partisanship. are we too partisan now? for weeks to discuss it for one never has been? >> when the framers " the constitution -- when the framers wrote the constitution, they knew the laws would be slowed down and considered. when you consider the tools that could be used for a long debate and amendments, it is not surprising to see the constitutional intent. it could be an example of civility. it would be a good thing if we have more of that in the congress today. it would help us get our work done. the role and mission of the cuent congress, as expressed by senator mcconnell, is to make

sure that the president as i get a second term three what kind of stability can you have when the central intent is to be president in the next election? --eat the president in the next election. >> can you talk to was a little bit about the democratic south that once was and what ha become of that today? >> the democratic south emerged from the 1890's with the decision of the supreme court to stop reconstruction. it became the solid south for the next 75 years. it has definitely changed in terms of its makeup back home. people think differently. they live differently than years ago when we have these solid democratic parties.

i think that that has been an improvement over the past 75 to 100 years. we have recognized the american rpose. we have given meaning to the american public. we have overcome slavery and desegregation. that is true in the south today. no question about it. both political parties support the idea. >> i want to revisit the american purpose. what are you thinking about there? you just said that we reinvigorated the american purpose. >> i think that we have. >> what does that mean to you? >> it means that everybody has a chance to succeed in america. everyone has the opportunity to pursue education to the fullest extent of their talent or ability. it means that this is a country of opportunity and opportunity

means education for all americans to the fullest extent that they can appreciate it. and the essentials of life. health care, good education, and basic food so that they can survive. the american -- is a country that pulls together. i think that there are hits and misses when it comes to that. >> let's talk about the politics within your own party. the post-election analysis looks at nancy pelosi and the views she had about the role of government and society. what do you think about the democratic party and its ability to govern?

>> i think that we have shown that they he the ability to govern, at least in the house. some of it may not have merited, but numerous copies still lie in the senate. we have moved a lot of legislation, including health care, including legislation dealing with global warming. meeally tough legislation was passed and i give the speaker credit for passing that legislation. getting back on the strategy, i think that we could have done it differently and more persuasively. i think that it would have been good if we have taken the health care in segments, piece by piece. perfecting -- adopting a plan

that would hel small businesses in pticular and individuals as well obtain health insurance at an affordable rate. start with that single quest and before we make it all together for two hundred page bill, do it step by step b step -- 81400 -- a 1400 page bill. we simply say that projects are ready to go and we will find those. i think that we could have done this differently a come out better. >> what is different about the politics of today that great big landmark pieces of legislation could be passed?

i am thinking about civil-rights legislation. >> in this case, it would have been incremental. the cost is so great and economic circumstances of the country -- the people were alarmed with the proposal and it had to be explained again and again and again people got iand agree with the basic concepts of that. one of the things that we stipulated on the budget committee, of which i was chairman, what we did could not have been done. it to their credit, the democratic leadership kept the bill from costing any more or having any more impact on the deficit that was something that we were able to do.

you have to sell the package. this is a good example of how we should take more time to think about how we would merchandize this. a lot of leaders said that the people will not buy it. we cannot sell it. >> with all of those years at the gavel, how do we get out from where we are right now -- this $13 trillion debt. >> the programs that gave rise to the swollen debt -- for example, the tarp shows that it will probablrepay with interest all the money that loaned out and the first place. the recovery act will cease to be a factor this calendar year.

as it ds, the bottom line of that is at the budget will get better. we provided in a piece of legislation last year that when the tarp money came back again, it could not be respected. in additn, a number of programs, everything frofdic bailouts to medicaid, a number of programs were way up during the recession and then they come back down again as the recession receives and it gets better. over time, if we simply do not get carried away and start trying to make sure that these things have that impact on the budget, that will help us.

>> i wanted to do a little exercise with you. you have the bird's-eye view of looking at president's from the vantage point of congress and the relationship between the two branches. i would just want to run through the namesf presidents that were in office when you were in office and give me your recollection of them. do you mind doing that? >> sure. >> start with president reagan. >> he made people understand that communication is part of the policy -- the process of setting political policy. yet to make people feel good about it. he made americans feel good about stuff again which was quite an accomplishment. >> mr. bush 41?

>> a very decent guy who limited -- who did not capture the ability of mr. reagan to ignite the public spirit. nevertheless, he was a good man who was liked by everyone who knew him. >> bill clinton? >> a very bright guy. but also with a gift of persuasion and explanation. you can sit down at a table with del clinton in the lincoln room -- with bill clinton in the lincoln room, and when you got up, there was always give-and- take. he was a very quick study. >> what does the impeachment process look like to you? >> the fact that he was so

effective is reflected in the fact that the impeachment came and went and he survived it all politically. th is a strong indication o how strong a personality bill clinton was. >> president george w. bush. >> somody who could have done a lot more than he did. decent guy. a good sense of humor. easy to talk to. someone who was content to take something, some conclusion, some recommendation. he was a very bright guy. he was a very effective guide. a very personal guide. when it came to examining d reading something, he was not the and he was not profound. >> and now the current

president, barack obama. >> really one of the brightest people i have ever sat down with. as i said about bill clinton, if you sat down with barack obama tomoow in thwhite house, you would have a fair exchange. he would be on top of the material. you would both get up from the discussion with a better understanding of what was before you. >> what is it that this country needs in the position of president? >> the first thing that we need is a leader that can bring people together and help people find common ground. make them understand that we all have a common stake in this. it is something that a president has to do and ronald reagan taught us that that is an essential element of the job. >> let's turn to your own part of your 28 years here. what were your best years?

>> in terms of publicervice, biggest accomplishment was the balanced budget act of 1997. it was the budget resolution that put the budget in surplus for the first time in 30 years. it was a big accomplishment. we got together and initiated the process and gave the administration of the budget. every time we met, his tea was on the floor and they were in the room with us. we were able to negotiate over a period of six months. we were able to put the budget in balance for the first time in 30 years. that was the biggest accomplishment i have had here. i had a hand in drawing the law to stop nuclear testing. that was very important.

and never -- when i came here, i got on the armed services committee for a couple of reasons. i had a military base in my district and i could help them out -- the armed services committee had big defense industrial base is i had a small hand in that. it was easier in that context to the independent and self directed. that was a nice achievement, being able to assume the chairmanship by the armed

services committee after two terms. >> i wanted to compare that proces when the budget chief scott together and found a compromise for the current process with the debt commission. what do you think about the tactic of these congressional presidential commissions to for a consensus or find a path for policy? >> it was shown to work in previous cases. in this particular case, the president said that we have done quite a bit and that we need to let these factors played out. they would have been much more respectable level. since this involves all of us, it involves taxes and spending,

everybody has to be at the table and everything has to be on the table for to succeed. the best way to do that is form a commission that has a direct line to the preside. that is what we did in this particular case. the cochairs of the committee decided that it would precipitate action on ambitious proposals. they were trying to be very provocative and break us from our traditional ways and think outside the box. it would be interesting to see what happens. whatever happens, i think it is clear that the process cannot end where it is right now. >> during this debate, people keep harkening back to

government during the new gingrich years. what was that like? when the government was essentially shut down in negotiations fell. >> that is an example of play in your hand. i know from here in new gingrich say it several times, that we should shut the government down and nobody would miss it. they sat down with the american people asked if the federal government ceases to fund social security, where does that leave me. it did not take the republican leadership wants to know that they were way out on a limb. i think it would happen again.

nevertheless, i enjoy the fact we he a government that does have so security and medicare and does it well. >> in a sense, it provides a int to where no party wants to return? >> i do not think anybody would likely do what they did last time. i think that newt gingrich thought that he was on the wrong side of this dispute. that lesson has been learned but everybody in proximity succession groups. i do not think it will soon be forgotten. >> i wanted to talk to you again about speakers. i can either run through the list and you can give me a few comments on their leadership or you can pick them out. why don't we just do that? first off, tip o'neill, what you think about his leadership of the house? >> tip left with respect and

compassion. by being a very good order, we would speak about him in those terms. pped him out of nowhere to the house caucus on the house floor and he saw that the bill was drafted. that was the first time that ever happened. he was known as the g.i. congressman. he went on to tell the story of how he served. >> i said -- asset i think we had better regroup and reconsider. there is a good example of how

through the power of his oratory he could affect the outcome of something. you do not see that as much today. everyone wasanging on his words. he could turn the whole thing around in the space of 10 minutes. >> he was followed by jim wright. >> he was a hard worker, effective, personable, easy to know and like. there were those who were not easy with jim wright. he was a very partisan player. the first time they took a swipe at him, ey took it. i think jim played his cards wrong.

she said i should not have received a royal for the book's sales. tell me how much to pay back and i would pay it to charity of your choice. instead, he challenged the ethics committee. as a consequence, it got deeper and deeper into his personal affairs. he finally just gave up and quit he was a good man and an effective legislator to. he was a good technician and craftsman. >> did you remember being on the floor of the davis resignation speech? >> yes, i do. the man was exhausted. they had worn him down. he knew he could not gn back the of moral authority, so he said i am belling out of thi i am sure it was a tough decision for him to make.

>> tom foley? >> tom foley was a wonderful storyteller. he was articulate, and an effective spokesperson across the spectrum of issues. he had been chairman of the agriculture committee with the provincial topic of -- he also used his time to travel quite a bit. its very well verd in foreign affairs and foreign policy and liked by everybody in the house. i cannot think of a speaker in my time who has been more liked and respected than tom foley. in the end, he was not as effective as jim wright. jim wright named for things were going to do, and he set about and did them. tom did not have that kind of easy successes

everybody felt good about his leadership. >> what about newt gingrich? >> i give him credit for being good on his feet. he was able to pick up on a metaphor and squeeze meaning out of it, but i think superficially, his unrstanding -- >> dennis hastert. >> a really decent guy, a nice guy, but while a good speaker and a solid speaker, no flair, nothing special stands him out amongst the crowd. i think he served longer than any other republican as speaker of the house, but he does not leave much in his wake. >> you already spoke about nancy pelosi is legislative accomplishments. what are your viewof her as a

leader? >> i remember when she first got to be majority leader -- no,he was speaker. the california delegation was meeting to pick a certain committee for people in that part of the country. i went by to ask her support for somebody else outside california. i said to nancy, why don't you just left the caucus make that decision for you? then you are not responsible for it. you cannot win and you are going to antagonize some people and alienate others if you go forward with the proposal to put a certain person on a certain committee. >> she said it has to be done right, and i hope in the long run i will be vindicated. that is our attide about

things. she will take a risk. she works extremely hard. i worry about her traveling as much as she has in keeping that stamina going, but she certainly has the stamina to do the job she does. in the last election and the month before it, she went all over the country, every weekend, supporting differentemocrats. just the energy it took to do that is remarkable. >> thank you of your insider views of speakers. as we close, on your scale of pessimism to optimism, i am wondering how you feel about the congress and the country right now. >> if the economy improves, as people go back to work, i think the whole atmosphere in congress will be different. both among democrats and republicans.

what caused republicans to lose a couple of years ago was because we had the larders recession since the great depression. -- the largest recession since the great depression. we have not been able to work miracles with the economy. once the economy is behind us, we can turn ourselves back to the issues that really matter to the american people. >> thank you very much >> now, another exit interview with chet edwards. mr. edwards was first elected to congress in 1990 and has represented the 17th congressional district in central texas since 2005. representative edwards chaired the appropriations subcommittee on of veterans affairs from 2007

to 2010 and was only one of the few house members to serve on both the budget and appropriations committees. we spoke with him earlier this month about his career and his future. this is a half-hour. >> when you look at polls, the public is not sharing that optimism. what do you think is going on? >> i think people are struggling. struggling with high health care costs, or about whether they will have a job tomorrow if they have not already lost it. so there is a lot of frustration.

the reason i am an optimist long-term as i think the american people the american people will sort this out. >> after two decades in the house, only getting 37% of the vote has to be painful. how are you processing your defeat? >> five days before my election i was in the hospital in my district working hard, putting in 16 hours as i had for months. i met a couple, a heartbreaking story i said to you have a loved one here. she said, my daughter was killed earlier this year, by a drunk driver. i'm in the hospital today because my son has been in the icu for 30 days because the

text-messaging driver ran into my son when he was changing a tire and he lost a leg. i said to my wife, "we do not have any problems. let's sing and pray for this family." we will be ok changing jobs, myself. i do not see this election as a rejection of everything i have done in congress. i am proud and tumbled to be able to work hard on military and veterans' issues, and church-state issues >> we're also talking during the week that tom delay was

convicted. what are your thoughts on that period and mr. the late's conviction? >> i think the mid decade redistricting, when it happened in 2003, i think it was the first time in 100 years that you had mid-decade redistricting. it was supposed to be once every 10 years after the census has concluded. i think that just reflects the kind of no-holds-barred partisanship that people are tired of and washington. they are tired of it whether it comes from democrats or republicans. but the mid-decade redistricting was a blatant power graf -- power grab, and it was not the right thing to do. i survived for six years after that. mr. delay reorganized the appropriations committee, so for four years, thanks to its changes, i became chairman of

the military construction appropriations subcommittee, but the veterans affairs appropriations subcommittee. that gave me the opportunity to help veterans more than it had occurred in the history of the v.a. >> two years ago, you're on the short list for vice-president dick and endorsed by speaker pelosi for that role. which obviously went to senator biden. i wonder what that whole period was like for you. >> it was an out-of-body experience. i was driving to the home of , north of my home in waco. my phone rang and a voice said, "hi, i am barack obama." it was senator obama, and he asked me if i could be vetted

for vice presidency. it was a shock to me. i had known speaker pelosi had mentioned my name and she and i had worked very closely on veterans issue and she had been a real champion, as i tried to be in support of veterans' health care and veterans benefits. but i did not know that senator obama would be calling me to be vetted. i called a friend and said, is this 25, or 50, or how many is this? he said, no, it is four or five or six. i found out that 15 or 20 years ago a friend of mine gave me a home mortgage that was higher than the market rate. they checked everything in our life from our investments to our work in congress. it was an experience i would not take anything for. i always knew i would be outside

the box choice. senator obama said for you to be considered or chosen would be an outside the box choice. i said, senator, that is ok with me because you are outside the box choice when i endorsed you. i got a call in august from caroline kennedy that it was down to four at that time. i had made the final four, and i kept thinking each step of the way i would be knocked out. but we made it a lot farther than i expected to. it did not change our life dramatically. i'm still a boy scout-little league dad, but it is one of those memories i will treasure in the years ahead. >> that have been a number of times when you look -- have there been a number of times when you have gone and look at the administration and said -- >> i do not think president

obama has been given credit by the voters yet. the day that he walked into office and was sworn in as president, he inherited a $1.3 trillion deficit from 2009, and two wars, one in iraq, one in afghanistan. we were in a recession that could have been turned into a second great depression, and america was losing 700,000 jobs every single month. we're still facing troubling times, portugal early in the economy, but the fact is, said -- particularly early in the economy. but we're gaining jobs in the private sector today. that is a positive turnaround. that is not where we want to be or need to be, but it is a major turnaround. i hope hindsight and history will show president obama, as did president bush and tarp, took some tough choices to say this economy. i know two things that hurt me

greatly worked my support of the tarp, known as the bank bailout, and i voted for the stimulus bill. i am convinced that had we not pass those pieces of legislation, we could have ended up in a second depression. even john mccain's advisers said we have 8.5 million more but -- we would have 8.5 million more people unemployed in america had the government not taken action. i worked with the obama administration on the stimulus bill. and that is ok. i hope hindsight will give him, as it does all presidents, a deeper look in terms of what he has actually accomplished. >> we are talking about the votes. talk to me about health care and your decision there. >> that was a tough decision because i voted no on it. i did not want to hill -- i did not want to kill health care

reform altogether. it was less expensive -- one that was less expensive, one that 75% or atp -- or 80% of the people could have rallied around even if congress voted against it. that was a much better approach than the divisiveness when we had a bill passed on a partisan basis for the country even today seems to be spread. with a lot of misunderstanding about what is in that bill. my goal was not to kill it altogether, it was to simply try to take a different approach toward health care reform, a little more scaled-back version and i think the white house even seriously considered it and submit -- at one point. i give the white house and speaker pelosi credit for not just sweeping these hugely

important problem under the rug. finally we had leadership in washington, even in my district -- and i had some problems with the final project -- with the final product -- we said this problem is not going away. costs have been going up, unemployment has been going up. it was unsustainable. i commend speaker pelosi and senator reid and others for not just ignoring these tough problems. now we see the price people pay for making tough choices. >> with the court challenges and also with the republican majority in the house determines to scale it back, where do you think health care will end up? >> i do not know, but i hope most people understand that the status quo prior to health care reform was not acceptable. we would have ended up with costs going up two and three times, wage rate increases which

are unsustainable. we would have millions more uninsured for health care every year. that was unsustainable. the entire system and the quality of our system was within years -- maybe five years, maybe seven, maybe 10 years -- a virtual collapse. where we go now, i would be surprised to see a complete repeal of health care. there are a lot of good things in that bill that 70% or 80% of americans do support. my guess is that some parts of it will change, but not all of it will be repealed. and we should not repeal all of it. i would oppose full repeal of the health care reform bill. >> how do you view house speaker nancy pelosi? >> i think as a strong speaker that is something no other speaker in history to accomplish, passing a major health care reform bill with the goal of seeing that every american has access to

affordable, quality health care. and i think she takes a lot of criticism because she is strong- willed, and to get things done within the house of representatives, it takes a strong person to do that. i think she will go down as a historic speaker, not only as the first woman speaker, but as someone who accomplished health care reform when all other previous congresses has failed in that effort. i wish the everyday citizen could get to know her on a more personal basis -- the wife, the loving family person that i know her to become the champion of american veterans. the untold story is that speaker pelosi has led more improvements in health care for our veterans and benefits for our veterans than any speaker in history. that surprised a lot of people. the veterans' leaders in

washington know what she has done, and she has accomplished a lot. i do not always agree with her on every issue, and i have not always voted with her on every issue. but i respect her personally and professionally and politically, and i just hope that somehow she can find a way in the next two years to find common ground with republicans. it takes to get you a note to tango. the republicans will have to work with her, -- it takes two to tango. the root of this will have to work with her and find common ground on the continuing health care challenges come immigration reform. the big issues will not be solved on a partisan basis. they require bipartisanship because the country has to buy into those solutions once congress passes the. health care is an example of what happens when major reform is passed on a strictly partisan basis. you divide the country. we cannot have that on the

deficit, immigration reform. so i do hope the speaker and republicans and the president can find a way to seek out common ground in the next two years. >> you made an earlier bid for congress after being a congressional staffer. >> we are going way back now. >> when you were unsuccessful in that bid, you went to the private sector, went to harvard, got your nba. there has always been a debate about the professional politician -- your mba. there has always been a debate about the professional politician. give me a reflection on what better serves the public. >> i do not know that we can categorize people -- there are people such as -- there are people who have made incredible contributions to this country through their service.

i don't buy this idea that the professional politician is some kind of an evil person. i call it a lifetime of public service, whether it is people serving in the military for 20 or 30 years. many of those people i consider heroes. or whether it is people who have chosen to serve in public service for 20 or 30 years. remember, these people are not serving a less the people and families and voters of their district have voted for them and ask them to work for them. the great thing about the house is you have this eclectic mix of people. you have farmers, you have former teachers, you have a single mother on welfare at 1.2 is now an important representative in -- at one. -- at one pointe who is now an import representative.

people spending their own dollars, and if we end up with the vast majority of members of congress being millionaires, i think there is some risk of congress losing touch with the challenges of everyday citizens. by and large, one of the secret of congress is they are a fascinating, dedicated people who serve here. even though the system is not working as well as it should, there are a lot of dedicated people who should not be disparaged simply because they have chosen and their voters have chosen to ask them to serve in public service and serve our country. >> how does the mba serve you over the years? >> i think it helped because as an i'm tripping over in some sense, it might be surprising -- because as an entrepreneur in some sense, it might be surprising to some, but it

requires some skills and management to run that kind of an office. instead of customers, we have voters. constituents. i have found a lot of similarities. i think there are some lessons from business. that helped me in my career for congress. i think it's healthy to have this eclectic mix of members of congress from all backgrounds and all walks of life. >> will you look at any particular period over the years as your zenith, your best years? >> i think these last four years were very humbling and gratifying to me. i never dreamed as a young age in a 1970's to a war hero who earned two silver stars, known as mr. veteran for 30 years -- when i worked for him in the 1970's, i never dreamed i would

someday chair the veterans affairs and military construction appropriations committee. in those four years. i have done nothing alone. in partnership with speaker pelosi, chairman of the -- chairman obe. not through my subcommittee, but working with others, we passed the new gi bill. several hundred thousand troops and family members have taken advantage of that great investment, not only those who have served our country honorably, but investing in our country's future and education. one of the things that has meant the most to me personally was to have authored and passed with speaker pelosi's help last year that we named -- a bill that we named after a constituent of mine. he was seven days from coming home from iraq, did not have to

do another thing. yet he volunteered to go out and our province -- to anbar province. he defused three bombs. the third one that he defused, he had no way of knowing that it was a booby trap to a fourth. he lost his life that night. this incredible sacrifice, not only that john david frye made, but his widow and his children made. i thought we ought to name a post office after their loved one. i approached speaker pelosi and said, why don't we add to the gi bill, the college scholarship gi bill, all military children who lost their mother, father in military service since september 11, 2001. with their help, that is now the law of the land. i know we can never replace what

the fried family and dozens of others like them lost, -- with the fried -- what the frye family and dozens of others like them lost. and malia frye told me that another woman had six children and they lost their father. now they will have a college education. the day after president obama signed this bill into law, i turned to my wife and said i want you to know that every campaign, every tough race we have had over 20 years was worth it. if we had done nothing but just off of that one bill, because these families are so deserving. nobody is more deserving in our country, nobody is more deserving of our country's respect than our military

families and their children and loved ones. >> what were the toughest years in the last four years? >> i guess the last four years were the best and worst of times, as charles dickens would say. it is a thrill to be able to chair the committee that fought for 20,000 soldiers and worked very hard on veterans' health programs. that was a good side. the bad side of the last four years has been the increasing partisanship, the hard edge that i just do not think was quite that bad when i came to congress in january of 1991. >> can you trace it through? >> well, i think there is kind of -- i do not blame this all on newt gingrich, but it is the new gingrich model of winning back a majority. rather than the bob michael model of a wedding party working with the minority party.

-- of a winning party working with a minority party. the model was teardown confidence in government. now i think both parties take the new gingrich approach, that if we cooperate too much and accomplish too much, the majority party gets the benefit for that. and will be put forever resigned to being the minority party. i do not blame newt gingrich solely for that, but i think he set an effective model for how you win back a majority. you tear down the institution and obstruct the process whenever you can. both parties at think have been guilty of that. i was disappointed that when newt gingrich became speaker, that for the first time he canceled the trip that new members take with their families to harvard. that gave us our class of 1990 a

week together with our family members. i always felt a special bond with that class. i might have had differences with republicans and democrats from that class, but i never wanted to go to the floor and attacked them personal and vice versa. there was a special bond for that, and i hope that new freshmen classes can get their families together and get to know each other personally before the caucuses, the party caucuses have indoctrinated them into thinking the other side is the enemy. the other party is not the enemy, it's part of the checks and balances of our democracy. >> in the years since 1990, we were talking about this before we started taping, there has been an explosion in technology. how has that changed congress and the life of a congressperson? >> first of all, made his allowed greater communications. the public today compared to 1974 when i was a young college graduate working for tiger

teague, in those days there were not as many recorded votes and people did not no how they were voting on major issues. there was no c-span. you did not have the communication. i think technology has improved the public's access to what is going on in washington. that sometimes creates skepticism and frustration because people are seeing that sausage being made, whereas in decades past they did not see the details, the process. democracy can be an ugly process. maybe if we watched on television every day the founding fathers' deliberations on creating this country, maybe it would not have been possible. democracy has always been a difficult process, but i think it is a very positive thing to let the public see the inside

workings of how our democracy -- the other thing that changed, when i was here when mr. teague received a letter requesting a copy of the bill, i walked over the rotunda to the documents room, a week life -- a week later, we got the letter, i would go to the document room, go back on the ibm electric typewriter, and 23 carbon copies of a typed letter back to them. did you zero weeks after somebody wanted a copy of the bill, passed two weeks after somebody wanted a copy of the bill -- two weeks after somebody wanted a copy of the bill, they would get the copy. today they get it immediately. i think the information has improved our democracy. what is not an improvement is some of the cable talk shows that tend to glorify shouting and only want to invite the

farthest right republican, the farthest left democrat. really i think that contributes of thecourarse discourse day, and we have to find a way to move beyond that. a lot of the moderates are centrist on both democrats and republicans sides, and their voices are not heard on msnbc or fox news on a regular basis. it is not entertaining to have people who just make the nuts and bolts of government work every day, so the public thinks that all members of congress are like some of the more extreme representatives that end up on the cable talk-show. that is one part of our technology explosion, our information revolution that we need to find our way around, and we will do that. ,ut i do not like that focuse most attention in the press going to those who scream the

loudest. it should be the quality of their ideas, not the decibel level of their voice that gives them exposure to the public. >> there is a debate raging right now, the public about earmarks, and it is something that has increased in both numbers and dollar amounts over the course of your tenure in congress. as one of the college cardinals, that the public may appropriationa n committee sub shares. should they be ended as a concept? >> earmarks, like fire, can be used for positive purposes or negative purposes. the earmarke process is a broken progress. -- is a broken process. work was done to not allow closed-door deals.

i'm glad congress reduce significantly the number of the year marks compared to where we were when the republicans last gave up their majority. i still believe that congress, under article one of the constitution, has the right and responsibility to right wrist brought back to write appropriation bills. -- to write appropriation bills. you know, earmarks -- people do not always understand what earmarks are. year marks -- earmarks are any site-specific -- i am asking for in your mark right now to replace the soldier service center at fort hood where 12

soldiers were murdered in november of 2009. no soldier should have to go through that and acquitted facility and one that is now a memory of the great tragedy \. that is an earmark. is that wrong? no, i think it is the right thing to do for our soldiers at fort hood. i hope we will have to earmark reform, not earmarked elimination. eliminating all year marks would be a great boon to the executive branch. -- eliminating all year marks would be a great boon to the executive branch. imagine a situation where they will not vote for a president's earmarked projects. >> what is a story that best applies for you, what it is like

to serve as a member of the house of representatives. >> the everyday heroes per the 29-year-old widow with a baby in her arms that would never hugge he father because he died in iraq. it is the young soldier that missed the birth of his two children because he was serving overseas in the military. meeting the people of our country, the teachers, volunteering to tutor struggling students after school. the volunteers in our chambers and churches and houses of worship. i am an optimist about the future because i have seen the strength and spirit of our country in everyday heroes. it has been fun to meet the famous people, playing golf with bob hope. but the real memory i cherished is the one of everyday heroes and their strength and values and courage and spirit. that is why this country is going to do well, and our best days are ahead of us, not behind us. >> you are leaving congress in

middle age, and lots of articles have been written about your political future. will you tell me now if you will seek public office in the future? >> i will not rule that out, but it is a chapter of my life that has been a wonderful chapter and it is time to close that chapter. will it -- whether i run for congress again, i do not know. if i run for political office, i do not know. we live in an age where we are not supposed to say anything positive about congress. i consider this an incredible privilege to serve our country, veterans, my district, my home state of texas, and the congress. it is an imperfect democracy, but we do not get everything wrong. with immigration, it is not that people are leaving the country, people would do almost anything to come to america and bring their families to this great country because of our freedoms and opportunities.

it is a great country and it has been a privilege to see the spirit of america through the everyday courage of our everyday citizens. >> mr. edwards, thank you for being with us on c-span3 >> thank you, susan. good to be with you. >> republican bill flores replace incumbents congressman chet edwards. coming up on "washington journal, we will take your questions and comments. later, a pentagon briefing on operations in the of eastern afghanistan. coming up this morning, a look at the conflict in north and south korea with michael auslin of the american enterprise institute. institute.