we just want honest truth. what they really want. all of your books complement each other so nicely and empowering people to have those discussions. i am so appreciative that we got to do this. and that we get to share your work with the world. thank you for joining the conversation in the virtual bay area book festival. [music] tonight at 9:00 p.m. eastern td ameritrade founder talks about his book the harder you work on c-span two.

welcome to the policy briefing series. the nations permanent research centers. they dealt -- the national security and democratic governors. it led to significant impacts on important public policy initiatives here and around the world. as we are taking the steps that will lead us out of this crisis we will find value. they will have the potential effects of that the coronavirus has have on the u.s. in the world. as a reminder will be taking audience questions. today's briefing is a senior fellow with the hoover institution.

the u.s. i aib. in other governmental and nongovernmental agencies dealing with developments. the democracy from the russian rage. thank you for joining us today. >> let me jump right into the middle of this. several leaders within the communist party have claimed that the government has performed while with eight and political surprise -- supplies. in the reputation.

i don't consider myself an expert. i don't think you need to be an expert on china. the pose of democracy. they have a lot of holes. we know it began in rouen. radical containment. china was not transparent with its own society.

it could be very dangerous to human life. one of the chinese doctors lost their life. it's very important to recognize first of all that we don't know what the death rate in china is because we can't believe any of the statistics that they produce they are all manipulated. and second of all we do know what the death rates in democracies around the world because they are transparent. that record shows a very wide demonstration. it how they are managing the crisis.

in spain you've have over 500 people and 1 million population died from the virus. over 400 and italy. over 300 in britain. but some countries had had very little impact on human life. taiwan has have under one death per 1 million. it's been the greatest success story and managing the virus. i think the lesson here is not to just take propaganda but to look and see why some democracies have been doing better than others. i want to ask you what explains at the variation. what about china's claims

providing critical aid and supply. what is the validity of that claim? >> they had been sending pp and face masks but facemasks but nothing at the level that they promised. good think you thank you and so on. what they delivered is what they had promised. and people feel a little bit cheated. >> let's go back to talking about the cross country variation within democracies of success in thwarting the pandemic. i would imagine that there are some demographic variables that had that.

the differences in governance across this country. i think, if you study what countries like taiwan had done we will have a very deep dive into that one week from now when they will host at 9:00 a.m. pacific a really extensive policy discussion of the taiwan experience in managing covid-19 we will have the vice president of taiwan in the secretary of state's of science and technology advisor speaking to us along with several other panelists. what you learn from the taiwan experience from south korea from israel and some of these other countries like germany and scandinavia and if

countries responded very rapidly and very vigorously with public health measures and public education measures they were able to get ahead of the virus and often contain it through identifying the sick and isolating them. screening at the airport and so on. early widespread testing made a big difference as well in a number of these countries in different ways taiwan was doing testing korea manufactured quite a lot of viral test they had been using bigger bigot data to try to track the pattern of the virus

into the country in the democracies that had have success also have some other common features was strong public health systems. the populations tend to be healthier with long life expectancy. in lower levels of chronic diseases. one of the things i worry about in the united states if you look at the advanced industrial democracies in terms of one indicator of public health which is the rate of obesity the rate of obesity is 36 percent. maybe 50% higher than many of our peer advancements. we have some work to do. and these successful democracies we are able to widely distribute facemasks in hand sanitizer they pushed their public health experts out there in front to be the

authoritative voice and coordinate a response and they started from the beginning with higher levels of public trust and confidence and therefore cooperation than in some of the other democracies. i know you are an expert in the government's around the world. and the use of democratic institutions. they kind of characterize the growth of democracy around the world. with the constant struggle between authoritative regimes around the world. it was deepening and accelerating the recession in alarming ways. you have them seizing on the public emergency to become even more comprehensive and

persistently authoritarian. you saw vladimir putin was to be expected. they stay in power into their 80s or beyond. you have hungry which would arty crossed the line to authoritarian past and measure in the parliament. they give decree power and suspended parliament and elections. the prime minister can now rule by decree. they had been banning newspapers. even india has been and intellectuals. including the brother of one of our esteemed hoover fellows.

the major online newspaper. just reporting the truth in a critical fashion. you have them seizing on the crisis to narrow freedom. and then there is another thing e we we can talk about it something we all need to ponder which is the challenge to human freedom that comes from even liberal democracies like korea and israel. implementing these apps on mobile phones. and what happens if those don't go away after the crisis. i would like to talk about that. we are listening to larry diamond who is a fellow at the hoover institution.

a big part of the screening and tracing and tracking that a lot of people are using are what they might be invasive. the condition of the citizen in the implications. it seems on the one hand assessable. it does create some problems and i know you thought about the problems and ways to mitigate those problems. see my since we are defining a free society at the hoover institution this is a pretty important problem from the standpoint of human liberty the problem in part is that these methods work they have helped states identify where

the virus is cropping up who has it and who has been in contact with them. it does automate and speed up the contact tracing. on the other hand governments can use them to monitor people for other reasons on what happens when we surrender our privacy surrender our freedom from state surveillance and then we don't get that freedom back after the crisis. i don't think we can trust governments even very liberal governments to surrender these tools after the crisis is over. .. ..

religious in ethical leaders who can monitor what the government is doing in the claims that the government is making. get authoritative information from the mobile phone companies about how they are using these applications so that we can have a full and frank discussion within the society about how much freedom we want to surrender, and when that surrender should be terminated and returned to the people. >> the free democracy you mentioned has been successful in managing this south korea taiwan israel. very aggressive tracking and tracing techniques involved. how did they navigate the civil liberty, the democratic

government associated with that. >> well, i think that this is very much a matter of debate now in korea, where the current president moon has a lot of popularity and, at the moment, strong support. in israel, you know, israel is the very kind of independent minded so society and people are concerned that the message that has been used by the israeli and intelligence organization to track terrorist are now being used to track the virus. i think that this is ongoing. i think may be the problem is less serious and taiwan because they had such enormous success and containing the virus very

early on and in reducing the infection rate to pretty close to zero. of course, it is in easier thing to do if you are an island state. nonetheless, it requires strong diligence and early reaction. i think the compromise of individual freedom in the temporary emergency has not been such an imposition on people. >> larry, i don't know how much you know specifically about the absent technology that allowed tracing, but i have a couple questions that are interesting. joseph suggests that these apps, or technologies, could be built with self-destruct system so they would automatically expire at a certain point. six-week x out, eight weeks out. balancing that with surveillance

issues. making the following claim, the google, apple effort around contact raising his claim to protect individual privacy. do you know much about that. >> i do not know how they do it. i know that they do it and one way to ensure greater privacy is to use immediate neighborhood bluetooth connections. >> yeah. >> to identify who you are in contact with, rather than the more centralized cell phone system. some of the apps are limiting the exposure, in terms of freedom, by relying on the more neighborhood immediate geographic connection of bluetooth.

with respect to the self-destruction, i loved that. i think that definitely all legal and technological steps towards inc. is eclipsing liberty have to have sunset clause attached to them. it can be a time related one, or it can just be an independent review board having the authority to order the mobile phone companies to implement the self-destruction button when the crisis has passed. >> got it. >> great idea. >> great ideas. i want to come back to the challenges that the pandemic is imposing on democracies. i have a couple really good questions about what they are doing to authoritarian regimes. james asked the following question, when it comes to broad-based crisis such as

covid-19, due to the regimes and economic structures have an inherent advantages over open government economic structures. if such an advantage exist, how can countries neutralize or mitigate that competitive advantage? covid impacts on the regimes of cuba and venezuela, have there been any and, if so, what are they? how are they reacting to the pandemic? >> okay. well, it is impossible to claim that there is an intrinsic authoritarian advantage for managing a pandemic. when you see how many democracies have done a pretty admirable job of doing so. frankly, in terms of immediate and transparent reaction to the first signs of crisis. a much better job than china has

done, without the cost, in terms of human freedom. korea, taiwan, singapore and so on, countries that have had more success, they did have the 2003 experience of the sars epidemic, and they learned from that about the need for a lot of the measures that i spoke of. but, the claim of intrinsic advantage for authoritarianism simply does not wash. the second question, again? >> what is going on in places like cuba and venezuela? >> you know, it is very hard to know what is going on, with respect to covid, in countries like cuba and venezuela because we do not have honest reporting of information. because, in venezuela, the population has been so

devastated by hunger and malnutrition that, you know, it is hard to know who is dying from what. i will say, it is interesting, as you look at these infection rates, there is a website where i have gotten the data that informs my earlier points, it is intriguing that countries in the equatorial region, the cuba and venezuela are either in or they border, countries that are more in the hot and humid climates in the global south have not yet been hit with anything like the level of epidemic that europe, u.s. and so on have been. is that because of their climate , is it because they just have not been in the global transmission belt quite as much?

it remains to be seen. it is noteworthy. i will say that iran has been hit pretty hard by this. again, we do not know what the real rates of infection are, because he would leave iranian state authorities in terms of the accuracy of reporting. >> we know there have been no infections in north korea. >> yes. except maybe -- [laughter] >> may be. i want to go around, i want to get back to democracy and talk about the way the pandemic is affecting the pillars of democracy. free press and the media. what kind oppressors are being played in democracy generally as a result of the pandemic and vibrance in the important part of democracies. >> well, i think that what we are finding now is a heightened

need for an effect give vigorous independent press. now, we would like it to be one that does not further feed our political polarization. we want a contest of perspectives. we will have media, print media, online media, television media that will have different editorial orientations for jobs. pluralism is crucial. what we do not want is government threatening that pluralism or threatening investigative reporting with laws like what hungary has passed that threatened five-year prison terms for any "false reporting" about the covid-19 pandemic. who the heck is supposed to determine what is false

reporting and what are inconvenient facts the government and authoritarian or liberal governments don't want their people to know. again, i will say, india has become, i think, an important friend of the united states. the relationship with india is a very important one. president trumps trip there was a positive step for the united states. we do need to be careful not to get the prime minister a completely free pass while he intimidates critics and tries to suppress media independence in this crisis. that is a very dangerous potential trend that could develop an india. >> yeah. let me ask you one more question about the media. i asked george this yesterday. you know, one of the responsible acts of the media in these kinds of circumstances as to moderate

scientific information about health consequences and the policies that can mitigate the development of the consequences. our free society is better able to manage at? how do you balance the need for accurate information and consistent information with the need to have a pluralistic wild west discussion about what is going on #. >> well, i think that our major publications, whether their editorial line is in one direction like the wall street journal or the other direction like the new york times, they have done a reasonably good job of trying to inform their readers of what is in the realm of scientific possibility. we did not know about hydro chloroquine until recently the evidence for it does not look

very promising. media reporting, properly identified it as speculative, at best. now we are hearing the reporting that rendered severe, this antiviral drug is showing some very promising health effects. i think the media has been pretty wise and responsible and reporting the range and possibilities when we may have a vaccine. a public expectation, but allowing for the real prospect of a hopeful and early breaks breakthrough. any reporting that is inconvenient, any reporting that could cast them in a bad light is suppressed. when you start suppressing reporting, you actually handicap your ability to fight this virus

china you take for granted, but this is the way they operate, and the world is paying the price. i think germany will not wind up suing china for damages, but, you know, in a certain moral respect, i think that the whole world has a right to do so. whether the virus emanated from a wuhan wet market or whether it escaped from a wuhan instituted virology lab, either way, china's incompetence and suppression of the truth from the beginning contributed the spread of the virus. i will just say this, because it has been so important. the success story of the democracies like taiwan, korea and israel.

transparency, transparency, transparency. early, truthful, authoritative reporting of what is happening an intelligent responsible interpretation. they can question it if they want, but moderation of it by the media has been very crucial in battling this virus. tom, that brings us to the social media where it is much more like the wild west and here i have some hope that facebook is going to be more responsible and venting some of the information on its website. facebook is moving pretty soon now towards the creation of an independent review board for some of its editorial decisions. i think that that could help in moderating this content. >> david asked the question, are you concerned about the danger

that the companies will be censoring actual useful information, as opposed to conducting legitimate editorial activities? >> this brings me to the review board. let's say facebook decides to take down some post challenging a scientific claim by the government or floating a scientific idea that facebook decides is quackery so they take it down. the thrust of david's question is, isn't that dangerous, the value of where we are headed now with facebook's voluntary decision to create this independent review board is that the facebook user, if they have their cereal taken down, could file an appeal to the new independent appeals board and then they would assess that, and

there be a noncorporate body of individuals, kind of weighing the evidence in making the decision. >> interesting. >> let's move onto another important pillar of democracies and that is voting. the pandemic has affected our physical ability to conduct fair and wide voting in elections. i have a question from michael which is, are there any best practices for conducting elections during this public health emergency? >> i think that the clear best this that is at hand, and that most election experts think we should help to rapidly develop, in terms of support, technical and financial support, for state and local election administrators, to make more broadly available to the public, is vote by mail. just think about it logically.

if we are going to have, even if we make progress, which i believe we will, in slowing or containing the virus in the coming months, if we are likely to have a resurgence of the virus, in the fall of this year, as we did during the great influence in the fall of 1918, a lot of people are going to be afraid, once again, to go outside of their homes. we will be short poll workers as we were in wisconsin. even in cities like milwaukee where they reduce the number of polling stations by over 95%. people can vote by mail, absentee from their homes, put their ballot in a pre-stamped envelope for free postage and have the mailman pick it up or put it in a po box. it will be a lot safer.

it will be a lot safer. a lot of people will want to do that. at a minimum, i think it is very important that we give the states and localities the assistance they want and need to ramp this up as an option for their voters, if they want to avail themselves of it. five states now will vote purely by mail in november of this year. three that have been, colorado, oregon and washington. they will be joined by two others, hawaii and utah. utah is an interesting case. a deep red state. pretty faithfully republican. the county by county, they have been phasing in universal vote by mail. the voters have liked it. it has worked out well. they decided to adopted at the state level. our political science colleagues who have evaluated what happened

when counties in california, washington and utah switched from voting mainly in person to mandatory vote by mail, what they found i think is very encouraging for the current moment. there was no partisan impact at all. vote by mail had no affect on the percentage turnout of democrats versus republicans. it had no effect on the average electoral results in terms of the balance between the two parties. it seems to be partisan neutral. partisan neutral, we can all get behind it and improve our safety and security and legitimacy of the election by having more comprehensive vote by mail. >> michael asked a question about fraud associated with vote by mail. how do you know the person that check the ballot is a person entitled to make the vote.

how does one protect against noncitizens voting by mail? >> they will not get a mail ballot. i don't think no one has really raised that as a significant concern. i think the greater concern is very, very subtle. there could be households, i don't dismiss this, where you've got kind of an authoritarian figure in the household and may be a traditional father or strong-willed other individual and they say, i will tell you how you're going to vote. give me your ballot. i think it will be, you know, you way the downside of every other option. the downside of that, i think, is pretty low risk, compared to many people feeling like they cannot vote or maybe they are

exposing themselves to greater danger by voting in person as seven people, at least, who voted in wisconsin came down with covid in the april primary. >> larry, maria wants to know, why don't we just vote electronically by the internet? >> well, i think that there will be growing support for internet voting. senator bob carey authored an op-ed in favor of that. the answer is very simple. the technology simply is not there to ensure against fraud and subversion and, you know, contamination of the vote. it is too easy to hack any internet system. even what would be a very secure

one. just ask the pentagon. the best scientist in the world and the united states have a very clear stand here. it is in two parts. don't ever hold a vote of consequence that cannot be audited or recounted by a paper trail. internet voting cannot do that. therefore, number two, do not institute internet voting until we have some technological breakthrough that is not on the horizon. >> let's talk a little bit about civil so society. people who concern themselves with public issues and engage in voting and discourse to solve problems. the predicate of the civil so society is freedom to assemble.

freedom to associate with who you want. this pandemic is limited in many significant ways. how do you see the pandemic undermining the civil necessary for the democracy. >> first of all, there is a danger of legal action by elected and nonelected leaders who want to heighten their power and diminish freedom so that they don't have to suffer criticism in oversight. secondly, i am really worried about the damage of the resource base of civil society organizations. nonprofit institutions, if i may say so, including think takes, universities, oversight organizations, as a result of the economic pain we will be

going through. the third thing is, a lot of civil side hundred society organizations prosper from face to face interaction. community action, and, by the way, not just to defend democracy, how about just to hand out food to hungry people. one of the great crises that food banks are facing right now is not only a shortage of the money to buy the food to distribute, it is also a shortage of volunteers. who actually hand out the food, because people are afraid of getting sick. all of these, i think, are dangers to civil society and our community spirit. >> have you seen any new displays of civil interaction that give you some optimism about the future of our democracy? >> yes. i have.

we are all seeing them. some of them involve these, from a distance celebrations of the amazing work of our medical care professionals and first responders, who are being treated like the battling heroes that they are. when people come to their balconies are playing music or applaud them or sing them or so on and the musical tributes including the amazing musical tribute that cnn hosted a couple of weeks ago. tom, i have to say, i think another reassuring thing is, we have not lost our sense of humor. some of the best humor that i have seen, political humor and just frankly almost infantile humor has been generated during

this pandemic. if i can just share one example, i think we need a light moment amid this grim challenge we are facing. a new yorker had a cartoon, many of us are dog owners, so i think we will identify with this. they had a cartoon of a bunch of dogs seated around a board room with the head dog in your role as director in a cat at the other and of the board room and the director was saying to the other dogs, our covid-19 plan is working. the humans are staying home. the cat pipes up, why wasn't i consulted about this. [laughter] >> that's great. funny. appropriate for the times, too. the greatest social interaction of our time, the virtual

cocktail party everyone is attending, at least on friday afternoons. >> mine is on thursday. i will savor it at the end of this day. >> larry, great conversation. thank you for joining us this morning. >> thank you. >> tuesday, may the fifth will be the next at 11:00 a.m. pacific and 2:00 p.m. eastern with doctor scott ellis in economist john taylor. discussing covid-19 and the reopening of the economy. a very interesting discussion. senior fellow at the hoover institution. before coming to hoover full-time at a 25 year career. the top knuckle centers in the country and served as chief of neuroradiology at stanford university medical center. john taylor said george p scholz senior fellow at the hoover institution in a professor of economics at stanford university. he served as undersecretary for

the treasury for international affairs under president george w. bush. i am looking forward to my discussion with a permanent medical dr. and an economist as we examine the question surrounding reopening our economy in a safe and productive manner. you can join tuesday's briefing at the same link you signed in on today. hoover.org and twitter, facebook and instagram. i want to thank you all for joining us today. please stay healthy and i look forward to seeing you next time. ♪ >> and i don't tv and prime time new york times reporter chronicles his journey to reconnect with his south asian culture and family. we take a look at author program with political pj o'rourke. ameritrade founder joe shares his insights and becoming an entrepreneur. geneticist betty investigates her family's oral history.

the claims of their descendents of james madison and his slave corine. african-american study professor frank wilder offers his thoughts on being black in america. find more information on both tv.org or on your program guide. >> joining us on book tv from detroit is janet webster jones in alyson jones turner. the co-owners of source book sellers. janet, when did you start your bookstore? >> 1989. we just celebrated our 30 years of selling books here in detroit. at that time, vendors, people had been showing up. in 2002, we helped form a collective of three independent stores that share the space.