appearance to the american people could not have been more different. barry goldwater was stirred. he was scary to a lot of people people in and the johnson campaign went to town on that. ronald reagan by contrast he's a friendly guy and he tells jokes and smiles. ronald reagan is conservatism with a friendly face. ..

>> it's great to have you here ralph, on c-span. >> guest: thank you. >> host: i'm very hardded to be able to interview on this new book "return to sender." is that an homage to elvis presley. >> host: that's the point these days. >> guest: it's a message that 103 lettered sent to president bush and president obama from 2001 to 2015, were -- with very few exceptions not acknowledged and not answered. and so i thought i'd embarrass myself by putting them all in a book and raise a bigger issue which is the most democratic media is when a person writes a letter to an elected official, like a mayor governor, senator president, can't be censor order not distorted and not to respect it and to try to answer it or even to acknowledge it so that people know it's not going to some dark hole, is major issue, i think and most young

people don't realmize that a written letter to pool particular has far more impact than an e-mail. >> they get lots of letters. i income a half million a week. >> guest: yes. >> host: certainly you don't expect them to answer every alert. >> guest: no. here's how i break it down. >> host: you spoke about that. >> guest: a lot of people don't know that teams of volunteers go to white house every morning and they separate all these letters. now, no one expect this president to answer these letters. right? but he has a staff. he has departments. he has agencies throughout the sprawling executive branch, and the should all be acknowledged, at least and that's my complaint. now, they have robo letters for profile issues like the gm bailout, people writing letters yes, no. they'll send a robo, which onis like this, doesn't even answer the letter. or they will write letters to supporters or contributors, and

presidents do write personal letters to a governor, a mayor who supports the president or who gives something -- some finance 'er gives money so anybody that says the president doesn't sign particular letters to particular people, doesn't know what they're talking about. and so they do play favorites. then they also -- here's the way to get a letter automatically from the white house jump say, -- mr. president i want you to taken my daughter's high school graduation. so they have to be polite. so they write a let expressing regret. >> host: or tell them, dear, mr. president, i want to give you money. they'll an that right away. >> guest: they will. i have a variety of letters which they could have farmed out to the second of energy, the secretary of transportation, he the head of the federal trade commission. no they don't even acknowledge my letters simple wrote both

bush and obama a letter and said what is your policy on answering letters. right? and they didn't answer that one. >> host: naturally. >> guest: by comparison i sent two credit critical letters from the prime minister of canada, and back came a formal acknowledgment saying they received my message and referred it to the respective ministry. at least you know a human being or more answered the letter. so, if it all goes to a dark hole and is not acknowledged, andy fewer people will write letters, and the postal service shows that her-writing is declining, and not just because of the internet. what interesting in canada, they have an affirmative policy encouraging people to write letters to their members of parliament or prime minister, because it's free. no stamp is needed. and our country the politicians are free. they send letters to us.

the franking privilege. but we can't do it in reverse. >> host: you said most of letters were not answered. a couple were. can you spoke about that? >> guest: i wanted to make it easy for president obama. when he was running for re-election -- here's what president carter did oppositement he went a major hotel ballroom three blocks from the white house and we filled it with a thousand leaders of citizen groups, labor environment, religious charities, community groups, you name it, who have millions of members out there around the country. the nonprofit sector. and i said, you've gone to india, you always have to have a little spark in a letter. you've gone to indiana to promote harley davidson motorcycles, boeing airplanes. this is three blocks. >> host: surely you can walk across the street. >> guest: yes, and he did walk across lafayette park to pay homage to the united states

chamber of commerce, who criticized him every day. this didn't answer the letter. i thought it was good for him and thephone profits because he would bring viz exhibit they would get more contributions and a lot of jobs are involved in the nonprofit sector so more conclusions, more service for poor children, people in need, et cetera. so i sent the letter, copied to michelle obama and she writes back and she says, thank you very much but the president is too busy. so you see when you do persist, when you try to get an answer you get a response that is more interesting. >> host: now there's at letter that you got from president bush. he actually invited you to contribute to his library. >> guest: yes. >> host: what did you reply. >> guest: a letter to me by name. they can do that now. they can separate out dear hari

harry. >> was that in response to a letter. >> guest: i was on their mailing list. he was out of office heel. he's asking me for money bus of the presidential library. i consider him a certified war criminal along with dick cheney of i have picketed him. i've challenged him publicly. the computer is nonpartisan. >> host: that's right. >> guest: so anyway, i said, i know -- i chided him on his criminal invasion of iraq, and how he didn't even have the decency to open up to iraqi refugees who were supportive -- they weren't supportive of the mission but to feed their family they were chauffeurs, translators, some of them lost their lives because of that. and he wouldn't let them in. we let 160,000 vietnamese refugees in, maybe 10,000 at the most iraqi refugees, and then at the end said i want to make a

contribution in kind. so i sent him a book by mainstream think tank guy clyde and the title of the book is "rogue nation." >> host: did you get any reply? >> guest: no. i'm going to check and see if they cataloged it in the presidential library. >> host: a lot of the letters are funny in some ways. you wrote one bat terrorist name e.coli. can you [speaking speak about that. >> guest: there was a bacterial outbreak in europe. they gave it the name, e.coli and then some numbers. so i've been trying to get -- become back to president clinton, to, shall we say redefine terrorism. you're worried about the loss of innocent civilian life you better worry about viruses and back tiera not just the ones from africa or asia. we are dealing with a lot of

mutations. you were a scientist. this is a scary thing. i we don't get ready too time it could be like the influenza epidemic after world war i. i said, how am i going to get to these people? i decide to write a letter in the name of ecolow in a petri dish in austria. it's life is limited. they analyzed it has no more use, so this e.coli figures i got to do something to redeem myself. >> host: the back tier use. >> guest: -- made the case nor president to rates the priority of resource, focus and concern to prevent epidemics. deadly epidemics all over the worlds, and there's no one better than the united states to confront that if we can get over the restriction of the word 0 powe "terrorist" toy to a few gangs. >> host: i was at a few of the

events where you spoke about book politic and prose. i wanted to ask you issue was fascinated how that talk went. it was a great talk, obviously but the first question that you got was about why did you give the election to al gore in 2000? have you ever been to an event where you have spoken where that question was not asked. >> very rare. just hangs in people's head into i thought your answers were so spot on and so direct. in fact, the audience there tends to be rather skeptical about their -- they're staunch democrats, but you got applause, like serious applause. please enumerate the answer. it's important for people to hear. >> guest: because we can never file political bigotry against third party or independent candidates who -- we have the right to run for elocation and if we all have the trying run for election, big guys, third

parties, we all have a right to get votes from one another which means we're either spoilers of one another or none of us. why should the green party candidate be a second class citizen. that at the fundamental reply. the pragmatic reply if you ask al gore why he lost the election, he would say i won the popular volt. the electoral college antiquated threw it into florida, and then he say it was stolen for him in florida secretary of state, jeb bush there, shenanigans those of us remember all of that. >> host: the supreme court no then the supreme court. and also would have been president if he just won one state, his home state of tennessee, that he represented in the house and the senate and his headquarters were there. so when you eave seen a sin na quan non, two three any one of which, everything else being equal, would have put him in the white house why blame the green

party? >> host: 250,000 democrats voted republican. >> guest: in florida. 250,000. >> host: now, how much was that election lost by? 50537. >> host: at 250,000 democrats switched parties to vote. also arkansas. >> guest: that's right. >> host: the state of -- he was vice president to clinton. >> guest: that's right. he didn't want clinton to campaign. clinton could have gotten arkansas for him. >> oo i'm amassed how many time people continue to ask the question. >> guest: part of it is like an alibi. they so dislike the runs they'll take anything the democrats offer. the corporations are pulling on two parties 24/7. so how do you the progressive wing of the democratic part, which is becoming inning creasingly corporatized, militaristic, hillary clinton

militarist corporatist how do you have any -- well, not by saying we're going to go for the least worse take me i'm yours, i'm not going to put any pressure on you in april may june july. they tell the pollsters exactly what the corporate democratted want to hear, which is blanket support no matter what the democrats will do that you don't like because the runs are worse. every four years of that least worse mindset and both parties get worse. >> host: back to the book. "return to sender." have you sent a copy to the white house? >> guest: yes. i sent a copy and a letter. there's no certitude it ever got to the white house. has to be screened. now i think i have a contact in the white house and i may give it to her so she can give it to the resident in the oval office. >> host: what would be a victory for you in this? would you -- a phone call from

the president? an invite? what would be a victory? >> guest: well it would be first of all to acknowledge the letter and -- by the way issue send these letters around you. can't put all your agencies in the white house basket. you send it to white house reporters at times. you send it to opponents. send it to members of congress. you send it around to, say university professor who is interested in the subject. acknowledgment that's a courteous -- we have to deal with courtesy here. and i would like substantive responses. for example, we tried for six years to get an appointment with the secretary of energy, who is pro nuclear who meets all the time with the nuclear industry, and i had before leaving antinuclear groups who have been around for decades and been right and right and scientists, et cetera, never been able to see him. and he would just blow us off. so i wrote to president obama and i said, your secretary is

not giving equal time here anywhere near. no answer. and they didn't even refer it to the secretary of energy for response. so would like the sprawling executive to get some of these letters and respond. if they come from the white house, they should have more meaning, where the cabinet secretaries or assistant secretaries respond. >> host: you talked to two presidents -- you stuck to two presidents, bush and obama. obviously written letters previously to other presidents. why did you stick with those two? are they more egregious than the others as far as not replying? >> guest: yes. it's getting worse. even senators and representatives when it comes to substantive letter, i'm shocked to they don't respond. >> host: because of e-mail. >> guest: they're very secure in their seats. jerry arey maundering, safe republican, safe democrat. they have robo letters and don't want to be bothered. >> host: so not answering is safer than maybe answering in the wrong way.

>> guest: yes. they have robo letters which sand papered and noncontroversial. but the interesting thing i would write to jimmy carter and once in a while he would respond, or his special assistant would respond. i would say write to senator warren magnus son asking for a congressional hearing and it would be in the "washington post" or "the new york times." now no matter how fresh new and authoritative a letter is -- let's say it froms from professor ted postal at m.i.t. against the missile defense saying it's a total boondoggle. nine billion a year almost as much as the epa's entire budget. suppose he writes a letter and it's new? the press just degrades letters. they don't report them the way they used to. i once wrote a letter to a public official on what we call white lung disease in the textile carding rooms can the dust and it was kill can well-s

in north carolina and south carolina. it was page three of the "washington post." so it's a dying media. we have to reand it there's no one who can stop us. no one can stop us from writing letters and sending them around. no one can stop us by writing more powerful letter biz putting cc to different parties and the senator and the white house says this person is a networker. this is going to a reporter. i better write him back. >> you have a podcast and people can go to it, nader.org. do you put those letters in the podcast or other ways to bring them out in obviously sending them to white house may not get the attention but there's a lot of people out there reading alternative meet ya and listening to alternative radio. so aside from the alternative let's talk about the use of the podcast in getting the information out. your ultimate goal is to get the

information out to the people. >> guest: that's right. >> host: not just to get an answer obviously. do you do a multitier approach to accepting out this information? >> guest: i should do more of that. the radio program basically interviews people on very important subjects that are not in the news. so that is the whole bulk of the program. i just interviewed steve silver steen from san francisco a philanthropist, and helps with other fund seven or eight people who are going replace this presidential practice where you can come in second in the popular vote and still become president, like happened four times in american history most recently in 2000 when gore came in first, bush came in second, but electoral college put bush with the supreme court help. so who knows about that? they now have 165 electoral

votes, laws from maryland, new york california, if they go to 270, that's the end. what do the laws say? the law says that in maryland or california, they will throw the electoral votes completely to the winner of the national popular vote. so they redefined what the electoral college cannot do. and so we had him on. but you're right. i should her some of the letters -- herald some of the letters and summarize them. >> host: one way would be to put the letter out you send the white house, and along with it you could do some sort of grassroots activism so people can write similar letters focus on the issue call the white house, do whatever it takes. a lot of times from what i hear at least from people in congress and even the white house, they do respond to the number of calls the number of letters. so when you have the same voices being heard over and over again there is a little bit of a tick,

i guess in their -- >> that count the letters. they count the calls they count the letters. that's right. they may not respond but it has an impact if it's coming in, in larger numbers. >> host: if you picked up the phone and called the white house, do you ever get a call back? >> guest: if i called the special assistant, like jean sperling, i would get a call back maybe after the third call. you have to be quite persistent. >> host: when was the last time you were invited to the white house? >> guest: it was under bill clinton. excuse me. he would assign mr. mccharty, a special assistant to handle our groups, so to speak. so we were invited several times, but only to see him. >> host: i see. you were name one of the hundred most influential people of the 20th century by "time magazine," by atlantic monthly.

i'm just flabbergasted that -- and having run for president having had an impact, i understand there's an old saying in politic you bring your friends close and your enemies closer so whatever you are whether you're seen as a friend or enemy bringing you closer would serve probably better purpose. why do you think there's this resistance to ralph nader. >> who reasons one the 2000 campaign produced a lot of shunning by the democrats in congress and the white house. how dare i challenge a mutating democratic party that is a shell of what it was in the 1960s. we couldn't have gotten through all these bills for environment consumer worker safety, couldn't have gotten them through today. we got them through in the 1960s. i think the second thing is if you don't get mainstream press coverage they don't think that they need to respond to you.

and so if "the new york times," decided they're not going to cover certain citizen groups, then they -- they'll say why should we bother responding? it's too bad because these letters often point out things going on in their own government they don't know about. things going on in the country they don't know about. they don't like the criticism. they like the praise. but it's just not good politics. it's not good politics to do that. if i was in the chamber of commerce if i was a national association manufacturers you can be sure they would respond. they respond to perceived power. the '60s, if you had good knowledge, good information about how cars could be made safer, for example how the air could be clean that often went

over the hurdle and you could get press. if you got press the senators and representatives would respect you more. >> host: a lot of people, when they talk about -- when i speak to friends about you about ralph nader they often times will speak about the idea of legacy. you're 81 years old. you must be thinking about that. you must be thinking about what will the average american, let's say, who did no grow up in the '60s and knew you in a very direct way with the issue of gm and all of that, what would you like people to know you as? what is ralph nader -- >> guest: well, more than that we'd like to have the celebration for the 50th 50th anniversary, and then have a series of events that helps create new groups and helps create and introduce new leaders whose names are not on the evening news.

that's really what legacy is all about. not about memory. it's about putting forces in motion that then multiply themselves, like we started the public interest research groups in the '70s and there's over 25 of them now student-funded, full-time staff. scientist, lawyers loy i.s.es, places like madd, new york, california they run referendums and file lawsuits. they're multiplying and that's -- and i like to give people ideas that they put into play. for example, we had a discussion with you on what a great community restaurant would be like and now you have several restaurants which have a book store, they have an event room, with events almost every night artistic poetry, music political, nothing is offlimits and a food store. >> host: that should be added to your public funding.

this came out of conversation we had. i remember talking about it when jerry brown was running for office and you helped him to cobble together this platform at that time. >> guest: fantastic. in the 1990s he still has box of enemy his basement. >> host: i remember. it had a picture of the statue of liberty with a scaffolding around it. i have copies of that from originally when we started talking about it. your idea was that you really do believe in citizens. that's the beauty of all of this right? >> yes. >> host: you believe in sunset is and feel strong i having known you to are so long, that if they just know, if people just knew, how much power they have and what is it they're up against, or what they can do, they can in fact affect change. >> guest: yeah. >> host: has your faith in the average american or average citizen strengthened over time?

weakened over time? do you feel you're up against such a tide it's hard to get your views across? >> guest: there is a progress factor here, and that is people know who is doing them in now. i mean, they didn't even know that the auto companies were selling them less than safe cars. the gleaming 575 -- '55 chevrolet with the hood ornaments. >> host: they're all in cuba, all those car snooze that's true. now, they know who rules them. they know who is degrading them. underinsuring them. denying health care, screwing them as consumers. martialing exclusions. they know all of that. so that step one. step two is, to avoid demoralization, that's the big problem. people have given up on themselves. can't fight the big boys.

just live pleasant lives as minute as you can text-messaging watch tv, play sports watch sports, whatever. that's the biggest problem demerelyization means they've given up on themselves even though the constitution starts and ended with, "we the people" there's no refers residence to corporation or company or political party who rules us. not a single mention in the constitution. so you have demoralization can. here's my antidote. american history shows one percent or less of the people who are seriously engaged through the country on redirections and reforms that are supported by the majority of the people, that's all you need. so people go around and say i just got to get one out of 100 people in my town or in my congressional district, or in my state legislative district to put in 200, 300 hours a year on an issue they believe in.

look people put more than that for their bridge game. for their bowling league forks watching birds. it's all over. and like minimum wage now is a big issue. by the way listeners here's a restaurant youer who believes in a higher minimum wage and even organized restaurant owners. that's i call them democracy restaurateur. less than the population of the city of waterbury connecticut put this on the map. people took a few hours to demonstrate in front of mcdonald's, burger king, walmart, there are 30 million workers making less than in 1968, adjusted for inflation. if a do disgrace you. want more consumer demand, less than the population, 100,000 people scattered around the country, getting media and maybe a few think tanks maybe few groups like ours, contacting

politicians, writing op-eds, putting out reports. doesn't that encourage people? what's what made obama pay attention. that's what made cities and towns and states saying we're not waiting for the federal got which is still stuck at seven and a quarter per hour. they're raising it. l.a.'s city council $15 an hour over three years. so less than one percent and when "occupy wall street" was when all street was the one percent, the one percent of the ruling class we need to talk about the other one percent. with majority support just what abraham lincoln said, so astute. he said with public sentiment you can do anything. without public sentiment you can't. there's so much majority of support for whole area of improvement inside the country minimum wage, full medicare for all. everybody in, nobody out free choice, doctor and hospital. majority support. corporate tax reform. majority reform.

90%, left right, support the breakup of the big new york banks who are too big to fail. there's just huge support support against empire. support against the bloated military budget that is destroying so much abroad while our bridges and sewage and water systems and highways and schools crumble here at home. this idea we're polar rised and red, blue, that's the divide and rule tactic of the ruling groups. there are -- >> host: you wrote a book boot cincinnati called "unstoppable. the emerging lefts/right alliance to dismantle the corporate state." >> host: how often times we are put in a red-blue situation and again it's basically gonalal politics that don't affect our live in a direct way but yet we continue to be very divided and yet you would like -- like you mentioned we have so much more of interest and non. >> guest: much more. 24 hours of major convergence.

left-right now prison reform, june justice reform. the reform of the war on drogues trade. >> guest: trade are that's coming out. just all over. certainly left-right support against crony capitalism, corporate welfare bailouts, handouts, but the ruling groups lack the focus and the press falls into the areas of the trap in the areas where we disagree, reproduct perspective rights -- >> is that because it's easier because it's a black-white thing? >> guest: it's a controlling process. >> host: to deal about the more nuanced issues. >> guest: if they pay attention to the areas where left-right agrees it's over for them. they're not going to be ruling us. it's unstoppable. the thing a senator fears the most or governor, whether they're republican or democrat, someone walking into the os left-right. they can't game it. they can't play it. so left-right people come into the office, and that's what is

passing juvenile justice legislation in over 15 states already. by the way the koch brothers who are oil and gas, they're lobbying to get a century tax on solar panels in southern legislatures. they're not winning. no such thing as a republican or democratic solar panel. that means jobs in every neighborhood. >> host: wow. so you spoke about the one percent, which i haven't heard you talk about that specifically like that. you're saying that if one percent of the people get activated, they can actually tip the others. >> guest: yes. >> host: there's been books written about the tipping point being you need to have ten percent of the people to have an impact you. are saying you don't neat ten percent, especially i suppose you are taking into account the new social media. >> guest: the key is public offend. i over 50 or 65 or 80 -- like 70-80% support higher minimum once you get beyond 60, you've

got an unstoppable public support and opinion. which he politicians know because they see the polls and then all you need is one percent or less. we defeated the coal industry. we defeated the auto industry. we got through all kinds of things with handfuls of people that you could put in an auditorium all over the country, but serious hack tick cal, -- tactical, smart. a lot of smart people is in country. they don't give themselves a chance to be civically smart. i tell people a little humor obviously, when you meet people, why waste is by saying, how are you? ask then the other person says, i'm okay, even though they have a sore throat. why waste salutation, which are billions of years? you say how i yous civic life? >> oo i've been trying that on people. they do this double-take. what did you say? >> guest: it will catch on. like the trampoline.

>> host: or the pogo stick. you know, instead of taking it back full circle, are are you mow hopeful today of the average citizen becoming more involved or do you feel that -- what is it that needs to happen to get people -- because whatever i talk to you ralph you seem like you're in a hurry. glory a are youry to get things done. so much to be done. and there's a sense of, like, urgency in your approach. how effective do you think that is? is this how -- is it just a matter of noticing the urgency and being able to go for it, or a matter of -- is it a process issue? what is it that stops people from moving at the speed that you like. >> guest: it's a strategy inch hoyt the greatest changes occurred pretty quickly. in legislation. quickly in terms of decades.

for example we got auto safety regulation. my book came out november 30 1965. by september the next year, lyndon johnson had me to the white house signing the motor vehicle and highway safety laws. on the other hand, president couplan recommended -- president trumanan recommended medicare in the 40s and we still don't have it because it's spread out. when the public is for something, the majority opinion now is the time to move fast and you can do it with less than one percent of engaged people. >> host: but it was very different time then. >> guest: it was. >> host: obviously you didn't have the white noise that the jerry brown used to talk about. with the internet and all that information going on. people jump from one -- all of a sudden we have -- the entire news cycle and suddenly whatever issue you're working

on is way down the chain. >> guest: it's simple. less than one percent. you can always find one percent serious people on major issues, and not only that, but you can get sort of instant public reaction on social meet media. you don't have to wait nor gallup poll. that's another plus that its important. okay, you can say well, the congress more right wing now dominated by republicans. let me tell you something. the one thing everybody in congress wants unless they're ready to retire, is votes. they want to be re-elected. voted are more important than raising money. they raise money to go on tv to get a few more votes. and once the message is clear even to the ones you think would never stand for environment, for climate change, for consumer protection labor rights, it's like that. we had right wing senators and representatives in the '60s. they could care less for anybody but the industries in their

backyard, the steel industry, the maritime industry, and within a couple of years they were raving consumer advocacy. the auto safety bill passed almost unanimously in the house even though it was oppose bid the auto companies cher powerful forces. once the people wake up. once the people feel their power. once the understand the one percent strategy reflecting majority opinion one victory like a minimum wage victory will lead to another victory and another rescue and another victory. i think there will marge push for single payer full medicare for all as the insurance companies raise their premiums enormously and start -- >> host: we're seeing from a business perspective the impact of obamacare and the affordable care act i should say. how complicate it it is. and i'm thinking, why can't we just have single pair.

-- single payer. >> guest: unbelievably complicated. >> host: so much regulations that businesses have to deal with in order to be in compliance. >> guest: and -- >> host: very few are. >> guest: there's a complications are irritating for everybody. business probably just regular patients. business patients, everybody but it's business, isn't it? it creates consulting firms its creates litigation. it creates -- >> host: oh, boy. seeing it from all angles. >> guest: now, the obamacare legislation was hundreds of pains long. the regulations are thousands of pages. right? you know how pages the canadian medicare for everybody bill was? in the late 1960s? >> host: i'm afraid. it's going make me really mad. >> guest: 13. you know, you can have a hip replacement or break a hip and get operated on and get rehabilitated, you don't even see a bill. the american people see reames

of inscrutable coded bills. that's why a man like malcolm sparow estimates the fraud just by computerized billing fraud this year is at least $400 billion. billions with a b. we're dealing with fraud crime complexity bureaucracy all of which generates jobs. it generates profit. it's this perverse incentive we're tying ourselves in knots with the corporate taxes phoniness, tying ourselves in knots with health care and forms and do you qualify for a subsidy, et cetera co-pay. why are we tying ourselves into knots? because we lost confidence in ourselves. we have lost confidence in our history and how we change things for the better, and we don't know the one percent rule. >> host: the one thing the one percent rule has done is this

trade agreement the tpp thing. i'm amazed. when -- i remember when margaret fowler greats a slow gets and proponents against the issue of the tpp they were talking about it a year ago. no one really -- wasn't on anybody's radar. suddenly it's on everybody's radar. and people -- what is -- there's a lot to be learned about the success they've accomplished and very complicated issue that isn't just black and white. it's a complicate issue to explain to people. it's remarkable. have you been involved in that? >> guest: i started it. we got lori wall lack into this and the has an organization called trade watchdog.org, and she potentials its down to precise shifts of power to global corporations over the democratic procedures, our environment, consumer, labor all of these disputes, going do

secret tribunals which are not part of the court system. that's why alan morrison, the lawyer what teaches at george was university, put out a memo that it's unconstitutional. these tribunals. so not only that but she shows how people can get involved and congressional district. now, they blocked the most awesome power combination you can imagine. you have the business lobbies the corporate law firms their heaven people in congress, and the president of the united states and they beat them, and i dent think hey have a half of one percent out there around the country, who are even calling their members of congress, because people in their gut and knowing how communities are being hollowed out jobs, industries sent to communist regimes, strip mining america you don't have to tell people that. they see it every day in their towns and cities. >> host: they see other things and don't react the same way.

>> guest: because they don't have that part of that one percent seriously engaged in every congressional district, by the way and on capitol hill. they don't have that vanguard. the two work together. that's what -- the whole point of return to sender is not just showing people, hey look, these are all kinds of interesting things that affect your life day in don't care, and don't acknowledge the letter. it's to try to get young people -- we're going to try to get terrible social studiy teaches around the country. we want to have a contest where students witch the best letters to the president and they win prizes to get them tone gauge. once you have written a letter, you're over hurdle number one. you're muchmer committed on the issue. if you are justifying about it, you internalize it and become cynical you withdraw, and you produce a vacuum and that's what

they wall street one percent want. >> host: you really create the future civic engaged citizens. >> guest: that's right. >> host: i remember for my daughter there was a lot of speeding happening down our street and they needed a stop sign because they wanted to slow cars down. their third grade decided to make that their civic project. and every kid in that class is hooked. they're hooked for life, because they see they were able to make an impact. the got the sign in place and all sit around -- >> guest: perfect example of what we should do in elementary school other than this core curriculum. here's the point. we're obsessed with tests. tests on thursday, test on tuesday. high frequency testing corporate -- core curriculum. one day a fifth grader, a little girl, walks into a classroom in salt lake city and says to the teacher i think i

located a waste dump. she says what are you talking about? she said it's only five blocks away. so they took other little journey and it was like a swear block with brush all over it. it was waste dump. and they exposed it. and the press gave them publicity, and the mayor invited them and they cleaned up the waste dump, and as you say they're never going to forget that. they testified on the super fund legislation in the state legislature, and the teacher was so motivated she writes a book called "kids and social action." just put out the second edition and is now lecturing around the country how to motivate elementary school children to learn about their civic responsibilities and improve their own local communities instead of watching screens and text messaging. we have to stop thinking it's awesome, because that's what the power structure wants. they want to breed us in a way where we grow up corporate to shut up and shop, is a george w.

bush once encouraged us to do, and live our private lives in an increasingly degraded standard of living. >> host: i want to ask you what's been your biggest disappointment in, let's say this last president? obama has been now almost seven years. he came with so much hope, i think, if that word has been overused. and i think me being included in that wave of excitement, that brought him in, i think a lot of us are disappointed in many ways. what is -- you were speaking about -- don't raise your hopes too high. i remember then. what has been your biggest disappoint in him? >> guest: my own small way i ran against him. i rain for president in 2008. so i knew about his legislative

record in the illinois state legislature, which is not very courageous at all hitch dodged a lot of controversial votes by not voting. and you can see that he was a maneuverrist. he was trying to figure out how to climb the ladder of power. >> host: if you want to know who will be the next person climbing the ladder, look at the one with the least legislative record. that's the way it -- it's really true. >> guest: about it comes down to character and permit. for all politicians. he was a., conflict averse. when it comes to challenging the power structure. b. he wanted desperately to win so therefore he was very easy on the military industrial complex and the war machine and empire. and, three he wasn't elected on a mass movement. there is not -- like 1912. there were no populist mast

movements where they send him there he had an e-mail list of 13 million of people who sent money. that's the problem with these politicians. unless we have the mass movement like in the populist era when the ones who were eleaked knew where they were coming from and they weren't coming back. >> host: so hope is not a movement? >> guest: hope and change is a slogan and so that is the problem. he didn't have a transformative personality politically he had transactional. the worst thing is he didn't have the personality to deal with congress help didn't like it. you have to schmooze with them. he paid the price on the trade bill. >> host: he was transformative by some way by bringing people on the right and left together, whatever it is, call it some magic trick that happened that brought all these people together. he had to have that transformative ability and i think for a lot of us, we saw that as a potential for other

transformative things to happen, having owned that mantle of the people being able to make an and effect some great change right from the get-go. all an issue of timing. >> guest: he lost the capital and enthusiasm. he was transformative in terms of votes and bringing minority groups and in and gave a good speech but it stopped at water's edge, when he had to go into deep water as a president he had that critical two years when the congress was dominated by his party the house and senate. big majority, and he blew it. he promise it us he was going to go for 9.50 minimum wage by 2011 he never negligenced hit in two years when he could have got it through college. same at health care. he punted on the public option now the insurance companies are laughing to the bank and so are the drug companies with these staggering prices of medicine. again, woe can turn it around. people don't like this and big

majorities, less than one percent. >> host: you see statehood? i mean, hasn't been talk about. he had a majority, majority house, senate, and president. all democrats. and he had that moment passed. >> guest: i'm so glad you mentioned that. most people don't talk about it. we have a colony in the district of columbia -- >> host: 650,000 people that cannot elect a representative, and you know what the irony is -- >> guest: or senator. >> host: i'm from iraq originally. i'm able to vote in the iraqi parliament today. to have a representative of iraq i haven't lived in iraq in 50 years. my daughter, who was born here, hardly speaks arabic, is able to vote in the iraqi parliament. and yet we both live in d.c. and cannot vote for a representative, full representative here in d.c. senator or congressman. >> guest: nor can president obama.

he's in the white house. the thing is people have to be supportive of us here around the country, because there's no capital of any country that even has a hint of being a democracy where the people who live in the capitol, like paris london, bon, cannot vote. >> host: i think the statistics show that 80% of the people throughout the country don't even know that and that's one of the reasons why we don't have -- because other congressmen decide our fate. that's just unfair. that's taxation without representation, what this country was built on. >> guest: isn't that the lion plate. >> host: but it becomes just a slogan. no one really even pays attention it to, just like every other slogan. >> guest: and the democrats for blame more than anything else. they have 90% of the vote here. >> host: i agree. both parties have been complicit in this issue. >> guest: by the way, web site

for statehood for d.c.? >> host: d.c. vote does a lot of work on this issue. so d.c. vote.org is an important web site to get started on it. but the green party has been talking about it's lot. so that's an important element we need to continue to push on. in the final few minutes wayen to talk about the current election. we have three democrats running right now, hillary clinton and bernie sanders and martin o'malley. are any of them interesting to you or exciting you in any way shape or form? >> guest: well hillary -- >> host: are you going to run? >> guest: i'm not done hillary is a very v confirmed militarist. she shoved aside the secretary of davis robert gates who did not want to attack libya. and she got the white house support, and libya was toppled and the dictator who is beginning to negotiate with the

west and there's total chaos and secretary in revenge and isis is going in and all quite is there and the weapons are spreading all over and it's spilling over into central africa. huge geographic area. she august -- ought to be held accountable. never seen a weapons system the doesn't like. never seen a war she doesn't like. it's part of highly placed women trying to overcompensate by being more aggressive, so that the macho men don't say you can't lead us. >> host: to soft. >> guest: teen though the great to tryings of piece is more associated with women than with men. >> host: what about bernie. >> guest: bernie, when it comes to domestic, sometimes i have to accuse if only majorrerrism. he is very good, good on the pharmaceutical -- >> host: good to majorrer. >> good stuff. >> guest: good on wall street

good on worker rights good, on tax reform. a little vague on important policy. >> host: not vague on israel. very very, very hawkish on that issue. and very supportive no matter what. >> guest: and voted for the appropriations for iraq, year after year and afghanistan. he hasn't taken on the military industrial complex. bernie is very sensitive as to industries in vermont like the dairy industry, let's say and the machine tool industry, which feeds a lot of its products into military equipment. but he has to take strong stands on that. and he has to take her on. he can't have a parallel campaign. because she can sweet talk them during the six debates coming up during the primary. i agree with bernie. i served with bernie in the senate. >> guest: o'malley was a fairly

progressive senator in baltimore, mayor and governor, and he can really develop -- has to be more exciting. he can really do. >> host: abolished the death panel and ratessed the minimum wage and worked on healthcare issues. >> guest: right. so he has to develop a strategy. now in the republican side, you're going to probably have 18 candidates and the worth nightmare of 17 of these candidates is donald trump. because assuming he hangs in there, with his flamboyant, he is going to burlesque he whole nomination prospect. his ego -- the problem that donald trump -- he's going to be a nightmare i'm sure rubio and walker and bush and others are going to say oh, no, this guy can go all the way through the primary because he has the

money. and he is going to brag his way through the entire country and he is a militarist but he thinks he is going get a lot of people jobs. he presents a serious problem for "saturday night live" because now they're probably figuring out how do we deal with this flamboyant announcement who it's, i i i. unbelievable. >> host: some god and all this stuff. >> guest: the only techniques that "saturday night live" has is to exaggerate somebody's bizarre traits and make people laugh and provide satire. how do you satire satire? and second, you can't exaggerate trump. there's a real problem for "saturday night live." >> host: pulled the trump card on us. >> guest: that's right. >> host: are you in communication with bernie. >> guest: doesn't answer my calls. i've lost hope. 15 years i called him in the senate. he doesn't answer. and i was very laud tory of him before he became mayor of burge ton, vermont. doesn't like to be pushed in

areas of progressive movement that he doesn't want to about pushed on so he is a lone ranger and he is not a networker the way senator paul wellstone was of citizen groups representing millions of people around the country in washington. he is not that type. he doesn't have that type of personality. so it's unfortunate abuse if all we have are ten or 12 progressive senators and they're all lone rangers and they don't even have a caucus, is a urged them to do in a letter, which was never answered by the senators we're not getting anywhere. >> host: maybe we can send them copies of the platform in progress. >> guest: that would be good. jerry brown doesn't like to talk about it now that he's governor and has two-thirds of the legislature in sacramento. it's amazing. when he can make things happen, he doesn't. he is playing it very safe. i would -- i said to him i think you're returning for president. i don't thing you're going to iowa and new hampshire.

i think hillary falls or collapses, something happens where her popularity is dimmed, he is ready. he is ready. >> host: well, thank you so much rafael. being an honor me have to this conversation with you. we have had conversations but never this in depth. >> guest: thank you. if you think this is an easy interview, folks he opposed me when i ran for president in 2004 and 2008. >> host: i had a gleam in my eyes. thank you ralph nader. >> guest: you're welcome. >> that was "after words" in which authors of the latest nonfiction books are interviewed by journalists public policymakers and others familiar with their material. "after words" air easers weekend on book tea tv.

you can watch "after words" online go to booktv.org and click on "after words" in the booktv series and topics lister on the upper right side of the page. >> book tv visited capitol hill. >> i'm reading a couple of books. i decided to re-read a book i read 20 years ago, the monk who sold his ferrari it's written by a gentleman named robin sher ma a fable about a lawyer who is a very successful trial lawyer who has massive heart attack in the middle of a trial and goes to nepal to discover the meaning of life and comes back good starts to teach everyone that the meaning of life is to help others and that's the only way you can lead a fulfilling life. a neat little story. i also started reading d-day by

stephen ambrose. we went to normandy last year and over the memorial day weekend at home it rained and we rewatched "saving private ryan" and that caused know start reading" de-day." the book i'm excited to read this summer, heard evan thomas talking about a book he just wrote "being nixon." a profile of president nixon and his life and characteristics and personal quirks and i'm a big pan for evan thomas. one of my favorite books is a book he wrote about edwards bennett williams "the man to see" about the famous trial lawyer and some of his successes in the legal practice. so after i finished these two i don't travel with the books. i leave one on even night stand one at home and here i'll be reading "being nixon this urge."

>> now joining us is wendy perlman, a professor of political science at northwestern university. professor, what was your route to northwestern? how did you get here. >> guest: well, i did my ph.d in political science at harvard university, my specialization is middle east politics. i began during a college september america terse abroad in morocco, got hooked on the arab world and being doon it ever since and it led me to the israeli-palestinian conflict where i did work both as a student and a human rights worker before i went do graduate school:...