be a generational one. i'm thinking of a good friend of mine who is my age and very smart, who refuses to do the electronic business because she spread all sorts of that bad things can happen, but she doesn't want to reveal private information, social security number, et cetera he so is this something only applicable effect to the for the younger? >> that's a great question. there is something one cabinet department did in the last few years. they send out papers salaried wage notices every month or every two weeks to employees. they thought that probably wasn't a great idea. what they said is we are going to start sending electronically. if you want to paper, get the paper. it would be to notify people in the context you're describing

what a lot of people don't use the internet or don't rely on it for the relevant interactions that affect a paper that were going to stage, that should be certain reasonable. with which to request a prayer. you're completely right there in number of people for various reasons found fleck electronic interaction. in cases where a spec preferences, and there's a with outside nine customers were taxpayers the expense of unwanted paper, which people are subject to. >> i've spent many years and still do with pharmaceuticals and particularly around safety and information. two questions related better to issues. issue number one, where's the

intersect between liability in tort laws and making things simple. the pharmaceutical of these days blew up into 12.5. it has over two dozen discrete facts. three fourths ephemera safety. whenever one tries to simplify the label, the other side to call lawyers for pharmaceutical companies goes the other way because of their duty to warn. that is question one and guidelines for then get the push was always tell us exactly what to do. detail everything that we routinely said buser judgment that didn't go down well. i wonder if you comment on those two. >> those are great. there's a few in washington held by some pretty smart people that

is asking a different way of asking for it. my motto is the easy interaction. this is the other simpler capital of s. the other is common sense for rigid specification pier one view is what ails the united states today is too many governments, state, local, national or specifying too much and you should just say we want people not to get sick from pharmaceuticals to rebut the air to be clean inducer on common sense about how to get there. your question suggests that is whether that's a good idea. some contacts they use are common sense is good because people know what to do and they can find around cheapest is

getting there. in some areas that is ray. companies would say we don't know what you're talking about. tell us what you have in mind and then we can evaluate whether a sensible infeasible and know how to comply. the trade-off between specificity and common sense so to speak depends on the context and if regulated actors could evade the law lot of kerry of very sent specificity. they don't know what they love. then there's an argument for specificity. it's a great question. as a first approximation of the academics say is there's a wind really want people to see, make it big in delhi that. system two for most of us the

cognitive system is working with the site are jobs and not the details associated with the drug to doctors prescribe for us. they detailed warnings may be the reasons that needs to be there. maybe they have some deterrent effect on.as making a prescription the first place. you want to isolate the major thing some of them clearly see what they are. he may have noticed for some screens, there's a new requirement that for the one not protective against cancer, there's a warning that says this

has not been demonstrated to protect against skin cancer. in my protect against burning, but not skin cancer. that isn't hidden in complexity. it's clear on the sunscreen. so you have a simple warning to the obama administration has tried to have a more graphic attention grabbing one. point taken exactly. surely a space for the long list for the experts might make the market work better. if your patients to know what they are getting into, simplicity has advantages. >> i assume and i hope you're familiar with the academic literature which has a huge amount on consumer behavior and communications. but the question many times well intentioned laws and regulations have unintended consequences, substantial unintended consequences that may not, but

in a cost-benefit analysis because it's a dynamic behavior response to it. is there any attempt to extend those analyses to get some of the more dynamic aspects, which predict. >> there are two things. here's how the cost benefit analysis goes than it seems kind of drive, but i confess i'm excited about it because it's a way of making sure people's lives are saved if it's a lifesaving rule or economic effects are not that it is a costly rule or if they aren't good, economic social effects that are really good. so the way it works is before he wrote his issued its expensive, it is reviewed by what used to be my office, which is to say

numerous people who are specialists. the rule in the area of highway safety and there's some thought it's going to reduce highway safety through one of the unintended consequences. there a lot of people scrutinizing it and include it with the federal government the council of economic advisers are terrific. a lot of people at the department of transportation is very strong specialists. the national economic council. department of commerce, environmental protection agency look at the environmental effects. a lot of people looking into it before his issued and they are often able to identify unintended consequences and get them on people screened for discussion. the noble cause that if it's approved for public scrutiny and what is inspiring to see is the largest less than as members of

the car boot but isolate unintended consequences even if the specialists they stand. so you get from any number of places local government from little companies, big companies, environmental groups and the u.s. chamber of commerce, ordinary citizens did they say this will create something you don't see. if it turned out to be true, that can be fixed as it's called. but the final rule closeout, sometimes the desires of the final rule didn't see clearly enough. an internal or external concern was expressed because the dynamic nature of the system created a bad surprise. then the president spoke by kick stand. so the look back is designed

exactly for that to correct the unintended consequence of the doctors and nurses and the nozzles, it had that advantage. if there is a rule having on in 10 consequences, often in all administrations it can get attention, even without a formal look back. that's not to say it always happens, but far from it. there are mechanisms in place and they are more formalized now under look back than they ever have been. >> thank you. an addendum to the pharmaceutical issues and had a sewing wet in the created in the pharmaceutical names and brand

names that relate to what kind of jacket is. most of us are not familiar with the root name and brand name. to ask you please question that really impacts everything you said here today. the most important thing for me as a consumer is not to spend all of my time doing my business and the person who is a vendor needs me to do to continue making a profit. this is an overburdening of everyone in the united states and that's where your simplistic never to kick sand. i'm busy trying to make a living. when i call the credit card company, they are vague on what is simple for them and make me spend the burden of would-be employees of the corporation. you see what is shifting harris saw the timeframe, all the time it takes to answer questions on the forums.

these are unintended consequences of where we are today vis-à-vis the great system of capitalism then tremendous burden placed on the average working person to comply with the requirements corporations make on us. right, councilman? thank you. >> complexity can create hardship for people interacting with the private sector and you're drawing attention, so the book's subtitle is the future of government, but the message is much broader. in so far as we talk about the private sector, we have one institution underside, which is the free market. so if companies are making a nightmare to interact with them, other things being equal, that is going to hurt them in the

marketplace. that needs to happen is market forces work combined with company ingenuity and that of the curve myth to produce greater simplification. if you think of the companies with which he most enjoyed interact and because of their products or initiate can call them up and make it easy for you. they are simpler. so that plea for the private sector is this is a winning strategy. it's often cheaper ones they get the network up and running. hoover is an example where a simple for individuals to interact with it and who knows whether the business model is the right one. there are other examples. of course the successful tabla companies, interact and it's easy and i'm sure you can tinker

some more if you have it turned, calling them up to cc. so markets are the things consumers have on their site. they are not perfect and let's see what we can do in the next years. it democracies, working with the government we have some pain on our side, too, which is accountability. a government, which is difficult to navigate will take political heat. i haven't done a sufficient survey to the generality of what i'm about to say, but some motor vehicles now i suddenly easier to navigate than they used to be. so to renew your driver's license in many states is just to send and a very short form and then it comes back. or when you don't get that benefit, it's a very customer

friendly visit to a place that is well organized. the fact the department of motor vehicles in some states is so much simpler isn't all night, it's partly that the relevant officials want to fix the problem. it's also because people demand it. the number of things we did to simplify the system are responsive to concerns like the ones you describe, where people said this terrible. simplify. the student had a lot of attention, but it eliminated over elliott annual hours on employers and work with employers to think what was burdensome and not useful? another example of government simplification, which came from

some pain that you're describing, truck drivers fill out reports to make sure trucks are safe. the basic idea of track safety is extremely important as secretary of the hood is number one priority. 2011, by the way, the number of deaths on the highway is the lowest in recorded history. a tribute to the private sectors conscious and ingenuity, but the regulatory system smartness. there's a requirement that is duplicated so they make up basically the same report. attract drivers have the experience like what you're describing and the department of transportation took away the requirement. that's about 1.6 million hours. they do with to more. ..

>> so, um, automatically enrolling people saves money which, i guess, the investment industry probably would favor because it pours more money into their system. but the problem with all of these things is that politics becomes involved. and the politics is, as you raised, about incentivizing things by tax policy that the republicans almost certainly

would not choose, um, automatic enrollment, but would choose to incentivize things by giving people packed rates for enrolling. just like they, on the other hand, probably -- and i'm pretty sure -- didn't favor the negative options because it favored industry. so this twists the entire behavioral nexus and calculation. and i wonder how do you find a way out of that? >> a little more optimistic, and i hope not unrealistically optimistic. i hope i'm not showing my own susceptibility to this. in terms of automatic enrollment and its presence in savings across the country, it actually was incentivized by a law that had broad republican and democratic support. so automatic enrollment hasn't split people.

and you're absolutely right that you could imagine forms of automatic enrollment, and i'll say a little bit about this, that are not in people's interests. a well designed automatic enrollment program for savings seems pretty good. it's in workers' interests so long as the automatic contributions aren't so high that there's going to be a struggle for people every month. and if they are that high, you can be sure people are going to start to opt out. so all the evidence we have is that automatic enrollment isn't creating hardship for the people who remain in, and it is creating a safety buffer for them when they're going to need it. in terms of bad uses of automatic enrollment, you could imagine -- and i'm not sure, i don't know enough ant the book example to -- about the book example to say any more than you did, just to notice there was a

political fight. but there are actors who will give you something like a hotel room for free, and in return for that you are paying monthly fees for the hotel room organization that you now find ourself enrolled in. and they're counting on people not to notice that they're enrolled in that and paying monthly fees. and the federal trade commission has expressed concern about that. i wouldn't take that to be a lesson about the undesirability of default rules in general. if you look at your cell phone or your computer, it has a ton of default rules on it. and they're generally good. not all of them necessarily, but generally good. and the reason is if they defaulted you into settings that were ill suited to you, then you'd think what are you doing to me, and you'd get them on the phone, and you'd hate it, and they wouldn't like it very much.

so default rules are not dispensable. if you're not automatically enrolled in a savings plan, you're automatically enrolled in something else. that is a system in which 100% of your take home pay goes to wages rather than 90 or 95. so there's got to be some allocation across various things. and the question is how can the government make allocations that are actually good for people, not incentivize the private sector to make allocations that aren't good for people, and how can our own alertness to the immense power of default rules help us as citizens and choosers to have things that serve our interests? one little example, often we can design default rules that are going to make life easier for us. so a number of people create a situation so that some percentage of their wages go into something. maybe a charity automatically. so they don't have to think every month, do i want to give

to chair think this month -- charity this month, because they'll be busy trying to live their lives even though they also want to go to charity. or they may be thinking i want a certain percentage of my take-home pay to go into my savings account. and those are individually designed automatic enrollment systems, and can they can make life a lot easier and better and safer. >> with the prevalence of scams on the internet, asking for money from nigeria and from all the other places, one of the things the government says if it comes from the treasury, the treasury does not go on the internet. and if you -- none of the treasury forms go on the internet. so how do you combat that if, in

that case? >> well, i want to look into it a little more carefully, and i worked closely with the treasury department in my time in government. it's not quite right to say that treasury department doesn't go on the internet. one initiative that was adopted very much in line with what i'm discussing is the treasury department in the census, this is a slight overstatement, went all electronic in the sense that a wide set of benefits payments are going into people's accounts electronically. and that's saving taxpayers a lot of money from mailing. it also increases accuracy, because the system is pretty good. and if paper gets -- paper can get lost. so the treasury department very much is electronic. in fact, more so probably than at any time in its history. um, i gather what you're referring to, and i don't know puff about in this to -- enough about this to have a view, if you get an e-mail from the u.s. treasury saying congratulations,

you've won a free trip to -- [laughter] have a tour of city of d.c., and if you'll only send us $7,000, your free trip will be -- so i think notes from the treasury department maybe are not part of what the ordinary e-mail experience involves. but the treasury department interactions with them frequently are electronic. >> but i know -- [inaudible] if it's the treasury, ignore -- the treasury does not directly connect with you. >> okay. okay, fine. i just don't know about that. if that's so, that's consistent with the proposition that there's a lot of electronic activity by the treasury. it's just not by e-mail.

thank you all. [applause] >> you're watching booktv on c-span2, 48 hours of nonfiction authors and books every weekend. >> and now from our recent visit to yuma, arizona, with time warner cable, our local partner, we hear from a local author whose book "postrevolutionary chicana literature" talks about the impact of chicana women in literature and the unique role they play. >> i believe that chicano writers historically are very interested in the day-to-day lives of real people, in real places. so, for example, anna castillo of chicago, many, many texas women writers are embracing a sense of place that is part of identity. so when i think of other

feminist writers i've worked with, let's say some of the great ones, betty friedan or anybody like that, i think that sometimes a criticism that could be made is that there's an immediate sense of wanting to be a global sisterhood or a global we are all against the man, but then we get away from -- but at the same time we have of to live a day-to-day life. and for me, chicana writers in particular are about addressing that day-to-day life as a place of strength to deal with the larger picture. i think one of the most important is the sense of empowerment that what has to be said is significant whether it is a poem about watching your grandmother make tortillas or tamales which is very typical, i think, to stories and fables about guadalupe. it's about empower m, but it's also about, i think, a deep looking inside and a connection with both the sense of self

creating an identity that is yours, but also a familiarity and a sense of connection with the family. and for many chicanas, with the past, all the way to the distant past. 19th century, let's say. oddly enough, i think that instead of looking inside ourselves as a meditative, philosophical thing, i think frequently in america we're just simply selfish. it's not really about learning about ourselves to become a better part of humanity or to become more connected with that which raised us, it's about i want, i need. so i do think that those voices of introspection for the purpose of looking outward and benefiting something beyond ourselves, i think those are getting lost. two of the texts i write about were only published in the 1990s in the their full form. so i think chicana writers have been recognizing a pattern in their own work that they can now

see, gosh, i wonder how did people make it when everything was so against them, when we had no power, we had no right to vote. and they're looking back at that, and they're seeing that their grandmothers and their grandfathers and their great grandmothers had a community to build out of, and it's part of what made it possible for the new chicana writers to exist. i grew up in san antonio, so i grew up with a majority which is a very different place for your average mexican-american female in this country. laugh and i'll be frank, until i moved to the university of iowa to do my graduate studies, i didn't realize there were this'll white people in the whole world. because san antonio's very much a mexican-american stronghold, you know? i thought of myself as mexican. my spanglish was simply what was spoken. and when i moved up there, i was origin originally going to work on shakespeare, on french poets. and the culture shock was so great that i really kind of retreated into myself and got introduced into borderlands.

i recognized in myself trying to negotiate two lives. i was very articulate, very good in english, a good scholar, good enough to go to iowa, but there was also very strange looks at me. not unkind, but simply who are you, where did you come from. and reading that book single handedly led me onto this path and trying to swim through that book, still to this day, is enlightening and thankfully for me, i got over the fright. it became definitely something empowering. in the necessity we have of labeling, i think it's easy to say, oh, the chicana, chicana and chicano movement, that coincided with the black power movement so, yeah, it was all about the '60s. and i think as a nation we're incredibly poor in our history. so i want people to look at it and realize that women explore anything in depth that they're passionate about, they're going to find connections they may not expect, and i want them to be

open to the joy of finding that. and also the, um, knowledge and introspection that that should bring to you. you really need to think about where we came from and why we're here. >> for more information on booktv's recent visit to yuma, arizona, and the many other cities visited by our local content vehicles, go to c-span.org/localcontent. >> next, booktv sits down with eric draper, the longest-serving white house photographer, to discuss his photographs of former president george w. bush. it's just over half an hour. >> host: front row seat is the name of the book. it was put together by eric draper. there's a forward by president george w. bush. mr. draper, in this book you ask the question could a black kid from south central los angeles be the photographer for the president of the united states. what's the answer to that

question? >> guest: that's a big yes. >> host: how'd you get the job? >> guest: well, back in 2000 i was assigned by the associated press to cover the bush campaign because i was a staff photographer, and that's my background, is photojournalism. and so i covered the campaign full time for 18 months nearly. >> host: did you get to know the president in that -- do you get to know the president in that kind of work? >> guest: you do, you do. you spend a lot of time on the road, mostly with other journalists and a lot of time with the staff, the campaign staff. and i really didn't think about the job until actually after the election because you might remember the election wasn't decided that night. and during the recount, well, that gave me the opportunity to pursue the position if governor bush had won the election. and everything lined up. there was perfect timing for me because right after he became president-elect, i had the opportunity to ask him in

person, and i actually took a page out of his political playbook. he would always say during the campaign, it must have been echoing in my head still that i'm going to look you in the eye and ask you for the job, i want to be your president. so that's what i did at party right after he became president-elect. >> host: and what was his answer? >> guest: well, he kind of looked at me. it was the longest handshake forever for me, and he said, you know, i really appreciate that, and i'll get back to you. and a week later i received a call from the chief of staff's office for an interview back in austin, and it all happened very quickly. >> host: how many years did you spend with president bush? >> guest: well, if you count my time with him as a journalist, nearly ten years. >> host: so you were at the white house for eight years with him. >> guest: uh-huh. >> host: how many photos did you take altogether? is. >> guest: well, i did a count, because we had, we had a digital system at the time, and i typed in my name to see how many hits

would come up, and it came around to nearly 10 -- excuse me, one million images under my name. and that's everything. that's outtakes, you know, out of focus photos, photos of my feet, so -- but, yeah. you have a trip tick in here from atop the oval office. how did you get from up top of the oval office? >> guest: i mounted a camera on the top of the oval office, and there's like a little ledge that lines the top of the oval office where the nor access sent lights are, and so what i did was mounted a digital camera and left it up there all day to show the sequence of events from the very moments when president bush would walk into the oval office through all of his meetings. and so that sequence shows his morning meetings, and then there's one image showing what it looks like when the oval office is full of media just to

show you how many people can fit into the oval office. >> host: how long were your days? >> guest: you know, it varied. you know, it could go -- definitely, nothing shorter than eight hours. you know, either 12 hours or 16 hours, and then a lot of the, my schedule when i would travel with the president, those days are even longer, you know? international travel. so basically as long as it took to always watch him and i didn't miss anything. and, of course, i had backup. i couldn't do it all alone. so when i needed help, when i needed a rest, i had a support staff. i had five -- four other photographers on staff which we covered the first lady, we covered the vice president. and so -- >> host: between five of you. >> guest: exactly. >> host: were there any times that were off limits? >> guest: good question. well, you know, obviously, there are a lot of private moments on

his schedule. his private time in the residence definitely off limits and, you know, i had so much access that i literally had to kind of hold back just to respect that privacy just because i was always around. i was definitely on his radar but not actually in front of him. so i tried to respect that. >> host: this photo here in the white house, mr. and mrs. bush are in the oval office, were you the only one in the room at this point along with them? >> guest: yeah. >> host: what's that like? do they talk with you? do they interact? do they just ignore you? >> guest: they ignore me, actually, and that's what i wanted. i would go days where the president wouldn't even speak to me, and that's what i wanted. i didn't want him to acknowledge me every time i walked into a room, because that would change the environment. i changed the environment because i was already present, but i didn't always want him to interact. because i really wanted to document real moments and not

change anything. so that, yeah, that was my role. eric draper, you write that it was magical whenever president bush and his father were together. and there's a lot of photos of the two presidents bush in this book. >> guest: well, first of all, they look so alike, which was really interesting. and anytime they're together, it was like history in the making, i mean, because you have two presidents together, father and son, the only second son of a president to become president. and they, it was always really interesting to photograph them together as a family because they're so normal in lots of ways other than the fact that they're two former, you know, two presidents together. and i really enjoyed documenting the family. the entire bush with family. >> host: and did you get to know mrs. bush as well. >> >> guest: i did. >> host: i want to ask about

photo on a very, very long couch -- [laughter] how did this one come about? was this just happenstance? >> guest: this was inside buckingham palace. this was prior to departing for a black tie dinner hosted by the queen. and the president and mrs. bush were staying there, and they were kind of walking around. they were like kids. they really enjoyed themselves. and they said, eric, come photograph us on this couch. and they were playing around for me in this image, so it created a fun, light moment. >> host: where they both got on each end of the couch. >> guest: right. >> host: there's another photo from 2001 where mr. and mrs. bush were dancing. >> guest: yeah. that was taken on january 20, 2001. the president and mrs. bush were rehearsing for before their very first inaugural ball back stage at the reagan center. and just, you know, a quiet moment just the two of them. obviously, there are lots of commotion going on behind me

because everyone was preparing for the event to start, and they wanted the to rehearse their dance -- wanted to rehearse their dance which they released literally a dozen times that night because of all the balls. >> host: now, in a lot of these photos you do see secret service agents standing around. what was your relationship, did you, did they have final say over your access? >> guest: no. no. of i love those guys. they were great to work with. they knew exactly what i needed to do, and, of course, they were the priority. i mean, the president's safety was always ultimate. of and if they were in the way, they would actually ask me am i, you know, they would get out of the way of my images if they were, you know, in the way. so they were wonderful people, and they helped me get my job done especially with just kind of predicting the president's movements and knowing where he would go. part of the job was trying to stay a step ahead of the

president in order to be in the right position in the right time. >> host: barney's in a lot of these photos. >> guest: yes. miss barney. the president called barney the son he never had. and as you can see, they really enjoyed each other. the president would play with him even during the day in the oval office, and barney literally had the all access pass to the white house. he could go anywhere. >> host: well, eric draper, i wanted to ask about this photo, because the president's on the south lawn of the white house, and you can look straight out. can people see him here where he is on the jogging path? >> guest: you know, the white house is so unique because of the way it's laid out. and typically when the president would walk onto the south lawn, you couldn't see anyone. it was almost like he was alone. like completely alone. but, obviously, thousands of tourists outside. so it's a really interesting place in how it's laid out. >> host: and here's another visit, i think this is ms. beasley in this picture.

>> guest: right, right. miss beasley was more affectionate, and she really enjoyed petting, you know, the president would play with her a lot. and, you know, these moments are, these types of really light moments happen just literally seconds, and then it's back to the seriousness of the day or the meeting, and it was amazing how quickly things can transition from very intense and serious to light and funny to back to serious. the whole day was like that. >> host: crawford. you write in here, and i should say that in front row seat there's just a page or two of text introducing each segment. and you say here that i enjoyed the president's trips to texas more than the time we spent in washington. why? >> host: you know, well, first of all, i'm more of a westerner in terms of, you know, i'm from california, i'm from the west. i really enjoyed getting out to the open space.

i enjoyed not having to wear a suit because crawford was always casual. and, but then as a photojournalist, as a photographer trying to tell a story, the story of president bush as a texan was so fun to document. so what i tried to do was just hang out. he was more relaxed, because he had more down time, and photograph president bush as a texan. and even though his meetings, his schedule would be very much on d.c. time, he still had time to unwind, and i was able to document him more on a personal level. >> host: you spent a lot of time riding in the back of his pickup truck, didn't you? [laughter] >> guest: bumping around in the back of that truck. >> host: what was that like? how many people were in there? here he is with i'm not sure who's in -- >> guest: that is, that is the king of saudi arabia.

>> host: this is the king of saudi arabia in the truck with president bush. who else was in this truck at this point? you look like you're in the backseat. >> guest: well, it was tricky, because typically depending on who was visiting, you know, you had several people that needed to be in the trucks. so you had, obviously, security, but there's also an interpreter or even another guest, let's say be it was a couple -- if it was a couple, you know, if the world leader had a spouse. so i typically had to ride in the back of the bed, open the little window on the ford truck and shoot through the window as if i was in the truck. so, actually, that's -- >> host: is that where you are in these pictures here the. >> guest: i'm literally -- actually, i would make a funny picture because i had to stretch to get my camera through the window and not, you know, i was bumping around in the back of the truck at the same time. >> host: and there's security in the backseat or interpreters in the backseat? >> guest: they're all over the place. >> host: would security also

follow you around the ranch in vehicles? >> guest: yes. yes, there was always an entourage following the president wherever he went. >> host: just want to read a little bit from your crawford introduction. on one of my first weekend trips to the ranch, the president and first lady invited me to join them for a walk. i wasn't prepared because i was still wearing my too-hot wool suit. the president said he would loan me some clothes so i could go along. i said, sure. we went into the house, and he searched his closet and emerged with a t-shirt and pair of shorts. both were two sizes too small for me. i couldn't refuse, plus i wanted the pictures, so i got dressed. there we were walking out on a dusty trail, me and my too small clothing and dress shoes, when i heard the president, first lady and agents having a laugh at me in my not-so-presidential attire. [laughter] >> guest: yes. that really happened. [laughter] >> host: 9/11.

'em pa booker school -- emma booker school. two photos here we want to show folks. >> guest: yes. these moments were following the famous moment when chief of staff andy card whispered in the president's ear. the president left the classroom with all the children and walked into the hold room, and that's where there was a tv in the corner that someone had turned on. and it showed the live images of the towers, the twin towers burning in new york. be and i was -- and i was just shocked like everyone just looking at that image, and immediately i tried to focus on making the pictures and not missing anything. what i tried to do was definitely have, connect what was happening in new york with what the president was doing. and i was waiting for the moment that the president would actually watch the tv to see what was happening, but he never looked up. he was so focused on his words

because he was preparing for his very first statement to the nation and to the world in response to the attacks. and it wasn't until the moment that dan bartlett alerted everyone in the room and they were replaying flight 177 hitting the south tower, you know, it was the first time we'd ever seen it. and the president turned to see that um imagine for the very first time -- image for the very first time. >> host: who got the famous photo of andy card whispering in his ear where you can almost see the president tense up? >> guest: the press photographers that were in the classroom captured that moment. >> host: and then aboard air force one that day? >> guest: uh-huh. yeah. we, the first few moments aboard air force one were very surreal and very tense. no one knew where we were headed. no one knew where we were going. i remember walking up the stairs of air force one before we left, and as i walked through the door, andy card was standing there, and he was telling everyone to remove their

batteries from their phones, because we didn't know if we were being traced. and you might see in this image here, the president's on the phone, and on the other side of the frame you have andy card discussing where, you know, in a mulled l with the -- huddle with the secret service, with the military trying to decide where to go. and i later learned we actually flew out over the gulf of mexico, basically, for safety. and it was very tense. we started hearing lots of reports on the plane like, you know, a car bomb hitting the state department which was false, and we heard that a fast-moving object was headed towards the president's ranch in crawford which was false. and then came the most surreal moment when the president came out of the cabin, and he said i just heard that angel is the next target. >> host: angel being the code name for air force one. >> guest: that was very, very

surreal. those were the early moments aboard the plane. >> host: of fete air force base, what is this photo? >> guest: this is an image of a secret service agent standing post outside this room where inside the president was receiving a full briefing from military commanders that were there. >> host: and this is one of the occasions where you're not allowed in. >> guest: exact wily. >> host: did you have clearance? did you have secret clearance, top secret clearance? >> guest: i did. i had top secret clearance. >> host: so you had to go through the background checks and everything? >> guest: exactly. >> host: what's that process like? >> guest: very intense. i mean, they call etch. [laughter] everyone. [laughter] >> host: what time did your day end that day, on 9/11? do you remember what time you got back to washington? >> guest: we ended up flying into washington very late in the afternoon, and we -- the president, you know, got aboard marine one and landed on the south lawn, and the rest of the

staff including me were in vans that headed to the white house. and so by the time i caught up with the president, he was down in the peoc, the presidential emergency operations center, under the white house which i didn't know existed at that stage until that day. and that's where he was having his first face-to-face meetings with the vice president, with his national security team in reaction to the attacks. >> host: eric draper, what time of the day was this photo taken on 9/11? >> guest: that was probably early evening, you know, 7:30, 8:00. this was before the president addressed the nation from the oval office. and, yeah, so the day still was not over. yeah, very long day. >> host: march 2003 you have this photo of the president walking outside.

>> guest: yeah. this was the moment -- in terms of like intensity, obviously, 9/11 was off the charts. but this, to me, was one of the most intense moments that i experienced photographing. this was the moments after the decision was made to commit troops to iraq. and the president made that decision in the situation room just minutes earlier, and i was standing outside the door of the situation room. when that meeting broke up. and i literally had to leap out of the way when he, when the door swung open. the president walks out, i can see the emotion on his face. i can see that he, something was happening. i didn't know, so i followed him. he walked through the oval office and walked the entire circle, and that's when i made this picture. and the decision still weighing

on his face. >> host: did he ever say to you, get away, or not now? >> guest: no. at in this moment, matter of fact, he did speak to me right after i made this picture, and he said, he said -- he asked me on the south lawn, he said, eric, are you interested in history? and all i could say was, yes, sir. and he said these pictures that you're taking and the one in the situation room and the one on the south lawn are very important. and just as he said that, out of the corner of my eye i saw don rumsfeld, the secretary of defense, and vice president cheney were walking out of the oval office, and the president walked over the greet them. and at that stage they were discussing the timing of the start of the war in iraq. >> host: when you see a meeting like this happening, how close can you physically get to these three? >> guest: well, i tried to give them space, you know, i didn't get too close.

but it was -- that was fine because i felt, you know, photographically speaking i was in the right spot in order to capture the environment. you know, they were standing outside the oval office. i actually shot a photo with a telephoto so you can really see their expressions during this moment. and i was just far away enough where i really couldn't hear what they were saying, but i can definitely tell from the expressions that it was a or very intense discussion. >> host: eric draper, did the photos that are contained in "front row seat," did they have to be cleared by secret service, by the bush folks? >> guest: yeah. everything is approved by the president's library, and nothing was top secret that i photographerred, so that was -- photographed, so that was no issue there. >> host: and here's the photo when the president announced on october 7, 2001, afghanistan

war. >> guest: right. and this is in the treaty room of the white house and the residence. and this was just, you know, nearly a month after 9/11 when the war in afghanistan was announced. eric draper, a lot of historical moments in here, but there's also some lighter moments, i guess, is the word. that i wanted to ask you about. this is from 2004. >> guest: um, so are you talking about -- is it the boots picture? >> host: let's start with this one that's on the screen right now. >> guest: so, you know, being around just hanging out, waiting for, like, the surprise moments i mean, i had a schedule. i had briefings, because i know everything -- there's a lot of things that are scripted. but, to me, the joy of my job was waiting for these surprise moments like this day was the day that this box showed up in the oval office. this was very early in the

morning, like 7 a.m. and the president opens the box, and there's a boxing robe that he pulls out. and he puts it on. and i'm the only one there, so he's like, well, met me find someone to show it to. and so that's what he's doing here, he's opening the door to the hallway in the west wing to see if anyone's around so he can show it off, because he really thought it was pretty funny. >> host: and there's two more photos on this page from 2004 re-election. inauguration night. >> guest: exactly. this is inauguration evening 2004, and this was just prior to the texas black tie and boots ball. and the president took off his tex sue -- tuxedo shoes and put on his boots. he would always find the right time to lighten the mood even in some of the most serious

moments. the comic relief that he would deliver, and the taffe really enjoy -- the staff really enjoyed that about him. and i myself just really enjoyed being around him because of his sense of humor. >> host: now, eric draper, this looks like a big holding room, looks like one of the hotel rooms here in washington. >> guest: exactly. >> host: how many people -- he looks all alone in this great big room. is he all alone in this case? >> guest: no, there are people behind me. >> host: aides, secret service, the usual? >> guest: yeah. half a dozen people just scattered about. not a ton of people. in 2007 visitors to the white house. >> guest: yes. queen elizabeth and prince phillip visited the white house, and this was prior to a black tie dinner hosted by the president and mrs. bush in the yellow oval room which is in the residence. and so they're just talking before going down to dinner and

trying to show the grandeur of it all. the yellow room was so beautiful, it's really a great place to photograph. >> host: well, i just, i want to ask you if this is significant at all. prince phillip seems to have a drink in his hand, but it looks like the queen might have put her drink down over here on the table. did you happen to notice that at all so she wasn't photographed with a drink in her hand? >> guest: you know, i didn't notice that. i'm not sure what that is. >> host: either you tell the story about your intimate moment with queen elizabeth, or i'll read it straight from the book. >> guest: well, i'll tell you -- [laughter] because, you know, when you're the photographer for the president, i mean, you have to stay close. and sometimes too close. and in this case, and this was earlier in the day when the queen was visiting the white house, there was a -- [inaudible] arrival. she walked upstairs to the residence. i'm trying to remember exactly

how long between visits, she hadn't been in the white house for a few years. so mrs. bush was giving her a tour of the residence, the lincoln bedroom, and then we end up in the queen's room. and then i followed mrs. bush with queen elizabeth. and then i realized that she's actually taking queen elizabeth to the restroom. and, um, by the time i realized what's happening, i was embarrassed, i kind of did an about face, and standing in front of me was prince phillip, and he kind of said with a straight face, are you following them to the loo? [laughter] luckily, he laughed, and i laughed, and it didn't turn into an international incident. but definitely awkward. >> host: eric draper, why'd you choose the photo on the cover of "front row seat"? >> guest: you know, that picture to me visually, the composition, the lighting is, it's an iconic image to me. it shows the seriousness of the

job, but it also shows the environment of the white house. and to me, that one just stood out from the pack as a cover photo. >> host: did you have a favorite trip you went on? >> guest: i think the president's trip to africa, his last trip to africa, i believe it was 2007, to me, that was my favorite trip. i think witnessing the outpouring of love and thankfulness from all of the countries that we visited -- and this was after in reaction to the pepfar which all of the aid for global health that the president initiated. and all of the african people in these countries are so thankful. and it was as many -- as if -- it was wonderful to witness. and the color of the culture there. and for me, it was my first trip to africa as, you know, a black

american to go to africa really unique. and i really enjoyed that. >> host: didn't see in your book the picture of him dancing there. [laughter] the famous video of him dancing. were you there? were you present? >> guest: i was there. >> host: what was that moment like? >> guest: you know, it was fun. it was fun. and the crowd went crazy when he started to dance. and he actually -- >> host: did you get some photos of that? >> guest: yeah, yeah. it was very, very fun. >> host: in this section of the book, if your introduction to it, you say you got into the habit of developing a slide show for the president on way home, on the flight home. >> guest: yeah. it was something that i started following 9/11. one of the first trips a abroad. i tried to create a show to kind of lift the spirits of everyone traveling the kind of show the hard work that was put into a lot of these trips. and i started doing it after every, every trip abroad.

and every trip i would raise the bar and add music and add graphics and title slides, and the president and mrs. bush always looked forward to the slide show. and so it was like every trip it was very enjoyable to produce. >> host: did you have facilities on air force one? did you have an office where you could develop or a computer, i guess a computer in this case, you really didn't need a development office anymore. >> guest: right. exactly. and this was at the time that i directed the white house from film to to digital. and all the work was done on my laptop. so while everyone else was sleeping, i was up pounding away, creating a slide show to play just before we landed. ..

>> guest: it was really -- it never got old. i felt very blessed to see the world aboard that plane. >> host: here's a photo, january 2009. >> guest: yeah, the five presidents in the oval office, and this was after the election, and so president obama hadn't been sworn in yet, and there was a meeting in the oval office and a lunch with the five presidents, and definitely a rare opportunity to see a lot of history all in one room.

>> host: have you counted up how many people have been in the same room? >> guest: no, no, i would like to know that. it was very special. >> host: back to george hw and barbara bush, a lot of photos of them in here as well, including one p barbara bush with her camera. >> guest: yeah, she was a really good photographer, actually. she would photograph me with president hw bush and president george w. bush and send me the photos signed in record time. she was amazing. >> host: and here's another photo of mrs. bush, barbara bush. >> guest: yes. this was election evening 2004, very late at night. actually, this move been early in the -- might have been early in the morning, and we had just learned that president bush was ahead

mathematically to win the election, and the family decided it was time to celebrate with a conga line. >> host: how often were you alone with the family, just you and the bush family? >> guest: a lot, a lot. especially around family gathering, holidays, typically, for example, every christmas, i was invited to camp david to photograph the family, and the best thing was my wife was with me at the same time so she can be with me and enjoy the holidays with her, and i would photograph the family around christmas time. >> host: you say it was like herding cats. >> guest: yes, because the bush family is large, and just like any family, theytey were vy

busy doing a lot of things other than waiting for a photo. >> host: what was it like as president bush said in the forward you put your life on hold for eight years. here you are, easter in crawford texas. right. you know, i tried to document family life, which meant -- and family was very important to president bush to be together for special holidays meaning my holiday was spent at the ranch or camp david, and, actually, enjoyed that, you know, and i would -- my wife would also be invited to fly on air force 1, a nice perk, because the president wanted to keep family together if there was an opportunity for that. >> host: and did your wife get to know the bush's as wel him, politically?

>> guest: you know, i don't think everybody agrees with everyone politically, to be honest, but most thing, i did, uh-huh. >> host: january 20 #th, 2009 -- >> guest: yeah, so this moment, i had been waiting for for literally years because i was there when the president walked through the oval office doors for the first time, and i wanted to be there for the very last time walking out the same door, so there i was that morning, around eight o'clock, and envisioned what that moment would be like. i thought it would be emotional, people crying, hugging, and, you know, rem necessarying, and it was simple, very anticlaymatic. the president asked for his coat, turned around, walked out. didn't look back. very simple. >> host: the book is called "front row seat," photographer

and author is eric draper, spending eight years as president george w. bush's photographer. you're watching booktv on c-span2.

>> our programming cometting on the interview process. we sat down with author of "purchasing wars" during our recent visit to the area. >> government procurement is a broad name that we give to everything that's purchased with public funds. lick funds are essentially taxpayer money, so as soon as taxpayer money becomes involved in any kind of purchase, that entire activity becomes subject to a series of rules and regulations which i certainly won't go deeply into, but enough

to make life difficult for people participating in it, and so in many cases, you have private agencies, for example, agencies that assist the homeless or agencies that may be making senior centers and so on and so forth and apply for grants. as soon as public funds are granted to that agency, everything changes, and everything they purchase becomes governmental or public procurement, and then, of course, there's the regular ones that are 100% financed with taxpayers' money like cities and counties and police departments and services for the homeless and for the aging, and every kind of public service you can think of that are also entirely public funds, and then because of that, subject to all these

governmental procurement regulations, and invariably, they stem from one of two sources, the federal government, which has a number of very stringent rules, depending on which department you're dealing with, and state governments, and almost all state governments have very specific statutes dedicated to the definitions of what you may do and may not be permitted to do when you're buying stock from public funds. the nigp has put out numerous papers on why it's improper and poor government policy to have what's calledded preferences. preferences are essentially the process of awarding a contract

to a proposer or bidder who is not the top scorer or the top price that you're looking for. in states do that. many cities do that. new york has done it saying you are -- you must award a contract to a resident new york company in certain areas. the entire state of kentucky says that if you're going to award a contract for the purchase of coal, c-o-a-l, coal, you must award it to a kentucky company. okay. that's really, really bad business, and i'll give you the very short version on why. if everybody did that, we'd stop all commerce in america. it would be as if we had 10,000 little fifdoms each arguing for

their own positions and excluding everybody else. furthermore, you don't get good competition and prices go down the toilet as soon as you have preferences. nevertheless, citizens want preferences, and some places have aseeded to the demands, and others vice president. the state of oregon gives a 5% preference to companies that recycle a certain amount of things, and they what's called a recycling preference, and so if you're purchasing office supplies or specifically let's say paper, paper is a biggie. agencies use $5-10 million worth of paper every year.

a local company gets a 5% preference. that means -- a state, within the state -- what that means is a company from california bid, let's say $10 million for a certain paper project, and an oregon company bid $10 million or even $10.1 million, the oregon company wins because you add 5 #% either to the california bid or subtract 5% from the oregon bid, and they get the lower number. there was considerable con consternation here in the city of yuma over preamps for local bidders, not just on one type of commodity, which is far more common, you know, new york wants pop to be in all of new york, kentuckyments call to be all bought in kentucky, and oregon

has a preference for government printing of all things, all government printing has to be done by an oregon based company. yuma had in preferences, and as far as i know, there's no preferences in the arizona statutes until last year when there was almost a year's worth of argument in the city council about having preferences, and i was sorely tempted to stand up in front of them and tell them what a bunch of idiots they really are, but i was actually afraid to do that because i was afraid i might lose my temper and say something really stupid, and, besides, at my age, i'm getting more -- it's easier for me to let things go and see where they come out.

after considerable argument for providing what are called local preferences, that is a preference of some kind for all commodities, whatever's being purchased for people within a certain boundary or companies within a certain boundary, they decided to award a preference of 5% for all bidders offed of commodities only, that's my understanding. for example, not construction and not services, within the city of yuma. now, finally, that settled down, and i think that's where it came to rest, but even that is a big problem. over that way, just 60 miles on the other side of the california border, we have another fairly large city called el centro, and

they complete regularly in our purchase, the south down to the border, only five miles away, the border with mexico i'm pointing out, we have a town calledded san luis, a pretty big town, they have people there. they were not happy about that either. well, and on and on, and so even here in this little area, you find when you start giving preferences to somebody, you open a can of worms which is, once opened, you can never get it closed again. >> for more information on booktv's recent visit to yuma, arizona and the many other cities visited by our local content vehicle, go to c-span.org/localcontent. on a recent visit to london, booktv sat down with acclaimed

historians, philosophers, literary critics and more to talk politics, war, history, religion, and culture. watch these interviews every sunday at 6 p.m.. we start with ac grayling, a professor of philosophy at college of humanities in london is the author of 30 non-fiction books, most recent, "the good book," and "the god argument." >> host: you're watching booktv on c-span2, and booktv is in london interviewing some authors, and joining us now is professor ac grayling, author of 30 books, most recent called "the god argument,," and in that book, you write the burdens of religion are both social and political. what do you mean by that? >> guest: well, we need to look really across the landscape of history to see how devicive, how many conflicts, how