in ohio into the civil service commission as the commission to watch of what's going on in the career civil service spare president in a previous administration, is this right, either under kennedy are under johnson, there have not been specific individuals who were tasked with these

responsibilities? >> that's correct. >> at the white house or -- >> that's right. >> is located between vera glaser's question and 1969, barbara's appointment in april of 1971, is a fascinating time to look at because it shows not only the diversity of opinions among the white house staff, which is emblematic of the diversity of kinds of people that the president had in his dad and his cabinet. in a, i think today we have have this kind of ideological purity of politics and that was not the case then. >> tell us about that. who was on different sides of this discussion? >> barbara has already mentioned several people. bob finch and several others. don rumsfeld had come in from congress to be head of the office of the economic opportunity.

was considered a person of interest for this. lin garment had sympathy to this. and there were several others. ray price i think. >> as a speechwriter. >> speechwriter, and a number of others. >> what about on the other side? >> at the same time your people like pat buchanan, a speechwriter, and a whole raft of other men. in interviewing some of barbara's colleagues in the office of, and the personal office, stand anderson who is here, jerry jones who are here, earlier said hey, we were young guys. you know, we were of our time. there was a lot of sexism. a lot of men who made, a few men who were probably sympathetic to this. an awful lot of men who just simply it hadn't occurred to them that women would want jobs like this, but once they

discovered they did, they could, and good, it was okay, all right, let's do it. but they will still of awful lot of men who said no, this is -- >> let me say this. when barbara came in, those who did not want this to happen do not even provide her -- did not even provide her with anything to work with. she had no typewriter. she didn't have a desk. >> does anybody here know what a typewriter -- [laughter] >> we did use them then. >> did you have an office? >> i had to create this, and that took -- true, it took some doing. i have to say, thankful the support of hell in the sydney dictating machine which was the

size of the stable, and i was dictating to send stuff back over to her office to get back. because i had no secretary either for a time. now, over the next few months i did get an assistant to help with recruiting somebody else to help with some of the external stuff, and the secretary. we got the mail answered through white house correspondent. but it took some pushing and pulling. >> i do have a question. we talk about the debate inside the white house. what about when he got to the president? i mean, how did that decision get made? what do we know about that? >> well, the president, you know, i've often been asked, why did the president do this? and my answer is always the same. i didn't care what he did it as long as he did it. but what i really think, and it was counterintuitive. people didn't think of richard nixon this way. if you look at his life he had a strong, self-made life.

and he had two daughters and he had a mother who he really felt gave him a lot of the strengthen principles of his life. so there was something rather natural about it. and then there was a political imperative going on, too, that women's equality movement have become growing and raises some of these issues. >> you want to add anything? >> of course, we look back now. and, unit, most of what's been written for about the nixon administration your talks about watergate or it talks about foreign affairs and the china initiative. those are significant, but in the last 15, 20 years we have had a group of historians who have begun to look at him reevaluate his domestic record. and what they find when they do that is really some remarkable results. area in civil rights and desegregation and economics and

the environmental policy, regulatory things, osha, epa. is really an amazing record of accomplishments. and often these were things that the president was not spending all his time on, because he had vietnam. he had a lot of foreign issues and, you know, some very serious domestic issues with the economy. but i want to say that periodically through the records there are memos and reports that people would say, you know, the president asked, how are we doing on this. and you know, or would say, you know, we got the grant on this, we've got to get going on this. barbara mentioned his directive in april of 1971, perhaps a year before he had a cabinet meeting and he said, we need to get

going. we need to hire, promote more women. i want you folks to get out there and get going on it. nothing happened. >> the directive made it happen, and the fact that there was a managerial aspect to it, and they came to my office to monitor how these folks out there were doing on their plan. we had targets. the state department had x number of women that were supposed to be in these jobs, and they were targets -- >> quote is? >> no, targets. [laughter] but that's what we did. and i monitored against that, and reports would go to the president. >> what would happen if a department didn't meet -- >> that would be a note that would go from the president, signed by the president, to whoever it was. we drafted those note. >> and helen, what was the sister of the administration at that point, after barbara came in?

was there a sense that this is somewhere got to do? sure that every single agency was as enthusiastic as every other agency about is? >> true. no, they weren't but they were becoming so. and there was a difference. when you stop and think that the chairman of the federal maritime commission, which is what the title i was given, in history of the united states at the time i was appointed to that, that was the fourth highest appointment for a woman in the history of the federal government. i mean, that shows how slow it happened, but it happened than. you at frances perkins back in fdr's day, and at present eisenhower. >> but that was it. no other cabinet women running an agency or department. >> no. until helen.

and then the pace picked up at this rather remarkable when you think of it. >> what about the reception though in other, around the administration? you were depending on individual departments and agencies to do what you were telling them they had to do. >> and we were helping them. we were pushing, and i was out there beating the bushes. we divided the country into 10 regions, and i would go and make speeches and set up a network of contacts. i was building a talent bank of women so that if they wanted to fill whatever job, they could, and tap our talent bank. of course, i was doing that, too. i was trying to spot places where they're going to be opens -- openings. >> what kind of reception we getting when you said we want women to come into government? >> i would say my technique was more targeted.

i would find a job or a term of an appointee that was coming up. and do what i would try to do, frankly, was to go to the powers that be, and that would've been ahead of presidential personnel, and the liaison guys in personal. personnel had two sides, recruiting and liaison, and they were all men. i would go there and -- >> it was all men and? >> all men. and i was to look, if i can find women, i want first crack at this job. >> what did they say? >> well, i got plenty of commitments, okay, we will give you first crack. but that was what i had to do, because otherwise there were many, many men always who -- >> wanted these jobs. >> or they had friends or whatever. that was one technique. and i'm have to say that everybody knew the president wanted it done, and that helped my leverage in doing that.

>> lee, why did fred malek approached barbara for this job speaks well, he had known barbara because she was one of the first women graduates of the harvard business school. he had known her from harvard business school and he had been in h.e.w. i believe. >> yes. >> he had ideas had been tapped after the midterm elections to come over and sort of redo the personnel operation. but i think they felt by that time they had gone through all other kind of obligations as a result of the election. people have been placed and sort of had that kind of political clout. and the president, you know, one of the things that impressed president nixon was he was very interested in efficiency and good government. he believed that the government needs to be effective and efficient. i mean, he didn't believe in necessarily in big government,

but what there was needed to be done right. and so fred malek's operation was really designed to make the personnel operation a professional approach. so the recruiters were people who knew how to do corporate recruiting or how to do recruiting in general. >> i'm kind of yet the court is in barbara that made them look at, because that was an important position, the first woman who was going to be going into to the personnel office and saying you've got to put women, you've got to lease consider women first. we're looking for someone with a strong person on. >> apparently. that would be the case, but i think also because barbara had executive experience for the singer corporation, for citibank and she knew people and knew how to work with people and knew how to get around and yes, she was

not a shrinking -- >> i have to be assertively charming. [laughter] or something like that. >> when he approach you for that job did you think oh, my gosh, this is going to be tough? or did you think, oh, i can't -- what did you think? >> i was at what is that citibank and i was one of three women and assistant vice presidents at the bank, and i was a fast-track -- >> you had a high position in the bank? >> there were no women vice presidents at the time. i became convinced after talking with fred and others that this was serious. i had colleagues at the bank and other places who told me not to do this. because they didn't think the administration really was serious and you will damage your career if you go. well, i decided to go anyway, that i believed in the cause. i believe there should be more women. i believe in equality for women, i still do. so i decided to go and -- >> but you are giving up a

composition? >> but i took a leave of absence. i took a leave of absence intending always to go back there. i never did. as it turns out i stayed for two years. the white house made me visible. actually my first leave of absence was six months without sort of a joke, looking back. they made me visible. there was an early press conference -- >> they put you in a news conference right off the bat. >> set up via guide who shall remain nameless. >> go ahead and name him. >> is no longer with us. the person you preside at those my dear friend who, it got kind of wild in there. it was only the women of the press and the kind of mad at the president, and it wasn't set up in the briefing room like every other press conference but it was in the roosevelt room, i think. and so they just, they hammered

me. it builds character, as you know. i had a title that was not useful at that point to a staff assistant to the president for executive manpower. [laughter] >> and the first question was, how can you have a title like that if you recruiting women? well, there's no good answer to a very good question. and so they took me part, i don't think however the press that came out of it was not all that bad. and at least there was a sense that something was going on. it turned out that mark tidd white, when she wanted to come to press conference, didn't do it because the room was been because she was sick. she was pregnant with her son. >> did that change your title after that? >> the time to change in soon after that. >> helen, how did things start to change after that. and, the fact that barbara was there, i just focus on this? >> first of all, if you look at

just some of the photographs, and there's one very prominent of all of the women together, in the rose garden. >> you would see a different it was winning in the beginning there may be three of us, made a big difference. >> what year was this? >> this was 72 and this was the first anniversary of the president's memo. and actually it was, there were many more than this, because we had a goal for this, a numerical goal. we were trying to double the number of women in policymaking jobs in a year. actually we tripled it in a year, and these were the ones we could find. we just couldn't get everybody together. but a lot of things happened in that year, and maybe even more significant than the policymaking job, what happened at the middle career levels,

when there was a commotion of women into jobs that have been forbidden to women. that's when you had the first -- >> was this bylaw or by practice? >> no, by proxy. narcotics agents, tugboat captain, secret service agents, forest rangers, those kinds of jobs that were not typically women's jobs. and the first generals and admirals in that same timeframe. >> were there women who wanted those jobs at that point speak with that, there were a lot of women who felt, i'm you, i had a lot of women company just as i was in that position who said, i would like to be moved up the line, or, can you help me get an appointment? and i did whatever i could. i had a friend here who i would pass them along to. but, you know, there were still

men, plenty of men still who -- i can tell you all my commission to award for male commissioners beside me, and i can tell you, they were never happy with me. [laughter] >> i can't imagine. [laughter] >> i cannot imagine. lee, help us understand the political and private at that point in terms of women, you know, wanting to see women advance. over the polls showing in terms of what the american people wanted about women, thought about women's? >> i think the administration's diversity was frankly representative of the country's diversity of opinion about this. you had this whole spectrum of, you know, from women who thought this was the most horrible idea that had ever been advanced, all the way to the opposite end of

what would be called in radical feminists. you know, a whole spectrum of women in between the two are okay with some of it but maybe not other parts of it. but i think in general, we were seeing a shift. you mentioned a poll. i think there were some polls that even within a period of a decade or so, the percentage of women who felt they were being discriminated against and from something like a third to 50% to 70% nationwide, and you can't have that kind of shift of public opinion without, as jerry jones said, it's a political organism. you push that hard, the political organism responds. >> i think it's fair to say that our society at that point was

not all that, well, let me say a different way. women in careers were not acceptable the way they are today. and women having careers and families were not so acceptable at all. society was very divided on this. that's one of the huge changes that has occurred in these intervening years. and quite frankly what i think the president did here by advancing women and being clear that that's what he was doing was to take the movement for more equality, which was for a controversial, more on the left side of the ledger, he pulled it right into the mainstream of american life. the equality for women was now okay come it was now legitimate. >> you have the bra burners, the more activists, some of the methods i think that they were using to publicize their views were controversial.

>> and so -- >> you're saying president nixon moved it more. >> he pulled right into the middle and that it was okay. i really think we can't overstate how important that w was. this may have happened later anyway, but the fact that so-called conservative president did it and it was very visible, and government by that time was an example. i'm not so sure that's the same today but it was them. this was an important societal -- >> i want to talk about how it affected the private sector because i get a i graduate from college in 1968, was interested in getting into journalism, could only get a job as a secretary at, turned out at a television station news department in atlanta. and i was told that women, they were looking for a woman reporter, and then only after a year or so i kept pushing and

pushing. i will just say this because i think there's a connection here, another news director at eight and a philly, as cbs affiliate, the news director there said to me, i am feeling, he didn't use the word pressure but he said i'm feeling like i should be hiring more women on the air. look at what the federal communications commission is saying about women, look at, the network is saying to me that we need to put more women in positions of decision-making, and on the air. so it was filtering. this was 1969 and 70. so this was before you came but it was still very early. and there was resistance, but i'm saying all that was going on out in the country slowly at the same time you are doing it in washington. >> i think this climate generated or help them in a lot of other things. if you look at some of the legislative activities that occurred in that same timeframe,

the equal rights amendment passed. title ix which, of course, helped very much educational activity that we're getting federal funding and support in particular. the old -- not be all but the equal employment opportunity commission got more enforcement, keith for gender discrimination. >> in the early '70s. >> yet, this is now 71-72, and then there was the laws that gave more equality to women in terms of getting credit and housing, and 74. in other words, there was a bunch of things like this that were germinating and that all popped out. i think because of the change of climate about women in our society to go back to what you said, this time period turned out to be very pivotal. >> you may not remember, but

going back to the '50s, '60s and '70s, women were not allowed to have any credit to buy a house, to buy an automobile, et cetera. it was always, i know, because -- >> when did that change? when did that -- >> seventy-four. >> it was that late? >> yes. >> that roots right. >> it's hard to believe since we think it back about 50 years ago it couldn't have been that different. >> it definitely was the a lot of things were different. >> and it was a whole series of laws and regulations that just simply were represented that kind of traditional patriarchal approach to, you know, what women could do and should, what their proper role was. and that was all going through tremendous change.

>> lee, what surprised you, and all your research and you talk to a lot of people as we have for tonight, and working on this book and putting it together. what surprised, tell us one or two of the stories that have stuck with you. >> well, as i was, you know, part of the top of this book by deciding we wanted to use the excerpts as the focus of the book and gradually we realize we needed, that the interviews told fascinating stories, but we needed some context, background. because of the interviews as you're probably unaware oral history interviews give you those highlights, they give you those reflections, those perspectives. but there not always great on chronology and who said what, when kind of things. that's what you need documents. that's where you need archives.

and so we could tell those stories but we didn't have quite enough to provide a historical context. and so barbara's papers and papers that had been donated by other women that we interviewed, we went to the sauce and your library, look at katherine eastman's papers which had a large amount of vera glaser smetana. went to the nixon library, look at charlie's materials, lynn garments mitchell, a number of other sets of records there. that began to formulate that contextual background that results as part one of the book. but the stories aren't nevertheless, the stories that are really interesting are the stories of the women. >> of the women who went through this. barbara, you ended up staying for two years. you originally thought it was only going to be six months. why did you stay? >> when one gets into something

like this and you realize, you make progress but you realize how much more there is to do, you just can't stop. and so you keep going. that's how i felt about it. i was just really engaged and a lot of other people were hoping. we have the momentum and i could see things are happening and even though we wanted more and we wanted is faster. it was happening. there's one story i'd like to tell speeded i just want to say to the audience that we're going to call on you for question in about two or three minutes to get your questions ready. keep going. >> to give an example of some of the recruiting that i did that some of the other activity that went on, we saw a vacancy, this'll be a specific one, a vacancy coming at the tax court of the united states. they had never been a woman on the tax court. so okay, we go looking for women who are tax lawyers and found one was on the west coast, in los angeles.

her name was cynthia. i called her and said simply, would you be interested in this tax court job, and she said well, that would be really interesting but the twins come my husband and i have six children. i've a part in my law firm, he is a part in another, i don't think that's at all doable. but please come talk to us. well, she did come back because she had a meeting here. she came back and talk to us, and once again said i just don't see how i can do this because of my career and my family and whatever. and then her husband was a tax were, too. then there was hatched a brilliant plan and i think anderson was the one who did it. one of the liaison guys. we thought well, let's get our husbands, let's get our husbands to come to government. so there in the treasury department was someone who had gone to law school with john hall and the person was dispatched to los angeles to

convince john hall to come back and be a deputy assistant secretary for tax policy at treasury, thereby making it possible for both of them to come to washington. that was the first. i think that is the first time there was ever a dual -- >> nowadays that is common. but back then -- >> and they both came and she then went on and served for seven years on the tax court, where her colleagues already gave her a hard time. the tax court gets sent all over the place. >> got all the dirty jobs. >> yeah, and they kept saying why aren't you home with your kids, and stuff like that. but she went on to become a distinguished jurist, ninth circuit appellate court. >> and it was even a "new york times" story about the combined income that this couple would receive from the federal salary. >> was a positive or a negative?

>> wasn't perceived as all that wonderful, kind of double -- >> they were both on the payro payroll. >> so helen, and i'm going to turn to the audience for questions, again, as you think back on that period who were the most important figures? clearly you were because of that memo you wrote. who else do we want to make sure not to overlook as we talk about what happened back in? >> i mentioned path because patent plays an important role. and bob finch. my good friend, peter flanigan at the white house definitely was not. [laughter] he is not in this audience i don't think. >> i don't give a damn. [laughter] >> he was a dinosaur, is that what you're trying to say? >> fred helped a great deal, too.

>> he brought you in. >> and fred was supported i want to mention we -- i want to mention julie eisenhower, she would go and make speeches about this. as a matter fact, julie's oral history is one that we have, and she was engaged with this project. but as a young woman she really took the bull by the horns, and that -- >> so she would have a talk about what you are doing. >> and an arbor was another one. >> absolutely in. >> became counsel to the presence with cabinet rank and that was the first breakthrough of that sort. but when she was at the republican national committee she was a great champion of this ever. catherine, another one i was single out, who catherine wasn't the first woman elected to the congress from the state of washington and i think 1958. and then when she finished --

president nixon appointed her to the tariff, the old tariff commission. >> peggy hackler. >> peggy. should wonderfully supportive of me and of all women. catherine by the way her oral history has a fabulous story about how she, or this is the civil rights act of 64, she and some of the other women in this bipartisan group in the house, when a new the civil rights act was coming up and it had of course rape in it, and they wanted to get gender in, and they went to see this marvelous gentlemen who buy them a judgment or on the shirt he was a judge but he was chairman of the rules committee in the house. >> virginia congress. >> yes. he was very gracious and said, ladies, catherine actually does the accent, in one of her interviews, i'd be happy to help you. i'm going to make the amendment. somebody would have to make a

minute. he said i'm going to make that in my so. and she tells the story we accepted but he didn't fool us one bit. he was against the civil rights act. he figured if it got sex and there it would be down the drain even more. and, of course, what happened was he made the amendment, the whole thing past. [laughter] >> who has a question for one of our amazing panelists? you have to wave your arms so i can see you. tell me again, where is the microphone? >> low? how low? i was remarking how i was taking notes about talking about 43 years ago, and the question is about the current male chauvinist and -- [laughter] recommend women employees still as the men that we currently

face. >> i didn't hear the whole question. you said current male chauvinism. i didn't do the question. >> right. what advice would you offer to women today? >> helen? [laughter] >> i would probably bus them in the mouth. [laughter] but no, and i know exactly what you're talking about, because i've had several occasions in the past year where this has been made apparent to me by women working in various positions, and how they're being held down. and i said you're going to have to keep plugging. i will call when you think it's important that i call somebody there, but you're going to have to just keep plugging and pushing yourself. don't be obnoxious about it, but do it.

and just say, and make sure that they understand that you are every damn bit as good as they are, and you are as capable or more so. and that you worked very hard and you're not asking for any favors, but you want to be recognized here. [applause] >> that is a great statement. >> barbara, what would you ask? >> i don't know that i can improve on that. it's always useful to try to find some allies, and there are so many today who are quite enlightened. coming, my own wonderful husband is one of the enlightened, but there are others. and if you try to get somewhere in an organization into a woman, it's useful to find some allies who are male. now, it's always to have women

supporting each other. one of the things that i think our era back in 40 years ago stand up to me is that the women who were there really were supportive of each other. and that should continue today. but it's always useful to find some allies. and into the again, charmingly assertive and aggressive and recognize your own value. that's just basic. strength in numbers. lee? >> i which a barbara is a perfect example, that when she was working in new york before she given to government she was doing networking. she was, you know, glass of wine and a group of women getting together talking about their jobs and their lives here she was one of the founding members of executive women in government, which, you know, institutionalize that networking throughout the federal government. you may want to say a little more spent executive women of

government is still in existence today. it started, this hardy band up here pretty much, and has been going for 40 some years. i think these, these groups of this kind where people can share experiences and help each other are really very, very important. >> where women can support each other. >> i would say back then there were some women, not this group we're talking about here, but there were some women who had fought so hard to get to wherever they were that they didn't want to help. >> weber queen bees bees. >> queen bees. i don't see that so much today. but there were some of those. >> they were afraid. they were afraid for their own position. they were afraid of losing because it had taken them so much to get where they work. >> or they didn't want the competition from other women. i think a lot of that has

dissipated today. i will say one thing. i think the world has changed a lot, and i hope people can walk away from this discussion realizing how much it has changed, how important presidential leadership was here. i'm going to stop right there. i hope we can walk away with those. >> excuse me, you are names of people who are in the forefront. president nixon and pat nixon were in the forefront. >> pat nixon, i'm glad you mentioned that, she was very eager to have a woman on the supreme court. >> yeah, she was. >> and/or to vacancies in 1971, and we scoured the landscape looking for when. of course, justice, the justice department has a lot to do with who gets into these judicial roles. there were not enough women in the pipeline anywhere. that was part of the problem.

>> were the women who are upheld -- >> there were just a few. and the problem was that they were not self also friday compatible -- a woman surface who had been a local type judge in los angeles. state court. by the justice department and the american bar association just killed her. they also -- >> they said she was not qualified? >> they said she was not qualified. they did that also with a potential appointee. we think was the first time there was actually a serious discussion about women on the court, and i know i prepared a list. liz carpenter who was labor johnson's press secretary came with a list, represent a bunch of women script. so there was a lot of activity around us, and there was a real

effort. and pat nixon, according to julie's oral history, told her husband that she was not pleased. >> even in the earlier vacancy when just to support us resigned, according to julie, pat nixon and vera glaser i think verified this, that -- >> that was -- >> that was 69. >> that pat nixon had asked vera glaser if she could suggest name because she wanted to get some names in front of her husband as possible women candidates for the supreme court. >> the reason this got on the table, but it took another 10 years before sand o'connor -- that's something i do want to see. i still think there's resistance in many quarters about women in leadership roles. we haven't totally cracked that. >> we are a long way. >> even on capitol hill.

>> made especially on capitol hill. >> i've looked it up. 70% in congress indo there are more than 50% of the electorate, only 17%. >> we need to crack that barrier. >> who has another question? right here, yes. >> actual you kind of answered it. i was? what your hopes at that time were for where things would lead and where you would like to see things lead today? you kind of elaborate a little on the percentages. maybe you could talk more about other areas you would like to see women contribute. >> you mean in government or outside of government? >> in government. >> what else, alan? >> repeat the question. >> he is asking what else would you like, what other areas in government would you like to see women progress? we've talked about the judiciary. there are now three women on the supreme court. you mentioned congress still needs women. there are several women in a cab to pick with the three secretaries of state.

no woman vice president or president yet. >> i would like to see a woman president of the united states. that's the hope i had back then. i think we are closer today than we were but were not quite there. spent i expect to live long enough to see that. [applause] >> do you tell -- i'm just asking if she tells her age. >> i am 88. >> fabulous. [applause] >> question? >> i was wondering did you work on title ix at all? or did nixon, how much did he influence that, or the woman that you are getting into the government influence that? >> on title ix, and what you did that has? >> the summer of 72. spent does everybody know what title ix is? it has to do with women in education.

>> basically forbidding discrimination against women in education, and not just i think every thinks title ix is just -- its education in its broadest definition. >> barbara, remind us, i mean, how did that play out? was that something the president was pushing? >> the president was for the. i came out of the congress, and i don't know, i didn't work specifically on that but that was, again that was part of this climate of renewed momentum for pushing women forward, women's causes. >> i wish is going to say, from my reading, my sense is that at the time i don't think that anybody really appreciated what the ultimate applications of that would be, especially in athletics but also of some other areas. >> how much pressure are you feeling, barbara, from the outside? i mean, from the women's

movement, whatever is going on in society come to be even more than what you were doing, or were you? >> no, there was clearly pressure. and i met always with a lot of women's groups, and some of them were angry. >> tell us about -- >> wanting more. and, well, on one occasion i was for britain to go to such a group why i think the chief of staff because he didn't think it was appropriate to be there. but, you know, there was nobody else to do this. >> did you agree with the decision, not to go? >> well, when you're told by your boss not to go, you behave yourself usually. but i still, i was still at reaching to those groups, and they were talking to me. i think the movement for equality was important. and noise that was being made about this was important so that we could then as we were on the

inside make progress. i think you needed both of those activities. >> did those groups recognize the progress you're making on the inside or not? >> summed it. some did. some didn't. >> if they were honest they did recognize spent well, some were not as honest. because there were some over on the other side of the aisle to any kind kind of a litmus test. you were not really a feminist unless you are also against the war in vietnam and for more government to do -- >> there was a lot going on at that time. >> i think where we were and certainly virginia allen who chairs the task force, virginia was terribly single-minded. did not get involved in other issues. focus on what you are trying to do, which is advance women. don't get involved in the war or whatever else there was.

just focus. and i think that's kind of where we were. we were focused, not trying to get into proliferation of other issues. but got confused on the effort. >> i would love for another audience question, so go to the microphone if you have one. while she is making her way real quickly, barbara, to what extent was there a political thinking of what was going on, we want people to support us, we will women to vote has? >> that was in the max. the closer we got to the 72 elections is that the more it was in the next. the more clout i had, frankly, in terms of pushing for the cause. >> so you saw at? >> yeah. so there was a political imperative here. i really do believe that the president and certainly bob finch output in this category, and others, thought that moving women ahead was the right thing to do, but it also, the right

thing to do is often the best political thing to do as well. so i think there was all that going on. >> a lot of us, i was teamed up with mrs. rumsfeld to go out and campaign and strip women's accomplishments and what was being done for women. >> so you were out speaking about this. >> we called it the committee to reelect presidents spent we have heard of that. >> remember crep? i was the one who did -- >> unfortunate name or acronym. >> it was that i was the one who had to do the scaling up of the plan. and there were trios of women who went out in that campaign speaking.

there was a mixture of appointees and cabinet lives, and it was a novel approach and we covered the country pretty much and it was really quite effective, i think it but it was a new idea. >> question? >> the discrimination against women in the political conversation right now did you come a special the elections, very, very discouraging. and i'm excited about this book, and i wondered, would you comment on how you think maybe this book could help get that language out of here and back to equal rights for women? >> i'm sorry, which language are you objecting to write no? >> well, all the rules that are being made against, you know, if you want an abortion in virginia you have to get a sonogram or whatever it is, and the birth control stuff and, i mean, to me that is totally discrimination. the men want, they don't want,

they want less government but they want to control the women. and it makes me so angry. and i'm hoping that a book like this would have a positive effect, and i would just like some comments on that. >> who wants to weigh in on that? very much in -- the political air right now. >> i don't know what to say, except that i would agree. i would hope that this sense of history and what happened then in the trailblazing that happened then could be brought forward, and hopefully inspires some of what is going on today. that would did my whole. i agree with you. >> helen, what do you think? >> probably very close to what barbara does on that. things are changing, and as we

changed way back in the '70s and the '60s on other issues, changes are going to happen on this one, too. along the way. >> i really think for those who believe otherwise than what you see going on, i think you need to make your voice heard. >> okay, another question from out there? because i think, i think one of i guess curiosities i have is, i'm always curious about how decisions get made on the inside, the things that we don't learn about until much, much later. and i think, i want people to appreciate what it was like for you on the inside. you're in a big organization, the white house, there's so much pressure, so many things going on. was it you come to work every day, did you feel, you know, i

have got to get this done today? try to take us back to what it was like them. doing, you know, doing this task that you had agreed to take on. >> well, it was a really energizing task, you know quacks i really wanted this to happen. i wanted to see what we set up and as i said, we had goals and we were marching forward and we were catching every ball that would coming. it was frustrating on occasions. it was. and i lost some battles, yeah, but on the other hand, we want a lot of battles. there was a lot of support. that's energizing. >> did some agencies get a pass like the pentagon? >> no, they didn't. >> that is a place, you don't think of women having, being listened to. >> in this era you have the

first women generals and admirals. and i credit the president memorandum on that, and i also credit the defense secretary at the time, and he was pushing this. i have forgotten the numbers but it was going to remember, four, five? one of them at least genes air force i think. and so some barriers were broken. i think some agencies are always going to be harder than others the same thing is true in the corporate world. some companies are slow to move than others. you just have to keep the drumbeat going and keep trying. and demonstrate that women really can do a lot of things. i think that back then the navy had just decided, i'm trying to think, in the '70s era, to allow women to be crew on combat ships. and that sent a ripple through the universe.

>> i was late '70s, early '80s. >> i thought it was 75. the military academy started him to allow women in 75. in other words, sometimes i think one of the important things here is the breakthroughs that were made. when women were putting jobs that women have never held, they could do it. been the barrier is broken and it was a lot of the barriers broken. >> but there was a lot of pressure on the first women. did you feel you couldn't make a mistake? >> i felt a great deal of responsibility and representing the president, and i was very careful in what i set out in press conference is. because i travel all over the country a lot, and abroad. i recognize the fact that your

words are going to be taken back to the white house. be careful of what you say and how you say it. don't go spouting off. i mean, i felt tremendous responsibility along that like spinning especially since you were the first woman. you would feel that way in which a degree but you're saying even more so. >> so did i. i echo that, because i was pushing on the inside but i was out speaking and i have this balance to make sure that i was not saying anything on the outside that was going to be misinterpreted on the inside, or would damage my credibility to be able to move things forward. build a balance. >> this is related to the last question. clearly as we just heard there are many for whom the issues like abortion, contraception are directly related to