can articulate one end is given a tremendous amount to think about in a provocative approach so about improving the political process in the united states. i hope everyone join me in thanking professor orentlicher for a two-day seminar. >> thank you all for coming, for your great questions. thank you, c-span for coming, too.

>> reselection of practiced in a prime minister nawaz sharif. women's national democratic president nuchhi currier tattoo has historic significance and increased participation by women in pakistani politics. she's introduced by u.s. ambassador to practice them, wendy chamberlain. this is just over an hour. >> so let me now introduce our introducer, wendy chamberlin, a diplomat who served in the united states department of state and usaid have worked for the commission on refugees and

now serves as president of the middle east institute. she's been there since 2007. a 29 year veteran of the u.s. foreign service was ambassador tupac is an from 2001 to 2002 when she played a key role in securing pakistan's cooperation in the u.s.-led campaign to put out al qaeda and afghanistan after september 11. as assistant minister at her in the near east bureau from 2002 to 2004, ambassador chamberlain oversaw the reconstruction program in iraq and 10 and development assistance programs throughout the middle east and east asia. other assignments include u.s. and not other to the democratic republic, the near east bureau, deputy chief of mission, arab-israeli affairs and hosting for, laos and zaire.

she's been all over her. a graduate of northwestern university and an ms in education from me attended the executive program at harvard. she serves on the boards of the american academy for diplomacy and she's a member of the trilateral commission. her opinion pieces have been published in the "washington post," international herald tribune and "philadelphia inquirer" among other places. she's commented on pakistan in the middle east and interviews with the news hour with jim lehrer abc comes abs, in ec, fox, npr and al jazeera. please give a warm welcome to ambassador chamberlain. [applause] >> well, thank you very much. that was far too generous an introduction for a mere introducer. we have a star performer today

is very much looking forward to hearing from. i really don't need too much of an introduction for your president, nuchhi currier, president of your club, women's national democratic club for nearly four years. you're really in for a treat this afternoon because nuchhi will pervade the review on what happened and the historic pakistan national election only last week. she was not only raised in lahore, went to college in lahore, but was in lahore last week as an election observer for the election. i might point out that the winner five nawaz sharif, who won the party but a clear victory in the election is from the horror.

so as nuchhi will provide us an insider's view, should be able to provide a larger vote at the political culture of pakistan and shall be a little tell us a little bit about the significance of this election for not only regional stability in pakistan, that the u.s. pakistani relations. i am often asked of the former ambassador to pakistan, why is that he cares to much? we tax much about packet and click for those of you in this room, you know as our troops, nato troops began the drawdown from afghanistan, and the incoming government of pakistan will be consequential to stability in the region and this impacts us directly. pakistan is important to us because it is -- nawaz sharif

will be inheriting the fastest nuke their arsenal in the world. pakistan has perhaps between 10200 is growing as is their delivery capability. some of the fastest-growing populations in the world machover have come nearly 60 but then are under 35 also consequential to us and for any american who ought to know we give our largest assistance packages to pakistan. nearly $3 billion a year in economic oteri assistance. so this is a country we do care about. pakistan's largest trading partner. so we do care about this election. nuchhi will tell us more %elect. nuchhi will tell us more about it. now let me tell you a little bit about her. nuchhi has had a successful

career in the private sector. she's worked in senior management positions in the gulf ended by and south asia, but also here in the united states. she made a career switch when she returned to get her master's degree in international affairs at columbia university and has worked very closely after that with various agents these within the u.n. system, writing and doing report for unicef and the public affairs for the u.n. before she became your president. i'd say i have watched _i'd lika couple times as nuchhi has revitalized the moment national democratic club and put it back to the hub of debate and dialogue certainly enjoyed during its heyday with eleanor roosevelt.

so i know trinh said will be leaving in turning over the presidency to the next president in the first to introduce me. just a final note, and that's great, great grandmother -- great-grandmother whispers of, eleanor roosevelt. statute cannot into nuchhi, with i.q. ought to join me in welcoming and most delightful woman. [applause] >> that's the kindest introduction i've ever had here. thank you so much, when he. downstairs i have a few blog posts i've done on the election. you can read them. they're in great detail and

depth. little bits and pieces from them. i want to start out with the fact about what really happened in this election. the facts usually pakistan are little hazy in a little fudgy and a little hard to come by. so this was the first time a civilian elected government completed a five-year term and handed over power at the ballot box. and pakistan's 66 years this has never happened before. the government entranced usually by the army. so they never did fall term. the reason i wanted to be there was because the excitement this election generated is unprecedented and has been in pakistan and people is that it really doesn't make a difference whether we vote or not.

most people don't vote. in this particular election, the number is not quite solid that between 55% to 65% of the election voted. not even enter an advanced democracies you have that. so this truly was an exciting election. my family was one of them. there was so much excitement by 86-year-old mother went in karachi. karachi was where a lot of the bad stuff happened. they got there, she and her sister and her friend at 8:00 in the morning and said we will not leave until we have voted and they voted. then there was a revote because there was some hanky-panky that happen and she was back to bed

again. enter candidate one. [applause] then i have other stories just be a matter. so it may a that of a socialist society. dinner parties every night and of course and every single party was represented at these various events. would not be returning back home, midnight, 1:00, 2:00 in the morning, you saw young people in the street. the excitement was unbelievable. and you will never read that in the papers here. this is something not captured at all.

all the different parties are out there rejoicing, celebrating, hoping. the pml and, their cries were out there, music blaring and people dancing in the streets. you can see there was police cars around, but we know that the army was out because there are lots of threats. but you never saw a single army guy for army people appear to me that was remarkably ken because usually pakistan is a sure first brainier forces. here they were invisible, but very fair. they were keeping basically the peace. so to me, it was one of the most exciting trips i've taken. i go every year. but this was an incredible time to be there.

one of the faxes and many traditions come if you don tribal structures in place of the traditional voting patterns. this is particularly true of the punjab, which is where i hail from, where the winner hails from and so it was somewhat of a foregone conclusion. i say he was the bookies favorite and the one and so he was a clear winner. and then there are coalitions, which basically means there's a weak structure if congress and the presidency is just tired to enact will.

the right thing now gets in pakistan. a few facts and figures because i know the audience are very familiar in pakistani politics. they took 126 assembly seats and a million votes and now i'm going to talk about next year because one of the more electoral votes, one more seats. the pti, which is a party headed by the cricket's star, a dashing imran khan took 28 seats, but it took more photos. it is such an icon that is the

one secular party which is 32 seats. now, their seventh season can tension and it's possible that there is a slight shift between the ppp and the pti, but it's going to be the fact that pti is the new party that generated all this excitement in the change. he came in and again i have a plug on him in particular. he came in with this message of clean government because there's been a lot of corruption in pakistan, especially about the

ruling elite and is one assiduously got to get away with this and people really flocked to them because of that. he hadn't won a single seat, so for him he deserved to win a few more is a monumental task. these are mostly new voters. just to let people know how the whole system works, 100 dirty 32 foreign government and it seems independent searcher and the winning party at the 126. they don't need to make a coalition with another party. but the other thing i find really interesting is each of the parties won majorities in the three main private says. for the winning party wins in

the punjab. then ppp, the incumbent ruling party when the other problem, sindh. they won the most difficult, which is the frontier, which joins afghanistan, which is where all your terrorism is happening, which is basically the spot in the country. he has to govern not now. this is not going to be easy for him, but basically what this means is every single party has a vested interest in government and they are calling to be responsible to make sure that their piece works in conjunction

with the center, so there has to be some level of cooperation. you can't sit there and point fingers only. it inevitably happens in government. now, yet another interesting thing that happened, the army. i'm going to quote the army chief. he said in the selection, the people of pakistan not only courageously withstood the threat of terrorism, they also decided the dictates of an insignificant misguided majority. so now he's talking about the so-called extremists, fundamentalist, religious nuts. now they never win any seats when there's an election and maybe one or two added flex 244.

it's so unsafe for can't do that doesn't even count. so over and over again, the population of the country tells us this is not where they are at. vicious to what we here in the rest of the world are only those flatly says, which are speaking in a speech hate and terror and extremism. i am not trying to minimize that threat. the threat was real and present. two days before the election, i was in lahore and i was supposed to meet the interim chief minister has a friend of mine who might've spoken here. she called me up and said we can't let anybody into the house. were not going to be even able to vote because they asked prime minister's son had been

kidnapped a few days ago and apparently they intercepted some intelligent guy was going to be a state of suicide bombers all over the country. associates at itself. were not going to meet today. nothing happened. everybody goes out to vote. i cannot even tell you what it was like. i will a brother which are overrun. there was jubilation everywhere. friends of mine went into the interior part of the horror, which is a really congested wonderful part of lahore, where the monument that, but also that of sovereignty. even there it was like a siesta. what she saw was different because what she saw in the more affluent areas are the pti, the young party and when he went

into the interior part, that's where you saw the established party that actually won. so if you went all over you, you could see the writing on the wall. you can see the majority was probably going to go the way of what was predicted. the other thing i found an illegal bowl was the role that the media play. the television was emulating what cnn or msn pc or anybody was doing. i was sitting in america. we had election night that is much that just happened to be at a friends house, human rights act to various and she had two televisions in about 80 people in her home and her foreign correspondent and everybody you

with inca and results were rolling in. it was like i was back here. if you are into it and know what's happening and if you actually have a clear sight, it's like my god, we are doing the same thing here. it is really very heavy. before the election, television in particular for educating people about the election process. they were training people. if they wanted to make a change, they had to do this. that made a difference. it is a beautiful campaign they ran. sitting here i would not have known that if i hadn't actually seen it. and then, of course there were irregularities. without them here here in

florida also. maybe a little bit more there. but again now we have more, so people are taking pictures. so there's much more accountability now than there ever has been. then the large factor i'm going to mention is we have a really resilient judiciary in pakistan, which again is a new take. obvious factors are going to help in making politicians just a little bit more honest than they've been in the past. i won't say much about human pakistan relations because when they just said staff. i'm just going to get a little anecdote. i was in pakistan in march. i wanted to be there for the election so i went and had a dinner party i met with the

council general. this is in karachi, so wasn't the ambassador. i met with the italians, the raising daughter and we were basically quizzing each one of them. we obviously feel safe when we are there. so the american contingent said they would much rather be back in islamabad. they have more freedom of movement. the german guy said to me, why would i not feel safe? i am not endangered. you guys are in danger. what do they gain if they kidnapped me? what do they gain if they kidnapped me? the italian ambassador's wife said to me said i am out all the time. my daughter goes to the beach every day. so again, it depends on who

feels targeted and who is targeted. otherwise it's not like it's basically presented in the press. let me see if there's anything else i want to say. i'm not going to read anything at all from my blog because you can take them home and reads them. i want to mention a couple things pakistan actually fears in the next couple of years going forward. they had real problems. the energy sector is a mass. might be eight to 10 hours a day and 110-degree heat when there's no electricity. people for generators have less of an issue. most people don't have

generators. that's a big issue. there is a cash shortage which means you can cut. so it's directly related to the state of the economy, the energy crisis. i think the government is focused on two things. one is the economy and its religious issue of the energy crisis. they're also very concerned about what is happening next door in afghanistan whatever happens in afghanistan has impact did pakistan. there is no drug problem. i'm not saying pakistan has a role to play in any of these things. whatever geopolitical reasons because of where they are

situated. so they are possibly a ns because of where they are situated. so they are possibly a civil war and what does that mean for pakistan? then, the other ratio is they want the taliban to go home. then they could maybe deal with their own who have been converted. but they can't handle other countries problems within the borders either. so there are difficult issues that state. i am going to now all been the floor up for questions, discussions and request my very able partner to come and join me and field the questions together. ask anything you want. [applause]

>> you mentioned a figure 55% to 60% of the electorate voted out what about the percentages for women voters somewhat remnant play? is there of league of women voters in pakistan? how is the electorate compared for voting? >> women weren't for us. i was at different polling stations. so i'm going to give you anecdotal evidence. i think that 464 women ran for the parliamentarian feet. that's more than any other country. we have a large population as well. in terms of percentages, it worked. but even in the most frontier region, there were two women who ran. this is the region were there and not allowing them. there were two women who ran for

seats. [applause] women are a force in pakistan. they are an amazing person pakistan's and that is again a story that really doesn't get told. >> one of the peculiarities of the pakistan system with regards to amend the parliament was introduced by president musharaff to have reserved seats for women. nawaz sharif has moved to name the women for that seat today. so that will continue so pakistani political elite are very much behind having female represent a shame. and just to stress what nuchhi was saying about the border area where it's quite dangerous, but pakistan, taliban made a concerted effort. it was relentless and it was

with the precise goal of killing democracy and keeping people away from the polls. ..

and he had hoped that he is going to govern more effectively this time. >> just to chime in, we are right they are with very large dramatic opinions. but the practice is a big part of us. which we here in america consider corruption. it is not always corruption. it is a way democracy works. >> we have a job and we have to do it. you go to your political group

and you go to whoever is the most dominant party. you work through that political party to get a job or get a job as a driver. and in exchange you get your vote. now, we would call that nepotism. >> yes, nepotism. >> but in this system, it is tradition. but i think that the question was really about the $10,000 or $20,000, under the table about contracts and so forth. >> in regards to the united states and getting jobs, this definitely has an impact. >> thank you. thank you. that was just so fascinating. i do not have an answer to this

question. i would like to ask how this may change pakistan's international relations, particularly with india, with the middle east crisis and all of those. >> that is a really good question. friends think that he wanted to extend a hand to work in india. he had tried to do that in the past as well and in fact, there was a lot of talk in the newspaper with his swearing in. because it seemed as though it was a little bit too soon. but there is a lot of hope in that direction. because he is focusing on india than he is in pakistan. because otherwise we were going to lose out in the geopolitical

game. but this is going to be part of it. because he is here more for trade and other reasons. this is another very serious thing for him. >> it is worth noting that when he was prime minister in his second term, he was moving towards his relationship in india when the military worked against him. many believe because they didn't want this relationship occurring in india. but a lot has happened during that time. turn the term of the government, there has been some very positive steps forward in improving the relationship of india.

>> right now i'm going to enter interjects this. in regards to this particular event from india, we have the defendant and etc. it seems like it is really strange that there shouldn't be more of a conducive relationship between the two countries. because there is so much in common. hopefully in the next decade in the next two years or three years, we are going to go to a place that is a regional cooperation.

>> okay, judy? >> [inaudible question] >> it has to do with the army. as he presented it, the army kind of stood back and i am sure they have reasons for doing that you perceive that the government will have a bit more space to deal with these policy issues without an army? >> that seems to be the indication. again, one doesn't know. we have a saying that basically we are going to try. we are going to try and when the line gets a taste of blood, it is very hard to lead them away from it. it is not going to be an easy thing for them to divest themselves from it. but one may hope that this

election is going to facilitate a stronger civilian government and we made move away from this. >> within the army itself, i think they understand that it is not in the interest of the army we have turned back from this involvement there are some opinions. i would not expect the government to show how it is in that church. and i do believe that this includes the handling of the weapons arsenal. so i think that there will be some continuation of army control. >> yes, please go ahead. >> this is changing the subject

a little bit. but i wonder whether the country is being affected by climate change. whether there is a concern about water and natural resources. whether this is entered into the campaign and whether there is any distance between the candidates. >> it would be a step beyond. they don't have energy or access to energy. once they have that, then we have come to whether or not you want a sustainable kind of method or not. at the moment, it is a big issue. this has been a huge political issue as well. that is part of the contention between india and pakistan. because they share the same thoughts. so that is another reason for

political stripes. but i do not think that climate change and that kind of stuff has really entered the discourse. there are such basic things like this at issue at the moment. >> we have not entered the political discourse. >> in the sense that irrigation systems have become so silted up over years and years of neglect that when heavy rains come, it flooded and it's so cool in. the agriculture production is

being graded year after year. but a lot of the heavy rains have come from this and that is climate change. we are deeply affected by climate change. >> is there any talk about our drone program? with the media, socially? >> there is always talk about that. it is one of the most popular programs there. that somehow always becomes the one issue that everyone stands behind it. it is sovereignty that is being talked about. drone attacks have scaled back

considerably. it has been a major issue. it has also been an issue that it is very easy to hide behind. it has just been a great thing for pakistan. >> let me just add that in the election and campaign, we were really captured by this. we made this issue and he was against the drones, he was against corruption.

he tends to -- he intends to negotiate with the united states because this is a sovereignty issue. as pointed out by nuchh currier. it is far more complicated because the public policy of pakistan and the military and the government will oppose the drones. privately, however, there are other programs that are right helpful when it goes after the targets like the one that was killed yesterday. the pakistani taliban have the goal of overthrowing the pakistani state. there has been some collusion with us when the targets are still he be an enemy of the sta. it is other groups across the

border into afghanistan? even people here in the united states that support the drone program, they are asking questions is whether we should only support al qaeda, whether or not we should support the taliban -- the afghan taliban were pakistan. so there is a raging debate as opposed to moral and futuristic reasons with the nature of war. and those that oppose it not because they oppose drones but

because they are going after people and putting a fair in danger. >> in the back? >> oh, i'm sorry. okay come over here. >> i just wondered after the election what is the role or the climate of extremism now. are people going to be less extremist? do you think? is religion going to play a more important role. or secularism. how do you see a? >> that is a very good question. generally religious parties and leadership's end they have actually had the secular voice that has been heard. but in the past we have had religious leanings. one of the reasons that he was previously ousted by the army,

supposedly, is because he wanted to be more like individuals like the pope. he has ambitions. religion was very much a part of his agenda at that time. conventional wisdom has it that he has learned his lesson and he is not going to go that route. but that remains to be seen where we are going to go with that. the population has made its voice heard very at we have said that that is not the path they want to follow. i will talk about this for a little bit and i will hand the microphone over. my son is in the performing arts and he is between new york and pakistan i just think that there

is only one way to go now. and that is that. >> i'm going to be a little bit more pessimistic. not to contradict anything that you just said. because i agree with everything that she has just that. but to draw a clear line between pakistan and extremists and terrorists groups. you can be very religious and very devout and sometimes we confuse the two. on the extremist side, i am still pessimistic. many of the indigenous pakistani terrorist groups are from this

area. the question then is what will the new government's reaction be? on akamai would like to hear what you have to say. i'm not optimistic because i think that the element of terror, and these are terrorist groups that are more interwoven in the society, it is intimidation. >> i think the guards and the government are actually now going to be holy in control. everyone has talked about these

forces. they now don't need anybody's support. so actually i think that it is going to be up to them to accept this. we have to wait to see what happens the next few months because we have had religious leanings, the chief of the party. the incoming prime minister. so i actually don't know where this will go because he has in the past supported a lot of these groups. were whether very clearly or not. we have to be very clear on this issue.

>> if he is going to move against these groups and have great stability in the countryside and in pakistan, that is the vehicle, that is the institution. it is not the army. the police have been confronted with that. he served as a policeman and he is likely to be sitting under a tree, he said. and if someone comes to him and says that my house was just robbed. he says, okay, give me a ride

back to the scene of the crime on a bicycle. because that is how desperate the police are. i have seen very little since then. very little moving towards the police in that way. i have not heard anything yet in regards to building up the capacity to the police. >> there is also a lot of intimidation that happens. with the police, not by the police. so i come from a well-known family and i get struck by a policeman and i say, don't you know who i am. and how dare you stop me and so on. that is the culture. it will be very hard to break the culture.

>> you in the back? >> thank you for sharing your perspective, where women are involved, what you mentioned earlier, there are some things going on and that includes the bad and the good. >> women were everywhere and they were be very active force in pakistan. what was happening, i have talked a little bit about this, which is where my mother was. it is where most of the stuff happened. the bad stuff. what is the bad stuff? i think it is criminal more than anything else. it is just like a mafia that was being granted by one of the

parties. so if her polling station they would not allow that in a lot of these places. so there are real ballots and my brother told me about one of these suppliers. he talked about my wife and my 10-year-old daughter did. he said oh, it is only like 20%. he said, you can't make it 100%. maybe you can make it 100%. so you have to have an idea about this. the three of them sat there.

and i met with them and i had a long discussion with them because this was important. they said that we don't see beyond that. they will never see it because they are escorted in and escorted out. we went to see? i've been very happy. >> i have talked to other people who know that -- and i can't remember it the figures. something like 5000 ballots, there was one please send. but only 4000 potential voters and in another precinct, the ballots were counted and it was something like every 30 seconds. i can do the math.

all of that said, the conclusions are that even when women are intimidated, they still want to vote. this is a clear election as pointed out in the opening remarks. pakistan has come to expect a fair ballot. >> it was a clear victory. so the only contention here between the other two parties who have more seats, again, in the population, that is about a hundred 80 million people. i think that there were 86 million registered voters. this is nothing.

>> okay, here is a good social were questioned. i have a really good picture of the political aspects of pakistan. but i'm curious. i don't have a picture of the family structures in pakistan, possibly on the lower end of the scale, like access to education and access to health care, all of those good things. can you comment on any of that? >> pakistan has a huge population and a huge problem with sovereignty. i always said that the state has abdicated its responsibility with the basic things that society expects. so what has happened in pakistan, i'm going to give a very personal view on this.

everyone who lived abroad has gone back to pakistan. people like me who have lived abroad for 15 or 25 or 35 years are going back to their country because they want to be there. i know so many people who are stepping up and there is a huge amount of charity work that has been happening. it is also part of one of the five religious treaties of giving to the needy. more than that, there is a huge amount of unemployment. people are employed and that is how these people get their employment. so a lot of families take care of their servants and they sent them to school and they take care of their education. but it is just an interesting

system at best. there are a lot of issues. >> i would just like to say that one book i read when i learned the most have to do with what we are dealing with. other voices are represented as well. this man does have pakistani and half british as well. okay, american. and he writes about the upstairs and downstairs and german histories have been appearing in new yorker. this book has a really touchy dialogue. he is the one that wrote about it i think, i think it is a

really good book. it is the same structure on both sides. it is an incredible book which basically toxic and about how the underclass live in the society. there are many books out there. >> what time is it? >> woke okay, we will take two questions. very quickly? >> just wondering what the proposals are in the campaign and for dealing with the economic problems. what is this program? >> into the stockmarket and pakistan went up when he was elected. there is a lot of confidence and

there is a perception. i don't think he has put an agenda forward. but there is a perception that if anybody is going to be good for the economy, it is him. because he is a pragmatic leader and he knows how the system works. i don't know of any plan that has been put out. >> we will know tomorrow. because he is making his first address of the parliament tomorrow. he will talk about what he's going to say about the economy. he's going to tackle energy. we hope privatize it, and he will cut government subsidies and cut back on the size of government by combining various ministries. at the same time, what i was reading noted that the budget has increased and this includes his own private cabinet.

so we will see. >> yes, that is the best response is that we will see. >> could you talk about briefly what is happening in terms of education? secular versus religious education and the literacy rates of young people? >> schools are mushrooming with the population. it is really hard to keep up the population's growth. but i am not very sure about the extent. i was at a place much like this in washington dc. this was a discussion on gender and islam. there were three young men who

were obviously lower middle class and not well worth it. who have this discussion with a woman who is conducting this. they were scholars of islam and one of them was going to the islamic university. but they have open minds and they were willing to discuss issues, issues that i was unaware of. we were aware of what they were talking about. that is such a positive thing because here are the three young men who you think were here because they wanted to hear this woman speak about women's issues in the context of islam. they had open minds and said they were going to be coming back again and again. >> to reinforce that point, which is a good one.

when i was ambassador of pakistan right after 9/11, we have this notion that all chairs were in this area, thousands of them. over the years we have done some research and we know a lot more about where the terrorists come from, how they are educated, who typically become the suicide bombers. the studies reveal that the majority of suicide almonds are educated in public schools. they are educated in an area that was redesigned during the 80s and has a lot of what we would call a language in it. that is a small percentage of

suicide bombing that came from us. most of the people in pakistan today, they are not even educated in this area. it costs less and they still follow the same curriculum. but the government, at least in the past, has provided 3% of the national budget. it is simply part of the education of pakistan. so people had to go to private school. >> even the 3% sometimes does not get spent. that is actually what has happened. one more question to you in the back.

>> my question is about you talk about the great enthusiasm during the election time, particularly about the party. i wonder at this point, it is this not affected because the party didn't win overall impact or is their satisfaction that the party did quite well nonetheless? >> i think it is a bit of both. i think there was disappointment because the expectations were beyond anything in reality. they actually thought that they would have the election. but that was never really in the cards. by and large, people in pakistan are very happy with the way the election went. i think there is a huge amount

of anticipation about things changing because everyone is looking for change. and we hope that that is going to happen sooner rather than later. >> you in the back to . >> that is all we will take for today. thank you. [applause] >> i would just like to say that we have a whole collection. >> thank you so much. we want you to come back to thank you. this is a terrific though graham. [applause] >> coming up on "washington journal", the american alliance for manufacturing with the state of manufacturing job creation in the united states are done regulatory commission chairman discusses the regulation of electricity, natural gas, and oil markets. later, a look at the latest trends in school crime and

violence and safety. "washington journal" is live every morning at seven eastern on c-span. >> the first speech by a sitting first lady, becomes the first lady of the daughters of the american revolution. she designs her own china and that bush is the white house china collection. she's the first to have a christmas tree in the white house and meet caroline harrison, wife of the 23rd president, benjamin harrison, as we continue our series on first ladies. we will take your questions on monday night live on c-span, c-span radio, and c-span.org. >> next on booktv in prime time. an interview with senator olympia snowe on "after words." then, author mickey edwards

talks to the rnc chairman michael steele about party politics. later a law professor on his idea for a two-person presidency proposed in his book. two presidents are better than one. now, olympia snowe about her book, fighting for common ground, congressional gridlock and how to encourage compromise. she is interviewed by the associate editor of the hill, a.b. stoddard. >> we are here today with olympia snowe, the senator from maine, to talk about her book, "fighting for common ground." i want to they thank you for all you have done in the congress. i am looking very much forward to what you're going to do outside of the system.

i had read about you end up when i read your book, you talk about how you can no longer fill your responsibilities as a problem solver. and that you were embarrassed by the 112th congress and the challenges facing america. you were compelled to leave because you hope that you can help correct the system from the outside rather than the inside. that is news, obviously to people like me. as you noted in your book, bob schieffer of cbs asked what did it say about the state of our government when people like olympia snowe feel that serving

is no longer worth their time and effort. that is the part that you worry the rest of us. so make the case for me in the viewer that you can actually try to change the system from the outside. >> i was recently asked that question. it occurred to me as a cold, stark reality of the question of whether or not it would change. many people asked me that question across the country. so i talked about in regards to my own future. it was over a very short time. obviously i was planning to run for reelection. whether or not it would change, whether this would dissipate. i came to the conclusion regrettably that it would not be diminished over the short term.

given the pronounced changes of the outside campaign, campaign fund-raising, outside organizations. both of the political parties and the changes that are going on with the republican party. i didn't see how this could be sufficient to outweigh what was happening on the outside. so if i could contribute over the next six years in another way, what would it be. and i decided that i had to reaffirm what people were feeling about congress. but yes, you're right, it is different. you talk about generations of people and lawmakers who think that this is the way they did it. >> that is right. that is so interesting for those of us who have been watching for so long. in my case before the republican revolution went on before, we

have seen these changes in the electronic media and the professionalization of politics. the mandate is so different from the early days. the punishment of cooperation, compromise. it really is -- it is true that so many lawmakers have just gotten this process. you write in your book and i heard you in an interview about how working from the outside -- there needs to be a grassroots effort. >> yes. >> especially to the forces of extremism. so obviously there has to be a tireless effort. >> we want to break what is the

equivalent in. how do we talk about this people like you? >> many demand bipartisanship and you know come up they ask why aren't you working out a solution enact you know, what do you intend to do if you are elected? about being bipartisan, working across party lines, forcing them to commit to the whole notion that they must work across political lines rather than having constant political standoff. it is really in regards to turning the tables. we know that this is at stake. it is well-funded and well-organized. the same could be true if the

vast population of this country insisted on bipartisanship. it is to change the incentives and the political system by voting for those candidates and those elected officials. >> i think that that is really important. people feel like there is no control, they have no sense of control. we really do. we have to organize, obviously. it is filtering down to the local levels is where it is important and we need to deal with it. >> okay, so how do candidates and officeholders need to be

monitored? how can the supporters of bipartisanship and mass resources to keep track of a member who is not working to punish them when they don't, wore them if they do. so do we believe that the outrages their? that the passion is there? to force that kind of monitoring of politicians way that those others do? >> it is pretty easy these days. there's a lot of analysis that is done by various groups on the hill in publications. where you can easily garner that. real-time with congress. that is critical.

because right now we are developing a budget. and this is a good example to show how america doesn't have a budget because we just can't reconcile our differences. we can use social media for organization purposes and that is what the opposing side does. so part of what it's going to be is offering options and information in real-time. what is happening, but lawmakers are campaigning, the ethics work across the political aisle. that is the sort of thing that must happen in terms of turning the tide with congress. >> i wanted to mention some of the issues that you have been involved in in regards to what

the viewers realize. it is so critical to break down. you have been a champion of fiscal sanity, a champion of the balanced budget amendment. you have worked on legislation. you are the inspiration behind the effort to work with the schools and the child tax credit, the equal rights amendment, pension reform, welfare reform, the legislation on congressional accountability act. and the leader with women's health, and i think that that is so impressive but those endeavors. you also support cancer research as well.

so long the path, it became more challenging. talking little to people, viewers are very familiar with the process. but for someone who may be flipping around, we want them to know why, as we see to engage them in the country in the process with of reforming the system. why it is important that we talk about hell of a string of amendments. maybe we should tell people why parties avoid passing budget. >> you know, we didn't consider a budget for eight years.

throughout the budget history you know, three consecutive years. the house and senate have not reconciled their differences. this is supposed to begin by april 15. so congress is required to pass a budget and complete that process by april 15. here we are. it is no wonder that everything is so distorted and out of whack. the automatic cuts, you know, we have $16.8 billion and you know the deficit is coming down. that is a temporary event. >> so all of that matters in

having a budget. the committee is -- the policy committees are then set to work within this budget resolution. >> no wonder there is a breakdown in the process. it is completely broken. there is more order to the process. that affects the appropriation.

>> exactly. >> so we kind of have this and that is kind of what we have for this process. and then we can make adjustments and this includes a thorough and engaging oversight. but now we are doing months at a time as part of continuing resolutions. and we can go on about our business. yet all of these programs, we don't avert crises and we shut down in effect. >> the committees that are experts on the policies, so many different ones. that is so important before things are appropriated during the budget process means that we revisit our policy every year.

engaging in a policy matter is something that you get in the habit of doing. you also went out that there is a shorter amount of time spent on debate and amendments on the floor. >> guest. >> this is just so wide. and i was really fascinated. i'm going to be quick about it. in 1980, jimmy carter's program helped average unemployment. it worked the system the way it was designed to be worked.

it made the whole program fair to everybody. it is something that couldn't happen today. >> just. >> with the way that the system was designed, and it is truly an important and no. >> i can see that. >> it is truly incredible. you have also the most compelling personal story. i knew some of it, that it is in the book and it is such a great instruction about character and confidence. i want everyone to know that you lost your mother to cancer when you were young.

you had an aunt that took care of you and then you lost so much. wonderful anecdotes about you becoming such a survivor. going through grand central station when you were 10 years old. it was actually the birth of your political career, and i really enjoyed all of the descriptions. it was obviously material to the fact that you became a hard-working legislator. one with so much fortitude as well. i also believe with your assessment. why it was such a super committee and how this ended up being important.

can you talk to us about this moment? do think that there will be a budget conference? that there will be a grand bargain? this is another make or break moment for the government. >> well, i have been telling audiences that it is more than 5050. but i'm beginning to wonder if that is possible given the circumstances. the legislative process seems to be a constant interference. what was different was doing mostly legislation, everybody is moving on these issues that matter. this was an urgent and compelling issue.

it includes what should change and who should do the changes and how to weigh in now. that way we don't lose another two years. because that is what this is close to. a very tough time. how to make those changes in a short amount of time without being punitive areas so, can we get a grand bargain, and i have discussed this with our audiences. i thought that it was possible to get a house and senate budget conference, maybe it was conceivable that they could design this on the greater issue of taxes.

and i am not sure that that is possible. >> i think that the viewers should know that this is a time for them to get involved and know that there is a budget and congress is refusing to do its duty. because even now they have not reconciled. time is running out as we talk about the tragedy in oklahoma. the trouble in syria. it is growing worse every week. obviously many oversight investigations showed the department department of justice, what happened in benghazi last fall. so that is going to suck up so much oxygen in this town. people should know that it is

time to solve this fiscal matters. the great debate, the debacle of 2011 created the sequester. americans had to find out it was there all along. so all of a sudden everyone is panicking over these cuts. they had to learn that it was there all along. >> that was the alternative. the committee didn't have a plan to cut the deficit beyond the 1.2 trillion and it includes the automatic cuts and we didn't expect either side to let it happen for a different reason. of course, they did. it was part of the agreement and then this happened in the beginning of march. >> was it good that sequester

happen? can they do the sequester again? what is the plan? >> well, the late senator wong said it was a bad idea. >> everyone is going on tv saying that it's a bad idea. >> they understood that it was. and as much as he didn't like the automatic cuts, we wanted to balance the budget. >> we needed to have discipline, which honestly doesn't exist. >> outside, there is nothing super about the super committee. they are asking them to perform a lot of miracles in 90 days. congress hasn't been able to do

it because they have not put their mind to it. to put a priority in dealing with these issues and allowing the sequester to occur, obviously that they were not making any distinctions and then you have the air traffic controllers and they have the motivation. congress had a strong reaction from the. you know, the pilot comes over and says, i'm sorry, we have budget cuts and you are sitting on that plane. so i completely see the motivation. i can be the same motivation as the constituents who are saying why are you sitting there and solving problems? why are you not working on a budget? the house and the senate need to

settle the budget question. but even that isn't happening. >> so those around the country, your former colleagues about whether or not there is any backlash from the sequester. whether or not people can go that route again. you feel that there is a feeling of hope for the system this time? individually when you have these conversations, the people have these concerns that they can do this again? >> people haven't noticed it. >> it's interesting because you see it as a resolve in individual areas, what does that say? some areas do it more than others should they not be looking at all the programs and

is there an inequality that exists. who weighs in, and how it raises those questions and the spectrum of all that. that is one thing that i have gotten from the audience is where is the standard for that so that is the point here. so we kind of have this legislation with the average. >> the whole idea is that one of my colleagues indicates that they are disappointed. many are surprised. especially with the way the body works. the house is different because

of this. members know that they have to have some control. that has changed dramatically. i never thought much about it. >> i worked on the basis of fiscal responsibility and the balanced budget. so even these issues, we have the opportunity. >> we will get to that and i believe that that is interesting. i think that it is a big question about whether or not republicans use this effort to win the white house next time, whether or not they are going to be able to focus on the fiscal responsibility and whether or not they will broaden the topic

of conversation. there are recent forecast, but it is only in the near term. that is something that republicans have to focus on. they are busy legislating on tax reform. i'm sure that you are aware of senator baucus on the senate side and others in both parties are trying to hope that there is an opportunity that presented well. so that is something that cannot be done by a super committee on trade committee. and it can be done at the 11th hour. they are doing the work to try to hope that they can do that. and i believe that is really important for americans to know. tax reform is a gateway to solving a lot of problems. so i would like to point that

out that that is something that may break through after all of the focus on benghazi, the irs, the things that we have seen so much about. obviously this will continue to galvanize people. those who talk about this window. >> the budget window for 2014. we hope for tax reform, why it is so critical. so there is a campaign election going on the next few months. and i think that that is important. people don't realize. they think that obama is looking at the next three and half years. we are looking at another

election, which is really going to be starting this fall. >> we have the opportunity to budget because the new year begins october 1. >> yes, we have a temporary measure. when you do the short-term measure of the budget, the agency really has to work at the lower level. i discovered this and there is one individual who depends on the. so she can only get a small portion. so you see that it does have concert and says, the way it

works. >> that is why i believe that it works so well. we talk about the importance of this process. how it is so critical to problem-solving. we are going to take a quick break and we will come right back. >> tomorrow morning, the american enterprise institute holds a discussion on whether long-term care should be provided by a government program or private insurance. live coverage begins at 915 eastern time here on c-span2. >> when the attorney general iranian california, he indicated

he wanted to talk about this. that made me realize something similar. it was about the construction of this imaginary enemy. >> she wasn't that interested in what happened. she wasn't that interested in talking about it. so i wanted to get her directly. so i figured out that there were very important people in her life. i chipped away at the people that she knew and trusted. we were able to get them

involved. slowly she came around. reporter: sunday at 8:00 p.m. n c-span "q&a." >> we wouldn't be jumping into the stalemate if we didn't talk about and i just mention this. we have the focus and action. he said that in 2001 we can't understand why there was not a

better amount of people looking for the right situations. we are talking about the beginning of the iraq war. so the administration was centered on a range between 100 and 350 million in tax reductions. i was shocked. i was deeply concerned. we were not backstopping, we were not going to remote growth. it was a large tax cut essentially.

and i was so taken with the similarities between the stimulus of 2009 and it begs the question about this. how it happened in your lifetime. is the republican party really supportive of this? >> you are experienced with this. >> we have the opportunity. talk to us a little bit about whether or not fiscal sanity is the unifying thing. >> i think it was a priority.

we had the majority and it was at the forefront. on two different occasions this was very important. it includes the balanced budget amendment debate. when we had this in the early 2000, we didn't do anything. it seemed like we went to a different direction to consistently have tax cuts. of course after the aftermath of 9/11, then we had 2002 because of the stimulus to in 2003, with we continue to address the problem of the aftermath.

and yes, i think moving different directions on tax cuts is very important. and the responsibility was no longer the major underpinning of the republican party. >> you are at the white house, and do so enjoy this. the vice president was there and we were committed to the balanced budget. we don't anymore, and you remember that we were in the same congressional class. we always had our party support. we talk about the shift in the focus on this and then more focus on social issues. moderates like yourself and that

shift, republicans are going to hold the house responsible for the affordable care act red and it is going to take effect next winter. and i think that the democrats will really have a good chance of taking the house. so i see a very energized party which is going to affect until the party that these moderates can't always win. we had a great 2014. >> is not far from reality, actually read you are right

about the affordable care act. i have talked about the problems of implementation and things that i cited. there are many principles about it because i was so concerned that they should really hold back and fix it before you let go. because there are some serious problems. they really should work with these fundamental problems with the implementation. i could see what was going to happen. interestingly enough they decided to move forward with it and the president thought that it would dissipate. now i think it is the beginning. >> you say that the bill was passed and you talk about this.

>> i submitted a request to the congressional budget office and the day that this was happening, there was an analysis on affordability. that question has not yet been answered. i unfortunately cannot give my analysis. the director apologized because he said that he honestly had to fill different request. so he could never get his study. and here he was a main player in the health care issue and we got to the heart of the facts of the matter. you know, i mentioned about holding back on it.

especially on a smaller scale in its limitation. it would be very difficult to implement. >> so was sort of your role in health care and it is really part of political tension and what happened to it and why we are having so many problems now. there is a lot about our system in the party. and i wanted to ask. you have a fascinating mention about this plan for realignment. but it has five components and

we permanently elect republicans and that included education standards and the initiative and partial immigration reform. so today, the party is under tremendous pressure to expand its universal supporters to include young people. latinos, african-americans, everyone but the obama coalition contains. in order to win the coalition for the white house. it is older now. and so the pressure to acknowledge that climate change is part of this, something may

be done and of course immigration reform. >> what is your advice? >> well, president reagan was a good example. rather than something that is simply eviscerated, he talked about opportunity and how we have a responsibility to create the opportunity for individuals to flash and expand on their own potential. we should be about hope and opportunity with what we want of the american people. but rather it was all about negativity. you know, frankly government has a very important role. so we've position on trend we

position ourselves in terms of the policy. we speak to the young people, women, to families. i mean, he really showed that you embrace this. because that is where we are today. so we have positioning in our policies will nurture an environment where they can have their potential. as it is now, the way in which they deal with this even within the republican party, how do we handle this. because that is not appealing to someone on the outside of. how do you attract someone on the inside? >> whole group was trying to go through this.

we are contributing. we knew that we had differences. so we needed to narrow the base. how do you expand on the outside you cannot maintain it from within. and demonstrate that you are, you know, inclusive and not exquisite. >> it is interesting. in 2010, it was part of the movement without a leader. and without that leader, it is interesting to see how many have popped up. well, i would like to focus on one of the aspects of your book. i think it is so important as a woman. that includes a female

legislator. you had said that 18%, although we talk about this with the national population, i love your answer and your data about 2013. the number of women serving in the house and senate. and he put them all together. it is pretty incredible. i wanted to say that there was a wonderful anecdote that you have gone on to establish. it is the women's leadership. you are going to be working with young girls from high school. to develop their professional skills as well as their confidence. and i love that you are a

26-year-old arriving in 1973. and i know right now you're probably looking round how you got here. i'm sure that others are wondering how they got here. can you talk about the importance of confidence in being a united states senator, being a woman. and how you get through this. >> i encourage women to be involved and to step up front, frankly. i always say that i could never imagine that i would've been in your position either. but we go through the possibilities of doing that. because it is credible and track critical to have those examples with government institutions. it is important to have this

perspective in our population. the second part is that they bring a different experience and it is important to have that voice at the table. so i encourage them about the possibility in the future. even for me, as much as i talk about politics and coming to washington. i always have to go against the grain. and that is what i always do. and i felt so strongly about that that voice is so important. there is a direct correlation. i love the fact that even today, with the women's health initiative, that we respond. to this day, we have a discovery

for women and that is so important for the cause and effect for having women participate in the political process and what evolves from it. in fact, i was talking about it the other day. i love the fact that we have young women who just have no second.about it. all women are treated equally. >> is so fascinating how there are so many rights and responsibilities and how this came. how these protections came. many of them during the decades of service were really there.

those who witnessed the changes. >> we had such a thing on behalf of women. margaret smith of maine. he gave a declaration of congress in june of 1950 and that includes a political consultant. those who said it would be the next president of the united states. and when you talk about hillary rodham is and who is an old and. your husbands served as

governors together. did they sit next to each other at ngo meeting. >> welcome and he sat next to each other at the meetings. >> that's right, it was so serendipitous. we were friends and colleagues and so i have to ask you. she obviously has a great hope of the democratic party. a great hope for women. whether or not you want her to run, so that you have enduring respect for her service as a secretary of state. wrapping her up on capitol hill, we look at the future and you think that this country is ready. as a republican, did you discover that? >> i think that that she is an

extraordinary example of how a woman runs for public office. so i think that is how she broke down things single-handedly. so if she chooses to do that, i think that many women will embrace this. i think the country should have a woman president and i ain't that this includes what she was able to accomplish. i think that it has dispelled the notion that a woman could not be this way. this includes the differences within the party. but by virtue of how she conducts herself, i think she has basically eradicated any fears about how a woman would handle herself.

>> there are many delightful anecdotes and nuggets for congress watchers like myself. we talk about how we need to nurture each other. it is something that i had never known before. it is really quite wonderful. and i thought that that was, you know, another reason to delve into this. to learn not only about the way things used to be, but the way that women look out for each other in position of power. the way that you talk about hillary clinton, obviously this

is going to be a unique connection. >> so you want to tell them that there is a way out. even if it is not near term. it includes this future for the congress. it has been set in the meantime. we talked about it in the book. we have recommendations for a workweek. >> okay, part of the biennial budgeting. it is part of the bipartisan leadership committee. it means that they have to leave the congress. ..

i'm redistrict game and it's important for americans to reach her book, especially on the chat to run all of these political system and if they don't all about redistricting, they don't know how few districts during every election cycle and how 79% shouldn't even get in with

sincerity decided. so i think you have all the right ideas and if you could share up little bit in your book, you have a great anecdote to congressman bracknell and who left and who left the house in 1981 and has been warned. where do you get the establishment, the incumbents, the crusty old system that might e-mail, it is shows that in. where do you get the packs to change? >> guest: they release if everybody had both sides of the aisle. that's the key. any changes on campaign financial forum has to be a level playing field on both sides. that's what we have to work restricting mccain-feingold. i was struck on the supreme

court and citizens united, but he was the evenhandedness. so that's one less level of raising money. in the house of representatives, the majority have leadership pacs, but it's another avenue to get any two candidates at a much higher level than you can as an individual. the point being is not only raising money for their own care pain, they also have to raise this money for the leadership pacs because it expected that you're going to raise so much money. >> host: you are expected to deliver. >> guest: it takes so much time. it's another huge distraction. it reminded me of the honorary issue for members of congress would be paid for speeches and

so the whole schedule would revolve around the days in which we could give speeches on mondays and fridays. ultimately came to the conclusion we should have needs. people back in town. one last level of raising money because that is a huge time-consuming effort and not to mention a distraction. >> host: the loudest voices are raised her. during the gun debate must opposite about whether they support gun control circuit ransacked it is common to brady, bloomberg coalition as yet no match for the organization of the grass grew, funding him out as of the coalition. they are the sweet 16

republicans who voted against a filibuster and they knew they were going to go with that gun control coalitions, but they're a gun rights supporters and voted in against their party on process so they agree with him on policy. that's an example. will they be rewarded? should they be rewarded because they try to clear the air and stop a filibuster for a bill -- >> host: they were willing to have it on the floor and then they can discuss the policy because often times it becomes a critical vote as we know and a lot of drescher is imposed on senators depending which side they are on to vote a certain way. so i think that should be

certainly reflected because that's not an easy vote, especially against the policy. sometimes you do that and not support obviously. host scott even though they are the national rifle association. we are going to close here. you talk a lot about in people's forces me to be any mention something important because we only hear about the immigration reform when the switchboard to shut down over a big issue. each interaction is tracked in every office on a daily if not hourly basis. when you have the newtown family, when you have a big vote on something, public pressure can be brought to bear on either

side. this idea, even though people might not know they are being listened to is important. when you're a senator, how that works and why there can be political consequences, people need to get on the phone. >> guest: i've been emphasizing that to my audiences because he been speaking to groups here in washington that the organization say can you please tell membership that it is important to go to the hill and have conversations and to call an travel the country and emphasize that if we don't underestimate your voice. people asked me, how is that 90% of people somehow didn't prevail. >> host: how many people called? >> guest: it does make a

difference because then it's more obvious to their constituents see that they were in those forces. if they hear from the other side, the one side they do hear from matters and in some cases the garnishee was the case. so they have to speak out. people do not realize or appreciate the effects in power of their messages and the impact it can have >> host: you think social media has increased ability to be heard? >> guest: absolutely. that's a great message multiplier. the other way to build a community, get your message, organize so absolutely communications for the office, the same is true. i always want to know how many constituents cause issues to get a sense of it. and i want to know and have that

connection and go it is important to hear from people, so that's why they should not underestimate. the other side is the same. >> host: make sure your voices heard. thank you so much, senator. >> at this year's annapolis book festival, mickey edwards talked about his book, so to "the

parties versus the people: how to turn republicans and democrats into americans." he is joined by michael steele. this is an hour. >> good afternoon, everyone and welcome. my name is michael steele. i'm honored to welcome all of you. and the former lieutenant governor of the great state of maryland have an search from two dozen three tonight 2007 and then more recently and you probably read more infamously, the former chairman of the republican national committee and we will certainly get into a little bit of what i discovered is the chairman of the party and some of the things we did. as i like to say, turn elephant between two dozen nine and 2011 seems to be turning itself back for some reason. but i'm real pleased to be here. i'm also the author of the book

called "right now: a 12-step program for defeating the obama agenda" and it's not as nefarious as it sounds. he really was and remains a prescription for the gop to deal with this age that we now find ourselves, where the political landscape to shift me almost daily. the attitudes of voters are much more open as we've seen recently and how do the political parties deal with the very thing that confounds them the most and that is citizenry who are engaged, intelligent and i was going on and are developing a political mind of their own and a new form of act as an. very interesting dynamic for both parties. i'm quite honored to be joined by a dear friend and colleague.

i will let them go into the details of the background, but needless to say, this guy had the presence while in congress had the voice today she really lighted path for the future growth of republicanism and the republican party and as he will tell you in chair, his journey not that different from mine has been a little more interesting at times. but mickey edwards is one of those great voices out there, so it's a pleasure to welcome congressman mickey edwards. >> first of all, thank you are having this event, giving us a chance to come here and talk. it's a special of which because make steele is been a good

friend of mine and i'm honored to share the stage with him. let me tell you about my book. it comes that there's a little differently than what mike does although when we sit and talk about issues, we think very much alike. i have this new book out from yale university press and the title of it, which would give you an idea where i'm coming from is the party versus the people. has a sub title if that doesn't sound terribly exciting, but people usually get most entranced by the subtitle of the book, which i did not rate. the book started with an article in the atlantic magazine and the subtitle -- the title they put on the article is now the subtitle of the book called how to turn republicans and democrats into americans. when i first heard that i thought it sounds pretty harsh

really. the editors said, did you read what you wrote? so where i'm coming from in the talk we just heard, one of the authors talking about structural questions. i actually talk about systemic issues. when i left congress, i was the membership and later of the house and then i went to teach and taught at harvard for 11 years. one of the things that happens to need teaches you the chance to step back from the daily grind. you are on when you are in the classroom, but then you have time to reflect and observe and decide for happening. no matter what the issue was, whether bush was president, didn't matter whether you talk about an economic issue or

cabinet appointment or anything else. republicans were a one-sided democrats on the other side. the matter with the issue was, the government had become more like the nfl, seen here the problems we have. instead it was how can i defeat you? how can a defeat because you don't want to a different club, differently blunder had your head and i start thinking why that was and how did we get to that point? even reagan in the papers every day. you see here is two or three republicans talking to two or three democrats about doing something together and that is front page news. we've actually got republicans and democrats willing to talk to each other. so why is that the way it is? i go back and i thought about the only thing i ever found in her first four presidents agreed with each other on was to create

political parties. washington added service in madison don't create political parties. all the time, and me against you because you belong to the other cloud. i concluded that most talk about this. you will know the role of money and all this other stuff, and i'm glad to talk about those that i know my case, but i want to give you a couple examples of the political system we've created. so i was giving a talk to the american academy for the advancement of science and i know nothing about science, nothing about knowledge he. here's a starting point. what does the constitution and vision in how we as the people govern ourselves?

it envisions that because the power is not in the white house, the powers in the congress almost every major power, work on the spending, taxing, cabinet appointments and the powerless but they are the people could control the outcomes in the idealist people are going to go to the polls, elect their leaders and that's how the people -- what happens if it's not the voice of the people? i want to give you two quick examples of the party system we created and would have been. when joe biden became vice president, everybody knew who was going to be the new u.s. senators. former governor and members of congress and got challenged in a

primary violating christine o'donnell and she b-day. two things happening. one, there are 1 million people in delaware. christine o'donnell only got 30,000 votes. so why didn't he beat her in the general election? delaware has a sore loser love it if you run for your parties nomination and you lose, your name can't be on the ballot in november. those 30,000 people cut all the people of delaware choosing who they wanted in the u.s. senate for all the power lies. you should've put this guy in the senate. nevermind, i'm not going to get into those races. they have a convention.

there're 3 million people in utah. 3500 read the convention. 2000 voted for other candidates other than robert.net because of those 2000 people, his name could not be on the ballot in november for the 3 million people of utah because they had the sore loser law. how many states had this crazy sore loser law? 46. 46. here's another provision of the constitution. every senator and representative must be an inhabitant of the state from which they are elect it. batf i was running for congress here, with out you coming out of people and economic interests. you know me. you know my reputation in the community. that is the idea.

what happens when you allow the political parties to control redistrict and a richer congressional district district despite? the idea is the congresswomen are supposed to know the community. so tell a personal story. i've been on a farm and i know what i was looking at. and i'm a republican elected in the district's 1928 and 74% democrat. democrats couldn't figure out how i want. but they did. the other party at the time controlled the state legislature and they were able to redraw my district in the middle of oklahoma, all of new england fits inside of oklahoma. in the middle of oklahoma all the way to kansas, halfway across to arkansas, would have

been? either city guide is now representing wheat farmers and cattle ranchers and i didn't understand their interests and couldn't speak for them. most of those examples are the viewer because we allow the political parties to control our electoral process and we wonder how come our congress is controlled by the hard-line ideologues who promised never to compromise with the other side. they know if they compromise to get primary and not god for small numbers of hyper partisan ideologues dominate the outcome. how did we allow these clothes to control who we can vote for. i was active republican iran is

a party guy and started thinking later, what have we done to us does when you a congress where people are not talk to people on the other side of the aisle because we set up a system that alexis people and gives them the power. one more quick thing and then mike and i can get this conversation. then you could elect to congress and you take the oath of office could watch by the way is not about to be loyal to the president and not to be loyal to your party leaders. it is to be loyal to the country. and i took the oath of people elected the same time i was, al gore, others, toasty how old i am, but i took that oath. at that now were altogether. while members of the united is congress. that lasted about three minutes until they started voting on who would be speaker and who would

dominate each committee in congress. if you've been to the house floor, if you've seen the house floor, if somebody speaks here without this panel, you have a left turn here. not the u.s. house. republicans stand attacked republicans. democrats talk to democrats. if you want to go have a cigarette or it is damaged or make a phone call, go to the cloakroom. but there's on a cloakroom. one for republicans over there and democrats over there and operate the united states congress, the branch of government with all the power is supposed to make decisions for our country. we treated as rival clubs and set of people coming together. the bottom line i did in my book as we are not electing people to congress. we're not electing unpatriotic

people. we elect good people trapped in a system we have created the rewards instability, that rewards entrenched since, that punishes population and compromise and we are shocked that is the result we get. so that's on my book is about. i want to hear, but that's where it's coming from. >> well, that was pretty scary. but that's our government and that is part of the political process. as mickey was playing out in the first scenario, the bob bennett praised in the christine o'donnell raised, both of those have been on my as national chairman. and i remember meeting with a group of very, very excited and somewhat excitable republicans about a month after i had become

chairman, who were laying out for me a new strategy beginning to emerge from around the country. they call themselves teapartiers i said okay, so what's the deal? they were very clear about the focus they wanted to bring to the discussion, to the debate about the role of government, the size of government, expensive government. so we met them at that time they began to talk about being outside the party. part of my responsibility as the national chairman looking at the political process to elect individuals to the congress is to make sure we have a screen of a process as possible, that we don't cut our nose off to spite our face in the effort to

getting to victory. in other words, the race that matters come in a battle that matters is the one in november, not september jan or february, meaning the primary process. what i recognized early on was this tension that was beginning to build within the political structure at the primary level and a pop off point, the volcanic moment was new york 23. the 23rd congressional district in new york, spring of 2009, where the party officials of the local party decided to go around the ordained political process. in other words, having a primary. but instead, take their nominee over the frustrated voices that this and not particular congressional district.

ms. kahlo father was put on the ballot as the republican nominee and that was one of the key turning points politically within the gop at this, tea party voices raising up against the system had part of my job as the national chairman had something i wanted to capture and believed i captured in the boat was coming out of a system in which regard a watch and witness devastating losses of 2006 i wish i was one of the casualties in a senate run in maryland. 2008 presidential. the party has lost its brand at least furnishes a point were basically stomped. voters rejected what we put on the table, whether it was philosophically, politically,

policy wise. donors are began to dry up by withholding their checks because they didn't like the direction the party was going in. government republicanism had begin to take hold in the last term of the bush administration. so a lot of the economic conservatives who would eventually form themselves into tea party really began to figure out and find another way to assert pressure back on the party, on the establishment of the party. as a grassroots activist, i found myself in an interesting position because i understood both sides. the establishment to protect the status quo, the process to get a clean primary to go fight the democrats in november and the frustration of this new emerging voice that this, who were upset

the party had ruled back on its fundamental core principles with respect to economics. not social. one of the big misnomers about the tea party as it is somehow the social conservative movement. the tea party and its origin now is subsequently become very different from that first meeting i had in february 2 minus are beginning to emerge around the country as he saw played out in town hall meetings that number. he did not see or hear these voices raising on abortion or marriage or social issues. they were racing against the violation of the constitution, the proper role of the congress to come to the table with a budget, to manage the spinning of the country, et cetera. you had different dynamics

beginning to emerge and in some cases, submerge. part of my responsibility was to figure out the best route to november. some look at two potential candidates to helping make the argument that the party, the elephant had to turn. .. done and to of those individuals that summer happened to be chris christi of new jersey in the bob macdonald of virginia. when you look at where the party is now and where it needs to go, those governors i believe are examples of the future direction in many respects. you have a blue state like new jersey with a governor, republican governor-elect christie who was able to navigate but more importantly on

a foreign policy position to take the full use of the party, articulate them and translate them into the policy while is very, very smart and reflective of what the people want. however you have a competing interest that's grown in the two years between -- since 2011 that pushed back against that because it's now become intertwined with a social agenda, and it's kind of lost some of the economic edge with the success of obamacare and other successes the administration had so politically the party finds itself against the proverbial wall and the direction it takes in my estimation will determine when or not it goes the way of the whigs, or it actually becomes a party that competes for a governable majority were in the future and that ties back to what mickey has written in

his book, and i think his book really reflects the attitude of voters out, this idea canouas but.an eleed offici >>ss id [no audio]stuffli has the goes to the overall process of running throughnamico message points it becomes a tery interesting dynamic fory i the political party that1990 an 00rgely hopes to sway the2 1980, and 1990's and much of the first part of 2000.ff and at least through 2004. le05 is when the wheels strugg

begin to come off and since then there has been a uassive stroke that we seebo get played out fromeg candidates who talk about vaginal probes andeses legitimate rape verses those who want to talk like these christmas tree on how to govern a state in the i country in these times and so what i try to do in myy to book fromf a political strategy standpoint, right down to get the party to focus on both the challenges and opportunities. like a 12 step program you and ou have to a knowledge you have a problem.what e t the problem is us, largely what we think of ourselvesculate ourselves, what we ar value, hall -- how we articulate those principles and ideals part of the

founding organizations and in a world that looks vastly different from the one that ronald reagan inherited in 1980 and they're ready loves to put ronald reagan as a beacon of light within the g.o.p. ladies and gentlemen, ronald reagan then manleyf knew and loved on his last day of his presidency of the injured a primary today, he. would lose.f solid talk to the embracivear ectreagan they doing a disservice to his honor werem to his memory because they given would not elect him today.aspr given his stance on o immigration, what he did as president and governor on some taxes come on some of the that other social issues out there and it goes to the heart of this struggle that te mickey and i have to deal with the party to get the ellis had to recognize itsinger

core and move forward and minutes not necessarily to test the waters every 30 minutes butgnize standing on firm principal ground that recognizes theat value of the american dreamtheye dream, that recognizes the desire of those who want to be a part of hitter coming in the future, thatorit understands the direction demographically the country has taken over 30 years itheld o will be a majority minorityolit country. what does that mean?to the had to the parties deal withnklu that? an ellipse service to minorities in this country is quite that quite frankly. n visit the community. change happens around, not within for carnival is wgued the g.o.p. is set of theg just throwing things out

there to say we will 12 should be much mores goingn in embracing of the movements going on within various a communities. shut up and listen and pay attention. should you don't insult their to intelligence you bring in why they should listen to you. value are you offering?pty how we make the opportunities to access the american dream as they have to find it real?to and the political party and part the democrat will findthe nominf himself in 2016 particularly if hillary is not thethoe nominee, that those tensions

that exist within the partyleft begin to get exposed just on ehe left, not the right. tangl moderate -- moderate you havetive democrats will tangle with the center-leftparts or progressive democratsinc just says you have seen since reagan stepped off andolol theue glue is no longer thereled that is ideological glue he could bring right n left-of-center reasonably ccking together you seen now they're cracking that occursr at the foundation.n t men so the political challenge right now is how do you begin to men to the?he before the foundation completely breaks? in light of the demographic ou shifts occurring in the country. and right now the goal is to recognize the challenges, itun

met the feelings we haveion that committed a and then begin to turn the elephant in the direction that points to the future standing on aal foundation that is all about individual opportunity or choices or freedoms andinivid decisions we cannot be a party that says we are aboutsom individuals making choices but then we want to limit those choices. we cannot be the party thathen t says it is about creating economic opportunities but ba then the policies of thetunities table that basically even ast the rate those economic the opportunities, particularly for the pork were those at the margins. i think we can be a party that speaks to a limited role for government withouthoutg being anti-governmentnsitutio anti-governmentns, without being disrespectful of those institutions that have been

beneficial to help people get up and move forward but the challenge for governmentot e is a has a tendency to throw stuff out there then not follow up for managed the at cre opportunity responsibly thee we resources. that creates a lot of dme attention we see today we the will not spend more unlesse we cut but now that has bled into the policy is now more political which makes itult to o much more difficult to do policy. >> it does. i agree largely with mike in inrms of changes it would beth cleared for the republicank or party for the democratic party to make that i really don't carei about either one. i have spent my life as a republican but i am the factp

the story i was tellinggues o before how we run into -- our primaries in ideologues to control the outcome hasd a driven me in a different direction and while that storyo i told about the alo examples of the 46 states thatno allow ty any unrepresented did minorities to be on the ballot? i am actually optimistic. why? 40 percent of americans today registered as independents. "usa today" had a big article on that the american people are fleeing from the political parties. pee i in 2006 they have initiative f petition in the constitution and the people of washingtonub

state having followed all ofher this and the republicans versus the democrats onallhe rei everything, there is unity and they all agree on oneof thing. they are against whatever the democrats are for you and they all agree whatever they are the republicans are of for in the people innt to the washington state said the death of that nonsense and went to the polls on thearty initiative they created and they got rid of partybili primaries and they got ridrol wh of the ability of the political parties to control what they were shaped like 13 states have now done that that was 2,006.ifornia in 2010 california did it they got rid of partyg primaries the bill is to doed. it in texas has just been introduced in reintroducedeople

in arizona. the people say we want mores the democracy we want a systemder to we want to the candidate toorate appeal to move forward to all of the electorate. so i think the people of finally getting to thatbecom yswat* fed up as i have become. i have, i am a i ve republican, always have been won and i have a lot of the friends who are democrats. i love them all and i wantethi them to sit down together.rves if you all wanted to do something for this school that deserves whatever good you can do, a new facility facility, at a new in building, where should be, what should you do in theou building udall get

together and forming a group to say let's make a decision and not one person in this entire room would say of the republican senator for their and that's come up with wifferent rival plans to fight it out. we don't do it in anythinginue t in our lives except the way run our country and we cannot continue to do that. abou i hope the republican party does make the changes thatcisios we have talked about but i wh's g hope ultimately ourty, decisions don't get made by what is good for my party but what is good for my country.some time l >> with that, we have time a mic left for questions if youu c have anyo. the there is a microphone back there.h your

>> i would like each of you and with your thoughts on citizens united short-term and long-term. a lawyer >> citizens united for cry have to be careful.or smoki i am a lawyer i don't think i am allowed to say the justices were smoking something illegal.e >> the only thing i will say about that corporations arel, i people?t g give me a break.the first of all, i will not challenge the knowledge that supreme court justices have about the constitution, butse cr they obviously skipped c corporate lawl becausecorporatis corporate what makes clear there is a distinction between corporations and persons.d i p i have ar chapter on this inore my book and i am probably a was one of the more extreme

nobo positions if you go to castcept a vote there is nobody in line with you except another human being.pai and when you give money to anobg campaign, there should be hu nobody giving money except to human beings no corporate mo, money, no pac money, no labor union money, nobei political party, it no money owrs in tenspt human beings unlimited amounts, not casino owners and loss vegas of tens of millions of dollars instantly reportable in is the way to fix it. now >> h?ow would you address what mayor bloomberg is doing in new york right nowased with basically threw his super pac to target based on. what you are saying? to do is >> i think what we're bloomberg should do is try to to encourage as many peoplee m as possible to individually give money to defend the iople he is tryiofng tot want defend.

i agree.money an you but i don't think it should be okay i have more than you isn so i determine the outcome. he is articulate go talk to people and go to the states to say i want you to put the money up to help elect thisapped person.-- >> the citizens united cases rnc is one of those that haveashat l been on my watch. of what happened to.e h [laughter] but that also happened during that time we had al case before the court as well that basically that was hi a part which spoke to allowing a the political parties are given was the third party in to t pacds should that be the source of t campaign funds but that

money should be back within the political party. mccain-feingold until thatu and they said if you ranwantsha half we could bid on the toat ee the extent of 38,000 butillions before that but that is what p the difference thel individual could write to.he amf but you had full disclosuref with the date, time date, time, amount, a job job, all the permit zen un interracial and then put it on the public record within 30 days. citizens united says not only is the corporation purpose -- person forhato o finance law that we will let that person do what no other person in the country can do that is to give an unlimited amounts without any record.

at you unlimited amounts without any record. there is no way of knowing that you just throw a 25 republic million-dollaran check to a pac, doesn't matter, theym we know you wrote to it that citizens don't. they claim we will disclose that information.t disclose okay. writ selectivelying because if you o say don't disclose war i am? not writing a check, what are g will they do?f so i think but if theter republicans lose the house the congress willce proactively going aftercontrol citizens united to put incord place some of the controls of notification, identification of the wreck courting of donors which i think should have been done.

>> it is my view politicalincre divisiveness has increased in direct correlation to the incessant pounding of talkformu radio i wonder if you have any comment with the that formulation of policy? >> no doubt that talk radio has been a real bone andto the spain to the political process and certainly to the political parties said gross side of it from the republican slavish conservative sidetheir w harkens back to the fire wall outlet that some felt they had to express there views on all lots of issues.itic

been in the american and other efforts fell away the political process of those activists unfold itself and republicans like to get in there and want to hear each other and reinforcement tod. pound pound pound.if youook whereas for of lot of folks on the left but the impact however is profound from thew radio and television aspectsain and what you see now bothlandsc trying to adapt the le landscaping have already checked about with the i

know what to hear you have to agree with me but i want to hear a common-sense solution i have been unemployed 18 months and i may lose my business in six months i have to get a kid to college and the cost of tuition is $50,000 vs 20,000ke in years ago. of these i think that hasd examl not been helpfule to see youthr atessee their dues thatid helping the debate becauseor it puts the party should do this slammer sure that to do pla toye right thing that what hethn said was blown headed andeal

stupid and we saw how that played out. wi that is still a real dynamicge within the party to contend with all the why would sayust oe it is getting less and less.gr >> i want to add one thing ilk a totally agree talk radio and talk tv are a major problem.. they just hyped-up thinkerhe pee and instability a lot. wait until a very good jobke to pin blame on those that own those networks to make theirb network off pouring t poison into the political system, but it is more complicated than that ande they are a big part of thes problem but studies havell ofou shown with the exception ofpart the people in this room, it every ready else that you know, and only thinks the, way they do. buy you and your friendsnd watci read the same

columnist, watched the same shows but open to listening to different points of view on issues and that is what im it gives we will like to critic report them but we have tomore report things in the culture so that would there is more whe critical thinking, people who understand civics whenrebutn they hear a different point*r of view listened instead ofal forming a rebuttal so talk to be an talk radio are not the whole problem. >> i just want to respond to the comment that i occasionally talk to people whose ideas are off the wallou s and i would just say what ise cc

your main news source?on bec toau lseisten to fox news allokt the time and that i stop the conversation because they're. not looking at the norm.exent they are looking somewheremi appear with their ideas.c my next comment is i watch yo you all the time at msnbc and sometimes i wish you can get a chance to finish your statement. [laughter] >> let me interrupt you. ar [laughter] part >> but when you think about bipartisanship i remember when tip o'neill and reagan were good friends.ge bipartisanship always starts at the water's edge in foreign policy was bipartisan and they're used to be a lot that only

recently and turning then the whole country upside down. but then he changed his mindsee on that besides newng cambridge so what you see happening?y -- in terms of, to get the republican party closer to the middle where it used toubli be.senato i come from new york we sent so many career republican senators to washington.i will >> lineate disabused of onen particular idea, i've come to use the conclusion that as someone who grew up in washington d.c. and what isrd

going on in washington? is backyard stuff.st try to go from the idea of b bipartisanship.at w the last truly bipartisan aero we have was clinton in lit and 18 virgin resaw what oth could s be accomplished forkle t its started off rocky butif many people realized. >> if they wanted to work on the water's edge with that they would have to proveand t

then this strategy implemented dai-ichi team set up a paradigm end overlaid with the agf your compassionate conservatism but it was really in yourhis face kind of politics.s also i have concluded overwhn y rhe last 12 years the sensep of bipartisanship no longer h exists.caus it is our rooms.e it will not happen because they will not do it because that as sneaky well illustrated, the system does not allow for that anymore.to what you see now a merileesus an speaks to the next day geoffrey need to go is consensus.ave se and we see it on an issue like guns where you have senator to me fromoe man

pennsylvania and joe manchin from west virginia to find some the consensus on an issue that no one in washington thought we could get near of imi resolution.ne at flip the script onthe immigration reform. what has happened there?s going right ry one put they cannot fall down but foley that consensus yet.l so you see on the right and su the left, i'm not sure. hi o that is really what i think the new dynamic is and swe i use the term loosely can really find that sweet spotp or the point* that says iut par know you have to give upr than something and i have to care

about something it is not about party other than that but people. that sweet spot maybe to the right or the left but it is in that area with the peoplentlu want us to be. hard we get there and that cities in germany should pay attention to see whether the whiten these house, senate, congress can find that on the complicatederge issues as we have begun to see on gun-control. >> the only thing is i wouldhe , we both agree on the republican party.max uc >> the conservative but this thing is happening in both parties but the democratsnd have lost their conservative and moderate -- moderate members also i was in

congress. now we can look back to talk ha aboutt bipartisanship at thein water's ed vge but it wasn't i that way in vietnam or thedor. uesues of central america s and it was all foreign policy issues. there is a speech given by a senator saying bipartisanship.togetherthey >> but we always had some people in the house andco senate to bring peoples together how can we move the country for word? nd have strong disagreementst ca but we have to make sure the t watehr stays pierre, a's bridgestone collapse, trips getsy supplies. disag of that is nothing and