thank you very much. [applause] >> booktv continues with nina munk. ms. munk talks about jeffrey sachs village product that had the end goal of eradicating poverty around the world. this is about an hour. >> tanks. i've been a fan of these events that julian has run. and i wrote him, asking him if he would allow me to present nina munk.

i am in the economics of book review of bearings. not only are we televised a booktv, one of my favorite weekend stations, we are also being covered by a rip order for bearings, rob milburn, who was sitting in the back. so we are covered in two different ways. everything is on the record or whatever you say can used against you. i want to begin but pointing out out -- that jeffrey sachs has already told us this book is not worth reading. just last week he apparently went on the record as declaring, i can't account for nina munk cynicism. it is what it is, but it's not at all the real story, which she simply missed. sorry to say, but it's like "vanity fair" meets extreme poverty. so be it.

first of all, nina has to confess to the fact that she's written for "vanity fair" and indeed read an article about jeffrey sachs for "vanity fair." the also alternatively, if he gets demonstrated you don't have to beat me beat me in his book to blurb it. he's declared venus book is an excellent and moving tribute to the vision and commitment that jeffrey sachs is was an enlightening account of how much can be received by a determination and the noble laureate economists will hopefully be encouraged to read in his book. they have a somewhat rude shock when they do. nina munk has written a fascinating book about a fascinating man and even more important, a set of ideas, but it's not quite clear what it's about.

however, here we had another blurb, a powerful exposé of hubris. i think that's pretty accurate, but even more accurate is the following front reviewer william easterly, professor at nyu and specialist in development. he's written in one of the most readable and evocative accounts of foreign aid ever written, virtually nothing about foreign aid is easy. that's a word that jeffrey sachs is not infrequently throughout the book. jeffrey sachs offered a subject message to westerners that they could be the saviors who could have poverty in africa with a modest amount of effort after reading the superb book, no one will ever again make ending poverty is really that easy. as for my forthcoming review by professor william easterly, having made nina munk spoke myself, i think that's pretty

accurate. nina is also the author of a previous book called fools rush in. not a bad title for the current book except maybe the forward he shortened to cingular. steve case, jerry levin and the making of aol time warner. she's invited wallet away this book was a very different experience, in another way was rather similar because steve case, jerry levin and they're like reminded her of the jeffrey sachs. i want to first of all begin with the misstatement about sachs. indeed, anybody who reads the book is going to recognize if anything she bends over backwards to respect it to be kind and do jeffrey sachs all the justice in the world. she writes in his speeches coming sachs presents his advances and ethical choice.

clearly people to die or do something about it here after all, 2 billion people on the planet are scraping by on less than a dollar or two a day. nina monk, please. [applause] especially for those watching the tv who was made never heard of jeffrey sachs, who was he, when janine and why did you decide to do a book about him and his ventures? >> jeffrey sachs is probably best known among laypeople, best known for its 2006, 2005 a solid book called the end of poverty. it's about it when i read it and i imagine many of you have read it or read parts of it is remarkably compelling book, a book that offers a tremendous promise and is a very, very hopeful above. when i read the book i was

immediately entrusted in this man. the man who assured his readers that we could impact and poverty, that we can and the planet who the guys at extreme deprivation. i decided that i wanted to follow him while he attempted to put into practice his theories on ending poverty. and i met first in 2006, not that long after his book, the end of poverty, came out. i racially read a profile for "vanity fair" and not profile really convinced me that this is a story that required even more research and listen to you and i dedicate our time to you. when it is seeking a book and what started out as a six-month magazine project became a six, seven yearbook project.

>> well, i'm going to call for easter this review because you actually were at ground level. you create some vivid characters in this book was great novelistic skill. as easterly writes, chose to villages villages for more intensive coverage. in the arid north of kenya and the better water to more fertile village of her hero. you can't come with novelistic skill spirit she tells the villagers story of the point of view of the local sachs project unique village. oxman mohammed and the ugandan committee was to marry both alive on the page. talk about dear two, oxbow hohman and what happened than what you saw. >> jeffrey sachs decided, for those of you who are familiar and didn't read my original story in "vanity fair," began organization called the millennium villages project.

he received $120 million, half came from church service in the idea he would put into crack as these ideas of how to have poverty, the theories he outlined clearly in his book, the end of poverty. he started by ruling effectively his project and a half dozen villages africa. how was lucky enough to be there from the beginning of these villages for starting up. i then wound up focusing on two in particular, the two mentioned in going back again and again over a period of six years, really watching from the ground as things began to unfold and then unravel unfortunately certain cases. the village in particular that she mention is right on the borders somalia and kenya. it's a truly desperate place, arid, populated sparsely by nomadic camel herders.

it really i would say has no reason for the. there's no economy to speak of with the exception of gunrunning and cattle raiding. there's an extraordinary amount of violence as you can imagine as a result of the civil war in somalia appeared conscious pour across the porous border. there's no water. resources are very, very scarce. for the rainy season does finally come, it comes with greater frequency. it tends to just rain and everything is washed away. of course, one can sometimes go for years but there's no rain at all enron scandals die. there's no opportunity and no hope in us in this village that jeffrey sachs proposed to demonstrate that poverty could be handed. if in fact poverty could be handed out a place as desperate while arguably poverty could be handed just about anywhere. if you could prove that the

experiment so-called work in a place of such extreme misery, then again you should be able to make it work almost anywhere. >> you mentioned here to. talk a little bit more about uganda. >> what was interesting about jeffrey sachs ideas in the beginning is he recognized he had to show his experiments are his ideas for any poverty could work in various places. so he chose purposefully villages that were in a variety of different kinds of agricultural zones, different kinds of environments. so by a sharp contrast to this area, camel herding community on the border somalia and kenya, the other village i spent time in was in the southwestern corner of uganda and is

seemingly very for tile, hilly in the main crop is bananas. in fact, so has long ago been beached if any nutrients. it's a very, very different communities. you christians as opposed to muslims. they are settled farmers. so i spent my time focusing on two communities that had nothing in common except for the interventions of jeffrey and the millennium villages project. >> now excuse me -- as another indication of nina munk generosity towards jeffrey sachs, she does read it and she's indebted to getting the media access to write this but mli me to shadow his work. we didn't always ci two i. nor did he try to censor me. i'm grateful to have and to members of his staff as nina judiciously points out, he never did any of these things.

all he did was try to deny her access to information whenever the information was unfortunate for his project. as she writes in the book is golf, that when things are getting a little bit tough, she for eternal purpose is found not the millennium villages project commissioned to postmodern report to discover why farmers had upheld a side of mutual accountability with some pain like copies of the reports dismissed. the reports were not rigorous others informed. lenin had nothing to gain to inquisitive journalists i inferred. things began to get us. tell us what that was about but the mutual accountability bargain about frustrations he did experience after a while when these projects are

continuing. >> i think jeffrey sachs is a character who too many of us is recognizable. he's a monomaniacal, very brilliant man who set out to try to accomplish something in her race and stake his career on the claim he could have poverty and he could do it in our lifetime. very graciously i think allowed me to shadow him in a way that's terribly intrusive. and if you have had a journalist like me cover you will know it's intrusive. it's not for. i ask a lot of questions for mr. ynez n. when things are going well, that was marvelous all-around. for jeff sachs is hopeful about cell phone when i began this project that the outcome. who doesn't want poverty to be on it. it as the time went by, from the

work of history in the villages from the ground level at the hurdles for ever greater. i've compared it to some people have asked me coming in now come you should not down. the little things can pop out. lacrimal, thank you here that's exactly what it is. this was sachs and his team and implement interventions in the villages and make improvements in there with the improvements. as soon as they thought they solve one problem, there would be a host of unintended consequences that would pop up and they end up having to whack all of these problems down. it was really heartbreaking to see what was happening. from a journalistic standpoint of the perspective of someone who cares about visibility and transparency, i suppose you could say as a journalist was equally heartbreaking as jeffrey sachs and his team became ever more entrenched in the data that

was coming out of the organization was increasingly problematic in the numbers no longer matched up with what i was singing and the and reports on the figures on studies that were coming out were clearly misrepresented. there is a growing amount obfuscation. in so many ways, and really mirrored in a large number of ngos and nonprofits generally, that people are under tremendous pressure to raise money for my daughter's unsatisfied or do anything to make sure donors don't feel their money is being wasted. none of us want to think what we give $100 to an organization that's gone missing or has been stolen or is just being wasted. it is very disheartening for me to see what actually happen, and the disconnect between the reality on the ground in what

was still in the official publication and press releases of the organization. >> thanks. i'm also not again going to quote from easterly -- [inaudible] sorry. excuse me. easterly was not into the boat ride nina munk, but he has quoted briefly and matches in history the following. i'm quoted at one point as remarking that sachs is essentially trying to create an island of success in a sea of failure. maybe he's done not, but it doesn't address the fear failure. actually i got that wrong easterly writes. munk resist us about the element success. i want to support fernández book

in this way. the key point in this concept several times in her book is the following on page 217. lawrence had out, director of the uk's institute of development studies asked the obvious question, who on earth will pay for this once the daughters leave? in other words, aren't we creating an eternal dependency? property during these people a disservice by not providing them with the means for sustainability? >> you know, i said this in a radio interview the other day. it does not give me any pleasure to have to report them a book that jeffrey sachs experiment is by any standards a disappointment certainly and arguably even a failure. i don't take any pleasure in that.

i have said many times and i will continue to say that when i began this project, i truly was hopeful. émigre skeptic both by nature and by profession as that's what journalists do. but i was really hopeful that this project would turn out well. i think bill easterly, who of course we do have to take his review with a grain of salt because he's very well-known well known as a great jeff sachs nemeses. he too was a brilliant man. when she mentioned that i didn't interview for the book, i did that on purpose. i didn't want anyone to be on to say, or just fax in particular to be out to say you were swept off your feet by my critics. i wanted it to be clear that it was i personally cannot really as an outsider. a major development expert. i'm not an economist. i am simply a journalist. i went in there, watch what

happened, follow the story as it unfolded on the ground. frankly i spent a lot of our time in these villages than any other outsider has spread. certainly much more time than jeffrey sachs. it is to migrate unhappiness to report non-of these experiments were as intended. >> i want to quote one part of the book to william easterly actually criticizes. he's an academician. he says they should be no ad hominem attacks jeffrey sachs. if he interprets this to be an ad hominem attack him and mena writes university paid 8 million in 2002, part of a package of benefits designed to the room from harvard apart from the six bedrooms and working fireplaces commode makes the house appealing as this out basic garden. but that she looks simple and he was graceful. >> it is a lovely house.

[laughter] i will say that, you know, we'll easterly is academic. i am a journalist. i think the details about the kinds of homes people live in our fascinating. call me a voyeuristic you want, that's fine. but i also to my defense, i think it is important and i know that all of us in this room are guilty of whether you have in an $8 million townhouse or rent a thousand dollars a month studio, we have no idea. we can even begin to understand between the ways we live, between the extraordinarily lives that we the just by having running water, let alone two lips garden. part of the reason it was important to point out that jeffrey sachs that is in an exquisitely beautiful townhouse on the upper west side is to

demonstrate he can hug difficult it is for someone like jeffrey sachs to begin to understand what it means to live the way people in the villages that he's trying to help live. i can tell you from firsthand begun that even in my case, and i spent a great deal of time in these villages, i thought these types of people. i did to the best of my abilities attempted to empathize, to really understand how they lived, i don't even begin to scratch the surface. to be in a place where there is nothing as a reporter, as an outsider, always knowing at any moment you can turn around and get out by definition means you don't understand it. i can assure you as much as i don't ever really understand it, jeffrey sachs really, really, really doesn't understand it.

[laughter] >> another reason perhaps why jeffrey sachs didn't like me this book. another quote, it's never easy to disagree with jeffrey sachs. you might trigger an argument. you might ruffle his feathers. in all likelihood it will make you feel small. okoye misguided or ill-informed or ignorant for everyone in the room depends on sachs or his or her paycheck even at the center to courage. that's clearly not a good character reference for anyone to run such a project. let me finally just lead off with a quote from easterly on the general subject, where he stands. it's not that we choose eight or no aid is easterly's message. it has had some focus successes such as vaccination programs. but it cannot achieve the end of poverty. only homegrown development based

on the dynamism of individuals in free societies can do that, just as it did for the lucky people who world whose forebears find poverty. poor people are the best resource with concrete problems every day that are far greater than you or i have to face. >> i couldn't agree more with that. i don't think i agree entirely with the easterly on its platforms, but i agree with that and i feel strongly and i myself lived deeply and charity and i believe in foreign aid, but i think it's very, very important to differentiate between charity, between doing good and so-called development. when i give money to have her international or money to the organization i adore called various meals come which helps provide free lunches for school children in poverty-stricken

areas, i don't imagine i'm changing the world or the course of history. i needed that eric and. you now, i don't believe that's possible. so yes. >> okay, thank you. we can leave it open to questions. idea back >> this is great. thank you very much. to question. the singer bono is close to jeff sachs and he in recent years, particularly a couple weeks ago made an announcement of free trade and direct investment in at about noon world but do not poverty. he is moving more and more that direction. it was doing if you happen to interview him because of his closeness to jeff sachs. when will the dream reckoning come? the proof is going to be in the

pudding someday publicly known. one will not comment when will the jury beat in her out or whatever juries do? >> i did in fact interview bono. he was charming. he was one of the nicest people i've interviewed. he didn't hold me up for hours, with all of her use -- with celebrities due to poor journalists. bono is very much reflective of the popular opinion is. when bono began with jeffrey sachs kublai started working on the story, there is very much the moment when people seemed, the general public seem to be behind the great surge in foreign aid. there was a real belief then read these popular support for heavy influxes of foreign aid. i think we've seen a dramatic shift, most recently with obama's visit to africa, it's been made pointedly clear that the popular opinion is absolutely not to increase foreign aid.

american survey after survey are against that for better or worse, but that were more as an idea that we should be doing this back in investment in africa, helping businesses develop and help in economic growth that quite frankly is happening in some countries rather vigorously. i forget her the question. yes, my book. read my book. [inaudible] exactly, read my book. [inaudible] very soon i'm hopeful. >> the great economist pt ballard taught me years ago that aid, foreign aid from government actually can do harm simply by empowering and strengthening government specifies development and countries. so the approach that it could only do good, from governments especially could do harm by suppressing development. >> i supported may corrupt

government. >> exactly. you put it much better than i just did. >> is there any indication that george soros or any of his staffers read your book? >> i have a soft spot for george soros because to his great credit coming i interviewed him very early on in this project when i was just starting out and he had just given $50 million to jeff sachs at the time. he's a cool customer. he said very casually coming in now, 50 million bucks. he said look, it might work, you might not. the worst thing that happens or doesn't work and i've just given a 50 million bucks for a humanitarian cause. and if it does work, that's about it willing to take. as you know, george soros likes high-stakes tests. >> would you give george soros a call tomorrow morning on what he

thinks now about a $60 million stadium world sydney spent that money, maybe a good development. >> or on a honeymoon. he got married last week. i haven't read your book. i have to say other reviews are not so inclined to read it. but what i don't understand so far is what is the message employed? poesy doing with the money? how is it being spent and what was the plan? >> that's a very good question, a fundamental question. apart from telling you to read my book coming in now, the truth of the matter is there's not that much of sachs prescriptions that are novel. but jeff sachs was prescribing with baby down done in a systematic scientific way with everything at once. so that's just building a school in a poor community are just building a while. his idea was that people were trashed by poverty and a way that if you look after one

problem without solving all of them holistically as academics like to say, that there was no point. so it was really a matter of a single-minded focus in doing a lot of things all at the same time, putting in a health care clinic,, recruiting nurses, bringing a diesel generators, solving the water problem and trying to take everything all in one go. [inaudible] >> no, no. combination. said very basic health services in schools and bringing in teachers. better medical care, mosquito nets, sort of a packet of a dozen basic interventions. fertilizer and high-yield seeds of vaccination for livestock. really a packet of fairly low-cost interventions that in his mind, when you put them all together and get them off once had a sort of exponential

impact. [inaudible] >> hi, i have to confess nina munk is actually my friend and classmate from columbia journalism, but i'll ask a legitimate question. i'm originally from uganda and i was a you comment a short while ago who works with jeffrey sachs on some of these programs. he said the key problem was he didn't listen a lot. he wanted to, for example, talk to presidents and not secretaries of ministries where he knew what was happening on the ground. my question is, how much was said about jeffrey sachs caring about the people in the projects and how much was said about him trying to prove that jeffrey sachs could do this amazing thing that perhaps it never be duplicated and be remembered for

a long time. because you wonder why with all these connections, white video programs that could make capital available to watch partners? they lack access to capital. my final question is do you think of a consequent of this whole experience with jeffrey sachs? ..

is that in the best interests in rural africa quatorze that in the best interest. nothing tense with your alluding to. something that to guess at. a really don't know. i forget what your other question was. was a success is something.

you mentioned about the undersecretaries you know, the truth of the matter is, there is a kind of defiance away everyone is in this together. mcconnell and the villagers, the president's, last thing they want, they're perfectly happy to continue to encourage the infusion. the villages below one of the astonishing discoveries, of quickly but when the outside has some show of hat quickly have to

assume a certain persona when the sure the visitor the his the nations are going and and and n becomes a kind who interdependence her. who is going to break the glass dome. >> excellent point. her is that bill related to it and reboot come. i am skeptical, and someone who believes deeply that transparency is the way for britain. reveal interns speak openly but the failures and new one you

could more weight to the success is beam. >> thanks you. that was interesting been movement it was interesting to your perspective. and not sure i agree with everything common and then been here highland and complexities in him. very difficult to measure success seven. and wonder if reflect the on what the state of the villages with have been mike.

>> part of the difficulty about projects in black and white-. there was simply no account that the ports in million hours into a village in are going to see some magnificence stories and. and none been burying children her pulled out of malaria, and it is extraordinary with a certain. the candidacy cessna will enter?

hoping a single person is something very different. his great failing lost over promised the title of his book ... and non-v, me -- was going to give us a model to end poverty that could be scaled and replicated. head is with to this day notice to d'agata been we don't know how people are uplifted by the committee. we understand the press meridian welfare related to a we don't really know what the drivers are

>> and just one thing award to hand. thank you for that. one thing that's interesting to mentioned is that is working across scale. i think through the millennium developmental and justice of until the his racing awareness. >> is no question. two chapters in my book were devoted to his extraordinary work of malaria. he has some more than anyone who in advance of some very practical ways to turn to reduce malaria chance mission. and magnificent and the cahuenga you should e-mail manhattan.

>> to the affair he did not think that africans should have it hidden. that was not wave began his question. obviously could of starting from the pro-business frighten me. >> next question. >> to you address the corruption and africa? which china's involvement and no in net cash hebe. >> both are important issues. i do absolutely address corruption. ago and above way not to -- my book and try very hard and did what it can be -- has read it

has attest to this. hon how the reader reaches are wrong conclusions. ec the fact the government clearly thinks often disappear and many business in. solar panels just disappear. at think i allude to the problems of corruption. my book is not about corruption. it's about something much larger >> and china is something that talk about the book. again, the book is not about china. it is such an important model. calling enormous amounts of money into africa, but interestingly china itself at this point is lifted hundreds of thousands of people of poverty had have their own methods. when the a relevant and a is a question oppose. i certainly don't answer to what

is something that is on the forefront of the minds of anyone his interest. >> said the you are not cynical but skeptical. does this experience making more broadly skeptical? t find yourself thinking lots of scientists and esteemed experts and politicians across the board actually useless gas buys? >> are you a journalist by any chance? >> sometimes. >> i think you can't possibly be a journalist and less to question everything you hear. we are taught to do that. many people call a cynical. many people complain. i have heard it all. they may be right. they may be wrong, but i will tell you that i don't trust any expert. that is just my professional

constitution. i am hopeful often that once i do the research myself and once i go to touch the back it up that i can demonstrate to that person was right, but i never take anyone's word until i have done my own reporting. i was completely mesmerized. >> you are you? >> i do -- i spent a great amount of my life so far on these issues. when i started reading the book was afraid. i could tell how dare she was trying to be divvied for me it

is not a matter of geoffrey sax. it is beyond him. it is anti it thinking class of people and never ever ever imagine that africans just like anyone else to know we are not different than anyone else. the only way we will make this is going to be to capitalism, conscious capitalism, but that is the only way forward. it reminded me of an argument at some point with this venture to of the new york times. she had the nerve to say, i heard him talk. she was saying, i could see why capitalism and business can work in china and india as vehicles of economic development, but i don't see how that would be relevant to africa. that is a problem. how come they did capitalism and we have economic development. the project.

>> to make such an interesting point. talk brought this in my book. there is this tremendous overlay or suggestion of neocolonialism as people talk about it. it can make you feel terribly uneasy when you're on the ground as an outsider in africa watching absolute domination and foreign aid and humanitarian aid circles of europeans. it is unsettling, and, of course, there are so many people who are deeply devoted. you don't work in those fields unless you are devoted to your cause, but it is unsettling. the cure is a very important point. >> and as you go around and talk about your book -- i don't know if you spent any time into your people, but i think it would be -- i would have loved when i was reading the book to see some hens on what i like to call the

industry of aid because it is an industry. >> lecky. she's been six hard years during it. sues not like a reporter a policy of the blue with a deadline in the morning. so six years in the making, six years of research. it's a great book. [applause] >> book tv is on facebook. like us to interact with book tv gas and viewers, watch videos commended up-to-date information on events. facebook.com/booktv. >> about the importance of confidence in being a united

states senator, but being a woman and how important it is so foster that in future of business owners or even mom's. >> absolutely. anchorage and women to be involved and step up from franklin. and i always say to graduating class is, i could never imagine that i would have been running for the united states senate when i was in your position either. but we have open the possibility of doing that because it is critical to have those examples in a governing institution and all places in our society and are important to have fino forces reflected. in the second part of it is that they bring a different experience. that is also important to have that voice at the table. encourage them to think about the possibility in the future.

those choices present themselves. for me as much as i was passionate about politics, the thought of running for public office, come to washington, you always have to go against the grain. whatever you do. that's what it is. and that is what i always did. i went against the grain. i felt so strongly about the things that i believe in. that voice. and i made changes in policy. it was a direct correlation. of the fact that even today the women's health initiative that we spawned by the disclosures, to this day that a clinical study trial for women, still revealing itself in life-saving discoveries for women which is important, the cause and effect to having women participate in the political process and what evolves from a. think tunnel nine, for example,

in fact, i was talking about it the other day, down in brazil as a matter of fact. if fishing areas. the love the fact is you get young women who were just so active, and a second thought about it. active because the law, there were treated equally. >> so fascinating, the rights and responsibilities came and protections came. many of them was really there at a formative time. people younger than you may take for granted from what you were a witness to the changes. and that is really worth -- women especially should read about the fights you had to wait on behalf of women.

i loved also an anecdote about your much revered senator of maine he gave us a speech called the declaration of conscience. june of 1950. a finance here. if a man had made the declaration of conscience you would have been the next president of the united states. and you mentioned in the book when you're talking about hillary rodham clinton who is an old friend, you've known her for years because her husband's served as governors together. they said baxter's other? >> the order in which the states came into union is having said. >> right. and it was so serendipitous. old friends and obviously kelly. >> guest: said that the united states is ready for a woman

president. i have to rescue, she is enviously the great hope of the democratic party and women you want her to run faugh. wrapping arab in any current benghazi, you know, and incitement. and you look at the future and that this country is ready, would you as a republican said it out if she ran? >> it's too far down the road to speculate, but i think that if hillary wanted to run she should run. i mean, she did set an extraordinary example of tall woman can run for public office. so that -- i think she broke down that barrier single-handedly.

highly talented and capable and smart. so if she chooses to do that to my think that many women will embrace, you know, her candidacy. i think the country's per to have a woman president. i think that by virtue of a factor when she was able to accomplish, i think it has dispelled any notion that a woman could not be prepared to me even though she did not win the primary, differences within the party. but by virtue of her candidacy in does she conducts herself that think she is basically eradicated any fears about how a woman would handle herself. >> many delightful anecdotes that i keep mentioning in the book. little nuggets for congress. one of my favorites that you devil so frequently and regularly, meant to reach other

which was so impressive. you actually done with female justices, something had never known before which i tull was really quite wonderful. what an honor. and that's about that that was -- that, you know, it's really another reason to delve in here, learning that only about the way things used to be but how much women look of regina and positions of power. your the form before shoes in the senate is a unique connection. so you have there is path to

unity and production, productive -- a productive future for the congress, diminished polarization in the future if some steps are taken. and you list them in the book. you have recommendations for a five day workweek and annual budget. at missouri, biennial budgeting ameristar in the process of getting to a budget which is so interesting. it means they have to leave the congress and get out of their own partisan. no budget, no pay. if there derelict in their duties in temecula to paycheck. filibuster reform, more open amendment process, no more secret holds on legislation. you can't throw up an emergency super committee sequester bill at the last minute.

everything would have to go back . and abolish pacs which made me chuckle because you're only one of five senators without one. i wanted to know, semi open primaries, a big believer myself. and commissions. i think it's important for americans to read your book, especially under chapter on all of these political -- the fix is kind of been on the system. if they don't have that redistricting and know about how few districts actually swing every election cycle and the 79 percent of us should not even get in the current is have already decided. this is really -- you have all the right ideas. wonder if you could share a little bit. you have a great anecdote, the congressman who left the house, back 32 years later.

thirty hours a week on fund-raising. ready you get the establishment, the incumbents, the crusty old system that might seem new but is now so senate and. brega you get them to throw away ? >> they signed a release, if everyone had to stand down on both sides of the aisle. and any changes on campaign finance reform would have to be a level playing field on both sides. that is what we had to work history. it is my provision that was struck down. but it was the evenhandedness. so both sides had to do it. that is one less level of financing, raising money. think about it. in the house of representatives, overwhelming. the have another avenue to give

money to candid it's head much higher levels. the point being, raising money for their own campaigns, they also have to raise money for their pacs because it is expected to you're going to raise so much money. >> if you want to be a power broker. you are expected to deliver. >> it takes so much time. it is another huge distraction. the issue when members of congress would be paid for speeches. so the whole schedule would revolve around the days in which they could go and give speeches and mondays and fridays. ultimately it came to the conclusion that we should ban this. hennin impact.

one last level of raising money because that is a huge time consuming effort, not to mention a distraction. >> you can watch this and the programs online. >> beginning at 7:00 p.m. eastern time we will hear from the attorney from rosa parks. he recounts his career and involvement. it 15

>> up next afterwards. this week emily miller and her first book, amelie gets her gun, but obama wants to take yours. in it the washington times columnist art is the obama administration has an entire second amendment agenda and plans to create a national gun registry with the ultimate purpose of confiscating firearms. this program is about an hour. >> i'm happy to be here with amelie miller. it describes what happens after you dec