ways, how he actually justifies the southern move from independence. he goes on to say that the drew upon ancient and medieval principles that were inherited through the enlightenment philosophers but those principles are stronger than the philosophers or even the founders recognized. the anglo-american legal and political traditions communicate those political and social principles that are more compelling than even the founders recognized. he goes on -- he insists that the war against southern independence was just as much a war against northern democracy as it is against southern aristocracy. i wanted you to take that away from reading and see how it fits into what de tocqueville sees. i think it does fit in quite well. let's take a question on anything at this point. i wanted to give you that as context. i saw you had your hand up again. >> mr. barone mentioned medicare.

it reminded me of earlier this week "the new york times" had an expose on ron paul and his early career when he first opened up his medical practice or he refused to participate in medicare or medicaid. a lot of people, of course, you don't want to treat poor people. he treated anyone, but those people who could not pay, he accepted vegetables, a dozen eggs. i think that speaks a lot towards our ability as individuals to make our own contracts and the ability of us to take care of each other. we don't need these centralized programs like medicare and medicaid. i think when we have an abundance of them, you spoke of america's prevalence of charity and giving to things like that. we hold an extreme capacity to take care of each other on an

individual smaller community basis rather than big centralized government programs. >> one of the arguments my father was making around the family dinner table in the late '50s, early '60s. >> good arguments, though. >> my father is a physician and a surgeon. his father had been a doctor. he was from a family of sicilian immigrants and unusually, they sent him to college and medical school, sort of like jewish immigrants than italian immigrants. he became a doctor and moved to detroit, which was the great growing dynamic city. fastest growing major metro area in the united states 1900 to 1930 except for los angeles, it was number two to l.a. it was bigger then. they didn't charge -- he developed a fine sense of which patients were freeloading and said they couldn't afford it but actually could, and which ones tried to pay you but you knew they really couldn't afford it and you just tried to settle it.

i saw people at his office, his office hours on tuesday and thursday nights. they would pay for the office call and the woman would get out her wallet out of her purse and take out four dollar bills and get out the change purse and put the last dollar on there out of change. it was $5 for an office call. $300 for an appendectomy in the 1950s. that was a free market system. people provided for that. you just ate the cost of that. sometimes people came out badly. my grandfather barone lost a house that he couldn't keep the mortgage up on in the 1930s. couldn't keep up the mortgage payment of $100 a month. a doctor. well, there was mass unemployment. people couldn't pay him. they would bring in cookies or a chicken or something. i mean, that was how you got paid. some olive oil or -- i don't know what they made. tomato sauce. they would bring you, you would do what you can. a lot of his patients were italian.

but you know, in some ways the medical profession -- that's not today's medical profession. you can't just wish that situation into existence and you can also imagine that there were situations that were a lot of people weren't getting care that you probably think should have. if you were all knowing, you would want to have get care. you know, not all doctors were going to do this and so forth and so on. increasingly people who entered the medical profession, mds do not go to become entrepreneurs with their own offices. they're becoming part of larger organizations, signing up on hospital staffs doing this or that. it may be this is also the result of in part half of the graduates are women who are somewhat -- tend to be -- i could be attacked for saying things like this. but i think it's empirically

true who are more likely to want to have stated definite hours rather than office hours on tuesday and thursday nights. oh, and also be on call 24 hours a day for your patients who are really sick and in the hospital. and you have e.r. duty. my dad left christmas day parties to go to the emergency room and sew people up. not everybody wants that kind of life. people have good reason for not wanting to do so. that's time away from your family. we're not going to retrieve that perhaps golden era of medicine ever again. we do -- we're facing in this election some what may be very serious questions and consequences may flow depending on how the voters vote, whether or not this law is passed in 2010 is going to go into effect or how it will go into effect. and we also face the interesting

question, was talking about a class this morning of the constitutionality of this law. it's been more than 70 years. >> it covers everything. >> that's what i was taught in law school. in law school, we were taught wicker filburn the case, he can't produce oats for his own cows with -- unless the government says he can. that was a 1941 decision. you know, so wicker v. filburn is maybe dead. we have for the first time in 70 years, the supreme court giving consideration and indeed devoting highly unusual 5.5 hours of oral argument to the constitutionality of a major piece of economic legislation. i think however the court rules, the question of constitutionality of many pieces of legislation will become a lively political and perhaps legal issue, which has not been the case for the last 70 years. that's a difference. it's a difference that gets us

more towards -- that senses at least a little bit in a decentralizing situation as far as these government apparatuses go. because to the extent that's an issue, it may inhibit people from even proposing some forms of centralization which they might otherwise in wicker v. filburn atmosphere might have done. >> have a follow-up? >> just to tag on to that. why is everything becoming a grandiose constitutional question now? >> it's grandiose because it's -- well, it's a constitution we are expounding as chief justice john marshall wrote. because it's an interesting question. because you have this -- in this case, the novelty, you got two interesting constitutional questions here at least. the novelty of a mandate to buy a commercial product. we've never had a court rule that congress can require that. they've never done it before. i mean, everybody has searched

the precedents as far as the people that want this to be upheld, surely it would have come forward with the precedent if they could have found anything, if they could have somehow cited president. they haven't done so. we can be sure they've tried. it's not there. so it's a novel question. we have a constitution of limited powers. tocqueville has some chapters on the constitution which i confess i did not review for this meeting. but the idea of limited government and subsidiarity is written into the constitution to at least some extent. now a couple of the issues we were discussing in relation to centralization are issues that do look like they're national in scope. who serves in the military in time of war? war at time in which by the way, 400,000 people in the military died. okay? you've got names on your plaques here at the citadel and it's a pretty big one for world war ii. if you were here during world war ii, you knew lots of those people who died.

the question of immigration, who gets within our boundaries. there's no rule of international law or national law, we don't have any obligation to admit anybody of any character to the united states except perhaps diplomats under rules of international law. even then, we don't have to recognize the country and declare them persona non grata. nobody has a right to come in to the united states who is not a citizen here. we prudently and intelligently let lots of people come in as visitors, as people doing business, as immigrants, as a lot of things. we'd be fools not to. we don't have to. we don't have a constitutional responsibility. that's where the powers of the federal government are the greatest. arguably, there's a need for uniformity or you can make the argument you need uniformity and so forth when you start getting into medical care policies and so forth. why not have more decentralization and also not just give states -- insurance companies and monopolies within

states, but let it go across state lines so people can purchase policies across state lines. there's a strong argument for that. although it's an argument that says we're going to undermine state and local autonomy. you see. the people of new york want you to pay for podiatry and for psychological counseling about whatever else. neurotic manhattan people. >> about their dogs. >> the dog psychology. you got to pay for that and have it as part of your policy. doggy analysis. you know, somebody was up to albany and figured a way to make money on that. we know how those things get into laws. somebody demands it. it is a local decision. one of the things i think tocqueville would say is when you have local decisions, some of them are going to be stupid. they're not all going to be smart. some will be real dumb.

>> some will be smart. >> and the sum total is going to do things and provide ways to improve things better than you can. the french had a system of computer system called the mini tell in the 1980s and it was going to take over everything and so forth. that thing you got there is not a mini tele. it wasn't invented by central authority. >> one of the readings was king numbers by john randolph. i think if you go back over that, you'll see how much he takes from tocqueville or how similar. in "king number," he refers to the bare majority and how he's horrified at the notion that precedent, tradition and law can be overturned by a mere majority appealing to an abstract principle. though that principle is not one that has been set down in tradition.

consider -- he looks at stability and predictability in matters of economic exchanges exchange and social order. he fears that an impulse of an egalitarian plebocite might usher in the unrest and horror of the french revolution. in short, adding on to what de tocqueville does. the pursuit of equality and widespread democracy rather than republicanism will destroy american tradition of oral liberty. randolph old republicanism reinforces the notion that the american founding was a revolution not made but averted. that goes back to what speaker gingrich said last week. his work also provides a bridge between jefferson and calhoun. i just wanted to make sure that -- i hope you'll go back and re-read that given the brilliant lecture by mr. barone. i think it will make a lot more sense now. any other -- let's take another one or two questions.

questions? cadet slater? >> you were talking about how the society and the religious tradition, really important in maintaining freedom and i guess keeping society together at a local level a lot better. now, i think that played a pivotal role in the peace process right after the civil war. because those local groups could really keep everything together, keep social cohesion. but a lot of times when we're looking at other civil wars that are threatening to relapse back into conflict, the peace process is really just kind of at that macro level. let's throw peacekeepers in there. do you think it should be encouraged that these local civil societies and local village communities should be really integrated into that peace process? >> that sounds like a really smart question.

i'm tempted to start off by asking with mal icetoward none, charity towards all. lincoln was addressing the federal government in that. but he was certainly setting a tone after. the most terrifying passage in american oratory that all the bloodshed shall be paid for. it's fair and just altogether. whoa. and then he gets right into that. i would recommend in that connection a book that i've read, i can't remember the title of it. the author is drew faust, who is currently the president of harvard university. and she has a southern background and she read a book about the remembrances after the civil war. on both north and south. the memorials. the amount of people killed. i refer to 400,000 in world war ii. 600,000 in civil war. in a nation of 38 million, okay? what is that for -- what's the equivalent of that in the

proportionate nation of today? it's 4,800,000 people dead. that's a lot. you know. you go to any little southern town and courthouse town, any new england town and so forth and you look at the plaque and numbers of people and look up the census numbers, 1860's census numbers for that community, and you get an idea of the sort of thing. but as i say, i forget -- i think the word remembrance or something is in the name. it's something you can easily find. it's a book that addresses this in a very intelligent way. since i have developed an anti-harvard prejudice after going there, i have to say that i thought she seems to be a very thorough scholar and a person that writes with great intelligence, sympathy for people in all these situations. >> we have time for one last question.

gentlemen? >> mr. lacey. go ahead. >> mine wasn't so much a specific question as just i was curious more on your thoughts with the -- when you brought up education earlier and you spoke about timid and industrious animals-type thing. i guess teaching in the main and not promoting excellence. i thought about, i heard about education in some other nations that we're trying to compete with, with our education system and perhaps trying to emulate them even though those systems seem to be along the same lines of promoting -- >> please read that book. [ inaudible ] we'll have a couple of chapters on that. please continue, mr. lacey. >> just interested to get more of your thoughts on that. along with -- once again, we were talking about de tocqueville and he was talking about these aren't these bonds necessarily but where these bonds come from. i would say that in america,

schools provide a lot of those bonds. like a lot of people associate with their alma mater more than any other organization. just interested to get more of your thoughts on education. >> okay. well, education. a couple things. number one, my thoughts that i expressed here are sort of few things that i -- a book that i wrote called "hard america soft america" published in 2005. hard america is portions of life where you have competition, and soft america is where you don't. one of my basic thesis is most americans age 6 to 18 lived in soft america. progressive public schools and then from 1830 lived in hard america in places like the citadel and selective colleges of all kinds and the military and private sector endeavors in various ways. that -- why do we have incompetent 18-year-olds and competent 30-year-olds. we have the most competent 30

year olds in the world. we don't have the most competent 18-year-olds or so i was asserting. so i was trying to answer that. there's an exception to that period after sputnik. i was a beneficiary of this. we suddenly decided that we've got to have advanced placement courses and higher ed courses in a lot of public schools, at least where you had affluent or high iq kids in large numbers. the private school i went to three years ahead of mitt romney, we certainly had this. we had very smart kids. i thought they were a bunch of jerks, but it turned out they are actually smart people. you see people in their adolescence, that's their worst. anyway, they were -- so that was it. school ties, yeah, some of the voluntary associations we're talking about, a lot is nurtured by football teams and things. which i think at some level, you can say it's just kind of silly. why do i care whether my sister or brother-in-law care whether the university of michigan beats michigan state. it's more important to them because they live in lansing,

and still have their u of m sticker on their car. but hey. it's a positive thing. it's helped to build, you know, an important academic institution of some distinction. so we have all these different things working together and you have, you know, so many worthy institutions that are worthy in one way or another, or many ways, that it's helpful. the french system, by contrast, probably produces, you know, produces more excellence. they had a period where all their presidents and prime ministers had gone to this one school. i happened to walk by it one time, one of their installations in paris left bank. they have a very efficient parking garage in the basement of this historic building in the left bank of paris, and these people are very confident they're going to run the country. and you know, you get -- >> they do. >> well, they do. they do. they run the biggest private firms in the government. they run it centrally from

paris. we do. and britain, you know, you still have an awful lot of concentration of oxford and cambridge. the current prime minister, david eaton and christ church. he's one of the 17 prime ministers that went to eaton, the same private school. these people basically identify each other by saying to somebody they see, were you at school? it's understood that the only one you could be talking about is eaton. apparently it's academically a really tough and rigorous school, and david cameron did well there and he was at christ church at oxford and this and that and so forth. the economist are mostly from mau maudlin college in oxford. we have many, many mafias in this country with lots of smart and talented people in lots and

lots of them. it's one of our great strengths. you know, if you get a leader -- you know, we've had a president who went to harvard law school, the previous president went to harvard business school and the leading republican candidate went to harvard law school. then, bill clinton came from nowhere and went to georgetown, this was not a top-rated college. >> he they not went to -- >> yeah, law school. newt gingrich came from a dysfunctional family background and attended emery and actutula and they don't hold the position in our society that oxford and cambridge did, and nobody would mistake them for that. yet, they both ascended to the top of the political heap in part through a show of genuine intellectual and skill in the 1990s and against the odds. there's plenty of room for achievement here. it's not entirely random. we're not as centralized as

britain and france are that way, and that's probably a good thing. >> well, the insights you've given us are invaluable, and i'm sure they will live with us forever. i'm sure they'll live with with the cadets forever as well. i can't thank you enough. this has been just outstanding. i hope you'll come back again sometime and talk to us. you're always welcome, and i hope you found it enjoyable being here at the citadel. thank you. >> thank you. [ applause ] >> every time i see mitt romney he is cram brook, we went it to the same school. he always says that with the school ties. the life of a sailor includes scrubbing the deck in the morning, working on the sails, climbing aloft, whatever the duties assigned, gun drill practice, but by the end of the day, you're ready for some rest.

you don't get aa full eight hour' sleep aboard a ship like constitution. it's four hours on, four hours off. >> this weekend on american history tv, the life of an enlisted man aaboard the "uss constitution" during the war of 1812. >> the sailor lived in fear of the possibility of being whipped by a cat of nine tails. it was carried by aa petty officer in a bag. the thing a sailor never wanted to see is a petty offer getting ready for a flogging. it's a phrase we use today. don't let the cat out of the bag. >> that's sunday at 7:00 p.m. eastern and pacific. also this weekend more from the contenders, our series on key political figures who ran for president and lost but changes political history. sunday, 1928 democratic presidential candidate, former new york governor al smith. each week american history tv's mernl artifacts takes viewers

into archives, museums and historic sights around the country. the smith season yanl will open a new building on the national mall in 2015. american history tv traveled with lonnie bunch, the museum's founding director, to a storage site in a washington, d.c. suburb where he showed us some of the artifacts on display in the new facility. >> right now we're in the storage units of the national museum of african-american history and culture. in essence, this is the heart of the museum, because what's behind me and what we'll see today are many of the objects that are going to be the soul of this museum. this is an opportunity to sort of preview some of the material that the public will see when the museum opens its doors. this story of the african-american experience is both a story of resilient see and achievement, but it's also a story of struggle. and one of the hard parts of

exploring this history is that often the people who were at the worst tended to be other americans. so that makes it hard to interpret this, because americans aren't used to being the bad guys. one of the things that's powerful is objects like that convey the haven't anti-black sentiment. this is a ku klux klan banner from the 1920s. the four ks are the knights of the ku klux klan. the klan began after the civil war and goes underground and bursts new as a result of the film "the birth of a nation." the klan is a national phenomenon in the '20s and '30s. this kind of banner is the kind of thing that people would sort of use to celebrate their investment and their

participation in the could yku kl klan. these are the kind of things we have to make sure we tell the painful stories as well. then i think that one of the things that is really interesting to me is to recognize that so much of what shapes a community is work. so we wanted to make sure that we found things that would give people an understanding of the way black america worked. one of the most important stories, often a story not clearly understood, is the story of the pullman porters. this is a wonderful hat, and in some ways we become to a point where pullman porters were seen in a stereo typical way of people that served and worked on the railroad to make the travel of the elite white community comfortable. but the pullman porters played a more important role. they were in some ways the communicative heart of the african-american community. they began to bring to different

regions of the country an understanding of what was going on in the south, what was going on in california, and they became one of the earliest black unions. so they were very successful in the early 20th century in unionizing and establishing a pattern that many african-american entities and businesses would follow in the future. for us the pullman porter is both a story of work, it's a story of the limits of what people were able to do because they were african-american, but it's also a story of how people trans sended the limits of their job and created a way to help the entire community. and then in some ways the whole notion of struggling against racism, battling segregation is really at the heart of trying to understand this story. these two artifacts that we're about to look at speak volumes about segregation. on the one hand we have what was

something that was ubiquitous throughout the 20th century, which were colored drinking fountains. things that were sort of ensured that the separation of the races were enforced. as we know, the segregation was the law of the land throughout part of the 19th century and all of the 20th century, and so colored theaters, colored hotels, colored drinking fountains were part of the way america lived. what's so fascinating is they're hard to find now, but what really moves me, in addition to things like the colored drinking fountain, and really looking at the depths one went to segregate america. one of the things that is so powerful is this lally kemp, which was a charity hospital in independence, louisiana. what i love about this is that this tells you clearly that race matters. when you look at the schedule of

actual hospital services, but on monday the colored could go to the gynecologist, but on tuesday it was whites who could go for pediatrics and internal medicine and on wednesday whites went to their gynecologists or had the dental services. so the notion that we were so rigidly segregated that hours of the day were determined based on the color of your skin. i think this is really one of the most powerful objects we've collected, and this was an object that is not 100 years old. this is an object that was really sort of used from the mid-1950s until medicare came in which basically then desegregated many of the hospital facilities. what we want people it to realize is that segregation, while it has long roots, was not