mark thompson on how political speeches changed over time. former attorney general, alberto gonzalez recalls his time with the gorge bush administration. and georgetown law professor brooks expands the role of the u.s. military around the world. face the nation moderator john dickerson about important moments in american presidential campaigns and mary thompson jones talks about her investigation of thousands of leaked state department cables. also coming up, temple university professor sarah rob describes possible solutions to rising college tuition costs. and david brat on his time in congress and the economic challenges facing the country. >> if you have your eye on becoming leadership or chairman there is nothing wrong with that. but these days the money is just so dominant.

we just had presidential level on the republican side and the democratic side and 80% outside votes going to presidential candidates and the american people put all the in cumincum- incumbents. if you photo vote in lock step with leadership to get the spot you can start looking. you are not doing what is best for the country all the time. >> afterwards airs on booktv on saturday at 10:00 p.m. and sunday at 9:00 a.m. eastern. >> c-span, created by america's cable television companies and brought to you as a private

service from your cable or satellite provider. afterwards is next on booktv. dave brat remembers his victory over former house majority leader eric cantor. he is interviewed by former republican national committee chair ed gillespie. >> host: i am eager to talk to you about this. i enjoyed the read and you can tell i have dog eared pages and things marked here. as you know, i worked in the house of representatives as a staffer to a former economics professor named dick army who had a big impact on the house and provided intellectual under

pinnings. here you are a former free economic professor and still in the house of representatives. >> i followed all of the guys and they have been role models for me. you can put free market economics and your values together in your politics. that is what i was fascinated about in your book. >> the book is, as you talk about it, this synthesis of fate, economics and public service. the fact is as a lot of people came to know you and your surprised victory, my old army was a house majority leader, you were the only person in the history of the u.s. house to beat a house majority leader and that as you note in your book is when a lot of people came to here about dave brat and all of the media showed up. one thing about your book that tells you who dave brat is and i

am wondering if you could talk about this since it is just an overview and we will go into more detail but how there is a synthesis between economics and politics. >> that is primarily why i wrote the book. the conservative ideas sometimes go back to reagan or the founders but it is about a 4,000 year tradition. when you go to grad school these days and p md in economics it is narrow. whereas, it was all about synthesis. the greatest thinkers all the way up to the enlightened period took the classics. that was the liberate arts education. i taught at a liberal arts

college for 18 years and only applied to teach at liberal arts college because i believe so much in that synthesis. i want to show folks i don't know if i did a great job but it is possible. it should hang together. if your ethics don't match up with the economic logic like carl marx. whereas, adam smith and the enlightment guys over here those ideas lineup and mesh. both of them wanted a large number of small competitors and smith, the free market ideal and madison he won a large number of factions competing against each other. that works. both go right together. we are not teaching the kids enough these days. so i wanted it put out 200 pages of the first edition and we will see if we can get better over time. >> one of the things i was

struck by is the comp pllimenta aspect. you said god worked six days and rested on the sabbath. do not covet that rule presumes a right to hold things that might be covveted. the bases of judeo christianity is fascinating and you said our founding was an important chapter in the history of fate. can you tell more about why you see our founding as tied to the importance in the history of 98? >> yeah, the one thing our founders did not see, right? they saw clearly incentives and the constitutional structure but you just got at it.

they could not see a day where the judeo christian was taken as church and state. we want that. the first amendment is about the separation of church and state and the press and no establishment of religion. it is very interesting. i went to princeton seminary. we moved it across the tracks and found it. harvard. secular society and we are sharing win-win group. you take the schools and we will move the seminaries across but you have to teach ethics. it was assumed it would morph

into the protestant tradition. the left took the schools and said you cannot teach ethics. if you bring up religion you get laughed out of the room. this is for real. everyone talks about separation of church and state. paul ryan sees moses every morning from this church. no law? no ten commandments in our secular society? i don't think so. i show compassion and love showed up zero. rome was the most loving society. cold, sterile, brutal society and in come this doctrine of love. do you want a separation of compassion and love? i know what they mean. they don't want religious establishment. but a total separation, we also all assume the left agrees with us on human rights claims.

and human rights emerge only in western europe about 1400 out of the judeo christian tradition. they perceive the existence of government. so do you want a separation of that? do rights exist? yes or no? i wanted to push the thinking a little bit. we are at war with part of a tradition who has a hard time with the first amendment and religious toleration. i wanted to push the ideas out there in public and get a good debate going. that is part of what was going on. >> and you mention the catholic tradition. i am catholic. i was struck by later on in the book how you dweelve in the wor of saint thomas. my faith informs how i live my life. how does your form, it is clear in your book -- faith -- talk

about how your faith informs your public service and the work you do in the house of representatives. >> i was born in detroit, group in michigan, my dad moved me to minnesota in 9th grade. thanks dad. that was tough but good to grow. went to hope college, dutch reform, protestant. went to work at arthur anderson and then princeton seminary and went down to weslyn seminary and a great friend wrote economics and ethics in the same book and that was the fire. i knew i wanted to teach philosophy and theology in college and once i saw the combination that was it. i went to the army, the world bank, worked in the philippines on education sector stuff.

met my wife and was lucky enough we both moved to randolph macon college and taught there for 18 years. that is how i live it out. it is my calling putting these two things together and keeping that conversation going. a lot of the book is old lecture notes. >> this is not a memoir. it is a book about economics, ethics and philosophy. you did touch on what you mentioned here which is meeting laura as you were closing in on your phd. i am sure the viewers would like to know more story there. she is a wonderful woman. tell us how you came to meet her, date her and get married.

>> mutual friends setup a blind date. it was awkward at first. we started talking and had values in common, kids, family setup and started going really? in washington, d.c.? i met a normal person? joking. ge i love it up here. we had the same outlook. she is catholic, i am protestant but i am going catholic now soia see who won that one. >> married how long? >> 20 years and jonathan just went off to college so we have been a sad household. >> dropped the oldest off at college. any tears shed? >> it hit me way harder. she has been home more and i am up here three weeks out of the month. so that is not good but boy, it hit me when i see his empty rook every night. >> jonathan probably not so much? right?

>> he is doing all right. except for uva lost to richmond. >> host: this is great. i want today come back to something else that you talk about in the book that i think is really telling because you touch on obviously our founding which is something those of us from virginia, the founders are a critical and so many of them. you talk about not just the horizontal separation of powers and mention mike lee. so not just across the three separate branches of the federal government but the vertical as well which is that the states were to be a check on federal executive branch authority and growth. it doesn't seem to be working out in that regard. can you talk about what you are seeing with the horizontal and

vertical check and balances and the problems it creates. >> you go back to madison who went to princeton seminary and after he finished undergrad he studied hebrew for kicks. so i add to my tradition how long doid it take humans to fal? three chapters. you separate power vertically and horizontally. so federal, state and local, there are 18 enumerated powers and we violated that beyond comprehension. mike lee has a picture in his office where the house did five inches of bill and the executive branch did 11 feet. if you get the sense we are upside down we are.

we all know about executive overreach over the last years. but zee to push things back. the federal programs are insolevent within about 14 years. everything the feds touch -- everything will go to the internal programs. that is not be. that is the best data up here. it is the main graph of the budget committee. so that is kind of evidence. whereas, virginia is a very well run state.

you want a well run state and education is in the constitution of the state. >> you noted in the checks and balances you note that returning governance to the state and local level where it was intended to be even if a few conservatives may not like it. >> if the people vote, right? the key is we are supposed to be a democratic republic. that doesn't mean you get to win every debate. it just means you have a fair

process and in a democratic republic if the folks vote for flowers and you can move. you want options. >> i point out the federal government is the creation of the state. states are not a creation of the federal government. it is remarkable how few people realize that. and i thought your point about the federalists checks and balances is overlooked a lot of the time because we are concerned about the trampling of the separation of powers between the legislative and judicial branches. but it is powerfully evident when it comes to the overriding properly the prerogatives of the state. we see so many cases in this regard obviously for virginians we know how important the clean power plant and the epa

overreach would be devastating to virginia. 23 states said no and stopped it but unfortunately we are not among them. i hope the legislative branch at the federal level puts a stop to this. >> it is important to note how it came about. some think it is the executive doing a power grab. in some respects it is our own fault in congress. there is hot button issues out there and politicians don't want to vote. you take two or three votes you might be getting kicked out. we have giving the executive all sorts of power. we vote on the clean air and tell that executive branch of government you will make the law, implement it, and you have given the federal government

tremendous power and now the farmer and rancher in virginia is learning what that looks like and are having a hard time staying afloat. we need to retain article one. congress shall make all laws. >> this period you talk about in casting those tough votes is that one of the reasons that you are a strong proponent of term limits? are you terming yourself? >> i termed myself 12 years. if you have your eye on becoming leadership or chairman there is nothing wrong with that. wisdom goes along with that. but the money is so dominant. we had presidential level on the republican and dem side 80% outside votes going to presidential candidates. yet the american people just put in all the incumbents again in congress. there is an amazing power of the purse in winning elections. and on top of the money part,

people are lining themselves out to be a chairman of the committee. if you vote in order to get that slot you can start looking and both sides do this. you are not doing what is best are the country all of the time. >> it is consistent with the founders, speaking of the founders, with citizen legislatures. go and some home. i ran for the senate, got close and i said then i would serve more more than two terms. i think it is important that that be the mind set and mentality. >> speaking of the founders do you have a favorite founder? >> probably madison because of the seminary and i love the constitution and that kind of thing. but washington is interesting to me. he stands out. we are blessed with just history in virginia.

but washington, the more i read on them, he is the one guy everybody likes. he walks into a room and he is the man. who is this guy that all great men turn to him? >> that is mine. i live on one of his old farms. i will tell you a funny story. i was over on a business trip in london and talk to a british historian and we were talking about the founding and i said many, including me, believe there is a divine inspiration and that divine providence in the founding of america and we look at these founders and i told him about living near mount

v vernon and he said it is possible the british empire could have defeated george washington. but washington, madison, jefferson, the whole bloody lot no way. it is remarkable. >> it is remarkable. >> you talk about this und underpinning of the moral case that i think is missing from conservative commentary side. i believe upward mobility and growth and as our republican party and creed says the free enterprise system is the greatest supplier of economics needs and justice. you make that point, i thought impre impressively in the book on page 198 freedom and earnings. i don't know if the camera is picking it up but the next grab

shows the income of the people in the bottom 10% of earners in four different groups of countries from the least marketed oriented to the most free market. also. history, data, show it. so those who don't have the book go out and buy it book. "america underdog" this chart is definitive proof of that. one of the things we talk about and mention work. we understand there is not jus economic value in labor. there is human dig nitnity in w. this data, why don't more people understand it? where is this enamored by socialism coming from? >> unfortunately, political

divide. i grew up with liberals and liberal, the root word of liberal is liberty. and madison is a classical liberal and the lines have gotten confused. it is not just income. i did my dissertation and did thousands of regressions on indicates and things liberals want. guess where you have the most women in the workforce? capitalist countries. guess where you have the most civil liberties? then you talk about the dig nity of work.nity of work. well read and incredibly smart person. her book says the cause of modern economic growth starting

in 1700 and up until 1700 every person on the planet made $1,000 a year. then boom, massive economic growth. she takes on 20 nobel lorerate. my favorite guys. those are all common and causal. but she says the primal cause is about 1700 is the first time in history moral language change such that we started calling the business man and woman morally good. my tradition hasn't been perfect on that. gandhi, buttey -- buddha, and it

is something you put up with. we changed the lingo. this is reversible. we ask what are you teaching kids in school? are we teaching kids business and free market is morally good or saying it is corrupt and wall street is nasty. unfortunately there are a few bad apples but the predominance of people in america are basically good. every small business person wants to give their employees health care. when i knock on thousands of doors that is one thing i learned. teaching economics i learned i should have knocked doors more. people are good basically and want to help employees. we have to reverse the moral language and teach kids work is a calling and you better be happy and passionate about you do or otherwise you will have a miserable life. we have to pump up the kids and

show them this is good for you. it is good politics, too. you are telling the kids the truth and pumping them up on business. the left is a little critical. >> talking about young people, college professor and you enjoyed it from the book. you loved being a teacher. not just a professor but a teacher is what comes through here. would you encourage today your students to get involved in politics? >> yeah, i do. but in there i kind of sit my idols plato in the republic and augustine vocate the same council saying do the politics when you are 50 when you are near death. you are done with rhyme rhythm

and song and taken care of yourself and make sure you are done are that deal. get in politics, do internships but then go knock doors. that is how you learn. go into a vocation first. i thought you were going to ask about going into teaching. the same thing, i say always major in your passion. where -- i was an advisor for 18 years. i said do what you love but minor in accounting or web design or something where you can make a dollar in case. follow your passion. a lot of people would come back to me and say i i am glad i did that. >> it is great advice and something when i talk to young people i always saying, you know, i know a lot of successful people from an external

evaluation. i don't know any happy people who are not successful. if your goal is the success part you may find yourself not very happy with what you are doing. >> the incentives from the video generation, too much on the glitter. but these kids are doing better. they are liking their parents more and there is good signs. >> one thing that came up, lot of them, and we talked about the economy and lost generation in terms of what they dealt with in the economy and you make an interesting point. the economic dead end in chapter 12 and i will hit a couple things and come back. you note, even as those keeping track of nothing but the dow jones numbers and the slight uptick in jobs numbers tell themselves everything is back to normal but among most citizens there is an uneasiness that

hints at ongoing deeper problems. a few page later, you say the outcome decades without sound money, increasing regulation, without growing government a great recession is dangerously optimistic. it is cycle and downturn implying all we need to do to get out of it is wait. that is bad news. a couple things. one is we have been told that this kind of flat recovery is the new normal and we will never see four or five percent again.

your point is this is because the fundamentals of our economy. ... on health care kind of thing but now that the results are in, the premiums are going up being fair 15 to 20%. of the deductibles or two to 5,000 in all the economic studies to show the average family has about $400 on hand. so you put that together and

it's devastating. the and then the fundamentals anofthe economy were going out % and that's with the deficit of the 550 billion so the fed has fortunately in on its balance sheet not money but it can become money if the loans ever go out. so if you are growing at 1% with huge stimulus i get in debates and if you raise the interest rates 2%, what would happen to this economy? >> the markets would get jitte jittery. 2% wouldn't be normal. so we have the sugar high and then the classic so low economic growth model. the number one thing is always

capital accumulation. nonfinancial capital that machinery. who is willing to put millions of millions into a physical capital base right now a planned with the best he wil bed he wilm the next ten year window. it hinders any investor's ability. >> and that's it if you are not making a positive act and everyone is looking across the sea, that is in the entrepreneurial spirit that we need. >> host: let me talk about in terms of the economics make a point in here washington shouldn't be in the business of picking the winners and losers of the economy in the private sector. the best way to ensure the

economy is to allow innovators to thrive based on merit and consumer demand for the products and services not on the powerful friends they have in washington. and this gets to i've talked about how this president this really moved our economy away from the economy where it's based on the premise that what you know is more important than what you know and the fact is we are seeing the decisions of 100 million americans every day in the private marketplace on our healthcare choices he talked about i the energy decisions, te internet, you name it are being supplanted by the decisions of 100 political appointees in the city and that has a dampening effect and i would call it the influence of economy. you are right about this

distortion of the incentives and people being rewarded for getting the better tax credit so talk a little bit about that. >> the american people have figured it out. for good or for bad, the educational upside is huge. people are figuring out what's going on right now so you have 80% of the voters going for outsider candidates and all the outsiders and on the left barney is getting 50% of the vote unheard of to see that much energy because people have seen them getting left behind in the dust and if you don't have a lawyer or a lobbyist, they can get through the regulatory tape. they don't like it. but back in the 50s, general

motors and the common sense saying goes to th the nation go. all of the ceos it gets 11 out of 15 exchanges and still has to say complementary things about the exchanges. so that shows you somebody is scared of the federal government. when you are losing 200 million a quarter and back out of the living were 15 and say that the exchanges were okay you can imagine what the small guy is undergoing. it's four years through the high price university so it's hitting them hard.

>> host: is a navigable water. >> guest: and that is the hardest thing to teach. you have to trust the system but that's what the country is built on that we allow them to dictate. how do they know to put ten loaves of bread and car batteries on the table? every time they scan one it's to so i goes shooting out of the supplier and they say make ten more loaves of bread into car tires and diapers amazing no central planner knows that. so the day you start picking winners and losers by the smart guys appear it isn't a little error. it's catastrophic and that's the main reason i wanted to run for office to try to convey that law check. >> host: in the book you point out the private sector business folks subject to corruption no doubt that is true people commit

crimes over time and yet there is this notion that that person in that position in a government entity otherwise making these decisions but i'm now immune from ingots the view of the left that it's a profit motive and the political motive. but if you kind of exposed that which is healthy. >> guest: that is the madison logic and smith. last thing you want is a concentration of power anywhere to read when you have a 4 trillion-dollar budget out of an 18 trillion-dollar economy, that is a concentration of power and the executive has control over that subject so right now we are going through the budget thing and i wish we were in regular order. that would mean the budget would go from the kennedy to the

people's representatives. such a mess so i've tried to call out the red flags on that and educate yourself on all the budget numbers because it is a big deal. >> host: another thing you talk about is the fact and the deficit in a few pages in this book we will hear on the nightly news over the course of months and you talk not only about the economic aspect of it with the moral aspect as well. i remember in the past debates and discussions about the future of the country, huge debate.

we got a balanced budget for the first time in 40 years and it seems to have just fallen off the radar somehow it yet but that has doubled from 18 trillion, 19 trillion, and yet it doesn't get much potential. why is that? >> guest: both sides get overcommitted. you have a good bill called economic goods, not economic bad so everything is good. you want more education, more missiles, more of this and everything but as i said before the date is 19 trillion. the unfunded liability and the promise to pay a decade, medicare is 100,000,000,000,003 in ten years all revenues are going to be used only for the mandatory spending not a dollar in this kind of thing so where is the ethics? anybody lobbying appear on behalf of all these goods it's forgetting one group of people.

medicaid and medicare and social security are insulted in 14 years, seniors under social security will get a 20% clip in the wall right now and medicare isn't far behind. the kids will get way more than a 20% clip so that is the ethics. i talked those kids. that's one of the reasons i went into this. i go to the press and i get tortured because of it. it's my calling and i want to do that. so i go out every day and they say here comes brad again. we know what he's going to say, that it is a moral calling to show what is going to happen. you have to run a bill through the house and the senate to overcome a veto. we can't do it on the committee and most people don't know those basic facts. if yo you yell too loudly people say what are you going to do about it?

well are you doing to fix it, you haven't done anything. i am out there doing everything to influence folks but it's a heavy lift. i'm talking with democrats. one of the biggest is between the right and left personally. they didn't get to that level by putting people down. we get along great. they make this left-wing and right-wing divide that isn't true but right in the middle. whoever is guiding the 4 trillion isn't being led by the right and left. you will see who is controlling the 4 trillion.

>> host: i always felt the media tends to extolled the virtues of those doing that kind of thing and everybody plays a role in the process but they tend to diminish the importance of those that were like you. it's the different splitters and those that are defining the differences in the political process are marginalized. >> guest: there's a few you have to govern and compromise. if you've got 550 billion deficit can we increase that number or decrease so when the fifth-graders get if we are

talking about compromise. i'm willing to compromise with everybody but it's got to be the same direction if you have one present economic growth i'm willing to compromise as long as one person goes out. >> host: that's one of the things too. the debt and deficit that would do more than anything to bring down the debt and reduce deficits of economic growth. absolutely. there is this false census because of the relatively low unemployment rates. as you know in the commonwealth weasel that wwe saw that we hava $1.5 billion revenue. we've had the climbing labor force participation rates so

people left the workforce entirely that contributes. we have a lot of part-time employees working 28 hours because of obamacare and the employer mandate and they are counted as employees towards the unemployment rate and we have been trading out high-paying jobs for low paying jobs. there's human dignity and work and we should value that that's one of the reasons the revenues were down. that is the exact wrong approach. we don't need more working virginians paying higher taxes we need more working. and it seems that the federal level the unemployment rate is down and the administration is always touting that just like in richmond.

the fundamentals are not sound. >> on the commonwealth where we stand for racial tensions are at an all-time high, but you don't get that when the economy is humming along. you get that at 1% growth and there is an animus because people feel like you are competing against each other and we should never have that feeling in this country. you don't see people getting on each other's case so we haven't educated the people when you talk about the labor force participation rates that is right on the money and then our kids are competing against the rest of the world and what good students. the chinese are working hard. i give indian friends here that have a phenomenal work ethic so we are competing globally now. you cannot make decisions in isolation if yo you ask for the

commonwealth of virginia to do a minimum wage of $15 the competitors are just laughing at us. you don't have productivity that you are going to raise the wage. we have to put our productivity levels up over the last 200 years people probably know what is the same thing as our productivity so if you raised your productivity it goes up. c. mccarthy still tracking the wages and productivity? >> guest: in the short run but over the long run that's what we've got to focus on. in addition to this book, he's in the national review that was talking very much about what you talked about on the race relations in the u.s. and economic dynamic. but if you get a chance, that is a great book that talks a lot

about what's going on. let me talk about a couple other things while we have some time. the book writing process this is a very thoughtful book and i enjoyed reading it. i've written a book. if you go bet my college roommas 30 years ago -- [laughter] but i did. and i found the process to be therapeutic in some ways and enjoyable. i would try to carve out some time like a weekend or something because i would have t i would o rhythm and right. some people get up at 5 a.m. before they get off the treadmill. how do you as a member of the house into someone who prides himself are home having

constituent meetings how did you find the time to -- >> a lot of that was already written. there were couple of books. then i had a philosophical. if you are really sleepy at night, was that bad, but his knowledge today. that was socrates and plato with his knowledge and how do you know what you know. we have a 2,000 year search for that and they broke out some of these world-class philosophers. so the left this is what got me to pick some of the ideas, the

left doesn't have a coherent philosophy they can get right now and i get in hot water for saying that. i say i don't own it. i want to give it to you for free. but that crack up in knowledge we don't have any systematic theologians right now internationally, nationally etc. after martin luther king, kennedy, the period. there'that period.there's been e systematic thinking so i wrote a book on that an dot and then i d economic notes from the lectures over the years and i have a few books in here on the brief history of the fix and people will see a lot of that in the book. neil ferguson and the western unique they will find a lot of that in there so there were friends that helped me write.

i have all these big ideas and he helped me put it together. there's things you look back and say i forgot to put that in there. you have a ton of knowledge and 200 sounds like a lot. that's the way i did it. i am not a 5 a.m. get up and write a few pages, it's look for a few we will start cranking stuff and get out of the computer and carve it together. >> host: i want to go back to one of the things in terms of your teaching. at the graduate school, there were about thre the three teacht were mentors can you share with us who they were? >> guest: i had hoped college

from michigan and a world religion i won't name them in the philosophy and then my teacher who was a scottish reformed presbyterian kind of creature but he had karl barth in coming and going into these systematic thinkers in the tradition. when you're in college don't have your act together so all three of them cared for me and i saw the concern look-alike and not only am i thankful for this but i always aim to be a professor based on these three and then i have plenty more. he went to church with me and it did the economics. he was the minister to bill clinton.

so i'm bipartisan. i'm friends with both sides of the aisle and i had been toured on the economic development in the third world think of a woman from the philippines and singapore so i had great people along the lines. it helps you grow. i want to pass it on. then at the end of the day you say i'm done teaching. now it's time to do it, let's put this in action area so i gave it a run. >> host: so you are coming back in starting tonight on the day that we are having this conversation and then what's it like for folks you get up tomorrow and do what? >> guest: in the presidential years over a month at home which is abnormal but then three weeks

in a row in dc, go to the gym, work out with everybody, democrats, republicans, have a good time, watch the news then you start going to the budget committee meetings taking off again tomorrow and votin voting throughout the day meeting with constituents getting your head up on what's coming at us in terms of major bills working with your staff then you go home three weeks of that and go home for one week and do the politics and run for office again to meet with your constituents in the district and i promise to be in every county once a month. i wasn't thinking when i made that promise. >> we just handed the lines change. how has that been in terms of the district that keywords used to to lose constituents and voters.

>> guest: it's okay but i still don't know how it happened. it's kind of a blur. so they are dispersed through the region but you almost wonder if someone designed it. i was there this past weekend running through those counties. it's fun you get to meet new people but it's hard work getting into the new counties can you get to meet new people, share ideas. when you are new people are skeptical. i think it is 12% or something. here's what i believe. you almost have to give proof now. >> host: this is clear in the book what you believe, but it's

interesting because i've seen you on facebook and you say the same thing back home you say here and anywhere else. we see that people are very receptive to that and they have the conversation they are hungry for. >> guest: it goes back to those you talked about in the contract with america. iran on the republicai ran on tn virginia and its not really republican. it's equal treatment for every citizen under the law you say that to anyone they like that. the problem is not enough people hold them to the promises that they are up here.

you follow adam smith and madison and you can predict every one of my goats and go check it out. >> host: here's something to get you press down on. was the prediction [laughter] >> guest: we got a great relationship with fluffy but it's fun. the economics department they are all good folks. >> host: enjoyed reading the book and thanks for taking the time to write it. >> guest: you took notes and

went beyond. >> host: i highlighted with a yellow highlighter and everything. >> guest: it's been fun working with you for a couple of years. >> host: u.s..

modern presidents are so obsessed with talking and campaigning and going places that they fail to talk about the estatstate of leadership that is implementing policy. in fact i start the book with a quote of thomas jefferson, the institution of the law is more important than making them. if you think of that leadership as three tests, getting the answer right, the policy right, communicating that and then implementing it the argument i makmade in this boo