>> find more on these bestsellers by going to nytimes.com. >> up next, lee stout recounts the nixon administration's

success is promoting women in the federal government. the administration is led by the staff assistant to president nixon who was hired in many 971 to end list female candidates to fill high-level positions. this is about an hour and a half. [applause] >> good evening. i'm the archivist of the united states, and it's a pleasure to welcome you this evening, and a special welcome to our c-span viewers. tonight we have a distinguished panel. i will take a little-discussed topic, the role of women in the administration of president richard m. nixon. our panelists will discuss how the tenure of the nixon-appointed women shaped opportunities for later generations of women as presidential assistants and advisers and heads of agencies and departments. i want to extend our thanks to barbara franklin and the richard

nixon foundation. ron walker, who is chairman of the foundation, is with us tonight. where are you, ron? was with us tonight. [laughter] a special thanks to him for, um, making this evening possible also. ron was in the nixon white house, and he was the very first director of the white house office of presidential events, and he was the one who was responsible for the trip to china. before we begin the program tonight, i'd like to mention two programs that will take place here in the mcdow wan theater later this month. the charles ambiguitien heym center presents the film california state of mind: the legacy of pat brown. this inside look into political power in the 1960s takes a new significance now that pat

brown's son jerry is once again governor. the film will be followed by a panel discussion. and on sunday, march 25th at 2 p.m., a sneak preview of "the dust bowl" will be shown. it tells the story of an ecological disaster and the heroic perseverance of the people affected. it's sponsored by the guggenheim center in partnership with the 2012 environmental film festival being held here in washington. to learn more about these programs and all of our public programs and exhibits, consult our calendar of monthly events. there are copies in the lobby as well as a sign-up sheet where you can receive this by mail, physical mail or virtual mail. you'll also find bro sures about other national archives activities and events. another way to get more involved in the national archives is to become a member of the national foundation which supports all of our outreach activities and

their applications outside in the lobby. and finally, if you haven't visited our gift shop recently, please, do so. you can do that physically or virtually, a wonderful array of reproductions from the records of the government. and the most popular record especially significant tonight is the photograph of richard nixon and elvis presley. [laughter] tonight's program is titled "a matter of simple justice: the untold story of barbara hackman franklin and a few good women." it's a subject not largely discussed today. the nixon administration more than any previous presidency broadened the opportunities for women in government. tonight's panel will take a look at this aspect of the nixon presidency. our moderator is judy wood rough, co-anchor of the pbs news hour, and she has covered news for more than three decades at cnn, nbc and pbs.

previously, she served as anchor for c, this n hosting the weekly political program "inside politics" and other major news coverage. earlier in her career she covered the white house for nbc news. in 2006 she was visiting professor at duke university sanford institute of public policy where she was an undergraduate where i was a librarian. [laughter] after serving as a visiting fellow at harvard university on the press, politics and public policy. currently, she also hosts a monthly program for bloomberg conversation," conversations with judy woodruff." let me turn the program over to you now, judy. welcome. >> thank you very much. thank you. [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 it if

you haven't already. i'm delighted to be here because this is international women's day, so the timing is perfect. it's a day when we celebrate the accomplishments of women not just in this country, but around the world at the same time we consider, in many regards and many respects, how far women have yet to go. and i know this has been a day to think about that as we should every day. but, of course, today in particular. but the timing, barbara, for this program could not be more special, more forchewtous. i have to say as i thought about what we were going to be talking about tonight, thought about the day we celebrate women, i was reminded what the canadian writer charlotte whiten famously said. she wrote, she said in order -- she said 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 backdrop for our conversation. this evening. as you just heard, this is about what happened with, during 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 then because what happened in the late 1960s and the early 1970s set the stage for so much of the progress and so many of the opportunities that have taken place for women in the united states since then. so this was really, in my mind, a pivotal moment for women in the united states. and so that's why i think it's incredibly important to consider what, what is, what is in this book. and so let's begin by meeting the panelists. there is an extensive biography in your program, so i'm not going to read all of it except to just say to my immediate

right is the distinguished former congresswoman, former chairman of the maritime commission, representative helen delich bentley, let's welcome representative bentley. [applause] in the center barbara hackman franklin about whom the book is, and, barbara, we'll be talking a lot about you tonight. barbara. [applause] and be finally, lee stout with pittsburgh state university -- >> penn state. >> penn state, i'm sorry. penn state, penn state. forgive me, penn state university in pittsburgh, pennsylvania -- >> no, no, no. [laughter] >> i'm sorry, wrong city. i got the sate right -- the state right. [laughter] penn state. but the most important reason lee is here is because this is

his book, "a matter of simple justice." so, lee, now that aye completely mangled -- now that i've completely mangled your credentials, i'm going to start with you to tell us why you wrote this book, what was the impetus behind snit. >> well, the impetus was really barbara, no question about that. the penn state university archives has a program where we try to collect papers of distinguished alumna and alumni, and one of our, one of our distinguished alumna was barbara, and me and nancy eaton had made contact with her and her predecessor. so i came to washington to meet with her, and we talked -- this was after she had served as secretary of commerce -- and we talked about the possibility of her papers coming to penn state. and she agreed that that would

be acceptable to her, and we talked about her experience bees in government. -- experiences in government. of course, i knew she had been secretary of commerce, and i knew she'd had an extensive governmental career before that, and i think just in the course of conversation i asked her, you know, so how did you get started in this? and she said, well, i started in the nixon administration. i recruited women for executive positions in the government, and i was kind of taken aback. i didn't know there had been such a program. and as it turns out, very few people seemed to know there had been such a program. and i kind of made a mental note that maybe this would be something that 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 building. i always thought it was wonderful any ironic that we were taking nixon administration records out of the basement of the watergate. [laughter] and from her home in connecticut and her offices in washington. and as we began to go through

them, we saw -- at least i saw -- that this was quite literally a very significant activity and effort, and that's when i came back to barbara and said, you know, we really need to do something more here. and i think an oral history project would be the best approach. and she agreed, and she took it from there. >> so what year was that? >> that was '95? >> yeah. middle '90s. >> middle '90s. and so, barbara, what did you think when lee came to you from your alma mater and and said this is what you should think about? >> well, i, i didn't know what oral history was. i now know a lot about it. [laughter] lee's been our guide and teacher. he convinced me that this would be a good way to capture what really happened back then, and by then it was, you know, this was the early -- late '60s, early '70s, and that we better get started because we were going to lose the people who

were there, and we wanted their stories. the women as well as the men. i want to say that a lot of people made this chapter a reality. i was on the point in the white house, and the personnel shop actually led by fred malick, but i sort of became the house woman because there wasn't anybody else there. but a lot of people were engaged in this. and in the, in my papers -- anyway, lee convinced me that this was a good thing to do. and in my papers was a list of the women appointees. and so we said, okay, we're going to start a project. margita white was instrumental, helen was there, too, at the outset. we had to find the people. and then jean rainy was the one who did most of the nearly 50 interviews in this correction. and penn state archives has now really a very nice collection, but it was quite a journey. on a wing and a prayer, we started it 16 years ago. >> we're going to talk about the project, but, helen, i want you

to help set the stage, too, because you were appointed the chair of the maritime commission in -- >> i was appointed chair only after a big battle, okay? [laughter] i had worked in the campaign for the nixon, in '68, and i've done the sea power statements because maritime was my background. and the job i wanted was maritime administrator. well, i was offered that on february 4th of 1969. and by february 3 19th of 19 -- 11th of 1969 i lost it. why? because i was told that labor had to support me. i said, well, that's not a problem. and the man that i spent ten hours in his office the day before talking to is the one who knifed me because he was not

given the opportunity to make the offer to me, and he felt he couldn't control me. so he knifed me. [laughter] >> helen is not controllable. [laughter] the second one was assistant secretary of transportation or communications. the number two person in transportation wanted me, the number three person wanted me. but john -- [inaudible] the 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. [laughter] >> and there you are. >> and there i was. then we came to the federal maritime commission. there were two openings. one was a commissioner, and one was with -- a chairman. they offered me the commission

seat. i refused it. i said, i'll take the chairmanship or nothing. i fortunately had four republican congresswomen who had gone to the white house the day after i had turned it down to talk to the president about you've got to get some women in office. and he said go talk to helen bentley, we need her expertise in the maritime department. so peggy heckler called me up. i told her the story. i said i'll take chairman, i'm not going to take a commission seat. i'm not going to make that guy look good. [laughter] he'd never been on a ship, and they were going to appoint him -- [laughter] so this battle went on for three weeks. they were back and forth. >> this is still 1969. >> this is '69, right, in june.

june/july. and, um, at one point when they said, well, that job has got to go to this man from a tiny town p in ohio. so i said to congresswoman heckler, the chairmanship of the c.a.b. is open, i'll take that. because i had been covering the airports and air travel and all that. my whole background was writing about labor and transportation for the sun paper. the white house came back and said a woman can't handle that. a woman can't have that. so i said to the congresswoman, there's discrimination. you can tell all of them they can have it, and i wasn't that nice. [laughter] and at the same time i was

fighting with -- [inaudible] about making the trip through the northwest passage on their tanker. they said they didn't have space for a woman. >> you were actually going to be on the tanker. >> yeah. >> okay. >> i said, well, i'm the best reporter there is in this business. i didn't think much of myself. [laughter] i said, i've got to go. well, on the morning of july 31st of 1969 at about 10 in the morning, they called me up and said we have found a cabin for you. i said, thank you very much, i'll be there. at #-bg in the afternoon -- 3:00 in the afternoon dear peter flanagan from the white house called me and said do you want to be chairman of the federal maritime commission? i said, peter, i will, but only after i've made the trip on the manhattan. [laughter] that's when i got -- then i

realized there was nobody, no women around. and be i put together -- and be i put together an 11-page, single-spaced memorandum to the white house about the need for women. >> you mean throughout the administration, you don't mean -- >> throughout the whole administration. >> okay. >> throughout the whole, yeah. about what we needed in the government. and that was -- barbara knows the memo. >> and i want you to talk about this because how few women, there were some women. it's not that there were no women -- >> no. >> -- but they were not in positions of responsibility, barbara, at that point? >> i would say the women in leadership policy positions were very, very few, and they were not very visible. and really what happened, and this never was a piece of it,

bob finch, you know, we need to go back because there was a question that was asked at a press conference -- >> right. >> -- that's really important as one of the catalysts here. >> shortly after -- >> his second press conference, actually, it was all men. and vera glasser, if anyone knew her, was very attractive and be well spoken. and she got up and asked the question, something like this, mr. president, out of your first 200 appointments only three have gone to women. can we expect some more equitable recognition of women's abilities, or are we going to remain a lost sex? i can imagine what kind of a ripple of, oh, my word, went through the briefing room or even all laughter or whatever e. and according to her, we have her oral history in this collection, at first wasn't quite sure what to do with that,

but then he got serious, and he said, well, i didn't know, and we'll have to do something about it. and there was this circuitous bunch of events that happened after that that documented in part one of lee's book. one thing that happened was a task force on women's rights and responsibilities was appointed, and there was a tussle in the white house about what kind of people would be on that. and there was a group that wanted kind of not a progressive bunch of people to be on that. the progressives won out, and the recommendations that came out of that were really very forward-looking. one of them was my job. the title of that task force report was a matter of simple justice. >> the title of the book. >> that is where the title of this book has come from. >> who was behind the progressive argument in the white house? >> actually, it was a man named charlie clap who's not with us, but he was working for arthur

burns. a lot of people were involved in this in one way or another. arthur burns was one, pat moynihan -- >> whether for us or against us. >> yeah. and he talked about some of the people who wanted to go the other way and put, let's say, a phyllis schlafly kind of group on this task force. and i think what would have emerged had that happened would have been quite different from what did emerge. >> so that move early on, lee, made a big difference. >> oh, absolutely. and charlie clap in his oral history interview 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 says, it felt like the democrats had been in control of this issue, that president kennedy had had the president's commission on the status of women which had

equivocal results but resulted in the creation of of the state commissions on women. >> right. >> and president johnson had done a number of things, but there were equivocal results there as well and no more significant appointments. >> no, that's a key. >> of women. and so the task force and some people, some historians have said, well, this really wasn't a very meaningful task force, but it was one of 17 task forces that arthur burns established on a whole variety of different policy areas to help the president get ready for his next state of the union address and to set directions for the administration in its first term. >> and, again, this was coming on the heels of what the equal pay act had been in 1963, the civil rights act which included gender as well as race in 1964, but it just took time -- >> yes. >> -- to work its way through the system. so there was this task force, and it began working on or

began, it set the wheels in motion to do something to get more women. and that was after the vera glasser question, right? >> yeah. that happened -- vera's question was in february of of '69. >> that's correct. this task force came into being later that year. it reported, i think, at the end of '69, and it was released, the results were released, the matter of simple justice came out in 1970 and really then helen's memo came in '70. bob finch 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 i really do believe that things picked up when bob finch got there. >> yeah. >> and he received your memo. we have in the, in some of our papers a decision memo that he put together for the president,

had the president, yes, do this, do that. >> which i'm asking because i think it's important to identify the individuals along the way -- >> right, exactly. >> -- who made, you know, key decisions that then moved forward. >> and pat was working very closely with bob finch. >> and a very early appointee also -- >> remind everyone who she was. >> she was assistant secretary, um -- >> in. [inaudible] >> at h.e.w. then. >> what was then health education. >> yeah. longtime california supporter of president nixon and bob finch. >> so that task force report was 1970. helen's memo was 1970, but it didn't happen immediately. it still took a little bit of time. >> it took some germinations, i guess. >> you had to get the wheels going. >> yeah. and lots of tugging and pulling inside. not everybody thought this was the best idea in the world. and one of the other

recommendations in that task force was more women in appointed and policy making positions. and then we have that one decision memo copy of that where the president did get some of the wheels in motion that bob finch had drafted. and then what emerged from that in early '71 or let's say in april, um, was a three-pronged strategy the -- to attack the problem of women, the lack. and the first thing was a memo that the president sent to every cabinet secretary and agency head that required an action plan about how those secretaries and agency heads were going to appoint more women, train more women. and this went into the career service in their department. >> and this was before you came onboard. >> i'm the second part of the three prong. >> okay. [laughter] >> i think. and the thing about this memo,

this wasn't just a memo that went. it had in it some teeth in that he had a date. i wanted these back by may something, and he wanted to know who in the department 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 the policy making jobs and to monitor the action plans of the departments that turned out to be fascinating. and the third one was to bring jane baker spain who had been a businesswoman in ohio into the civil service commission as a commissioner to watch over what was going on at the career civil service. >> but there had never been in a previous administration, is this right, lee, either under kennedy or under johnson, there had not been specific individuals who were tasked with these

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

office of economic opportunity, was considered a person of interest for this. len garment had some sympathy to this. and there were, and there were several others, ray price -- >> yeah, as a speech writer. >> speech writer, and a number of others -- >> and what about on the other side? >> at the same time you had people like pat buchanan, speech writer, and a whole raft of other men. you know, in interviewing some of barbara's colleagues in the office of, in the personnel office -- stan anderson who is here, i think, and jerry jones who was here earlier said, you know, hey, we were, we were young guys, we, you know, we were of our time. there was a lot of sexism, a lot of men who maybe -- a few men who were probably sympathetic to this, an awful lot of men who it

just simply hadn't occurred to them that women would want jobs like this. but once they discovered they did -- >> and could. >> -- and could, it was like, okay, all right, let's do it. but then there were still an awful lot of men who said, no, this is -- >> well, and let me say this, barbara. >> go ahead. >> when barbara came in, those who did not want this to the happen did not even provide her with anything to work with. she had no typewriter, she had -- >> does everybody here know what a typewriter -- [laughter] >> we did use them then. be -- nothing with which to work. >> did you have an office? >> i had an office. i had to create this, and that took some doing. now, i have to say i was thankful for the support of

helen who sent me a dictating machine that was the sides of a table, and i would -- size of a table, and i would dictate tough and send it over to her office 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 a secretary. and we got the mail answered through white house correspondents, but it took some pushing and pulling. >> before we get to this, i do have a question. we talk about the debate inside the white house. what about when it 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 -- >> right. >> and my answer's always the same, i didn't care why he did it as long as he did. but what i really think, um, and it was counterintuitive. people didn't think of richard nixon this way. but, you know, if you look at his life, he had a strong,

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

environmental policy, regulatory things, osha, epa. there's really an amazing record of accomplishments. and often these were things that the president was not spending all of his time on because he had vietnam, he had a lot of, a lot of foreign issues and, you know, some very serious domestic issues with the economy. so, but i wanted to say that periodically through the record there are memos and be 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, we've got to grab the ball on this. barbara mentioned his directive in many 1971.

perhaps a year before he had a cabinet meeting said, we need to get going. we need to hire and promote more women. i want you folks to get out there and get going on it. nothing happened. >> so the directive made it happen, and the fact that there was a managerial aspect to it, and it came to my office to monitor how these folks out there were doing on their plans. and we had targets. you know, the state department had x number of women who were supposed to be -- >> is that the same thing as quotas? >> no, targets. [laughter] but that's what we did. and i monitored against that, and reports would go to the president x be then -- >> and what would happen if a department didn't meet the target? >> there would be a note that would go from the president, signed by the president to whoever it was. >> and -- >> [inaudible] >> and, helen, what was the sense throughout the administration at that point

after barbara came in? was there a sense that this is something we've got to do? i mean, surely not every single agency was as enthusiastic as every ore agency about this. >> 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 the 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 then. you had frances perkins back in fdr's days and under president eisenhower, you had -- [inaudible] and bertha adkins. >> but that was -- >> and that was it. >> no women running an agency or

a department. >> no, until helen. >> yeah. >> and then the pace picked up. but that's rather remarkable when you think of it. >> what about the reis sense, though n in other -- reception, though, around the administration? because 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 helping. >> we were pushing. and i was out there beating the bushes. we divided the country into ten regions, and i would go and be 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, they could come and tap our talent bank. of course; i was doing that too. i was trying to spot places where there were going to be -- >> what kinds of places were you looking for women and what kind of reception were you getting when you said we want women to come into government? >> well, it was, i would say my

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

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

necessarily big government, but what there was needs to be done right. and so fred malick's operation was really designed to make the personnel operation a professional approach. and so the recruiters were people who knew how to do corporate recruiting or how to do recruiting in general. >> corporate. >> well, because i'm trying to get at the qualities in barbara that made them look at -- because that was an important position, the first woman who was going to have to be going in there to the personnel office and saying you've got to put women, you've got to at least consider women first. looking for someone with a strong personality. >> apparently so. [laughter] that would be, that would be the case. but i think also because barbara had executive experience for the singer corporation, for citibank and new people. and knew how to work with people

and knew how to get around and, yes, she was not a shrinking violate. >> well, i had to be assertively charming or something like that. [laughter] >> but when you, when he approached you for the job did you think, oh, my gosh, this is going to be tough. what did you think? >> i was at what's now citibank, and i once of three women assistant vice presidents in the bank. and i was on a fast track -- >> so so you had a high position in the bank. >> there was no women vice presidents at the time. i became convinced after talking with tred and others that this was serious. now, 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 do it anyway. but i believed in the cause. i believed there should be more women, i believed in equality for women. i still do very fervently, so i decided to go and --

>> but you were giving up a top position. >> yeah. but i took a leave of absence. i took a leave of absence intending always to go back there. i never did as it turned out. i stayed for two years. and they, the white house though made me visible. actually, my first leave of absence was six months, but that was sort of a joke looking back. they made me visible. it was an early press conference -- >> well, they put you at a news conference right off the bat that put you -- >> set up by a guy who shall remain nameless. >> well, go ahead and name him. [laughter] >> he's no longer with us, his name is van shut upway. but the person who designed this was my friend margita white. it got kind of wild in there. it was only the women of the press, and they were kind of mad at the president, and it wasn't set up in the briefing room like every other conference. it was in the roosevelt room, i

think. so they just, you know, they hammered me. and, you know, it builds character as you know, judy. i had a title that was not useful at that point. it was staff assistant to the president for executive manpower. [laughter] which the first question -- and the first question was how can you have a title like that if you're recruiting women? so they took me apart, i felt. however, the press that came out of it was not all that bad, and at least there was the sense that something was going on. >> something was happening. >> turned out that margita white when she wanted to cut the press conference off didn't do it because the room was spinning because she was sick, she was pregnant with her son. >> did they change your title after that? >> the title changed instantly after that. >> which was good. helen, how did things start to change after that? the fact that barbara was there, that she was focused on this? >> well, first of all, if you

look at just some of the photographs and there's one more prominent of all of the women together -- >> this is one right behind us. >> in the rose garden. yeah, you see how different it was when in the beginning there were maybe three of us. made a big difference. >> what year was this taken? >> now, 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 beaten -- we had a numerical goal, we were trying to double the number of women in policy making 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 more significant than the policy making jobs what happened at the middle career

levels. 3-5, when there was -- 13-15, when there was a promotion of women into jobs that had been forbidden to women. >> forbidden by law or practice? >> no, by practice. >> by practice. >> narcotics agents, tugboat captains, 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 time frame. >> but, helen, were this women who wanted those jobs that the point? >> yeah, there were. >> there were a lot of women who felt, i mean, i had a lot of women who came to me just because 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'd pass them along to. >> that's right. >> and move them.

but, you know, there were still men, there there were plenty ofn still who resented it. i can tell you on my commission there were four male commissioners besides 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 environment at that point in terms of women, you know, wanting to see women advance. what were the polls showing in terms of what the american people wanted about women, thought about women? >> well, this is, i think the administration's diversity was, frankly, representative of the country's diversity of opinion about this. i mean, you had, you know, 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, you know, radical feminists. and, you know, a whole spectrum of women in between that who, you know, were 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, and you mentioned some polls that even within a period of a decade or so the percentage of women who felt that they were being discriminated against went 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, you know, it's a political organism. you push that hard, the political organism responds. >> but i think it's fair to say that our society at that point

was not all that, well, let me say it a different way. women and careers were not acceptable the way they are today. and women having careers and family were not so acceptable -- >> at all. >> yeah. society was very divided on this. that's one of the huge changes that's 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 more controversial, it was 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 -- >> because on the one hand you have those so-called bra burners -- >> exactly. >> you have the more activists who some of the meths i think that they were using -- methods

i think that they were using to publicize their views were controversial at that point. but you're saying president nixon -- >> he called it right into the middle. >> he did. >> and now it was okay. i really think we can't, um, overstate how important that was. i mean, this may have happened later anyway, but the fact that a so-called conservative president did it and the very visible and government by then at that time was an example, i'm not so sure that's the same today, but it was then. >> set an example. >> this was an important societal change. >> and i want to talk about how it effected the private sector because i can say from a personal standpoint i graduated from college in 1968, was interested in the getting into journalism, could only get a job as a secretary at a, turned out at a television station news department in atlanta. and be i was told that women, you know, they weren't looking

for a woman reporter. and then only after a year or so i kept pushing and be pushing. i'll just say this because i think there's a connection here, another news director at a different affiliate, an abc affiliate, i went to work at a cbs affiliate, the news director said to me, you know, i'm 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 -- and 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. >> okay. >> so this was before you came, but it was, 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 were doing this. >> it really was well, and i think this climate generated, well, or helped to move ahead a lot of other things. if you look at some of the

legislative activities that occurred in that, this same time frame, the equal rights amendment passed, title 9 which, of course, helped very much in educational activities that were getting federal funding and sports in particular. the old -- not the old, but the equal employment opportunity commission got more enforcement teeth for gender discrimination. >> in the early '70s. >> um -- >> '60s. >> yeah. this is now '71, '72. >> right. >> and then there were the laws that made, gave more equality to women in terms of credit and housing. in other words, there were 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.

>> judy, 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, etc. it was only -- i know, because i had to fight my way at that time. >> and when did that change? when did that -- >> '74 was -- >> the '70s, yeah. >> it was that late? >> yes. >> equal credit -- >> that's right. >> it's hard to believe because we think back 50 years ago it couldn't have been that different, but it was very different. >> it definitely was. >> a lot of things were different. >> and there were 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. in all your research, you talked to a lot of people as we've heard tonight in working on this book and putting it together. what surprised -- i mean, tell us one or two of the stories that have stuck with you. >> well, as i was, you know, part of the -- this book began really by deciding that we wanted to present the excerpts from the interviews as the focus of the book. and gradually we realized that, you know, we needed -- that the interviews told fascinating stories. but we needed some context, the background. because the interviews, as you're probably aware, oral history interviews give you those highlights, they give you those reflections, those perspectives. but they are always, not always need documents. that's where you need archives.

>> right. >> and so, you know, we could tell those stories, but we didn't have quite enough to provide that historical context. and so barbara's papers and the papers that had been donated by other women that we interviewed, we went to the schlesinger library, looked at katherine east's papers which had a large amount of vera glasser's material, went to the nixon library, looked at charlie clap's materials, len garment's materials and another set of records there. and that began to form bulate that contextual background that results as part one of the book. but the stories are, nevertheless, the stories that are really interesting are the stories of the women -- >> of the women who went through this. barbara, you stayed for two, you ended up staying for two years. you originally thought it was only going to be six months. why did you stay? >> well, you know, when one gets

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

coast. she was in los angeles, her name was cynthia holcomb hall. and i called her and said, cynthia, would you be interested in this tax court job? and she said, well, that would be really interesting, but my husband and i have six children, i'm a partner in one law firm, he's a partner in another, i don't think that's at all doable. she came back and talked to us, and once again said, you know, 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 lawyer too. and then there was hatched a brilliant plan, and i think sam anderson was the one who did it, i think he's in this audience, one of the a liaison guys. and we thought, well, let's get our husband to come to government. and there in the treasury department was someone who'd gone to law school with john hall, and that 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. and that was a first. i think that's the first time there was ever a dual -- >> nowadays that sort of thing is common, but back then -- >> yeah. and they both came, and she then went on and served for certain years on the tax court where her colleagues, all men, really gave her a hard time. >> yeah. >> the tax court sits all over the place. she was sent to -- >> 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 there was even a new york times story about the combined income that this couple would receive from their federal

salaries -- >> was it a positive or a negative? >> wasn't all that, wasn't perceived as all that wonderful. >> no. >> it was kind of double dipping from the public treasury. yeah. >> so, helen, and i'm going to turn to the audience for questions. as you, 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, who else do we want to make sure not to overlook as we talk about what happened back then? >> well, i mentioned pat because pat really played an important role and bob pin -- finch. my good friend, peter flanagan, at the white house definitely was not -- [laughter] >> he is not in this audience, i don't think. [laughter] >> i don't give a damn. [laughter] >> he was a dinosaur, is that what you're trying to say? >> -- [inaudible]

helped a great deal too. >> fred brought you in. >> he brought me in, and fred was supportive. i want to mention julie eisenhower who was a young woman of whatever she was, 22 or 23, and she would go and make speeches about this. as a matter of fact, julie's oral history is one that we have, and she -- >> it's, i read her. >> -- with this project. but as a young woman she really took the bull by the horns -- >> so she went out and talked about what you were doing. >> yeah. ann armstrong was another one -- >> absolutely. ann was very important. >> counselor to the president with cabinet rank, and that was the first breakthrough of that sort in the years. but when she was at the republican national committee, she was a great champion of this effort. so i was -- katherine -- [inaudible] is another one i would single out who katherine was the first woman elected to the congress from the state of washington in, i think, 1958. and then when she finished --

>> she worked for the tariff commission. >> yeah. president nixon appointed her to the tariff -- now the international trade commission. >> peggy heckler. >> peggy heckler. she was wonderfully supportive of he and be of all women. katherine, by the way, her oral history has fabulous story about how she, and this is the civil rights act of '64, she and some of the other women -- it was a bipartisan group in the house -- when they knew the civil rights act was coming up and it had, of course, race in it, and they wanted to get gender in it. and they went to see this marvelous gentleman who -- >> judge smith? >> judge smith who i'm not sure if he was a judge, but he was chairman of the rules committee in the house. >> a virginia congressman. >> yeah. and he, he was very gracious and said, you know, ladies, katherine actually does the accent. in one of her interviews, be

happy to help you. somebody would have to make the amendment. he said i'm going to make the amendment myself. and as she tells the story, we accepted. but he didn't fool us one bit. he was against the civil rights act and figured if it got sex in there, it would be down the drain -- >> even more objectionable. >> even more. and, of course, what happened is he made the amendment, sex into it, and the whole thing passed. [laughter] >> all right. who has a question for one of our amazing panelists? you're going to have to wave your arms so i can see you. yes. >> [inaudible] >> let's see. tell me again where's the microphone? >> over there. >> and there's one on the right, the other aisle too. >> all right. >> is it working? >> hello? well, i was just remarking, or i was taking some note bees about how this -- talking about 43 years ago, and my question is about current male chauvinists and what -- [laughter] do you recommend women employ to

deal with the men that we currently face? >> i didn't hear the whole question. you said current male chauvinism? i didn't hear the question. >> right. what advice would you offer to women today. [laughter] >> helen? >> all right. [laughter] >> i'd probably bust 'em in the mouth. [laughter] but, no. ..

and make sure they understand that you have ever damn bit as good as they are, and you are as critical, or more so, and that you work very hard and you're not asking for any favors, and you want to be recognized. [applause] >> that's a great statement. >> barbara, what would you add? >> don't know i can improve on that. always useful to try to find some allies. and there are some men today who are quite enlightened. one of the -- there are others, and if you're trying to get somewhere in an organization and you're a woman, it'siful to fine some allies -- it's useful to

find allies who are male. it's always good to have women supporting each other, and 40 years ago, one thing that stands out to me is the women who were there were supportive of each other, and that should continue today, but it's always useful to find allies. again, be assertive and recognize your own value. and that's just basic. >> strength in numbers. >> i would say that barbara is a perfect example of that. when she was working in new york before she came into government, she was doing networking. she was -- a glass of wine and a group of women getting together, talking about their jobs and their lives. she was one of the founding members of executive women in government, which, you know, institutionalized that networking throughout the federal government. now, you may want to say a

little more about that. >> well, executive women in government is still in competencens today and -- in existence today and it's been going for 40-some years. i think these groups, where people can share experiences and help each other, are really very, very important. >> 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 fought 0 so hard to get to wherever they were they didn't want to help others. >> we called them queen bees. >> i don't see that so much today. but there were some of those. but i must say -- >> they were afraid for their own positions. >> i guess. >> they were afraid of losing their positions that had taken them so long to get where they were. >> or the can't want the

competition from other women. i will say one thing. 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. but i'm going to stop right there. i hope we can walk away with that. >> excuse me. you asked the names of people who were in the forefront. president nixon in the forefront. >> and pat nixon was very eager to have a woman on the supreme court, and it was two vacancessin' 1971, and we scoured the landscape looking for women, and the justice department has a lot to do with who gets into these judicial

roles. there weren't enough women in the pipeline -- that was part of the problem -- were there women who were appellate -- >> just a few. the problem was they weren't philosophically compatible with the president's point of view, but there was a woman surfaced, mildred willy, a local judge in los angeles. >> state court. >> state court, surfaced by the justice department, and the american bar association just killed her, and -- >> really? >> they said she was not qualified? they did the same with a minority appointee. a rough league. but we think it 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 lady bird johnson's press secretary, came with a list representative unto

women's groups. so there was a lot of activity around this and there was a real effort, and pat nixon, according to julie's oral history, told her husband she was not pleased. >> even in the earlier vic when justice for di cp, pat nixon -- >> that was '69. >> yeah. that pat nixon had asked earl if she could see -- she wanted to get some names in front of her husband as possible women candidates for the supreme court. >> if we -- got on the table but it took another ten years before sandra o'connor. i still think there's resistance in many quarters about women in leadership roles. we haven't totally cracked that. >> we're a long way.

>> even on capitol hill. >> maybe especially on capitol hill. >> where women are now 17% of the congress, even though they're more than 50% of the electorate. only 17%. >> we need to crack that barrier, too. >> who has another question? right here. yes. >> actually, you kind of answered it there. i was curious what your hopes at that time were for where things could lead and where you would like to see things lead today, and you kind of elaborated a little bit on the percentages. maybe you can talk about other areas you would like to see women contribute. >> you mean in government or outside of government? >> in government. >> helen? >> repeat the question. >> he is asking, what else -- what other areas in government would you like to see women progress? we talked about the judiciary, and there are now three women on the supreme court. you mentioned congress still needs women. there are several women in the

cabinet. three women secretaries of state. no woman vice president or president yet. i'd -- >> i'd like to see a woman president of the united states. that's a hope i had back then. i think we're closer today than we were, but we're not quite there. >> i have to live long enough to see that. [applause] >> do you tell your age? i'm just asking -- >> 38. >> 38. fabulous. [applause] >> question. >> i was wondering, did you work on title ix at all? or did you -- how much did nixon influence that. >> on title 9 resident? >> what year was that? >> summer of '72, i think. and everybody know what title

ix is? >> basically forbidding discrimination against women in education, and i think everybody thinks title 9 resident is athletics but it's education in the broader definition. >> barbara, remind us, how did that play out? was that something the president was pushing? >> the president was for that, and that 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, and women's causes. >> from my reading, my sense is that at the time, i don't think they really -- that anybody really appreciated what the ultimate implications of that would we be. especially in athletics and also in some other areas. >> how much pressure were you feeling, barbara, from the

outside? from the women's movement, whatever was going on in society to do even more than what you were doing? >> 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. i won occasion i was forbidden to go to such a group by the chief of staff because didn't think it was appropriate to be there, but there was nobody else to send. >> the decision not to go? >> when you're told by your boss -- but i still was outreaching to those groups, and they were talking to me. i think the movement for equality was important. noise that was being made about this was important for the -- we

were on the inside and making progress. i think the the activity -- >> did those groups recognize the progress you were making on the inside or not? >> some did. some did. some didn't. >> if they were honest they did recognize it. >> well, some were not as honest as others, because there was some overall on the other side of the aisle who had a kind of a litmus test. you weren't really a feminist unless you were also against the war in vietnam and for more government to do -- >> a lot going on at that time. >> yeah. now, 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. focused on what you were 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, too. we were focused, not trying to get into a proliferation of other issues but just used them in the effort. >> another audience question. quickly, barbara, to what extent was there upright cal thinking -- a political thinking in what was going on, we want women to volt for us, we should do this? >> that was in the mix no question about it. the closer we got the '72 election, the more it was in the mix. and the more clout i had, frankly, of pushing for the cause -- >> so you saw it. >> yeah. >> so there was a political imperative here. now, i really do believe that the president, and certainly bob finch was put 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 of that going on. >> a lot of us had other roles. i was teamed up with mrs. rumsfeld to go out and campaign, and that stressed women's accomplishments and what was being done for them. >> you were out speaking about this. >> yes. >> there was -- out of we called it c.r.e.e.p., the commitey to re-elect the president -- i think the person who dreamed it up was barbara mcgregor, the wife of bart mcgregor, who was heading c.r.e.e.p., and i -- jirkinet fortunate name or acronym. >> i had to do the scaling up of the plan, and there were trios of women who went out in that

campaign speaking. they were a mixture of appointees and cabinet wives, and it was a novel approach. we covered the country, and it was quite effective, i think. but it was a new idea. >> the discrimination against women in the political conversation right now here, especially with the election, is very, very discouraging, and i'm excited about the split, and i'm wondering, can you comment on how you think maybe this book can help get that language out of here and back to equal rights for women? >> i'm sorry. which language are you objecting to right now? >> well, although rules that are being made against -- if you want an abortion in virginia you have to get a sonogram or whatever it is. yes. and the birth control stuff, and -- i mean to me that is totally discrimination.

the man want to -- 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 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. >> barbara. >> i don't know what to say except that i would agree. i would hope that this sense of history and what happened then and the trail blazing that happened then, could be brought forward and hopefully inspire some of what is going on today. that would be my hope. 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 issue, too, along the way. >> you know, i really think for those who believe otherwise, and what you see going on, i think you need to make your voice heard. >> another question from out there? because i think one of the, i guess, curiosities i have, is i'm always curious 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, i've got to get this done today? how -- try to take us back to what it was like then, doing this task that you had agreed to take on. >> well, it was a really energizing task, you know. i really wanted this to happen. i wanted to see what we -- we certainly had goals and we were marching forward, and we were catching every ball that could come in, and it was frustrating on occasion. it was. i lost some battles, yeah. but on the other hand, we won a lot of battles, and a lot of people helped. there was a lot of support. and that's energizing when you have support from -- >> did some agencies get a pass -- like the pentagon? >> no they didn't. >> that's a place you don't think of women having -- being listened to.

>> in this era, you had the first women generals and admirals, and i credit the president's memorandum on that, and i also credit mel laird, who was the defense secretary at the time, and he was pushing this, and there were -- i forgotten the numbers but it was four or five women -- one of them at least, jean holme, the air force is in that -- >> in uniform. >> and so some barriers were broken there. now, i think some agencies are always going to be harder than others. same thing is true in the corporate world. some companies are slower to move than others. but it's -- you just have to keep the drum beat going and demonstrate people can do a lot of things. back then the navy just decided -- i'm trying to think. in the '70s era, to allow women to be crew on combat ships. and that september a -- sent a

ripple through the university. >> -- through the universe. >> i think that was the late 70s. >> the military academy astarted to allow women in 197 5. so sometimes -- i think one of the important things here is the breakthrough that were made. women reported to jobs that women never held, and they proved they could do it. then the barrier is broken and there was a lot of the barriers broken -- >> helen there was a lot of pressure on the first women, because did you feel you couldn't make a mistake? >> i felt a great deal of responsibility in representing the president and i was very careful in what i said in press conferences. i traveled all over the country a lot and abroad, and i

recognized 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. before spouting off. i felt tremendous responsibility look that line. >> specially since you were the first woman. you would feel that way anyway to a degree but you are say even more so. >> so did i. i echo that. i was pushing on the inside but i was out speaking, and i had to balance it and make sure 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. so it was -- >> questions. >> this is related to the last question. clearly as we just heard, there are many forms -- the issues like abortion, contraception, are directly related to issues

increasing women's professional opportunities. i assume this view inside the administration was that the issues could be separated. maybe that wasn't the case generally. i don't know. could you talk about whether or not people within the administration, the president himself, thought these issues were separable or thought they were linked politically and in terms of politics. >> this has to be the last question. we have to wrap up. >> it's just that the issue of abortion was not herely -- is was in there but not nearly so prom inept -- >> i think he is refer the fact that roe v. wade was 1973, so the year after you -- >> i think roe v. wade was something that came out of the same changed climate. some of what happened -- you know, it goes into a lot of

different ears, and judges and so on have ears, too, and when things are going on around us, we all take some of it in, whether we realize or not. so i think roe v. wade came right out of that climate, and the debate goes on. that's about all i can say about that. >> we're going to -- >> can i say something about susan b. anthony? >> okay. >> there was susan b. anthony story. >> some women's groups wanted to give the white house a bust of sues an b anthony. there's a bust of her in the capitol. so they had a copy made in bronze, which is very severe looking, and she -- well, she was, i but she was effective. and between the time she arrived and we could get a presentation arranged with mrs. nixon, she

sat in my office, my closet, on the third floor of the old d.o.d., and on the dead of night on occasion she would land in the office of somebody who had said or done something detrimental to women. and -- [applause] >> and then i had to rescue her in the morning and bring her back. >> tell us whose -- >> ron zigler. [applause] >> was number one. the press secretary. >> we're going to wrap up. i want to ask each of you in a sentence, what do you want this audience to take away? what should they know about this time, this -- a time when it was a matter of simple justice during those years during the administration of president nixon. helen? >> i want the young women to understand what really went on

to make the road easier for them. that it was not just paving over, and the doors were wide open. not by any means. it was a struggle. and a lot of women worked hard to make it happen. and i just feel it's important that the young women understand this. >> i agree completely. i'd like young women and maybe older women, or men, to understand the trail blazing and the breakthroughs that were made that really did open opportunities that are being enjoyed today. that's number one. thing number two is that the women back then really supported each other. that was important. and the presidential leadership -- president nixon in this case -- really made a difference. >> i would guess the -- i would

second both of those and say i hope that anybody that reads this book will come to appreciate the incredibly hard working, talented, and feisty women who are representative in this project, and you have two of them right in front of you. >> what a wonderful -- thank you very much. [applause] >> and thank you, and thank you penn state for publishing the book and for getting this project going. thank you all for being here. good night. [applause]

>> why another book? >> you know, you can't put everything in one book, and liberty and tyranny was really a restatement of conservativism. not conservativism. a but only i thought the republican party had turned into kind of mush and i thought it was important, with what the left was doing in the this country to remind people of conservativism and it represents individual sovereignty and all these things that made america so great, and yet on the other hand the left, which is constantly trying to centralize and concentrate power and how much damage has been done in the last 100 years. so it's kind of tough to do that in 250 pages, which i did. and then i thought myself later,

i really haven't gotten to the nub of this thing. that is, what is this force that lures millions and millions of people to it, and then destroys their independence? and the politicians who push it are so effective in their propaganda, and the phony intellectuals who push this are so effective in the arguments they make. where did this come from, where did it start, and i thought that had to be addressed if we're going to in my view, save the country. the other point is, where did our views come from? we talk about property rights and other things. where did they come from? the founders didn't wake up one day and suddenly think about consent of the governed, three branches of the government. where does this stuff come from? it comes from a lot of places but i decided to focus on those places as well. so, i concluded that the problem

we have is this utopian state. you can hear it today. politicians get up and say, i'm going to create a program and fix the mortgage situation. no they're not going to fix the mortgage situation. they're going to create a program. and incomes are going to be equalized. they're not going to be equalized. i'm going to create a program and do something else, and all you have to do is surrender more and nor of your liberties and assets and they're going to fix the situation. where does this come from? this ideology. now, the problem is that these notions of utopia are not utopia at all. their notions -- the idea, i thought when i started this, that the greatest country on the face of the earth, which has created more wealth for more people than any society ever, more liberties for more people than any society ever, is such a

civil society because our constitution is such a magnificent document. why would we surrender these things? on the fantasies and hopes and claims. so basically that's why i wrote this book. [applause] >> host: you mentioned the word statism, and if there's a word that you have success any brought back into the american lexicon, that it. statism. define ameritopia for me. >> guest: i got to thinking, after i go through a lot of these philosophies -- this is a book based on political philosophy and at the end it all comes together. i tie it all together. and the bottom line was, i got to thinking, and i ended