unavoidable, make things better. >> you said that the impact on u.s. banks of the right down of the financing for greek bonds had no material -- >> no, no material impact. >> what about on the cds side? >> again, no material -- >> how do you know that? is there anything -- >> because the fed, it's really them, but they have a really very good feel today, partly because of all the reforms that have been put into place for the direct and indirect exposure to greece, for example, so, they -- they can judge how large they are and they are very, very small. and the cds protection written was quite small, too. >> and finally, the financing of our own debt, and i share the same concern that he has, and i was encouraged that you said you are going to try to restructure. when i was secretary of finance in the state of delaware, we

were con trained by law in terms of how that could be structured and it had to be done, kind of evenly over time, so that, you know, you didn't get into situations where you are kind of, you know, befting on the future. it looks like, you know, from where we sit tod, rates and a significant amount of debt, you know, financed, short-term debt, short-term bonds, and they're going to have to be refinanced at some point, presumably at higher debt. at some point, we're going to be penalized, unless we get a better ten-year fiscal plan. >> again, that's why the prudent responsible, conservative thing to do is extend the maturity of our debt. we've done that, really, quite significantly just over the last two and a half years and we have a little bit further to go. we are closer now to the average of what most other countries do and that makes sense for us. >> thank you again for your service. >> mr. secretary, we thank you for your time and your testimony and we will allow you to excuse yourself now. the chair notes that some

members may have additional questions for the witness, which they may wish to submit in writing, without objection, the hearing record will remain open for 30 days for members to submit written questions to this witness and to place their responses in the record. this hearing now -- >> mr. chairman, i just want to acknowledge my gratitude to you for -- it's difficult when you have all these members and a limited amount of time and i thank you for the fairness and the efficiency with which you conducted this hearing. >> we accept the gratitude. this hearing stands adjourned.

on monday, the supreme court starts three days of hearings on the constitutionality of the new health carol law. hear the oral argument for yourself, in its entirety, as the court releases audio at

around 1:00 p.m. eastern each day, cwith coverage on c-span 3 and at c spn.org, listen and add your comments. our coverage starts monday morning live on c-span with "washington journal" and continues through the day from the supreme court and then, the oral argument on c-span 3. in march of 1979, c-span began televising the u.s. house of representatives to households nationwide. and today, our content of politics and public affairs, non-fiction books and american history is available on tv, radio and online. >> when weapon put that force together to go to desert storm, i viewed every one of those youngsters as somebody that i had a personal responsibility for. i know that general schwarzenegger coffelt the same way. weapon knew they were going into a very dangerous conflict, perhaps. and we wanted to give them every benefit that would allow them to come home safely.

i'm as distressed, more distressed than any member of this committee could ever be that there are veterans who are suffering illnesses that may have been a result of their service in the gulf. i do not know if those illnesses are a result of the service in the gulf or not, but i think we have to keep that as an operating hypothesis until we find out otherwise. we have to get to the bottom of this. >> c-span. kraeflted by america's cable companies as a public service. now, a look at presidential campaign advertisements from c-span's washington classroom. our guest is darrell west, author of "air wars: television advertising in election campaigns." he joined the class to evaluate the evolution of political advertising for the first ads from dwight eisenhower in 1952 to the internet ads to the 2012 presidential campaign. this semester's class is focused

on the road to the white house. with a look at issues and events as shaping the current campaign, as well as historical perspective from past presidential elections. this is an hour and 15 minutes. the. >> on behalf of the students joining us at george mason university in fairpax, virginia, and the students at the washington center here in washington, d.c., we want to welcome to the class the author of this book, "air wars: television advertising in election campaigns." darrell west working on his sixth edition. he is a former professor at brown university. thank you very much for being with us. >> thank you. >> as you look at the evolution and the change over the last 670-plus years in tell viz advertising, what strikes you the most? >> the impressive thing is how the technology has changed, when you go back to the 1950s, the early eisenhower ads, they just took film footage and plopped it

into the ad. today, you see voiceovers, you see animation, you see mornin m. >> let's take a look at that change. i want to begin with one of the ads that was released last week by the obama campaign. this was a 17-minute, some call it a documentary, a political advertising, for a rated by tom hanks. here is two minutes from bara barackobama.com. ♪ >> what do we remember in november of 2008? was it this moment? or this? >> this is an campaign right now that can't find the bottom of

bad news. >> ten years of saving, completely gone, vanished. poof. >> watching the dow industrial average has been like watching the heart monitor of a critically ill patient. >> how do we understand this president and his time in office? do we look at the days headlines. or do we remember what we, as a country, have been through? >> the president-elect is here in chicago and he's named the members of the economic team and they all fly in for the first big briefing on the economy. many of the leading financial figures of the world are taking the subway in from the airport and trapsing through the snow to get to the transition office. >> there was a screen set up for slides, but we might as well have been showing a mirror movie. because what was described in that meeting was an economic

crisis beyond anything anybody had imagined. >> you had people telling you that the auto industry was literally days from collapse. the financial sector, kind of the heart that pumps blood into the economy, was frozen up in cardiac arrest. >> how this ad was released, early excerpts a week and a half ago, then released to the "today" show. a lot of media attention for a web video. >> it was like a movie release. you have the trailer come out in advance to spike people's interest and then the actual documentary came out. and you had tom hanks being the narrator. hollywood coming to washington, d.c. you can see the contrast between eisenhower in the 1950s and obama now, just in the sense of the way they integrate the music, the interviews, they had news clips, and so it makes for a very compelling narrative with

the contemporary techniques. >> let's compare that from the very early ad, 1952, eisenhower for president. ♪ ike for president ♪ you like ike ♪ i like ike ♪ everybody likes ike ♪ for president ♪ hang out the banner ♪ beat the drum ♪ we'll take ike to washington ♪ let's do the job right ♪ get in step with ike ♪ you like ike ♪ everybody likes ike for president ♪ ♪ hang out the banner snsz beat the drum ♪ ♪ we'll take ike to washington ♪ we have to get where we are going ♪ ♪ we'll all go with ike ♪ you like ike ♪ everybody likes ike for president ♪ ♪ hang out the banner ♪ beat the drum ♪ we'll take ike to washington ♪ we'll take ike to washington

>> now is the time for all good americans to come to the aid of their country. vote for eisenhower. >> darrell west, we can smile when we look at that ad, but eisenhower embraced new technology. he embraced television. adelaide stephenson did not in 1952. as we have been talking about in this course over the last couple of weeks, every generation has been the advent of new technology. we are seeing it with the web today. television was brand new in 1952. >> yes. this was the first presidential campaign where tv ads played a role. and so eisenhower was basically using the best of the technology by those standards. of course, by today's standard, the music seems very cheesy, it's so repeltive, people would be bored by that today. we see much greater variety in the message and the production values. >> let's go to 1964. it was an ad only aired once in

september of 1964 and yet what is remarkable is that nearly 50 years later, we are still talking about this one iconic ad. let's watch and explain why when we come back. >> one. two. three. four. five. seven. six. six. eight. nine. nine -- >> ten. nin nine. eight. seven. six. five. four. three. two. one -- >> these are the stakes. to make a world in which all of god's children can live. or to go into the dark. we must either love each other or we must die.

>> vote for president johnson on november 3rd. the stakes are too high for you to stay home. >> and darrell west, one of the questions from brian, a student at george mason university, is, whether or not this ad was designed to scare people in 1964. it was an ad that never even mentioned barry goldwater's name. >> it was definitely designed to scare people. because what johnson wanted to do was to portray goldwater as a warmonger, someone who is given to rash statements. you have to keep in mind the context of this ad, 1964, the middle of the cold war it was a very real threat of a nuclear exchange between the united states and the soviet union. johnson very much played on those fears. that's the hallmark of a successful attack ad. playing on fears that already exist out there among the general public. >> we're going to look at the evolution of television advertising in this class. let me turn to bob from george mason university who has written

on this subject extensively. bob? >> yes, you know, in campaigns, there's always kind of a pulling and tugging match as to who controls the campaign dialogue. who gets the message out to the american public? and it's basically a fight between campaign staffs and journalists. campaign staffers saying, you know, we have a responsibility to get to the american public our candidate's message and let them choose whether it's better than our opponents. and journalists saying, we have a responsibility to police you guys, so that you -- we make sure that the public is not getting misled or you're not doing things like the daisy ad, which was argued scared people too much, was unfair and so on and so forth. and one of the things we'll see is that there's a debate as the media, television, especially, starts actually picking up on ads as a news event. so, every since that daisy ad, that was the first huge

controversy over paid advertising -- i'm sorry, paid media, which is the way theyads. you let the journalists say what they want or you use paid media, mostly tv ads, where you completely control the message and you try to keep both of those going in the same line and journalists often are trying to make sure that people have a chance to stop in that line long enough to think. >> that's a key point, because not only is it an ad buy that may be minimal, maybe $10,000, so it airs once or twice, but it then is -- does generate a lot of news coverage or ads that are only on the web, but also generate media attention. >> absolutely. i mean, today, the goal is to get other outlets to pick up what you're doing. it used to be, you wanted the establishment press to replay your ad. today, because of social media, facebook and twitter, candidates now are aiming at the general

public in trying to get people to watch the ad and then share that video with their friends, because if a trusted source items you, this is an interesting ad and you should watch it, you have much more likely to pay attention to it. >> bob, any questions? >> yeah, i have a question on whether you see a long-term trend toward making ads that are more appealing to journal ilss than necessarily to the public. just talked about this, but the question is, whether ads are intended to make news and whether, if that's so it's changing now, do you say, with the new audience and now ads, once again, are not just made for the people who see them first and not even always first, as we saw with the obama ad, but the general audience, but are instead intended to reach much wider audiences via social

media. >> interesting point. >> ads certainly are designed to attract attention and to generate news, because if you can get journalists to replay the ad for free, basically, that is a win-win for the campaign. candidates use a variety of techniques in order to attract attention. sometimes they use catchy music, we saw examples of that, both obama and eisenhower. sometimes they use humor to make fun of the opposition or draw light of some events. or sometimes, they attract attention by going on the attack. often times, when you look at the types of ads that are picked up by the news media, it tends to be more the attack ads than the positive ads. >> we've gone from the ike jingle to the kennedy jingle of 1960, let's watch. ♪ ♪ kennedy ♪ kennedy ♪ kennedy ♪ kennedy ♪ kennedy

♪ kennedy sfz do you want a man for president ♪ ♪ who is seasoned through and through ♪ ♪ but not so dog gone seasoned ♪ that he won't try something new ♪ ♪ a man who is old enough to know ♪ ♪ and young enough to do ♪ well it's up to you ♪ it's up to you ♪ it's strictly up to you ♪ do you like a man who answers straight ♪ ♪ a man who is always fair ♪ we'll measure him against the others snsz and when you compare ♪ ♪ you cast your vote for kennedy ♪ ♪ and a change that's overdue ♪ so it's up to you ♪ it's up to you ♪ it's strictly up to you ♪ kennedy ♪ kennedy ♪ kennedy ♪ kennedy ♪ for me ♪ kennedy ♪ kennedy ♪ kennedy ♪ kennedy ♪ kennedy >> pretty face-paced for its time. >> very catchy and certainly jack kennedy was a great innovator in terms of tv ads. he was one of the first national

politicians who really mastered the art, came across as being very comfortable in contrast to nixon in 1960, who just seemed awkward, sweated a lot when he was on television. just was not really comfortable in his own skin. and so, what candidates really discovered through television is, the camera doesn't lie. and it kind of led to new types of candidates emerging on the same. >> well, as you pointed out, that ad was 50 years ago, from the kennedy campaign, but this is one nixon ad, but not any different than most of the ads that nixon ran in 1960. >> ladies and gentlemen, the vice president of the united states, richard m. nixon. >> i would like to talk to you for a moment about dollars and cents. your dollars and cents. now, my opponents want to increase federal expenditures as much as $18 billion a year. how will they pay for it? there are only two ways. one is to raise your taxes.

that hurts everyone. the other is to increase our national debt and that means raising your prices. robbing you of your savings. cutting into the value of your insurance. hurting your pocketbook every day, at the drugstore, at the grocery store, the gas station. is that what you want for a america? i say no. ill say that's a false doctrine. i say that we can remain the strongest nation on earth, only through continuing our program of response government. >> vote for nixon and lodge, november 8th. >> and darrell, what many people forget is that john kennedy and richard nixon were essentially the same year, only two years accept rated the two of them. >> but kennedy came across as much younger and more vigorous because of how he looked, how he talked and the way he expressed himself. the ad that we just saw represents a genre we don't see that much anymore, of the candidate speaking directly into the camera. i mean, this year, sometimes you

do see obama and romney talking to the camera, but they are off in a public event, making a public appearance, giving a speech, having people behind them so there's a little more action. this type of ad would be considered very boring today and would be challenging to hold the attention of the audience. >> i'm going to ask jessica and stephen to be prepared to respond to these two ads from 1968. because we started to move into the negative ads, we saw a little bit of that in 1960, but it became much more direct in 1968, the race between hubert humphrey and richard nixon. >> how can a party that can't eunite its unite the nation? how can a party that can't keep order in its own backyard hope to keep order in our 50 states? how can a party that labels the results of its programs, the great society, ever find any real solutions? how can a party that lets the

country get bogged down in an endless war against a fourth-rate military power promise anything but decades of conflict? how in the light of all this can the american people fail to see that the united states urgently needs new leadership? by now, it's clear. the american people do see the need. >> do you want castro to have the bomb? now? do you want any country that doesn't have the bomb to be able to get it? of course you don't. where does richard nixon stand on the u.n. treaty to stop the spread of nuclear weapons? he says he's in, ah, no hurry, to pass it. hubert humphrey wants to stop

the spread of nuclear weapons now, before it mushrooms. hubert humphrey supports the u.n. treaty now, as do the 80 countries who have already signed it. let's stop the spread of the bomb, now. humphrey. there is no alternative. >> so, let me first go to jessica larkins and stephen kinney from st. peters college, get your reaction to those two ads, 1968. jessica, let's start with you. >> hi, yeah, i think that both of those ads are extreme little scary, you know? i mean, if i was to vote for president nixon, i might want to vote for him, you know, based on his ad but then i look at humphrey's ad, shoot, maybe i am afraid of president nixon, because i don't want the bomb to be in the wrong hands. i think both were very scary. >> stephen, what about you? >> i agree. and i want to say that i think

in contemporary era, certainly candidates can use war images to influence the public. however, i don't know that we could use sort of the same method. nixon's ad had images of foreign wars on foreign lands and almost insinuating this is what america could look like. i don't think people would buy the same idea if we had images of afghanistan and any other war. the same with humphrey's ad. i don't think the u.n. treaty would be as important now also it was back then. >> darrell west? >> i think both jessica and stephen make very interesting points there. it's important, when you look at those ads, to see how that type of attack ad is put together. in each of them, you hear the ominous music in the background, which is a little unsettling. and so you are kind of understanding that you are hearing information that is negative and unflattering towards the opposition. we also see the very common technique, which we still see even today, of guilt by association, trying to tie nixon

to fidel castro. >> i'm going to show an ad from the 1976 campaign. one of the earlier bio-ads that was very popular. these four-minute ad buys by the carter campaign in 1976, something we don't have today on traditional television. let's watch. >> hi, governor carter from georgia. running for president. i want to ask you to help me next year. >> in the beginning, jimmy carter's campaign was a lonely one. but through the months, more and more people recognized him as a new leader. a man who will change the way this country is run. a competent man, who can make our government open and efficient. but above all, an understanding man who can make ours a government of the people once again. jimmy carter. a leader for a change. >> bob, we turn to you. >> okay, it's interesting to see, as these ads over time

start to look more like what we're used to now, the '68 was still from another world, closer than the '52. this carter commercial is starting to incorporate the materials that i think we all are used to seeing. but let me get a reaction from chris. >> the -- what i got out of it was, you know, he came from nothing, had nothing and built up his campaign, you know, through grass roots, kind of like you see today with rick santorum -- >> make you want to vote for him? >> from what i know about him now, no, but back then, maybe. but yeah, you know, it just looked like a campaign of the people, just like you said, you know? >> good point. okay, well, jerry joined us in the class last fall, he was the media guy behind the carter campaign and also joining us from plains, georgia, former president jimmy carter, who talked about the 1976 race and why he was able to win over incumbent president gerald ford.

>> now that most candidates are full-time campaigners, what do you think they can do to stand out in the primary season? >> well, the republicans are the only ones that are going to have a primary campaign, as you know, and there may be one or two later that are added, maybe, several that withdraw. but their main hope for success is to go to the extreme right in order to convince tea party folks and others that they are the most conservative people who have ever lived on the face of the earth and the ones that goes most radically right is likely to be the best favorite for the republicans to choose. i think they in the long run are making a mistake but they have to do that. but some of the thing, for instance, that governor perry has said from texas, lately, has been, have been counterproductive, condemning social security and things of that kind.

i think as they move further and further to the right, they are moving further and further away from success. if president obama continues his moderate and very substantial and accurate presentation of issues, even though he hasn't been successful in washington on many domestic things, i think president obama is going to be re-elected. because republicans are going to kill themselves for the general election, when independents and moderates both, in order to get the election from the extreme right. >> darrell west, political advice from somebody who has been there. and one of the points that he made in the class is he had the invisible primary in 1975. he made mistakes. no youtube, no social media. he wasn't getting a lot of attention. he began to when he won in 1976 in iowa and new hampshire and his campaign was ready for the national media spotlight. >> no longer is there an invisible primary. everything is on the record, because everybody has cell phones that you can take pictures, you can record audio,

you can take video and upload it to youtube right away and people do that. so, candidates, when they are out in public, they have to assume it's on the record, so, if they make a little mistake, it can get mag ani fany fimagni. that happens in today's world. so, candidates have to be aware of that. they have toll be careful of what they say. they have to realize they're on the record all the time. >> bob, this next ad kind of displays the power of the presiden presidency. it was something that richard nixon used very effectively back in 1972. let's watch and i'm going to come back and get your reaction to this ad. >> this is the passport of the president of the united states. in his four years in office, richard nixon has visited six continents and 47 countries. in india, he laid out the nixon doctrine. in yugoslavia, he met with