is that the records of the congress that record how and why legislation comes into being are not subject to any over- arching legislation. the senator is free to keep or dispose of those records at his or her discretion. we are lucky that senator dole chose to preserve his archive available to the public here. it is now one of the largest country. a strong belief in making history accessible is something senator dole.

tonight we will hear firsthand from hampshire as he is directed>> richard start by giving us a little bit of your history, how did you get the job as the first historian of the senate. >> very few people knew that there was a senate historical office. there was not much competition for the position, but i was hired by the senate. i did apply for the job. a number of people applied. is that historians do. keep in mind that in 1975, when the senate was really feeling a

sense of institutional patriotism, the end of watergate, the watergate committee with some help from the house side basically brought to the president down, and the senate reasserted some of its constitutional investigative powers. it passed the war powers congressional budget and control act, and mike mansfield said, we do not know enough about our history. we ought to have an historical program. hugh scott, who also had a graduate degree in history -- they were the ideal majority and minority leader to bring something like this into being. i had previously worked for the

senate for a short time in the the it and my job was to help then i went off to work for a company called national journal as their research director, and by years later, i got a call from bob dole asking me to throw job. i did, and i got the job. then, we started out with note files, no real information, and yet, reporters knew that we existed and that they started calling. they were asking how many senators had been convicted of a crime? who knows? [laughter] i put together a staff. none of this would have been possible without a terrific staff. we put that together over the years pipit my assistant is now the senate historian.

he was one of the backbones of that operation. we went out and introduced ourselves to other government has durant. other agencies employ historians. is historians are supposed to do. we quickly learned that our responsibility was not so much to keep the history of environmental legislation in the senate, or name the subject. that is what the congressional research service at the library congress, with a staff of 800 experts, does. they are there to provide thatour focus, we realized very quickly, was on the institutional history of the senate. has the senate always been like it is today?

what has been at the career path of the senators? how many senators have served for 20 or 30 or 40 years? nobody really knew that? it was a noble, but the information was scattered. we went to work but the -- we went to work to compile the data base. we have compiled a biographical information of all of the people who have served in that the representatives. published a biographical directory of the congress. it was up to our office and to update the senate information. but that only took you a little way down the road in terms of finding information. how many books have been written about a particular senator? what is the location of that senator's office papers, personal files? all of that was a very

difficult for researchers to find out. we set to work with armies of intern's over about 10 or 12we went over the card catalog at the library of congress across the street. we rode down titles of books by and about individual senators. we put that all into a large database called biobase.gov, that anybody can check out. >> we are going to start with a couple of questions about bob dole, and then focus on the institution. what are some of your favorite memories of senator dole? >> well, one involved a lunch that he invited me and my good staff to in 1989.

it is related to the historical almanac of united states senate. we were working with him on that. we drafted a lot of of the text, but we also got a lot of feedback from him about things you would like to do it a little differently. he put his imprint on that book in a direct way. at the end of the project, he said, i am so grateful for your help. if i can ever find you and the office space -- fine-tune any-- find you any office space -- that was the currency of the time. we did not take him up on that. the other thing he did was in by dust to lunch. -- invite us to lunch. there was nothing rushed about it. that was sort of the high point in our relationship, but then it continued.

one of my all-time favorite moment in a senate chamber was in 1996, when he gave his but farewell address. i was fortunate enough to be sitting right behind his wife in the gallery. i think that the applause after his speech probably went on for a good tenant to 12 minutes. people had not quite heard -- a good 10-12 minutes. it was filled with his experience is going back to 1969. we were back to the senate of the classical days, when you hear a speech from the heart. >> when he resigned from the senate -- he resigned from the senate 14 years ago. what do you think his legacy will be?

>> is a legacy as a leader of the senate is one of civility. the balanced budget amendment of 1995 -- he spent a great deal of time rounding up votes, republican of votes. he joked at one point that some people go to sleep by counting sheep. he goes to sleep by counting centers. [laughter] -- by counting as senators. [laughter] does he have 51? does he have clo enough forture -- does he have enough for cloture? there was an account of the republican from oregon saying he would vote against the legislation but then it resigned from the senate. if i resigned from the senate, then you will have just the right number to pass it. senator dole said, no. that is extreme. he had great respect for the

senator and for the integrity behind his position. although politically it was the there was a sense of great respect for a fellow senator. i understand. go the way you have to go. and that was it. >> how did the founders kind of divine and structure the role of the senate -- define and structure of the role of the senate? >> in the constitution, we had the articles of confederation. we had a one-act chamber congress, the congress of the confederation. it had very little power and it did not get very much a done.

the framers said, we have to have two chambers, one will check on the other. there was the sense of a balancing power. but thenthere is a story about a teacup. thomas jefferson was in paris at the time that the constitution was being written. we do not know if this was a true story, but it should he came back and at george washington, why did you create two chambers? washington said, you just created your -- you just poured your hot tea into the cup to cool it. that is why we created a second chamber. it is a place for reflection. it is modeled after two state senate, that of maryland and massachusetts. the original senators or not elected by the people, but by the state legislatures.

they worked the elect of the elect. -- they were the elect of the elect. they met behind closed doors for the first five or six years. the big innovation was when the house of representatives started holding its legislation in public. the senate had meetings in secret. then at the state legislators who had sent them to the senate said, how do we know that you are voting the way we want you to? the senator would say, well, i talked to my colleagues, i learned more about the subject, and i changed my mind.

this was the classic dilemma of any elected official. do you vote your constituency or your consciences? state legislatures and said, we think of you as an ambassador to the government. we give you instructions, and if you cannot follow instructions, you should resign. the senators -- and some did. but others said, sorry, we have a six year term. there is no provision to recall us. we will stay. independent developed a very, very quickly. up with a lot of pressure from the public, eventually opened its doors in 1795. galleries. they could not open the doors into the chamber in philadelphia. that.

people wanted to see, what is going on in this chamber? after about a day, they said, what a boring thing. [laughter] there are 14 or 15 people sitting around being a very deliberate. we are going back to where the action is 14 below where over 100 house members are grabbing a fire tongs and chasing each other around the room. it was a lot more exciting. >> historically, there has been egregiously bad behavior on the floor of the senate. i know one particular episode was triggered by an incident in kansas prior to the civil war. >> that is right. it was a big day for us in terms of the historical calendar. it was in may of 18th 56, the day after the sack covet -- may of 1856 after the sack of lawrence.

it came at a time when kansas was the focal point of a question of how do we decide if a state is going to enter the union as a slave state or a free state? the missouri compromise separate that states would come in a slave state paired with a free state. stephen douglass came up with the idea of popular sovereignty which would let the people of the area decide. the result, as of this audience knows, was a divided kansas. charles sumner stood up on the floor of the senate and gave a very long speech in which he attacked stephen douglas for

his support of popular sovereignty. he made some very tough remarks about other senators. that triggered an assault on a sumner several days later by a house member who was related to one of the senators who had been verbally attacked. he came into the chamber, sat there, did not want to offend the dignity of the senate, so he waited until they adjourned, and then he marched down the aisle, walked up to charles sumner, who was bent over his desk signing his signature on a bundle of envelops so that he could mail the very speech he had made a few days earlier. as he was signing that, his opponent had at came up with a solid gold handle, brought it

down on the senator's head. the other senators a workshop. sumner fell to the floor every -- bleeding profusely. people thought he would die. he stayed away from the senate for three years. his empty desk became a tourist attraction. the senate considered creating a rule to say that this was not proper behavior, but then they thought, no, we should not have to try to write that thinking -- we should not have to write that kind of thing down. people should know that already. 50 years later there was another incident in the senate chamber. two south carolina senators got into a verbal tussle. one of them punched his colleague in the mouth. well, then the tears fell over

and a desk got knocked over and people were flying all over the chamber. the senate recommended both members, censored them, got them to apologize. but today apologized in such a sarcastic manner that the senate said, all right, we are going to we are going to pass it this rule. today it is known as rule 19. they should have passed it at the time of the summer caning. a finely pastorate -- and they finally passed it, and it says that a senator shall not speak ill of a fellow senator. if he does or she does, it will be required to sit down. they will be considered out of order. that was a huge step forward in

helping to read-define re- define the norms of civility in of the senate chamber. >> what are the foundations and support of civility in the united states senate? of civility in the united states senator? >> one of the major foundations was it is a small body, and you quickly get to know your fellow senators. over the years until the invention of the transcontinental jet airplanes, senators and use to spend a great deal of time playing cards on the weekend -- senators used to spend a great deal of time playing cards on the weekend. they would be in washington for maybe three blocks of time per year, and then they would go home for the holidays, a long train ride across the country, and they would be gone for a month and then come back. they live with each other in many cases. they really get to know each

other, so that was a basic problem for stability. there was not any real sense of, i am awaiting -- a whig, you are a democrat. it was a sense that we are brother senators and need to work together. .

when things are not going well for the nation, it is reflected on the floors of congress, and i think even more so in the united states senate. a huge problem and a lot at stake, but i would not denying we are a uniquely low point in the cycle. i am a firm believer that the pendulum will single -- will swing away from this low $0.30

so you say at some point there will be more bipartisanship, more comity, all those things. >> historians should not predict about the future. but i think the answer lies with the american people. they have a good ability for have at least to make self correction or to adjust the kind of people they are sending to the senate. it is hard for me to say this, but maybe people the electorate are more partisan now than they may have been. the american people have reform to the senate -- reformed the senate. a couple of examples, one i mentioned earlier, the fact that senators were elected by state

legislatures. that was an arena for bribery because you only had a few people abroad. and then you had the election. so from as early as 1824, the proposal to amend the constitution to change the senate -- the way that the senators were elected. a lot of anger about that and political cartoons. that only happened because of very strong popular pressure. house of representatives voted to change it and the late 1890's, but the senate for complex reasons took their time. but there was public pressure that made it happen. >> i had senator dole talked- about -- talk about his career here, and the portents of

working closely with the leaders of the other party. how we important is that in terms of maintaining a sense of civility and even cooperation and the possibility of compromise? >> it is absolutely vital. every party leader knows what a thankless job the other party has and sympathizers. it is crucial and for most of the 20th-century, the party leaders have worked pretty well together. there is a story that tom daschle tells when he was the democratic leader of the senate, he had just become democratic leader in the mid-1990s, and lo and behold, here comes bob deaoe to have been meeting with him in his office. daschle as the new guy on the block.

he was so flattered, spending his time with me, then he realized what senator dole was up to. it was genuine, but by him coming to my office, it showed that he had the power to end the meeting when he wanted it and the meeting. bridget wanted to end the meeting. that had a very good relationship. the senate organized a series of speeches and the late 1990's called the "leader is a collector's series." the transcripts are on the senate web site. senator dole gave his speech having been out of the senate for four years, and it was 10 years ago this month. i read it and it is filled within sight. about what it means to be a

leader of the senate. nine leaders and "-- including the former vice president came and spoke. each 1.3 the previous speeches -- each one went through the speeches of the previous leaders. it is of great deal of leadership in the senate and it is a terrific work on the leadership. >> is it fairly common for the leaders of the two separate parties to make deals not a surprise each other on things and that would allow them to go out and be partisan in a very aggressive way, but let their colleagues know that this is coming down the pike? >> senator howard baker, when he became majority leader in 1981,

after the great surprise that the republicans took control of the senate's, no one saw that coming. i remember where i was when i heard it. all the sudden, it was open to new management, as howard baker joke. he walked up to the democratic leader, robert byrd, and made a deal. i will never surprise you if you do not surprise me. and senator byrd said, that is a good basis for cooperation. and senator dole became majority leader a couple of years later, and they extended that agreement in 1985. so it is essential, and that the relations between the two leaders are not good, then everybody is in trouble.

>> what is the relationship between majority leader reid and minority leader mcconnell? >> you think that it would be tense. if you read the newspaper articles -- two years ago, senator reid did something that was rather significant. at the university of louisville, there is a mitch mcconnell center for the stubble -- for the study of public policy. they had an unveiling theire so senator reid interrupted his other duties, and attended the event. it was an enormously busy time and center, never forgot that -- and senator mcconnell never forgot that. beneath it all, there is a sense that we are brothers in a

battle. there was a time where you draw the line and do not cross that line, because if you do, just a basic operational structure of the senate would seem pretty grave. some time the tide washes off flee close to that line -- awfully close to that line, but it is the glue that keeps things going. >> the number of women senators have increased dramatically. give us the history of that. >> women had no place in the senate other than supporting their husbands until 1922. and that was tokenism at its extreme level, when there was a fake and santa in the georgia senate, the governor of georgia had endeared himself to the newly enfranchised women voters of georgia, and he appointed an 87-year-old