>> the ability as a court to

function. it is designed to operate with nine justices as every member of the extreme case occurred when the justice resigned from the courts so his son ramsey would not have to face the issue but it demonstrates powerfully. but i really do think the justices should wrestle with a and embark on a course of conduct that eliminates this entirely. because of financial interest. if one becomes the justice of the court then i think there is a deal. it is the implicit deal to

order the financial affairs to conduct yourself as a justice and do your duty. there may come in times with one death in the family there may be a process but i would hope the justices would move to a system since they are not subject to the code of judicial conduct that has no authority over the supreme court of the united states so self regulation or heaven forbid congress getting into the session that you will decide every case of less you have the of a decade in or tom clark type of issue. even if this is in the budget conversation but the instrument was question no judge should is to decide

because of financial but what ever that it interest might be from doing their job. >> congress a few years ago passed a lot to enable all judges to divest themselves without adverse tax consequences applied since 1980 with a number of the justices said judges have done that into a conflict free account so that excuse may have motivated people. what it you do about your children? i think the justices will have come to an understanding and ever ready is uncomfortable because there are so many that is used to work tolerably well.

>> and another in 1974 that orders to reduce you had jeff one share forces ever cruz o a.m. to is the justices could divest but congress does bear some responsibility and there is a cost not just with a justice white's upper accusing but also where these rip accusal words go on they will fight and strategizing from the start to figure out the law firm for this is extremely and sealy that congress could

change the rules of. >> whenever a said judicial conference it does apply but they get the final word. >> we just want to ask each one or two questions. you talked about the majesty of the court to in the uniqueness of the supreme court. said justices when asked with the supreme court exceptional as some the accord is uniquely a political and an elected i'd like the other court and mike any other branch or a double of government the justices say we have a

unique court we don't want to mess and upper. mess it up. but in terms of they should exempt themselves civic do share the idea of the supreme court is exceptional with a very first supreme court case was guantanamo somebody alleged to be osama bin baden's driver with very high stakes. we won that case five / 3-d decision to hundred pages long i did not have time to read it but i came out on the steps of ruins said what does it mean? it means he could bring the lawsuit against the highest

man in the world as the bad guy ian still wind. in other countries he would have been shot and also the lawyer. [laughter] but that is what the supreme court is about with the ability to do something like that against popular sentiment but i do believe we should be careful when we start imposing solutions on them i agree with certain personalities of makes sense but if they feel the ability to ask questions that is something we have to take seriously. >> what you just said was applicable to every judge in this country. every court of law but then to plead the case did rely

on the rule of law. our adoption makes the judicial branch exceptional from the lowest court up through the highest and there are rules and regulations in expectations that apply to the experience with the core. with the consequences of the decisions handed down by the supreme court that saved exception alyssum is present in should be of every court room in the country. the ability one dash ability to access the court is important also access by our citizens to the court normally that is a party and

night understand that but i take the view of access to be broader. >> with the majesty of the cocked -- the court more generally in terms of a constitutional democracy among equals, to use the term in the first comments, ought inspiring, and i completely agree with that. but the conclusion therefore should not be greater transparency falls at all from the promise and the right question is it a constitutional democracy democracy, what is in the public interest? that is the focus the kinds of concerns lifted up that

really it is snippet phobia that has people concerned or a john stuart appearance there reasonable response is grow in extra layer of skin. [laughter] you have life tenure you are a public figure for you have the blessing that compensation cannot be reduced you have a life appointment that if reform proposal is not adopted you can serve until you reach the age of 92 if you live that long. nobody will force you to step down. so how about now you give something? you serve the public interest. many of you choose to write books. which you write books you

choose to go on a book tour. seven you are on the leading shows on television. you must view that as part of the public education process they have already crossed the bridge that flows from the majesty and all. but you're not the oracle at delphi telling us what the gods me. you are a very privileged person now can we have a conversation? your concerns boil down a personal embarrassment. that is a response to all school children would be denied the opportunity of their lifetime but the final

thing i will say is a life the area of debate looking to international law it is a katy said the but the supreme court of canada has done but the jury is in. it has work 20 years all these concerns it is a febrile and not well founded. perhaps they are worse civil in canada. [laughter] then go to the mother country they are not so simple in the house of commons but yet the new supreme court of the united kingdom does have cameras in the courtroom. it is a new work experience but it works just fine in other countries. so those experiences confirm with the chief justice said that the 50 state supreme courts at the end of the day the arguments of exceptional

as some does not carry with it greater transparency. >> the volume of cases that are filed in this country with 5% in the federal courts said you minimize that by the number that is actually heard by the u.s. supreme court and if it works in 95 percent of the other cases, and yet the supreme court level but also at varying levels to a certain extent of the trial court and the appellate court in 95 percent of the cases, those numbers or experiences alone offer justification or presume to believe that they should order the supreme court to do that.

not that one branch orders another to make this monumental cultural change. so the supreme court has evolved from the original conception for gender with any other progressive steps that were taken. this is just one more. >> that moment with three women took a curtain and took their place it was a moving image bank efficent moment. would it be wonderful for us all to see that? or if it was extraordinary when john paul stevens steps aside in the outpouring of affection and admiration for a great man but an enormous

affection for the man and his remarkable service to our country on the supreme court. we did not get to see that either. isn't that a shame? even the ceremonial part. let's at least have some of the ceremonies broadcast. >> when a portion of the justice kagan swearing in was broadcast. >> but it was not in the course. >> was in a conference room. >> they don't want to preach that wall. the chief justice o'connor you said congress should not tell the supreme court what to do on this. and one of the questions from the audience is how can congress help me move to

more transparency of the supreme court? to other panels think it should play a role? >> if there is to questions separation of powers a situation not so long ago took the view the papers were their own yet even though the taxpayers have paid for them and paid for the president's salary that they belonged to the president. congress stepped in as a result of the nixon impeachment and said no. those calling for word are not personal private papers. they are the papers of the people and they can be made public. that could be viewed as the infringement it was tried to

call it average rent of the separation of powers and the supreme court said no. you cannot do that. there is a minor problem i don't think there is a separate -- separation of powers as it said with of recusal statute but the enforcement problem is a a a little harder because they don't want to put in the cameras unless the president will send in troops. [laughter] but who knows what that response would be? but it seems hard to believe all these arguments are extremely persuasive it could be experience but the logic is on the side of having cameras in the court room it is hard to imagine

what the people would look like today it is hard to imagine anybody supporting it. >> i remember right justice scalia was sworn in and he said my question now is can i go to the home depot? without anybody knowing who i have? now he goes on television with other public appearances and also justice -- justice breyer so that they are in any way not known to the public is not the case anymore and if that is a problem they could focus the cameras as they do on the advocate i remember the first time i argue the case i cannot even find the camera.

the five is going to grandstand that would be a bad time. >> with congress mandating is a nonstarter it will not happen. so the real question is what can you do short of that? and if congress can pass resolutions that would urge the court to do the best to share their experience to be televised to bring that information in the confirmation hearings for with the nominees and what their views would be for development with respect this is a wonderful example to get to the heart of the issue to educate the public then the court that the

objections to not seem to be that big but they have the idiosyncratic personalities do we isolate our colleague? that is a hard set of questions. >> there is a great concept called but the fact we have this transition from i think i can persuade my fellow justices to embrace to that i am so teaming up with the illinois senior senator dick durbin in saying this needs to happen when you have

individual representatives coming to said judiciary by congressman from houston and a very well-known judge. it is a matter of focus and congress can manage. i would respectfully disagree with the heavens fall if congress passed a lot and it has been inconsistent but it is not a violation of separation of powers and if it is the law and the supreme court of the united states would obey the law. richard nixon obeyed the law and it is a lot of the united states that you have to send in the marshalls or whoever tuz said judiciary but send in the appropriate folks to affect this too

extravagant to maintain the court will obey the law but hopefully through imaging, a gentle nudging and focusing on what is in the public interest, what do we need in the light of civic education or accountability, why don't you do yourselves? >> there has been a couple questions again whether the congress should adopt a require the supreme court to adopt a code of conduct. one questioner put it as every federal judges subject to a code of conduct except nine. should they be subject to such a code? >> we don't have that

distinction in the state court our state court decisions are subject to the same code of conduct as lower court but i am not sure what the rationale would be except that the also a just say some of the complaints leveled those that have spent politically berated. so we're in a better place finding ourselves to a disciplinary process it may very well be that the political ramifications argue in support of the nine members not doing something because of the of this use

of those colds -- coats are rules are the potential for that to happen. >> another question of chief justice o'connor are there and administrative burdens or issues to maintain the public electronic access in do you have any security concerns of the access given on your web site? i know security has been raised with u.s. supreme court justices as well as a concern. i don't know if the issue of cost or administrative burden is then issue.

>> i don't believe that would be with the hardware or software or the maintenance would be prohibited it is not within the ohio supreme court we have a sophisticated system. when you say security to they've been hacking that would change the content of our opinions? i have to tell you that would not happen we are secure of access of those details. the other security aspect which would be with justice scalia he could not go to the local hardware store. are you a recognizable face in your community or across the country? in some way should you be concerned about that? but with anybody who is a public servant or figure the

way those are dealt with even now the justice department as well as federal members have extensive security operations with their appearances that is not what the experience is with the state court judges or members of the supreme court. technologically i am not worried about security or a breach certainly not the cost they don't need to reinvent the wheel there is technology apart rare and software but personal security, when you are out and about i don't know if it is any more of an issue than is now based putting themselves in the public eye through interviews or book tours that would not get

much more attention. >> a question about the public perception about the court. i thank you said showing that the approval rating that there is a decline in public approval. in the greater access help or hurt the court? the more the public sees of the court. >> of the public sees what

is going on they will not like it so we should not allow them to see it means if they don't like it that is why they should see it. i about sure that is right but i do think if i were able to talk to the justices i would say the legitimacy is that you have a great story to tell that everyone should see. i can understand from their perspective all they can do is be stewards of this great institution that they could own the best set up and then to try to explain that why it is not so to bring the empirical evidence but it is not an easy sell. >> every advocate that appears before the court at least more than once with

say the court works beautifully in the process is the impressive process. >> also with the decision is pending. [laughter] the court works brilliantly there has a tumor and lightness with an end to seriousness and it is a very serious process that was described a very respectful quality. you're not sitting there reading greed ac and ham -- green a6 -- green eggs and

ham. >>. [laughter] >> but those polls a question is more important than the answer. >> but the unanimity that exist on the court were almost 50 percent of the decisions each year are unanimous in did you take a super majority it is a 20 or 2554 decisions those discussions would divide people in the audience and it is not surprising to use my flag-burning example the people of goodwill will have different interpretations. unfortunately now it is all

political but it is not. it is deeply philosophical for sure the lens through which the justice goes about their work but they are professionals that agree on the process they may not agree on the methodology and they are very open and transparent. they write books but the work of the court is so deeply misunderstood that and least the cameras will be beneficial calling for word. >> adding one thing to that you're absolutely right if there is a characterization of the court, it is in terms of a political characterization. with the public disagrees with the opinion does not go past with the optimism mower looked at the discipline that is utilized to get to

that. that is where the media comes in. stop characterizing characterizes of justices as republican a democrat. >> we call them liberals and conservatives. [laughter] i am glad we straightened that out. >> but when you attach a political fable to a justice or the judge said happened so often for a while we were the of republican supreme court now we have a democrat. had has been unfortunate for the journalist but i really think it is not a responsible way to identify members by attaching a political label. it does a disservice and adds confusion. >> in much of my practice is

representing businesses we have been talking about the american public should see this but the business community general counsel has the position in the liberal justice against this for the conservative is for us but most business cases are nine salacious hero and if the business community could see the arguments it would change the dynamics in should there be a supreme court press pool when they travel? >> the exciting trips to take a class a absolutely. [laughter] everyone would eat that up. >> you should be required. >> with the press pool the analogy is for a long time in our nation's history president's went out and had

dinner in did fund-raisers and no one was there. but changed when president reagan was sought -- shot now there is a pool that travels were every gigots town combination, the world's. to have a pool cover all of the nine justices, granted they don't all travel at the same time i just can imagine it would be logistically that people would want to do but how much would produce material that would be useful? >> i will take the trips to italy. [laughter] but with that we must end. if this program serves as the and edging tool that is great. it has been a great discussion. thank you very much. [applause]

>> host: joining us from daschle is president and ceo is the liberty commission for the seven baptist convention. what does your title means? >> that i'd be dead organization for the churches to think through ethical and moral issues todd reid grapple with what the bible says and also to speak in the public square in washington and around the country on behalf of the convictions that we hold where things that we think are necessary. >> host: you are relatively new in this position replacing richard the land that was on this program

several times and there was a profile in "the wall street journal" recently that said evangelical leader preaches a pullback from politics and culture wars. you have recently launched issues that accurate? >> it was inaccurate and missing the word against evangelical leader preaches against a pullback but a priority. when i am concerned about is i see a generation of evangelicals that are disaffected from political engagement many want to walk away which i think would be a terrible error. the reason they want to walk away from it is they have lived in the secularizing society understanding the importance of the gospel with the scripture says is the first importance. with christ speaking of mercy and reconciliation so

many say let's concentrate on that not consider ourselves as politics. but i say we cannot make that choice. we have to be concerned such as abortion and sex trafficking and pornography but within the standing and how it motivates that action not those that disagree as ever enemy but as those that we are through the reconciliation to the blood of christ the mission of the church as ambassadors of reconciliation and our

responsibility standing in the public square causing justice and righteousness. has settled theologian karl henry used to say. we believe of both justice a and justification of a god who says this is the way be schaede walkie of the god offers mercy and reconciliation. when the younger generation sees the fact that gospel motivates us to love our neighbors and speak including when it wasn't possible -- improper we just do not want to vent the of rage but instead to speak to the neighbors to say we love you and want to see you reference aisle five. >> host: mr. moore what do you thank you hear culture war. >> guest: different things to different people.

to say that culture matters tuesday and firm to have the ongoing conversation about what is best for our neighbors in our country. but we need to have that conversation. but if that means we are pitted against one another as mortal enemies in a shouting match that i don't think culture wars are the way to go the scripture tells us we have a battle, we have a war but not flesh and blood which means we need to have a long-term view of where we are going that the people who disagree right now not that we seek to vaporizes the arguments but to persuade better created in the image of god and

ultimately we want to see embraced the love of god and this is a mercy that we have received. that does not mean we don't have spirited conversation or debate because the issues at stake are very significant and important but we must always connect those issues backed to the central theme and that god reconciles cinders to himself through the blood of jesus christ. the best example in contemporary life is with the pro-life movement. one would have thought 40 years ago if they said in a time machine what will the pro-life movement be? i think many people would have said there will not be one. abortion will be accepted and it will all be over. but it is as vibrant and

active as ever. if you go to the march for life in washington there are young people, a diverse crowd standing for the wives of the unborn. why is that? we have a joyful positive message was a means to care for the unborn neighbors and to understand not only are they harmed by abortion by women and men who have a conscience that is deeply hurt and damage to. women in crisis pregnancies the evangelical movements are ministering to. care for orphans and those children and women who don't have anywhere else to turn. is a joyful optimistic movement connected to the gospel in resonates with the

yogurt generation of evangelicals. that is a good model to follow. >> host: dr. russell mort the ordained southern baptist minister "the wall street journal" profiled him a couple days ago. he has written a response to be blood to have him on to explain his response due to talk about the role of politics in religion and how they combine and we will begin with a call from new york on the democratic line. >> caller: my personal major question is which comes first? the question is whether or not you believe that the churches following the doctrine of the constitution of the united states or it follows an self and not

merely -- deserve the the constitution? >> we believe the church answers to the lordship of jesus christ fed is what we originally managed by the separation of church and state for those that have been coopted but the government doesn't have any business how to run the spiritual matters we believe in the free church in a free state but we also don't believe it imposes itself upon the rest of society we believe in religious liberty for everybody and it is not because we believe all viewpoints are equal rethink some things are true or false but we believe jesus

christ is the way bill becomes to the father but threw him. people disagree with us but we don't seek to coerce them but we seek to persuade them to believe that because we believe the gospel that we hold has the power of god and the salvation. big enough to fight for itself. we want jeffrey marketplace protected by the constitution that people come with the values they hold the police and principals to stand together it seek to persuade one another with his zeal to importance. >> host: dr. more in the "wall street journal" article you said religious conservatives should not be at mascot for any political party. is that an accurate quotation? >> with every age every

group in the church must be willing to work with our political allies but also to keep a skeptical distance from our political allies we are willing to work with politicians with an unborn human life and religious liberties and human rights to recognize that politicians are politicians. we work with them but don't embrace them as the messiah. we already have what he does just fine. , as long as we keep that priority in place we can work together in the public square.

they say to the politicians of the day we wanted written down in the constitution with jefferson and adams we should have the sense sense of cooperation in then to be willing to work together where we can't. >> host: dr. moore attitudes of gay marriage is changing. edward tweets where do you stand on homosexuality or gay marriage? >> as evangelical christian i believe sexuality is only to be expressed within marriage and marriage is defined as the union of one

man or one woman before life. that is what the scripture teaches and i think that is what every human civilization has recognized also the state's cannot define or we define marriage to just recognize is what it is. having said that it does not mean we hate our gay and lesbian neighbors or think they are evil out there in america in society. we love them we just disagree on what marriages. we disagree on sexual morality. we seek to speak that but i think that attitudes in american culture are changing it is true for the courts are changing the way they articulate this but i don't think when one thinks

or looks at the evangelical younger generations that those are changing at all there has been data that shows evangelical young people our more committed in the biblical understanding of marriage. with the divorce culture many of them have lived through the wreckage of that we need to speak about what marriage is a and what matters that marriage is a public good how we function as a society. moves to disagree to continue to love in this of

the that we can redefine. >> host: columbus to jersey please go ahead with your question. [applause] in good morning. my comment is while i'll a feel for christian science pointed you, i have the issue with them trying to force issues that they believe even if it is a different religion. lobbying the government to keep abortion out of the lives of other people but not everybody will follow that type of lifestyle. the bible also speaks of free will. that we will do what we will

do. i don't think it is up to the christians a lot of people who call themselves christians are not just in name only and i see that with the republican party they value the life of the child when it gets here that alan to teaching or feet or care for it can you expand. >> guest: this same argument could be used about slavery white you impose your religious views on the us just let us continue to continue slavery. that person would have been wrong because those who were speaking to the evangelicals christian said no don't know you do have the right because you are not the only one involved there is

another human being created in the image of god not that we want to impose our views about what we believe about religion but it that the child is created in the image of god this is a person and they have rights we would say we don't believe anyone can impose on that child the deprivation of his life liberty & topics on page pursuit of happiness. it is not true to say pro-life care only until it is board -- born. i was speaking to one organization to put did not only to actively working against abortion but seeking to persuade women but also a job training for moms into crisis, a ministry to single

mothers financially and child-care and helping those children going forward and to make adoption plans priscian people and pro-life people we have been criticized with the unborn children in the womb for the reasons to reject when we care by ministering to unwed mothers then criticized by saying you just try to be vandalized you cannot that the bible calls us in their discretion -- distress we care about everybody regard

this are not that person is seen by the outside society has been valuable to have a sense of peacefulness everybody has worth and dignity. >> host: alabama on the republican line. >> caller: i am right here. just sitting here listening to russell moore and applauding him what an excellent spokesman we have. i am a christian roman catholic evangelical. we join him and against the global war on christians there is a do both just on that topic fifth he covers that topic but i called about ted cruz probably the

single most heartening person i have seen on our national scene in 30 years. he is being pillared and drawn and quartered and called offensive names names, ridiculed by consistently he is the bright spot today for all christians and america. i am hoping we can get behind him and support him. >> host: reverent more is that something you have an opinion on? >> what we would have an opinion we ought not to ridicule people in the public square we need a level of civility that we have multiple viewpoints and that nastiness and vitriol that we see3 that nastiness and vitriol that we see directed to public go places -- public officials. that is not the way we ought to operate in civil society. >> host: what about the health care law? have you taken a position on

that? >> guest: we are very concerned about the affordable care act as it relates to religious liberty specifically to abortion and the contraceptive mandate. we have assemble a coalition as the caller from alaska mentioned includes roman catholics in southern baptist together also a broad coalition that might add ever be in the same room together or agree on anything that we agree the government ought not to improve -- go with those that are against their conscience with the abortion causing drug czar as relates to contraception. this is why you have the multi friend to engagement. we are in the courts, we are in congress talking about this because we believe religious liberty is a good

such as yourselves but all people but the government to say we can run over your conscience when we went to for the sake of health care is a government that is big enough to run over any one's conscience for any reason. this is of absolute importance and with all the threats to religious liberty going on right now, the hhs mandate is one fiery rafter of a burning house in the multi front conversation to say we believe and liberty of conscious -- conscience in the affordable care act is a disaster. we have been working asking viewed ministration working with legislators to handstanding behind those going to court to address that. >> host: in results of the

profile it was written he appears to be coopted by the side of young evangelicals into moral relativism by the republican party elite that once the g.o.p. to back off hot-button cultural issues. he seems to a forgotten christ has not called us to be nice but good. nice people never confronting evil but the good people do. >> guest: he has not called us to be nice people but kind. he has called us to be conventional and kind people who love those who are around us even when we're standing up for what we believe in, we stand up as those who offer redemption or reconciliation for christ. while it is necessary to stephen strongly for

conviction, exactly what i do. i of the pro life, a pro marriage, home schooling father of five that is devoted to religious liberty combating the pornography into force culture inside and outside the church but i believe the ultimate goal is not simply a more moral a miracle. but if that is very stop we end up with help. we need a gospel of a crucified in resurrected jesus christ that welcomes the cinders to be joined to his tribe and i believe we need an optimistic optimistic, hopefully understanding where the kingdom of god is coming. we are not losers who should cringing in fear or denting outrage. . . . .

>> caller: it's like peeling an union. i'm curious as to your views on spiritualty versus religion. if i torp go a church and sit and listen to the preacher, and i didn't agree with his view but i would raise my hand and request what he said. most people going to the churches sit on the hands and listen to the guy and take him for what he says.

and it just seems to me you nut a box and you just want to be in the box and bring people to the box and not allow people to have the diverse viewpoint of what you're trying to -- >> host: all right. thank you. i think we got the point. russell moor? >> guest: well, i would say you probably would think that by my asserting my truth claim i'm seeking to oppose my religion on you. i would say that you're perhaps seeking to impose your religion upon me. if what '02 suggesting that every religion ultimate lo is the same thing. we all believe the same thing. let be quiet about that. that's a religious viewpoint but it's not my religious viewpoint. it's not the religious viewpoint of millions or billions of people around the world who believe these things really do matter. it really does matter what we

believe about god, what we believe about life, about what we believe about reconciliation. i don't want to impose my views on you. i want to have a television with you. and i want to seek to persuade you they matter. i want to hear from you. i want to have the sort of free society where i am willing and free to have a conversation about what i believe about the gospel of jesus cris. if my muslim neighbor is willing and free about what she or she believes about islam and the whole gamete of things. religious liberty isn't about christians standing for our right and our rights alone. religious liberty means religious liberty for everybody. which means believe the state has no business cohearsing the conscious of anyone and the church doesn't have any interest in coarsing the conscious of anyone. we don't want people to be

cohearsed in to signing up for the christian faith because that wouldn't be christianity. an old baptist speech -- preacher said it can make hypocrites but it can't make believers. that's what i believe to be truth. we need an open, free society in the public square. we doesn't mean we say all viewpoints are equally true and we ought to shut down the conversation. >> host: the next call for the reverend dr. mussel moore comes from mary ann in massachusetts. >> caller: hi. thank you for taking my call. i'm calling from massachusetts. the commonwealth of massachusetts, and first of all, just about the affordable care act we've had it working here fine for many year now. in the beginning the first couple of years, yes, there were bumping, you know, everybody had a lienal -- little bit of sticker shock.

years down the road it's working fine here. i ask everybody to be patient. it's a good law. nobody, not one of my family or friends anybody has ever complained about it. >> is that all you've got? >> caller: no, i have something else to say. >> host: very quickly. >> caller: real quick. here in montana -- massachusetts i appreciate our state is very tolerant of our fellow citizen. 20 years ago, my daughter's first grade teach was married to her second grade teacher. that might come as a shork to a lot of people in the nation. i tell you what, the teachers were wonderful. i won't change a thing. i would do it all over again. her gay dollar, so to speak, didn't go up. she's fine. >> host: do you feel that reverend moore's group is

intolerant? >> caller: i do. >> host: why? >> caller: because i don't -- the thing about government is that government is fire all people. the government represents everybody not just one particular point. >> host: all right. we've got your point, i think. russell moore, would like to respond? >> guest: we all agree on some limit. we are agree there certain relations that the government thought recognize and doesn't. the government doesn't license us have friendship. the government doesn't license us in all sort of very important relationships we have. why does the state recognize marriage. why is it something significant and important? and the caller and i would have a disagreement about what that means. about what marriage is about. what the purpose of marriage is. i hardly think it's intolerant for two people in a free society to disagree about something. i think i intolerance, instead,

would be for minute to say since you don't representative what massachusetts believes you shouldn't talk. that sounds intolerant to me. i think we're in a situation in this country where we can have a conversation, we can disagree. we can seek to persuade one another about these things. i think that's where we are. >> host: joe tweets in ask about pope francis calling religious intolerant an illness. also, what about some of the pope's recent pronouncements you've been reading? >> well, i'm not sure because it seems that every time pope francis speaks there are 50 different interpretations what he said. i can understand that. i understand that happens. i like pope francis. i like much of what he's doing. i think the tone and -- bringing to the vatican is a good thing.

i al think that the emphasis he's giving on the church as a home for broken people something resonates evangelical christians. that's what believe as well. we believe in rescuing the parishing, gearing for the dying is our old heim put it. i'm not sure what the pope mean on some other areas. for instance, when he says that -- it is solemn nonsense. i have many catholic friends who say what he means they be is simply moving people from one church to the other. if that's what he means. that's one thing. if what he means is there's not a mandate to seek to say to people salvations found in jesus chris and press it. i find it very troubling. i don't know i'm not sure. the issue for propose francis. this is not his fault is that he really doesn't have the sort of

seability -- assessability give a clarify indication what he's said. i'm willing to extend some charity here and to say i think time will tell exactly what he mean by that. i do think that propose francis is not wishing to depart from the fundamental dogma of the catholic church in my way. that's what all of my catholic friends tell me. i think he's bringing a sense of freshness and humility to the vatican dealing with some of the problems that are there. so i wish him well. obviously i'm a prod protestant evangelical. i don't fall under the authority of the vatican. i wish him well. i think his voice and place in history very important. i'm cheering him on so far as i can. >> host: next call for russell moore coming from julius on the

republican line in hollywood, florida. hi. >> caller: good morning. how are you doing? >> host: please, go ahead, sir. >> >> caller: okay. my question [inaudible] we used to have the ten commandments up. somebody had the antiten commandments. this is every human being everybody society. you have so much disrespect about parents or authority. the dpip mat -- they belong but -- [inaudible] so much disrespect that now. i think it's business propose we encourage everybody to respect god -- people are killing innocent baby in the apportion clinic.

[inaudible] 12 or 13 there's a conclusion of the whole -- [inaudible] >> host: thank you, julius. reverend moore? >> caller: i obviously think the ten commandments are critically important. the law of god is critically important. i also think what is necessary to be able to obey the law of god in the fullnd is the new birth. and the spirit that comes from cris and so what i would like to see is to call on all of us not only to be obedient to the law written in the heart to do those things for good of neighbor and society. but more than that. i would want to say all of us are lawbreakers. we need something to reconcile us to god. i think what something is not a

something but a someone. it's yous fied and resurrected man who offers faith. >> host: when did you decide you wanted to be a baptist minister? >> guest: very early on. i was probably 12 years old and started to feel the call to preach the gospel. then i walked awhile for awhile. after time the lord wouldn't let go of that. and continued to tug at my heart in that direction. >> host: there's a new pugh poll out. it's americans nationwide that people who think that gay marriage is a sin has dropped from -- it's down 33%. it's down one-third. are you seeing people leave the church because they disagree

with the baptist church on gay marriage? >> no. what i am seeing is a cultural change in america where nominal christianity is no longer able to stand. there have a time in american christianity where being a part of a church seemed to be a social good. it made you steam to be a good person. it enabled do you do better. in one's career. and all all of the sort of thing. think about television, there was a time when television sitcoms families were shown going church. it was also nondescript. they are going to church. those days are changing in america. but the assumption that nominal christianity as being a part of a church is a good thing what it's being replaced with is a vibrant authentic gospel-centered sort of christianity that doesn't

confuse i.t. with just normal american life. it comes and says believe in something that is truly radical in the sense that it's startling. we believe that dead man has come back to life and he's every right to be lord over live. which is why one of the reason you see such vibrant sincerity on college campuses and among those in the younger generation. who are embracing cris. they have seen everything else. they have seen the empty promises of just chasing more and more money. and they're ready to go back to something very, very old. something that is very, very new. ping that is changing in american christianity. i think it's good news for the gospel and church. >> host: jennifer in connecticut. >> caller: yes, i would like to know who you think my sigh ya

is? >> host: what do you mean by your question? >> caller: he said he knew the messiah. i wondered who he or she was? >> guest: u i believe it's jesus of has ruth. i believe jesus was god incarnate. i believe jesus, as the bible put, all the promises of god in him and the amen in him. i believe that he was crucified for our sins. i believe he was raised from the dead. and i believe that he ultimately is the ruler of the entire erg. what i believe when i say jesus is the messiah or the christ. i personally would have no hope in this world i know who i'm i am. i know, who i am. hidden in christ and covered

with the blood of christ, i receive mercy and reconciliation before god. that's what we as christian call the gospel of good news. god is able to receive us and take us back as beloved children. >> host: karen in stanford, connecticut. karen, please, ged. >> caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. can you hear me? >> host: we're listening, madam. >> caller: thank you. i agree with some of the things you talked about this morning. i'm a born again believer. praise god! i'm grateful for god saving my soul. a couple of things i really want to say is you talked about affordable care act and you seemed to say it was terrible. a lot of people in the country need good health care. and i have not read all of the act -- [inaudible]

that talk about -- [inaudible] that your group may not agree with. let's not talk about it in full term. throw the whole thing away. the majority of people and not just -- [inaudible] >> host: we have to leave it there. i'm sorry we're running out of time. itit was back to health care, reverend. >> guest: i can't we say we ignore the egregious violation of religious liberty and accept the nart are good. it's a key aspect of the act. it has enormous implication for the religious liberty of all americans, present and future. and so i think we have to advocate to that. we also have to say, yes, we need work on health care policy in this country. i think that's something that everybody, conservatives and liberals, agree on. i think we need get our heads

together and come up with something that is just, fair, and right. that will actually will address the real problems we have in country. we don't need to do that in a they is going run over the consciouses and the liberty and the freedom of the american people. >> >> host: the last call coming from walter in florida. >> caller: hi. good morning. i have a question that i think a lot of religious people are concerned about abortion, and we three respondent use abortions and three or four children. i choired more about whether i would have four children or five children. and nobody seems to to be concerned about it. the thing i'm concerned about is war. i'm a war and have not voted for

bush since all the wars. i think we would not have had 9/11 had we not had the gulf war. to go and kill people that are alive vane brothers and sisters and million people went off to turkey [inaudible] >> host: walter, are you still with us? >> caller: yes. i'm hearing somebody else's voice. i believe that war is much, much worse than some young girls that makes a mistake and decides to take a morning after bill, and then she may then have a family later with of a husband that she can choose and not have to worry about a child being brought up without money, without father -- >> host: there is a lot there on the table. let get a response. >> caller: well, as a christian, i believe that war is

permissible under certain very circumscribed situations. laid out in scripture and the christian tradition. we don't believe in warring against innocent people. there are some wars that would be just wars and some wars that would be unjust wars. as a christian, i would say world war ii that's a war wort fighting. we fight it in a they is honorable and fighting against the enemy and not against innocent nonexat assistant. when it comes to abortion, what is happening is a war against innocent noncombatant. that's an issue. christians disagree over whether or not a particular war is just or unjust whether or not we ought to fight here or there. look at the debate we had recently over syria. should we go in to syria or not. it would be just or unjust? but taking the life of an innocent, noncombatant human person is just wrong.

>> host: finally, reverend moore sasha tweets in. why did jimmy carter leave your group the southern baptist convention >>? >> guest: i think when one looks back many of our people were disallusioned that president carter was taking the country. many believed in him because of his personal piety. because his church membership, because of his relationship with christ. but then when they saw the direction the country was going in his administration, when it came to issues of abortion and family and other things, they saw someone who if not line up with what nay believed. >> host: to take it where we started. the "the wall street journal" did a profile of you couple of days ago. what did you think of the article? was it accurate? >> guest: well, i don't think the article didn't quite capture

what is really going on here. and the article seemed to signal retreat when in fact what we're calling for is not retreat but onward and on ward with a gospel center focus. they aren't able to understand that and see what we mean when we say having a priority of the gospel of the kingdom means more engagement not less engagement. just a different kind of engagement and a different tone of engagement. as i understand that. and i also think there's human nature even in a local congress gretion when one pastor leaves and a new comes inspect what people ought to know what is different about the new guy from the old guy. i think sometimes it's easy to exaggerate those sort of differences. that's human nature. >> host: as always, we appreciate you being on the "washington journal." >> guest: good to be with you. thank you for having me. on the next "washington

journal". the just hours after the japanese attack on pearl harbor and before her -- was on the radio talking with america. >> good evening. i'm speak to you to be the at the very serious moment in our history. the cabinet is convening and the leaders in congress are meeting with the president. the state department and the navy officials are meeting with the president all afternoon. in fact, the japanese ambassador

was talking to the president at the very time that japan's air ships were bombing our citizens in hawaii and the philippine and sinking one of our transport loaded with lum we are on beneficiary lumber on the way to hawaii. by tomorrow morning the member of congress will be ready for action. in the meantime, we the people, are already prepared for action. for month now the knowledge of something of this kind might happen has been hanging over our heads and yet seemed impossible to believe. impossibled to drop the everyday things of life and feel there was only one thing which was important: preparation to meet an enemy no no matter where he strike. that's all over now. there is no more uncertainty. we know what we have to face. and we know that we are ready to face it. watch our program on eleanor

roosevelt. see it saturday on c-span at 7:00 p.m. eastern. we continue the series live monday as we look at first lady beth truman. ?rncht talking about the childhood in farmton, west virginia, his family political history and his own career. this is a half hour. democrat of west virginia. you are a true west virginia native. >> guest: absolutely. through and through. >> farming ton is where i really was raised and grew up. spent all of my childhood until i went to college. >> host: brothers and sisters? >> i have two brothers and two sister. there's five of us. in my family there's 20 of us raised really close together. very short distant and my

grandparents were mom ma k and. a pa. it was a may berry. >> what your parents like? did you talk politics grow up. >> politics was a big part of our life. it was not something i desired to be. i enjoyed being tarpd. i think in '47 or '48. he was elected. he was at least 20 years old. he had to be 21 to serve. he turned 21 so he would be legal to serve. he was one of the famous civil rights bake before. and he was defeated on that issue. he didn't think there should be two sets of books. one for black and one for white. they defeated him on that. back in 1950.

i had served with robert byrd. family was always very much involved. i never forget i had to 10 years old to worked in the grocery store. we to work there. i heard just a -- all the racket and arguing back and forth, and i went back there and there was robert byrd and my grandfather discussing the bible. different part of the bible true meanings. my grandpa stopped in the middle of the dialogue and said i want you to meet him. he's run for the senate. that was many years ago. as you can imagine. anyway, the campaign changed our family because of john kennedy making west virginia a battle dwrownd. we were catholic, and knowing it was going to be a big part of the election.

could he break the religious barrier. i never thought there was a barrier in my little town. everybody works in the coal mines and my father and grandfather had a grocery store and furniture store. i never thought religion of a friend. my methodist friends or baptist friends. we were all the same. anyway, that was a big thing. it got me -- i'll never forget. one night we were watching the news or something. they were talking about this if john kennedy got elected the pope would run the country. i looked at my mom and said i don't think they know the catholics they know. and so with that being said, that was put to rest. my uncle became a big part of the john kennedy group. hef really big and him and teddy were good friends.

the president wanted him to teach teddy to speak as well as he could. he said brother you're in charge of little brother ted do you make sure he has the oratory skills. it's in some of the books if you read the memoir. he wanted teddy to imdate to make him feel good. i saw young vivacious president. all i can remember was eisenhower before that. hef more of a grandfather figure. like to play golf and that's all i knew. i got a scholarship playing football and i went up there and met my wife. we were married there. but i got her playing ball. then my fathers and parents

burned down. we lost everything. the coal mine blew up in 1960. it happened in a short period of time. we had 58 minders blown up in that lost their live more than 50 still are entomed. my uncle john was one of the fatalities there. you see, i grew up in the coal understanding the real challenges we have. but also the opportunities that provided. my next growing up was -- harry dun mar. i was 7 years old. harry used to play ball with me across the street. one night he didn't come home and his wife -- i said when is he coming home? the mine just blew up. and pinchy is going to be late tonight, honey. two or three days went by and she's probably trying to figure

out how to tell the 7-year-old boy he's not coming home. i don't recall that. i really do that. fast forward. the same house was on the cutting machine he got blown up. my parent's neighbor. so this is all part of who we are. then you fast forward got involved. i was always in business. >> i want to come back to a couple of points. the 1960 campaign. west virginia was a protestant state. kennedy's win was significant. did you see him campaign? did you work for him? >> no. i was only -- i was 13 years of age. i'll never forget one day i was in the basement we lived in a garage apartment. i have in the base board on the go cart. my mom kept saying i want you to meet some people.

i'm thinking, mom, i'm dirty and greasy. i want do you -- of it the kennedy brothers. bobby and teddy and they were having spaghetti getting involved and the excitement the whole race got the whole state involved. it really did. it was turning point. not just for them but us. our car was in the parade. we were rode of that. in 1958 convertible chef lay, white, red interior. i remember that. kennedy road in that. my dad told us about taking him around. uncle jimmy would travel with him all the time. and come and share the stories with us. so i was kind of involved once removed, if you will.

from a complete culture. the assassination. do you remember where you were there that friday morning? >> it was afternoon by the time i heard. i just come off of lunch we were going in to english class. i was a junior in high school. i got my driver's license. in august i became 16. i was just walked in to class and our teacher walked in. mr. matthews was also on our coaches on.

my father was working for the ken i did. everybody was there. and just -- my grandfather said we have to go washington. well, you know, me at 16 had my license. i volunteered to drive. he had a '58 cadillac. we piled in. i me, my uncle, my grandfather, and my cousins. there were seven or eight of us. we drove to washington and my sister was working in washington living in arlington, so we got here and my grandfather said i have to go to the casket. he stands in line all night long to pay home imagine to the president. i can remember little kids if you ever see picture on pennsylvania avenue.

you'll see kids hanging in trees. it was probably us. we couldn't see. every time i visited my sister i would got graver to say a paper. it was easy to walk to the cemetery. the president's grave was right there and the flame was there. i would say a prayer and bless myself and go on. one day security was everywhere. i thought something happened. the crowds became more than just letting everybody just walk -- they had to have some kind of order to this visit that happened a few years after. >> did we change as a country after the assassination? >> any my eyes i did. i'm a 16-year-old junior in high school. i didn't feel as safe as

before. for some reason, you grew up in the most peaceful time the country has ever seen after world war ii. i was born in '47. up until vietnam, you know, korea war escaped. i was too young to realize what was going on there. it was a very easy and good time in america. all a sudden it was like the world shattered. in a few years we had martin luther king and you felt the country was really not -- it wasn't as cohesive as farmington was. let's put it that way. it's a different place out there. >> let me ask you about your parent. you mention the businesses they ran. >> my parents basically.

her parents. they were both born. they were born here. both parents, my grated to america both of them six miles apart. both of them had a little grocery store. my father, when we got out of the service in '46 started a furniture story besides the gauche i are store. we grew up in the retail business. i said in politics, it's retail. it's retail politics. retail politics simply knowing who your customer is. and making sure they're satisfied. good value and great service. you live and die by the satisfaction the customer. i took the same approach to government. i was 35 years old. i was in business awful long.

that was 10 years old with my grandpas. i learned this. my -- my mother and father and grandparents and aunt and uncles is who i am. the thing people don't know we grew up in an area we have tracks on the railroads tracks ran where the coal came out of the coal mine and we have a buffalo creek. all of us little kid. every time the train whistle blew my grandmother went insane. we would ride the train up to town. if she would have known that it would have drove her crazy. the train provided the -- it's what we lived with. my grandma was the most --

-- she was a social. if niche needed a place to stay they come in. she made us kids conscious of our social responsibility. she a shower, basement, not much. but she shared. we all the different people who ride the rails back in the '50s. a lot of people were riding the rails, if you know what i mean. we had name ever everybody. >> would your name be? >> we used to have name for people that stayed with grandmother. she would give them three rules. they had to be sober. you had to stay sober. i have too many little kids here. i'll feed you, take care of you. you can't swear. you can't cry. you have to work. it's a good example.

so i thought people had nothing but they loved our rules. you had do something. i had grandpa said to work no eat. i fund very well. when i see people down and out i say do something. some people need a a little bit of help. they made something of their life. i saw young girls that got pregnant out of wedlock and they left their house because parent threw them out. they would come to our house. i would come home and see her having lunch with the -- she got them back together went back home. they had a little baby the most productive kid in the world. i have seen it all. i am who i am because of where i'm from the environment i grew up in the family i was in. you ran for governor once. why did you lose? what did you learn? >> i didn't do a good job. i don't think i did good enough

job explaining who i was and what i thought the state could be and how we were going change the state. and basically polarizing come from business. i grew up in a labor town -- [inaudible] i didn't project it properly. when it was over, i knew one thing. i never lower house a race before that. my son was with me. i said honey we won a lot of race. i'm honored to be serving people and they've had a lot of confidence. tonight isn't going to be our night. said t easy to win. now so you to show a little class. i watched people walk out and want to blame everybody. there's only one person's name on the ballot. that's yours. if you can't tame blame for what went wrong. i never blamed nobody. i blamed me for not selling the idea i had for the state. and i lower house that

election. and then after that i thought -- i did all i could now i'll go back and get back in business and enjoy the private life with wife, three children, grandchildren. we had eight now with with that i was enjoying that. then i got pulled back in and pulled back in with some of of the people who worked against me a defeated in me in 1996. they thought they made a mistake. they would like to work with me. i said fine i want to work with you too. i probably made more mistake. >> let me ask you about your uncle killed in a mining accident. as governor you had two significant accidents. what did you take away from your personal experience to what happened as governor of west virginia? i had three 2006. three weeks later we had one.

i said it before nobody gives you a manual when you become governor. you rely on everything you ever experienced you've ever had. everything you learned and you rely 0 tennessee. you really dug deep in to your words. the thing i knew i remember flashback to -- uncle john was my mother's brother. younger brother. very low to us. he borrowed my gun to go hunting right before he got killed in the mine and slipped and fell.

i remember everyone waiting for news. sometimes sat for a day and never hurt thing. to me that's really what is hurtful and cruel. i always thought if i was in a fogs give trofl people there's ways to do it. and information was one. anything you have heard. if you have any questions ask us. if i don't have any appses i'm find out. i can find out. i want do you have the fact. i'm not going to talk to the press until i -- talk to the family. i knew -- i learned that basically from watching my mother and aunt.

it was so dangerous. i learned from that. i figured there was way. i knew one thing, the family depend on the paycheck. if i can do anything as a governor, i'm going to sit down with a people who are the owners of the mines and say i'm going to ask you to do one thing. never miss a paycheck. if yo u want to compound the problem we have now, the family can't take care of itself through the most difficult time until we can get it straightened out. you have to continue a paycheck as if nothing happened. we were -- i knew that. >>. >> you could have never learned that. no one could have taught it to you. >> is it safer today to be a

mine ensure. >> absolutely. we're getting safer. i said if you can't mine it safe continue mine -- don't mine it. hank the taken the approach. they can shut the mine down. you've heard other situations if a person try stop a shift or shut a mine down they would be fired. that's what have to change. that has has to be changed. i think it has. we had to change the whole attitude. i think we have. we're doing thing by law to make it safer.

the wot tom line is we have the best miners in the world. we do. these are the salt of the earth. they are -- there are patriotic as a our veteran. i say with the respect and love for our veteran. most of our miners are veteran. they look at mining as what they're doing for this country. and energy they provide for this country. is fighting and making people unthat coal is still part of this mix. t a largest part of the energy mix. work with me. not again me. don't make it more difficult. help me find the technology that we can't continue to clean up the environment. we have done more in the last two decades than ever before. we can even do more. i would like that think we have a partner.

right now in west virginia we think we're working again us and have to be honest with you. i think they are. if i'm trying to keep every door open i can work with them. i'm not going sit back and them not noaa we do. and how hard we do it and how much energy we ride for this country. i guess i locked through the identify what i saw. robert c byrd and his reference for the great institution. and i would have thought when chip were down it was country

first. state second, politicses third. i would have always thought that. it's no what i see. i see 100 good people. i really do. i don't have anybody i don't like. try to get along with everybody. i see i would question them some mote i have and reasons what the purpose of your service. ask not what your country can do for you but what you can do for your country. that means we have -- it's our country. we own it. the constitution said we the people. if we tone you have to take ownership and care of it. like owning a car. so you cho change the oil routine maintenance. take care of it. don't care. now it seem like we have a country where people -- what you can do to it.

that's a long way from 50 years. and so i want to get back. we're still the greatest country on the earth. all the problems we have to to fix. economic, we can fix all of this. if my state does great. people in my state are going do well. i'm here with the purpose of how i can serve retail government how i do serve my customers. that's the constituents and everybody in my great state of west virginia. >> what is next for you. >> i would like to get my finances in order. i came home to my grandpa and said i saw charlie on the street. what a beautiful person he is. he's a great guy. i said the nicest person.

i'm going it tell you one thing. you keep yourself strong not just mentally and physically but financially. talk is cheap. you want to help somebody? give them some money. he used to say, can i have 5:00 no problem. no problem, here is a shovel. take care of the parking lot. i'm be right back. financial i had i take the oath of office and cold january of 2005 and my grandfather popped up and found me. keep yourself strong financially. i knew my state wasn't. i knew we could be. i. all of my mandate.

i used every bit of capitol and i said there's two things you don't waste. a mandate or a crisis. you make good out of them. i had a great mandate. and i was determined to fix the finance of our state. my number one goal. fix the finances. raising debt don't fix debts. sooner or later someone has to fix the debt. haas what i'm here and hope to be able to achieve. i'm working very hard across the

aisle talking to everybody. is there a way we can move forward and fix our get? i became really engrossed in the simpson-bowles approach. it was bipartisan. one of the first things i saw bipartisan. stayed bipartisan and grew bipartisan. we couldn't get a vote. we were three votes short. they got 11 votes. they had five republicans and since democrats. when is the last time we had 6-5 and agreed on a financial duration for our country and couldn't get a vote on the floor? that drives me. >> your wife is here. >> my wife is president of the state board of education in west virginia. she's there most of the time. she is back home. try to go home on weekends or we meet in a little place in tucker county. we'll meet there or i'll go back

to charleston or fair month where my son is there. i have two daughters in pennsylvania about an hour and a half. we try as a people 0 to get together as were as possible. it's difficult. i never thought i would be this old and home sick. >> what do your kids think about their dad's profession if. >> we have good conversation. they are -- >> do you debate a lot? >> we talk a lot, okay. the girls in my family are very strong. [laughter] very opinionated, if you will, and strong will and successful in their own right. as mother, business career people. they have done well. and my son too. we have some good conversations on social issue, fiscal issues, it's quite a dinner party.

>> is there another office you would like to hold? >> i haven't thought of that. i really don't. i keep thinking i have so much more work to do here to figure it out. i really felt good and comfortable as being governor. i have ready and prepared. i thought i have ready and prepared here. i watched senator byrd. there's so much more i need to learn. how go we get through the toxic atmosphere and realize we are here for a purpose. our country and our state not for ourself and our political party. i'm a proud west virginia democrat. i'm a very proud american. extremely proud mount near. with all of that being said, i want to put it in proper content and hopefully i can convince my colleagues to do the same. >> senator joe machin. thank you very much. glrchght

the washington state representative is the house republican conference chair. this is 35 minutes. >> representative, republican from washington state. you're part of the republican leadership. the highest ranking woman. do you have a voice with speaker boehner and leader cantor and others in the g.o.p. leadership? >> yes. yes. it is -- i think it's an important voice i bring to the leadership table and daily i'm sitting down with the speaker with majority leader erick cantor or kevin mccarthy as we are sphrat guising on what is happening on any given day as well as what we face a few months down the road. and i -- i am the second woman. i'm proud of the fact we have four women now around the leadership table for the republicans.

and it is a little different perspective different priority at time that i think being a woman bring to the table. it is it's and i believe i'm heard and my input is valued as i present it around the table. >> why politics? why did you first run for the state house in washington and later congress? >> right. one of those kids when i was in high school i was in't sure what i wanted to do. what i wanted to be. what i wanted to major in. my dad had had an interest in politics. he ran for office when he was in his 20s. he ran for county commissioner and lost. he dabbled in politics. and i had grown up, you know, at least watching campaigns from afar. but out of college, i got involved in a family friend's campaign for the state house. in washington. our home.

and that was kind of my entry in to politics. whey learned was that, first of all, this was somebody i could really believe in. get excited about supporting. when he won his race and offered me a job that it was a way? which i could make a difference for my community and the people that where we were representing in olympia at the time. i found a lot of fulfillment in that. and purpose in being a part of something that was bigger than me. and so i wasn't expecting to run for office. i really imagine myself maybe being more behind the scenes. but soon after that our state senator retired and my boss was appointed to billed the seat in the senate and he encouraged me to consider the appointment for the state house. so i kind of got in the back door. but of it a great opportunity

for me. i mustard up the courage i had and said i'm going go for this. country i got the appointment committed to being the best representative i could be for northeast washington. >> with did you family move to washington state? we moved to washington state when i was a junior in high school. both sides of my family have deep root in the pacific northwest that came to the northwest on the oregon trail. any mom's family of in the timber industry. my dad's family has been inning agriculture. i have grown involved agriculture. we had a fruit stand where we raised cherries, peaches, apricots. it was where i really, you know, learned a good work ethic and had the experience of working

alongside my brother in building that business. i'm grate to feel my parents. my dad has a high school education. my mom had a scholarship to go to oregon state but dropped out as a freshman when her dad passed away. she was determined her kids were going to graduate from college. i'm grateful for the sacrifice my parents made so my and my brother could go to college. >> are they still alive? >> they are. ..

>> i always had house housekeepg duty at school, nots nip -- anyone's favorite, but i did that in college, worked a variety of jobs so i could go to school, and i have seen in my own life what a difference that made, and the opportunities that i've had, i since we want on and had my