>> well, we are out of time. pictureg a more nuanced of mary todd lincoln, the wife of the president, and i want to say a special thank you to the white house historical association. installments altogether. thank you for your contributions tonight. >> thank you. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013]

next week, first ladies fluence and image features eliza johnson. she was considered a shrewd wife and a capable business partner. she remained one of his most important advisors, especially through his impeachment trial. at is live on c-span at 9:00 p.m. our website has more about the first dailies, including a special section "welcome to the white house house," produced by

.he white house association with the association, we're offering a special edition of the book "first ladies of the united states of america." it presents a biography and portrait of each first lay epartment comment -- ladies. on can buy a book at $12.95 .com/products. >> next here on c-span the massachusetts senate debate. then a look at the charge

against the boston marathon bomber and how it could impact legislation. then first ladies, mary todd limit. wife of abraham >> representatives stephen lynch held a debate ey on key issue, including last week's boston marathon's bombings. the special election takes place june 25. this is about an hour. >> let's begin with the first question from cynthia directed to mr. lynch. >> gentlemen, last week we had a terrible reminder to our vulnerability to a terrorist attack.

as a senator, what changes would you pursue to the domestic and foreign policy? >> i want to thank you for hosting this debate. it is a great honor to be here an i want thank my colleague for being here as well. i want of offer my condolences to all the families of all the victims and offer my thanks to the first responders, the doctors, the nurse, our citizens who, i think behaved so valley lently and in such a compassionate way. it's been a long week. my thoughts and prayers are with those who are recovering. i will continue to do what what i've have been doing on homeland security issues. one of the differences between myself and mr. markey is our voting record on homeland security. i think one of the great parts of what happened this week in

terms of the rescue and the coordination and the capture of these terrorists was the coordination between the different agency, the joint terrorism task force. task to create the force. mr. markey vote against that proposal. i voted for funding for homeland security. mr. markey voted against that. i will continue my priorities that i have. it is probably why the firefighters, the police, and the nurses are all backing me in this race. >> thank you. mr. markey, 90 seconds. >> thank you for conducting this important discussion. steve and i have been on the call pain trail but we suspended it a week ago because of this great tragedy. my heart goes out to the families of all the victims but

also congratulations to all of those heroes who were able to help us through this incredible tragedy. it was a tragedy but it was also a triumph. i think all of us in massachusetts are indebted to those who stood up in order to make this a very special week. we mourn the losses, we identify with those victims and their families but we also honor the heroes. on the issue of homeland security, i served on the homeland security for seven years. i'm the author of the provision after 9/11. all cargo on all planes in the united states is screened for bombs. the republicans opposed me for six years. i'm the author of the legislation that requires the screening for nuclear weapons on ships coming into the ports in the united states. the bush administration opposed me. i am the author of the legislation, which inensures

that we have stronger security in our country. all the way down the line, i have made the fight to make sure whether it is nuclear power plants, chemical plants within our country that we learn the lesson of 9/11. that we make sure we poet those measures on the books. i had to fight the bush administration and the industries who did not want to put the safeguards around the facilities. i was successful in putting those laws on the books that protect us today. >> all right, sir. thank you. rebuttal? >> that is not what your record indicates, ed. when you look at the port security bill you voted no. when you look at the homeland security bill, i had $158 million in an amendment to fund real security. tonight, we're hearing about threats on rail security coming

in from canada, you voted no on that. you voted no for funding for homeland security. some of these votes there are 415 members, both sides are voting yes and you are voting no. >> you mentioned a couple. go ahead mr. markey. >> i am the author of the legislation to mare sure that rail security is more secure in our country. i'm the author of the legislation that moves towards enensuring that chemical plants, for example, are more protected within our country. look it, on our two records, i think we both try our best to work hard. my priorities wound up being the law of the united states in honor to protect the security of our country. >> go ahead. >> you voted no. you voted no on the port

security bill. terrorist the joint task force if all of those state and local agencies could not work together we could not have had the response that we had. i voted yes, you voted no. that's the fact. >> go ahead. >> i support the existence and the creation of the joint terrorism task force. >> you voted no. >> i don't know the specific circumstances at the time. >> you remember everything else. >> i don't remember that specific moment. i will tell you, when there was an object jecks by the bush by istration -- objection the bush administration, i was the principle person that was

pushing the administration -- >> you voted no. >> in terms of the joint terrorism task force to make sure there was cooperation for all agency, i was in support of that. >> when we created it you voted no. you can say you wrote this and that but when the issue came up to create the joint task force i voted yes and you voted no. i don't know how you spin that. you're doing a good job trying. >> the reason i know that -- on this issue that i stood up for the american people was that i was the one fighting in the trenches -- >> let me get this straight. >> let him finish. go ahead. >> so the other 417 members of congress, including myself, we were weren't standing up. you and the nine others that voted no, you were. i don't get that. every single member of congress,

democratic and republicans that supported funding for homeland security, supported having a coordinated effort from state and local officials we voted for it and you voted against it but you're the champion because you voted against it? >> if i did vote no, the reason i voted no was because they were excluding a provision that would have made the bill even stronger. that would have been the only reason i would was voting no. >> so it was good enough for 417 moves congress but you and nine others voted no. you know, even -- this is after 9/11. even the representatives of congress from new york city that had thousands of people kill they voted yes. there were times when i was one of two people that voted no. on port security i was only one of two that voted no because i

did not believe the bill was strong enough. on this issue, i'm a hard liner to make sure the bill -- >> an extremist. >> not at all. >> when the safety. -- >> one at a time, please. think the safety -- about all the people around the gulf coast, every single person who represents a port voted yes on the port security bill except for you. >> again, i will tell you -- >> let him finish. >> when i added my provision to ensure that there were screening for nuclear weapons on every single ship in coming into the united states of america, that was my amendment. every single republican voted no because the industry did not want the shipping coming into

our country did not want it screened. that is my law, that is my amendment and that is bill that every republican voted no on. >> i will give you 15 seconds. this is a port security bill for every port in the country. ok, there were over 400 votes, including every single representative that represents a port. those are port communities, any dangers in that port affect the people i live with, same with new york, new jersey, all around the country. you're telling me you and one other person that voted no on that bill and the rest of us were wrong? >> i want to continue, john. for example, on the l.m.g. tankers coming in, making sure they get screened 10 miles off

of the coast of massachusetts, making sure people like the one that jumped off a narching 1999, making sure other potential terrorists who have been coming into america through that terminal could no longer jeopardize our city. i'm the one that led it to ensure that the facility was secure. thyme one that led the effort that those tangers are screened 10 miles off -- >> this is the second time. >> look, the port security bill, you voted no on that. ou voted no with one other person. republicans represent ports as well. the whole thing about going 10 miles out that was after and that is separate and apart from what we're talking about here. this is the course security

needs of the country. this is the funding. >> again, there is nothing i would not vote to fund that would protect the port of boston or any other port. >> you voted against all of it, thousand. this is the homeland security appropriation bill. >> that issue, again, goes to whether or not the bill was strong enough. maybe you can say that i was wrong. >> you got to be kidding me? to say that. was all alon on nuclear power plants security. i was all alone to make sure that we screen for planes for chicago, i don't mind being alone. i don't mind losing year after year to make sure this right thing is done to protect the security of our country. >> i would like to move on. you can return to this topic

later as you choose during your open periods. >> the obama administration has chosen to survive the suspect in the boston marathons in a civil trial. did they do the right thing? 90 seconds, sir. >> i believe that president obama and his justice department are completely committed to ensuring that justice is done in this case. all voted president obama last week. he said that justice would be done in this case. if in the opinion of president obama and his justice department, the proper place for prosecution is here in the federal district court system of the state of massachusetts, i believe that the court system here in massachusetts can

provide that kind of a venue in order to hear this case. i defer to president obama. i defer to his justice department. if in their judgment, this is the proper place in order to conduct that trial. >> thank you, sir. mr. lynch, 90 seconds. >> i think we have sufficient laws in our criminal system to prosecutor terror its, number two if you will. i think the effort to classify baptsant. nemy com i've been to gitmo and i've been involved in the process of trying to find a way to prosecutor those individuals as well. i think, in this case, we are not lacking evidence in terms of the prosecution of this individual. i think that fully, we have

competent prosecutors at the federal level that can handle this case and come to whatever punishment we feel is appropriate. >> rebuttal if you like it or we can move on. >> we can move on. >> ok, next question. > last year the house voted to extend the surveillance amendment act. agencies ar old law to use electric surveillance in investigations as well as shield their methods in court. you both were on opposite sides of that vote. why did you vote the way you did and what does it tell you about you dirnses between you as candidates? >> we had differences in votes, which vote are you talking about? >> we're talk about the one in 2008, to reauthorize and to

extend ted leeway it was given. >> again, we had a number of bills that are -- we've extended for three morks 10 months. >> this was last year's vote and how did we vote? >> you voted yes and he voted no. >> what was the duration of the bill? >> i don't know. >> here's one of the problems. i have consistently supported the one-year extension so we ave an active oversight of the pfizer -- the foreign surveillance system. i have voted it against it when they try to extend it for four years and we don't have people coming back. we have to keep those agency in close check so congress continues to oversee them. however, i do believe in a system that has judicial oversight and this is the key here.

if we do have intelligence that there's an impending attack on the part of terrorists and they need an enhanced surveillance sim, whether it is a wiretap or mobile wiretap or going into e-mails. they should be able to apply for that. if there's life at stake they can apply but it should be subject to review immediately by a court in article three court. that is what we do do with these agencies. on some occasions, i vote against them because they try to jump that for four years. i would like them coming back so many months to make sure they are operating under the law. >> mr. markey, 90 seconds. >> when there is no sunset that means congress does not come to review it. we can't ask the questions. that's why went rand paul was raising the questions of drone,

what is the policy we have for drones overseas? when do we use them? who authorizes them? this is important questions that congress has to brace. during the bush administration, hey were taking this authorityization and they were using it open endly. the point is yes, we need to do surveillance of our potential enemies. we need to gather information about them. it also a has to be approved by a court. there has to be permission which is given. authorization which is given. there ask emergency situations when the country is around threat then they can act and then come back and get approval by a court. during the bush administration, ey were acting open-ended of wiretaps and without coming back and getting approval from the

courts and that is a violation of the constitutional separation of powers where there would be a protection that was given to the american people tone sure their civil liberties were not being compromised. my opposition went to the bush administration and complete inindifference of what has to be constructed. >> rebuttal? >> not a rebuttal but i remember when we had the first homeland security director, former governor of pennsylvania. i asked him in an exchange, he was testifying and i said how many applications for these special wiretaps have been asked for? he gave me a number, i'm guessing now, i think he said 121. i said how many have been approved? 120. 120 out of 121, what that ndicates to me is that a

thoughtful investigation was not being done, it was more of a rubber stamp. that is what raised our concern about the time frame that agencies have the time to operate for review. >> that's why i voted no. in my opinion, the civil liberties that were being short circuited when it would have been relatively easy for the bush administration after they initiated a wiretap to go to a judge, to make sure the judge understood of what was being done in the name of the people. es, we want to apprehend potential terrorists but we want to make sure we do it in the context of the constitutional system and the bush administration was not adhering to it snipe want to move on unless you have anything further on this? we're well aware on how crucial

surveillance cameras can be in solving crimes like the boston marathon. the most recent records shows that boston has less than 700 of them in the city and the subway. new york city has 3,000 cameras lower manhattan alone and london has more than half a million of them. do we need more cameras and how would we pay for them? >> after 9/11 we had to learn a lesson. they used box cutters. so we have to make the adjustments because we knew we were understood attack. i led the effort on nuclear power plants on screenings on planes, etc. here while i am the chairman and the founder to feel privacy caucus in congress, i do believe

that it is now time for us to consider more surveillance cameras. we see how helpful those surveillance cameras just were in solving this crime, very quickly. it is a balance between privacy and security. on this attack upon us gives us a warning. i think as a result, we have to have an open-ended debate on where we would place additional surveillance cameras within our society. if that that was to occur, i do believe it should be the federal government that does pay for it. it should be part of the national security expenditure that we make in order to protect our country. >> mr. lynch, 90 seconds. >> sure. first new york and boston are different places. in new york you can have between eight million to 11 million people.

per capita we probably have, you know, a few less cameras in the city of boston than they do in manhattan. the huge numbers of people gives people a certain level of privacy, even in public and new york and it is very different here in boston. i think there are places, for instance, i did support an amendment to give amtrak an opportunity to put cameras inside stations, a highly dense situation. there are unique security risks there. we heard about opportunities that might be taken on our rail system recently coming in from canada. we have more people, believe it or not, travel by rail in the united states every single day than travel by air. most of them are on the northeast corridor traveling from washington, d.c. to boston. so i think appropriately used

cameras can be helpful but i think they must be used in place where is people would not expectal high level of privacy. we need to be respectful of those rights. >> we have less than four minutes before we take a break. after that we're going move into other topics. why don't you split the remaining time until the break if you would like to pursue any of your own comments. mr. marke yrchings anything you want to add on national security and terror? >> i think we need to protect our resources to proket protect our country. on the drawing board there is another $100 billion of nuclear weapons to be constructed over the next decade. i don't think that adds to our security in the way that additional investment in homeland security would.

in being smarter and thinking about what are the real threats to our country. the same is true for our nato expenditures in europe. there is almost an nonexistent likely hood that we're going to invade germany and france there is money there and we can reallocate our sources. >> there has been a great deal of media attention on the last week and the violence that was incurred. gain, our hearts go out to the victims, however, i was reading in the press each day. on the day after the attacks, we had two young men shot to death in rocks bury. the following day we had two

young men shot in door chester. andnext day two in brighten on the south bend. we had 11 men, young men all of them of color, i believe, gunned down on the streets of boston. you don't hear a lot about that. you don't hear a lot a that and our efforts against violence, you know, seems to be some level of, i don't know if it immunity or just people are not paying attention or maybe there has been some level of acceptance in society. i think we need to devote the resources to security in those neighborhoods for boston's residents on a daily basis. terrorism is a different kind going on out there and it is called crime, just crime in those neighborhoods where i think people deserve to be protected as well. >> 30 seconds and twheven to

break. >> thank you. look, 52 children die in the united states from gun violence each week. we have to make sure that n.r.a. stands for not relevant anywhere. we have to put on the books background checks for criminals and others do not have access to these weapons. >> on that note we're going to take a break. when we return the democratic u.s. senate debate continues live. lease, stay with us. welcome back. r next question comes from cynthia political editor of "the

boston globe." ? >> the question is after last week's collapse of background checks one thing seems apparent. even with the emotional support of the fallout of newtown massacre last year the political tactics of gun control advocates are not winning on capitol hill. how would you change that? >> congressman lynch you go first. >> i'm sore precipitate thank you. i think the president has come out with a very reasonable proposal. i support the elements of his plan and i probably add one of my own. he was asking for reinstatement of the assault weapons ban. i think it is totally proposal. huntsmen and sportsmen don't need that. his third proposal was probably the most reasonable one, it has support of 90% of the people in the united states today and this is to have background checks for

people who should not have guns. at's a proposal that historically the n.r.a. has supported that but they rejected that proposal itself lately in washington. i think this would be an amendment if we could put in hat is to increase funding for for behavioral issues right at e ground level so that behavioral, issues funded would be in place for those people. as we've seen over the last few massacres and shootings, whether it is newtown or aurora, we've seen an underlining psychiatric issue that if we could get at that problem we probably could have prevents those massacres from happening. >> thank you, mr. lynch.

mr. markey? >> people who know me know that i take on the tough issues and i get results. 1994, there was another endemic of assault weapons on the united states. this qumsing from the chinese. they were selling millions of assault weapons for $130 or less and they had become the gun of preference on our streets of our country, you feel, i built a coalition to build the political pressure so we could, in fact, keep those weapons out of our country. in 1994, by executive action, president clinton did, in fact, do that after i built the coalition and they have been off the streets since 1994. so from my perspective, that is what you have to be able to do. that's why i want to go to the

senate to build those bipartisan coalitions, especially on the kinds of issues that there is a brood consensus across our country. these assault weapons on our streets, near schools, the only technology that should be near a child in a school should be a computer, not a gun. special those that have the magazines that only belong on the battlefield of our country and could have been purchased without criminal background checks. you have to be able to work in a bipartisan fashion to put together a coalition that can successfully pass that kind of legislation. >> but in terms of the political tactics that are not working in washington. is there something you could dow to prevent the stalling tactics. >> i would like to follow-up if i could. most people know my background and a few years back -- well, more than a few years back my cousin brian was gunned down

where we grew up. aknow what it is like to have family member killed by gun violence. i think that far too many families know that feeling. there is a lot of families out there suffering from that loss. we met with some last night at a orum over in dorchester. i think if those member opposite the u.s. senate that rejected that proposal had a sense of what u.s. was like -- if there was just one, one member of the senate that knew what it was like for their family to go through that loss and suffering i think that person -- that person could convey the that message to rest of the senators to let them know what it was

about. it is not about the n.r.a., it is about protecting our families. >> mr. markey. many organizations have started here. the health care movement started here. now its is national. i think the same thing has to happen. massachusetts has to be the leader. we have to lift our voice, a lot of this is public education across the country. we have to make sure it doesn't go away. the n.r.a. is depending upon this issue dying. it is not going to. we have to make sure our voices are heard, this is an ongoing public, political education process that activates our country so we implement this legislation. i hear the president and joe biden and they say they are not going to let this die. as each single day that goes by, there's going to be razor blade sharp edges around this issue. we have to make sure people pay

a price. ultimately, too many children are dying. too many adults are diing in our country. we have to make sure we get our coalition up and working. i think we can turn around those votes. too many members are in the vice-like grip of the n.r.a. they have to be pull wad from michelle mcconnell. - pulled away from mitch mcconnell. >> the specific services we had at the holy cross cathedral. i have to say i've never seen my president so mad, so angry, so frustrated as he was at that vote that was, basically, forced by the n.r.a. on the republican caucus and the u.s. senate. i think that ed is right in the sense that we have to make sure that the forces for

accountability are greater than the forces of the n.r.a. and of these special interest group, whoever they may be. there should be a course of independence. i'm happy to say because i've take than independence stand. identify suffered for it sum times but i think -- look i know who i work for in the united states. i know who i will work for in the united states senate. it won't be a democratic leader, it won't be the people who pick mr. markey, it will be the people of massachusetts that i work for. >> mr. markey, rebuttal? >> i was proud to be endorsed by "the boston globe" yesterday and groups that are trying to end gun violence as well as the league of conservation voters and many unions across the country. i'm running to make sure the voices of the people of massachusetts are heard.

the globe and their endorsement mentioned how successful i've been in basing bills in a bipartisan fashion that are now on the books, they are laws in our country. that is what we have to do. we have to find people across the aisle that we can work with to pass legislation in this area of gun violence that will make a difference in the lives of millions of americans. >> mr. lynch? >> sure. i want to point out we serve in a legislator. when you hear a legislator ying i solved the security issue. i'm responsible for nuclear safety, i'm the one that did the assault weapons ban. look, the truth of the matter is, ed has been on the side of big business. carp corp. th the

operations that gave jobs to mexico. i'm a fisherman deal with the fish. on the banking issues, i'm with the taxpayers and the people of america, you're with the big banks and the bailout. on all of these issues on a telecommunications -- you're with the telecommunications companies. >> that's a long list. let him respond, please. >> i did. i sided with barack obama. sidedd with john kerry, i with barney frank to enis that your our entire country did not collapse. the bush administration turned a blind eye that a casino was set up in wall street. i did not support any of the bush administration financial regulations policies. but when the threat was the system was going to collapse and hurt every family in america, i

did that to protect our financial system from collapsing and you did not. in addition, on telecommunication it was my egislation that broke down the telecom monopoly that led to a broadband revolution that created many millions of jobs in the united states of america. i'm very proud of that. my name is on the legislation and i'm proud that my name is on much of that legislation. it was my job to go to washington -- >> that's my point. that's my point. you said we were going to talk a this, you're proud of that and that is the problem. we have one cable company mcast that runs from here to washington, d.c. there is no companies. verizon has the whole market. open up your cable bill and see

if you're getting a good deal or not. that's the problem. you promised the people we would have a diversity of companies, a diversity of depock and media, we have two companies that control the whole market. most people in massachusetts are tonight. he yankees are you kidding me? there are companies that won't locate jobs because they don't have broadband access. >> steve is putting so many red herings out here we have to put an aquarium in the middle of the studio. let me say this, i don't think he understand this revolution. >> i do. >> i don't think you do at all. people can call comcast to get telephone service, people can have a satellite dish, increasingly people are going

their computers are in order to get video and the voice that they use -- >> because they don't have any other choice. >> they do. they have multiple choices. it is no longer a single choice, steve. it is a revolution and every young person is watching this debate and they are wondering what you are talking about. these choices was not possible before the 1996 law passed. >> you're on a role and take 30 seconds more each and we'll take a break. >> if you think we have competition going on in the cable industry you're out of your mind. the great article this weekend in "the new york times." they had a financial analysts from wall street. i'm trying to quote him but he said i'm amazed that verizon continues to squeeze more and more money out of its customers -- they run to the average bill

was $150. so even the people of wall street that are driven by profits are amazed at the ability of one company to corner the entire market. >> ok, let him respond and then we'll break. > we have not cornered the entire market. if they want to disconnect verizon, they can disconnect. hey can go to comcast. verizon, if they are up happy with that service they there is half a dozen other companies they can go fop it is a marketplace out there. it is marketplace where consumers have a choice. before 1996, one phone company. before 1996, one cable company. buy the package, it is a package of voice and video and data that you can buy from multiple companies that you can con

detect and disconnect at your wish. >> you're welcome to continue this after we return from a brief breark. democratic senate debate, stay us with please. >> welcome back to the democratic senate debate and let's continue on with the next question. >> this race is focused on difference of biography and votes you have taken in the past. what is the biggest policy difference you have with your opponent on an issue, any issue that the country is currently facing? >> mr. markey you take this first, sir. >> without question the

obamacare vote is still front and center. the republicans are committed to repealing that and that was the proudest vote of my career. that was the dream from ted kennedy through the obama administration. it ensures that every child in america had health coverage. it enensures that if you are sick you can't become bankrupt. i was very proud of that vote. i think it is something that modeled upon the massachusetts law. i voted for obamacare. i believe it is important, i blivet goes right to fundamental values in our state and in our country. i believe it is a right and not a privilege to have access to our health care. i voted yes and steve voted no.

>> mr. lynch, 90 seconds. >> sure. let me address that. i don't think that is biggest difference, the biggest difference between ed and i, if you look at our records. i go back. ed is a policy guy. i'm a people guy. that's why i was explaining before that on all of these fights with the bank bailout, you know, ed was with the banks and i was with the people. on the fishing issue, i'm with the fishermen, the fishing families. ed is not. on homeland security issues, i'm with the firefighters, the nurses, the police, ed voted no on those issues. on the telecommunication, i'm with the people in western massachusetts. i'm not kidding you, they are watching the yankees game because they don't get this cable. they were promised back in 1996. so on all those issues and more

i'm with the people. that reflects the type of leadership i offer. i don't think the problems we're different cities i don't think they are solved by a stroke of the pen in washington, d.c. you need someone on the ground. that has been my reputation. i'm hands on. i'm here. people aren't asking where i am, they know where i am. that's the difference in the style of leadership i have that i would like to bring to the united states senate. >> thank you. mr. markey, rebuttal. >> after 9/11 i went over to logan airport because i knew there were dozens of flight attendants that were all huddled at the hilton. i went over to visit them. i visited them because i knew how many friends they had lost

and how fearful they were for themselves. they told me what they needed and most of the things they needed was to make sure that the cargo on passenger planes was screened as well. i did that for those people in logan airport, for those who live in my district. there's a provision in telecommunication bill that pays the phone r 90% of bills paid for out of my 1996 telecom act to make sure every child has access to opportunity through education. i did that because i realized those kids did not have computers at home versus the kids in the wealthiest communities did. everything i did i learned from the conversations with the people in massachusetts then i work to make it the law of the

land. >> mr. lynch. >> you have to get over to rocks bury because i've been over there a lot and they don't like their cable. they don't like putting a dish in their window and they are concerned about the bill, let me tell you. it doesn't theap the unemployment rate is twouble -- double what it is everywhere else. in terms of going back to the health care, the bill. we had an opportunity to get it right. and we missed that opportunity. we could have forced the insurance companies to lower their prices, that was the idea of health care reform. we were going force the insurance companies to lower the prices that was going help pay for the people who did not have health care. ed made a boast that everyone can keep their own doctor. not only has that promise been broken already with thousands of people across the state, i'm

starting to worry if people can keep their own hospitals as a result of this bill because the costs keep going up and now employers are run wag from providing health care to those -- running away from providing health care to those employees. i went to massachusetts and i asked them what are you worried about today and staying in business? they will tell you the health care costs. that is what is threatening small businesses and small business creation in the state right now is the huge health care costs. we missed an opportunity. >> go ahead, sir. >> again, voting if president obama's health care plan was the proudest moment of my career. steve has the toppings vote against it. i'm proy choice and i voted for planned parenthood. i voted geps sequestration because i was concerned it would lead to cuts in education

funding, clean energy jobs in massachusetts. voted no because i did not s. st tea party steve voted yes. >> ed, you sponsored an amendment to overturn row v. wade in the united states congress. you voted for a provision that would deny a victim of rape and incest an opportunity for abortion. you forgot that part. now, look, i'm happy that you changed your progs because those are horrific positions but i want to be clear, you're promising people you won't do that again. i'm telling the women out there, i have never done that and i promise i will never do. >> let him respond. >> i have voted pro-choice for

30 years in the congress. that's why planned parenthood have endorsed me. you, on the other hand, within the obama health care bill, you voted to deny women access of the insurance coverage to make that choice. when you had a choice to ensure the women in the military had a right to access that health care procedure inside a military hospital, you voted to deny her that right inside the military. this is not 30 years ago, this is not in the last 20 years, that was in the last couple of years. that is why planned parenthood endorses me. >> the issue in the military base, they are in uniform. they did not just wake up some morning and all decide to dress in green. they are on a military base. you don't salute each other, the

idea of women to get an abortion on the military base is a bad idea. let them get off the base and if you're in favor of free choice, let them get off the base and make that decision out from under the power of a superior officer. >> one minute. you can split it but we have to combb gone in a minute. >> look it, i just think if a woman is in the military, she's in some foreign country and she is being told by this amendment she has to go out into that country in order to get that procedure whether that have -- >> come home. >> rather than having access to the medical care within that hospital -- as far as i'm concerned fire that general, get rid of people -- one of the greatest ongoing tragedies is the abuse of women in our military and that's what we have to correct. >> my point exactly. physical they are being abused

on military bases get them off of there. >> we're done. gentlemen, i have to stop because we're out of time. thank you both for a very interesting debate. "the ou to cynthia of boston global." that concludes this debate. stay with us for extensive coverage throughout this important campaign. one more reminder, if you want to help the victims of the marathon bombing and their familyings, please consider donating to the one fund boston. to learn more and donate please visit onefundboston.org. get out and vote and watch your vote count here. from all of us thank you for atching. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute]

[captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] >> on c-span tonight a look at charges against the boston marathon bomber and how the case may affect immigration legislation. we're with jay carney and witnesses at a judiciary senate committee on the immigration bill. then the first ladies influence d image focuses on mary todd lincoln. then senator mic lee speaks bout the principles of conservatism. >> he is a second prize winner in this year's c-span student cam's competition. >> we talk about crisis i think education in america may be in a crisis. >> what about education in the united states? is that going in the right

direction? >> no. that is a tough problem. >> the college board found in the graduating class of 2012 test scores fell in two of the three sections, reading dropped to the lowest level until four decades. the >> the children in our schools today will be the first generation of children who are less educated than their parents. >> freedom is like the secret ingredient that makes america special. freedom is what america is about. freedom has enabled the greatest minds to dare to know and it has enabled america to become a country of innovation. freedom has allowed us to explore into the unknown. it has allowed us to become the strongest nation in the world.

what is the driving force behind freedom? education. without education great men would not dare to speak up. without education, our forefathers would not be able to establish a free nation. that is why i believe education is the most important element in ur nation. they say we live in an increasing global society. so i wanted to know how american students ranked upon a global scale. >> so if you look at where we were several decades ago versus where we are now in the globe, we're 21, 23, and 26 out of developing nations in science, reading and math. ere is no doubt we're in the midst of a crisis. >> i decided to get a second opinion, headmaster of the

school. >> we're number two in the amount spent per pupil. we're number two in the amount of money we spend but we're falling behind further and further when it comes to international ranks in education. >> for every 100 ninth graders, only 70 will graduate from high school. 44 will go on to college. only 30 students will enroll in the second year of college. only 21 will graduate from a four year institution in a six-year period of time. that is simply not good enough to keep the united states competitive if n our global economy. >> in order to get an outside opinion about what is going on in america, i traveled to germanny where i met up with mr.

sink. he told me how things are done in germanny compared to america. >> there are many specialists in in america. our workers are used in many other areas of work. my american friend was surprised to see the same staff sweeping anding pork and all of the necessary things are learned in the three-year apprenticeship. this apprenticeship system serves as worldwide example and should definitely be maintained here. >> atren 'tis -- apprenticeships not good enough? i needed some sort of explanation. that's why i spoke to the headmaster of westminster academy. >> one of the challenges education, educated space today is the changing of the family because there was a time which in which the mother, father and

children a home in which we're growing up with both parents. now children go to school with only one parent and issues in the home, they're bringing some of the concerns and challenges into the classroom. i think what schools should do is help children love to learn, love to read, become thinkers, become learners and become problem solvers, because those who can cope with difficult situations. >> thin visited northeast high school, where i met vice president mr. thompson, who told me his thoughts on this issue. >> i think we're pushing every child now into the college prep when most kids may not want to go to college. they may not qualify for college. when they get to the high school part and 100% college prep and then they fail, we call thm a failure. technically, we failed them. bit eighth, ninth grade, maybe

interests are not with college. maybe vocational track. age 18, vocational degree, you can be earning a living. there are kids that wake upp after graduation with diploma in their hand and have no skills. so the ninth grade challenge at e 14, edges into a welding class and four years at age 18, they could be getting a job preparing who know what's and making more money then i'm making. so getting the steps to go back o college or i.t.t. vocational schools, we need those to help all children, not to in college. >> i met with i dedicated a.p. teacher to stalk about and starredized tests. >> i think a.p. as a program is a wonderful program. one of the things that are untestable that are happening that are very positive in the classroom, you know you can't really test. >> you can't really test for it? >> how do you test maturity and

responsibility? how do you test discipline? how do you take pressure on the teach tore have a certain test scores for their class and foremy success or ail fewer as a teacher, it will be based on those test scores in my success or failure will be based on test scores. what happens when you have a tremendous amount of failure across the board? you change the test scores or standards rather? >> now, everybody is handcuffed to a system that requires them to teach to a test. so teachers have gummed down the curriculum. like standardized tests have been dumbed down so our students can pass them and do well on them and we tried to load them up as facts for standarized testing and our nation continue to slip because our students have lost the ability to do critical thinking and to fall in love with learning. thomas jefferson once said that if a man expects to have liberty without education, he will expect what has never been and

will never be. >> america is free because it is a nation of intellect. we cannot let another class graduate unprepared for the tasks that lie ahead. if we let another year go without doing anything to improve the education sector, we will let fee feet prevail in our nation. that's why on this year 2013 i urge you, mr. president, to please reform the education sector, to encourage american chilled to ascribe academically, to challenge us to rise above so we can lead america as our forefathers did. >> congratulations to all of the winners in this year's student cam competition. to see more winning videos, go to studentcam.org. >> white house press secretary jay connie took questions monday on the white house decision mott to charge the boston marathon bomber as enemy combatant. ere's a portion of that event.

>> lastly jay, they're saying the boston suspects should be treated like enemy combatant. is that something that you guys have looked at or made a determination on? >> he will not be treated as enemy combatant. we will prosecute this terrorist under our system of justice. under u.s. law, united states citizens cannot be tried in military conditions. and it's important to remember since 9/11, we have used the federal court system to convict and incourse rate hundreds of terrorists. effective use of the criminal justice system is resulting in the interrogation, conviction and retention of both u.s. citizens and noncitizens for acts 6 terrorism committed inside the united states and around the world. the system has repeatedly proven it can successfully handle the threat we continue to face. there are number of examples hike pro fail. times square bomber, faysal

shsad pleaded guilty. the so-called underwear bomber was sentenced to life in prison. a somali national, who was a member of al shabab and close association with al qaeda in arabian peninsula is now currently in this system. we have acquired valuable intelligence from him through the process that is allowed in the system. so this is absolutely the right way and appropriate way to go. when it comes the united states citizens, it is against the law to try them in military commissions. yes? >> does the president believe that there is a system in place adequately target to deal with loan operators, those who may not be tied to some kind of larger extremist organization? >> you have heard the president and many others address the evolving threats that we face as a nation. as we have taken the fight to al aeda and have met with

significant progress removing from the battlefield senior members of al qaeda. we have a seen other threats develops and meerge and john brennan, the president, many others, attorney general has spoken about those threats. would i not in any way characterize the suspects in this investigation in any way with regards to that question because that is something being determined by investigators and prosecutors. but there's no question that the threat remains. it remains from al qaeda central, even though it's been decimated. it remains from affiliated of al qaeda as we talked about. and it remains within the context of your questions, self-radicalized actors, individual actors who pose a threat. we have to remain vigilant in the face of all of those threats. the president, of course, expects our various agencies

within the national security apparatus to do just that. ? i want to follow up on earlier question about whether or not the president feels like law enforcement, f.b.i., adequately dealt with this issue back in 2011. during his briefings, has he been asked specific questions about what law enforcement knew and is he comfortable with the answers that he is get something >> without getting into specifics of the meetings he's had, he has been thoroughly briefed and has asked of the host -- a host of questions as you would expect. what i can tell you is the f.b.i., as f.b.i. itself has said. thoroughly investigated the information it had received in 2011 that included checking u.s. government databases and other information to look for such things as derogatory sell phone communications, possible use of online sites associated with the promotion of radical activity. associations with other persons of interest, travel history and

plans and education history. and f.b.i. as you know interviewed family members and did not find any terrorism activity, domestic or foreign. as part of the overall investigation into these two individuals, into the bombings in boston, be obviously events later in watertown, there will be a whole picture i think put together to find out exact wlay led to the bombings, motivation that's were behind them, any association that may have existed if they did. and that's part of the process being undertaken now. now that these suspects, one is deceased and one in custody. process under way to thoroughly investigate the whole matter. >> as that picture is being painted and put together on this stage, any indication at all look back on it now, there are some thngs that pointed to what happened? >> well, yes, i would point you

to the statement f.b.i. made and i just repeated, looking back at it now on this time, f.b.i. did thoroughly investigate this this matter when it received information from a foreign government and went through the process i just described. all of this will be part of an investigation into an ongoing matter and that is the investigation of prosecution of the suspect in custody. >> two things. first, quick follow on immigration. senator ryan paul said at the very least process should be slowed down. understand what happened in boston and wrote a letter saying why did the current system allow two individuals to emigrate -- immigrate to the united states from the chechen republic in russia, area known as hotbed of screesmism and then committed acts of terrorism? were there any safeguards? could this have been prevented? do you think ryan paul things

what happened in boston reflects something wrong with the current system that should cause us to slow down and figure out? >> we believe we need to move forward with compensation immigration reform for a whole host of reasons. benefit that's reform will provide tour country and economy and to our security. and we agree with those coauthors of the legislation in the senate who made the point in recent days that enhancing our security is one of the reasons why we should press forward with immigration reform. speculation about this particular matter is fine but this is under investigation. the fact is comprehensive immigration reform, as anybody who looked into and can attest will enhance our security for all of the reasons i talked about at the top. >> now -- >> senator lindsey graham said he strongly disagrees with the obama administration's decision not to prosecute the surviving boston bomber as enemy combatant

saying it was a premature decision. he made these comments at a news conference at the capitol monday. it's 15 minutes. >> thank you for coming. i understand at 2:50 we will have moment of silence for the nation for the victims in boston. i think that is appropriate and i think the president is right to lead that effort. quickly, to the families who have lost loved ones, to those who have been injured, our heart breaks as a nation. to the people of boston, you make us proud by the courage you have shown. to the law enforcement officials and intelligence community, god bless you for hard work and bravery. what brings me here today is i have been informed that the ama administration has

indicated the suspect in boston will not be treated as enemy combatant. i strongly disagree with the obama administration's decision to rule out enemy combatant status for the suspect at this time. i believe such a decision is premature. it's impossible for us to gather the evidence in just a few days to determine whether or not this individual should be held for questioning under the law of war. the decision by the obama administration to try this individual in federal court is a sound decision. it is the right decision. military commission trials are not available in cases like this. i wrote the 2009 military commission act. i have been judge advocate for over 30 years. along with the help of my colleagues, we created military commission system for foreign errorists.

i have confidence in the world at the three courts at the federal level do a terrific job. i have confidence in our military commission system. the decision by the administration to not proceed into state court in massachusetts i think was the correct decision. the death penalty slable at the federal level. this is clearly in my view candidate for case to be deemed act of terrorism. here is my concern. as a lawyer for over 30 years, civilian and military, i strongly support the concept that no criminal defend should ever be required to incriminate themselves while they're in custody of the government. that is a long held tradition and american jeurys produce and military incivilian setting. no criminal defendant should every be required to incriminate themselves in a criminal case. every nation at war should have

the ability to defend themselves by gathering intelligence. these are mott mute churly exclusive concepts. i believe our nation is at war. enemy is radical islam defined as taliban al qaeda and affiliated groups. the question i have regarding this case, is there any association between these two individuals and groups i just named to allow enassembly combatant status to be conferred upon the suspect in boston? what is the difference? under our criminal justice system it is inappropriate to ask questions of any defendant accused, to elicit information to use against them in court. there's ample evidence here on the criminal side. first year law student could prosecute this case. what i'm worried about is what does this individual know about future attacks or terrorist

organizations that may be in our midst? we have the right to gather intelligence. under the criminal system you should not question someone without their lawyer present. under the law of armed conflict, when you're trying to gather intelligence about future attacks against your nation, there is no requirement for a lawyer. it would disturb me greatly if this administration is relying exclusively on the criminal justice system to gather intelligence. if we have to clear the questions that we're going to gather intelligence through the terror suspect's lawyer, who greatly diminished our ability to control the process, the last thing in the world i want to do is turn intelligence gathering over to the terror suspects and lawyer. i hope the administration will look long and hard at the evidence and keep on the table the ability to torget this

suspect for intelligence-gathering purposes for future attacks we may face. none of the evidence on the intel side could be used in criminal court. we're not prosecuting a our crime under the law of war. we're trying to protect the nation. intelligence gathering is national security endeavor. prosecuting someone in federal court is a criminal enterprise. over the coming days and weeks, we will have discussions about how best to defend our nation. the best way we can defend america is to realize we're at war. we did not choose this war. we did not want this war. but it has come to our shores twice. and now how can we defend ourselves against a vicious enemy who is recruiting american citizens to their cause in our own backyard. fight the war within our values and our legal structure. we provide lawyers, al qaeda

does not. that makes us stronger, not weaker. we have the ability under the law of war to gather intelligence and a way to make sure our country is safe from future attacks. the ability to talk to individuals who may know about terrorist organizations plotting our future demise is a long-held concept under the law of war. i'm asking you, this administration, to leave on the table the option if the president warrants to designate this individual as an enemy combatant. what do we know? we know that these two individuals embrace radical islamic thought, that there's ample evidence that this was an attack inspired by rat cal ideology. they were not trying to rob a bank in boston. they slaughtered innocent people because they view us, the united states, as colonial power, a christian nation infidels.

the muslim world as a whole can be our friend. i traveled throughout the world and i met many people throughout the world of the islamic faith who are great allies and great friends of america. unfortunately there's a small inority radical islam whoist would kill every modern muslim, jew, christian, any person who disagrees with them. it's imperative we protect the homeland. the desire of this enemy is strike us in our own back backyard. i do not wish america to be the battlefield but it is. it is the choosing of our enemies to make our homeland the battlefield. allky ask is within our values and within our legal system, we retain the right to defend ourselves. the values i embrace is interrogation under the law of war, not torture.

i along with senator mccain spoke loudly during the bush years about interrogation techniques that i thought were out of bounds in terms of our laws and who we are. but let me say this, having been a military lawyer for 30 years, i know the difference between prosecuting crime and trying to prevent a future attack. the ability to have access to this suspect without a lawyer present, to gather intelligence about a future attack is absolutely essential to our national security. if over time the evidence suggests after a reasonable opportunity to make this decision, this suspect did not fall into the statutory definition of enassembly combatant, i are accept thrault. i think to rule that decision out now is premature and is unfair to those who are trying to protect us.

don't know how in the world we can make that decision by monday afternoon given the recent nature of this attack. i will continue to work with in administration to create law that's live within our values, that allow us the tools to defend ourselves against a vicious enemy and on march 25th, our road to the judge advocate general community, all of our military lawyers, i asked them 15 questions, and you can read those questions for yourselves. i will not bore you. but on march 25, i asked questions that applied to what happened today. i have seen this coming from a very long time. i have taken the floor on multiple occasions on the united states senate to prepare our nation for this day. this day has finally arrived. the day when the evidence suggests that two people, win an american citizen, the other in legal status, took up arms

against our country. the evidence right now to me is ample and overwhelming to suggest the attacks in boston were inspired by radical jihaddists and their ideology. i do not want to jeopardize any criminal defendant's rights to a fair trial. the public defenders that should be designed to this case should vigorously defend this young man. by doing so, you make us all safe. having said that, it's imperative we have time to w this us expect not to prove his guilt or innocence. there's ample evidence of that. but to gather intelligence as to what he may know about terrorist organizations that exist or others who may be planning to attack our country. i hope that the congress will look at this case and look at our laws or come to the

conclusion i have come to. we're at war. we're going to be at war for a very long time and we have to have the tools to defend ourselves within our values. one of those tools is the able to question people about future attacks to gather intelligence for national security purposes without benefit of counsel. the information will never be used in a court of law against the suspect. t will be used to protect us and the lost thing in the world we should do in the times in which we live is limit our ability to gather intelligence to the criminal justice system because in essence you will have turned over the intelligence gathering process to the accused and their lawyer. thank you very much. >> senator graham, right now the people who are on the terrorism watch list can still buy a gun. what do you think of that policy? >> i think anyone who's on the terrorist watch list should not lose their second amendment right without the ability to

challenge that determination. i think senator kennedy was on the terrorist watch list. there have been people that come up on the watch list, i do not want to make that the basis to take someone's second amendment rights away. what i would suggest is if you come up on the terrorist watch list, you may have the ability to say no, i'm not a terrorist and that would be the proper way to do that. as to enemy combatant determination, every person designated enassembly combatant under our system has the ability to petition a federal judge through the habeas review process and the government is required to prove by preponderance of the evidence the person is in fact an enemy combatant, at least statutory definition. no one is without due process. under the criminal justice system, the government has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt the statutory elements of the crime charged. one system is designed to bring justice, to bring justice to a

criminal act. the other is to protect us against future terrorist activity. they both, in my sue, exist in harmony in our law. i would urge the obama administration to use both systems. >> the misspelling of the orlede suspect's name as traveling to russia? >> i spoke 45 minutes last night with the associate director of the f.b.i. i think all of us are wondering if the russians told us about this guy being add ral islammist in 2011, how could we have missed it? according to the f.b.i., they took the report from the russians seriously. they interviewed suspects itself. family members and those people went to school with and i think school officials put his name through the system and found one instance of domestic violence. they sent that report to the russians and said do you have any more because they didn't

have enough? they never got a reply. he went to russia. how could we not know that? apparently the misspelling of his name was such he did not pop up in the system. did he intentionally misspell his name? or did the russian airline just get it wrong? i don't know. here's the question we all should be asking, let's assume for a moment the f.b.i. made a diligent effort to make an investigation based on the russian information. quite frankly what what they told me, that would stand scrutiny and i assume it did. how could we from 2012 until the attack miss all of the radical statements and activity this guy engaged in, older brother, on the internet in the youtube videos? the f.b.i. is telling me some of the tools they need are not there. so is this a question of the f.b.i. not using the tools available to them or is this a question they're not enough tools in the toolbox?

i think we need to learn that. yes, i'm worried about how misspelling he cannot -- >> this is the second time it happened, with the underwear bomber? >> second time. let me tell you pattern that bothers most. underwear bomber was mirandized within 45 minutes. i don't care if you read people miranda rights. i just don't want you to shut down the intelligence-gathering process. that individual was never designated an enassembly combatant. only way he agreed to cooperate is f.b.i. flew to his family i and his parents convinced him. times square bomber, the times square bombing incident, he had pakistan/taliban ties. read miranda rights, never designated enemy combatant. we never terroristed him for intelligence gathering purposes. osama bin laden's soim, abu gazey is in the federal system today and read miranda rights. never designated enemy combatant. can you imagine what osama bin laden's son-in-law could tell us

about the terrorist organizations? he was the spokesman for al qaeda after 9/11. so there's a disturbing pattern here, quite frankly, of not gathering intelligence when that opportunity exists. thank you very much. i have to go. i will get a pen and pad and go next door to answer any questions if you have about the f.b.i. and, again, we're going to absorb a moment of silence here for the folks in boston. >> coming up on the next ashington journal," hina shsamsy of the american civil liberties union and cliff may discuss the legal definition and history of the term enemy combatant. former army judge colonel lisa

marie windsor examines the military's court marshal system which prosecutes about 5,000 u.s. members annually. "washington journal" is live 7:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. a senate judiciary subcommittee is examming the constitutionality of using drones to target american terrorist suspects overseas. that's live tuesday at 4:00 p.m. eastern on c-span3. >> c-span, created by america's cable companies in 1979. brought to you as a public service by your television provider. >> coming up next, c-span's " first ladies, influence and image" features mary todd lincoln, wife of abraham lincoln. and senator mike lee on issues of conservatism.

then a discussion on how immigration laws have changed since 9/11. ♪ >> born in 1818 in lexington, kentucky, mary todd grew up and lived to see her husband issued the emancipation proclamation 45 years later. a mother of four sons, she witnessed the death of three of those sons as well as her husband's assassination. her life was filled with tragedy, but as lincoln's political partner, she relished in his success. a look at the life and times of mary todd lincoln, one of the most complex first lady's. thank you for joining us on "first ladies: influence and image." we invite to of our academic advisers. rosalyn penn is a history

professor at meredith and morgan state university. at the table again is the director of five presidential libraries including the abraham lincoln library in springfield, illinois and a presidential biographer. thank you for being here. we will start with richard. mary todd is often viewed in broad strokes. criticism of her lavish spending and overly indulgent mother. if you look at a more nuanced picture, what do you see? >> that is why we need to get 90 minutes, to begin to get at the nuances. has been called the great american story, an integral part of the great american story. steven spielberg doesn't make movies about julia tyler or louisa adams.

mary todd lincoln remains someone who is symbolically divisive, perhaps. to some, a heroin, others a victim. she is a surprisingly contemporary figure as well. >> i like her because she is so complex. i say i like her. elizabeth was her dressmaker and companion. she did not live at the white house a good deal of time. formerly enslaved, purchased her own freedom and was interviewed along with other women to become the first lady's seamstress. or modess, as they called it. she made the most beautiful dresses.

>> what do you learn about mrs. lincoln through elizabeth keckley's eyes? >> it gives you a very concrete sketch of the relationship she had with her for four years. just reading what elizabeth tells you gives you an idea of how complex and hurt and victimized she was. >> it is the most intimate portrait we have of mary. >> we will begin our new lost --age, we call her mary todd. nuanced image. we call her mary todd. she signed it mary lincoln. where did mary todd come from? >> it was modern. she did not use it as i understand. >> lincoln famously said,

mocking the pretensions of his wife's family, gone are the time when the todd's needed one d. a thousand times she heard that joke. he's 6 foot 4, she's 5 foot 2 if that. he had a habit of introducing themselves as the law and the short of that, another joke she endured more than enjoyed. >> these programs work because they are interactive and we will get to phone calls. you can also go to the facebook page or tweet using #firstladies. let's take a brief look at what the country looked like.

31 million people in 33 states, but 11 were going to break off to form the confederate states of america. 35.6% growth since 1850, continuing to grow at an enormous pace. 3.9 million slaves, 12.7% of the population. the largest cities were new york, philadelphia, and brooklyn, and baltimore. they arrive at the white house. set the scene for the election and how tumultuous politics were. >> the political process had broken down. there were four parties that ran in 1860.

the democratic party that was the one truly national political organization split into northern and southern wings, divided over the issue of slavery. stephen douglass, lincoln's longtime rival and at one point romantic rival for mary's hand is the democratic nominee from the north. vice president breckinridge is the southern democratic candidate. they disappeared in the middle of the decade, they nominated john bell from tennessee, middle-of-the-road and support the constitution platform. the republicans were defined as anti-slavery, but not radically anti-slavery. they were all about containing the spread of slavery. lincoln along with 40% of the vote, the news of his election reached the state's almost immediately to secede. >> the white house that the first lady in here it was the

domain of. harriet lane, admired for her social skills even though the country was fracturing. >> historian catherine clinton said that in one of her biographies, she broke the elite virginia scheme of things. many of the congressional wives at some of the women that were very important during the virginian times were resentful. they lampooned them. lincoln and her. the sad thing was, she was a very intelligent and highly educated woman from the family in terms of what you consider wealthy and good families.

but they treated her very badly. the other thing that might have hit her is that washington was a swamp. >> in many ways. >> when i came to washington, it was mosquito-ridden. that was not 150 years ago. i am sure she had a difficult time dealing with that. she complained about how drab and worn the white house itself was. some of the furniture was back to the days of dolly madison. she had a lot to worry about. >> if you think of the repercussions of this woman arriving from kentucky, referred to as the republican queen, mocked by people that do not know her and willing to assume the worst about these banquets, it puts a chip on her shoulder even before she arrives in the

capital. it might begin explain some of her shopping, some of her preoccupation with fixing up the white house, for example. >> and we have a quote from her, her rationale for why she spent so much money on her own attire. "i must address myself in this attire because people who scrutinize every article i wear with curiosity. the fact i have grown up in the west subject to more searching observation." when she interviews elizabeth keckley, she asks how much she will charge for her dresses. >> keckley says, i will be reasonable. they came to an agreement.

my theory is that she wanted a lot of dresses but could not afford to pay lavishly. on her budget, she was able to get what she wanted because keckley agreed not to overcharge her. >> paint a portrait of what life was like in the lincoln white house as a family living there and the public using the space. >> it was astonishingly open to the public. in the middle of the great civil war that is raging, twice a week, the president would throw open his office and people could line up as long as they could wait for his public opinion badge. these were mostly job-seekers. mrs. lincoln, the children finessed themselves around these folks. the two boys at the beginning, of course.

willie was 10 years old when they arrived, and his younger brother. robert have got off to harvard. there was another brother that they lost years earlier in springfield. mrs. lincoln looked upon the white house very much as a symbol of this nation. they took seriously the responsibilities. as the woman responsible for the appearance of the house, remember that this was a time when the country was coming apart at the seams. the symbolic value of america's house is even greater.

in some ways, she took the same view of the white house. >> this network produced a documentary on the white house and we visited the lincoln bedroom. we will show you that next to show you the kind of spending that mary lincoln did on the furniture. >> it dates back to 1861, bought by mary todd lincoln as part of white house refurbishing. 8 feet long, 6 feet wide, made of carved rosewood. >> the lincoln bed with a purple and gold and lace. victoria and decorating. we have later photographs with the bed still dressed the way that she dressed it. >> it is this bed bought by mary lincoln that holds the key to understanding the lincoln family's time here.

>> it was one of mary lincoln's many extravagant purchases when she began a campaign to redecorate this entire building. >> she spent so much money, and he flew into a rage and said it was a stink in the nostrils of the american people. she was dying flub-dubs for that damned old house. >> in 1862, lincoln's middle son died after a bout with typhoid fever. mary never went into the room or looked at the bed again. >> willie's death -- lincoln took to the window and let her look across the river at a mental institution.

"if you don't get a hold of yourself, you will have to be put there." that was her time to absorb it. >> by contrast, it would hole up the week he died just to grieve. how they handle their grief goes to how we see them today. in the case of mary, it unhinged her. the final blow. the war melded the disparate elements of lincoln's personality and his grief. his loss of willie morphed into the nation's sense of loss. millions of homes throughout the union. >> it was a different interpretation.

congress allotted her $20,000, four years later, they allotted $125,000 for refurbishing. >> she did not have enough money to spend. >> how could she have spent some much if they only allocated $20,000? was it all on that one bad? >> she overspent the $20,000 by about $6,000. >> there was a war going on. it is part of the legend and the myth. the out-of-control shop-a-holic. >> a political aspect of that, too. how did they react when there were so many sons of mother's

dying on the battlefield? >> she basically disappeared for over one year. her social life ended for over a year. she ordered the marine band to stop playing concert on the white house grounds, maybe they could move to lafayette park. her grief was too great. she indulged herself even beyond the standards of the day. her compatriot was queen victoria that would spend the rest of her life grieving over the loss of prince albert. >> what brought her out of her grief? >> she was continuing to be vilified. her son, robert, who was really a disappointment in the long

run, had her incarcerated and sent into a mental institution. she decided, i am going to get out of here. she was able to mobilize to get her out of the mental institution. >> i don't think she ever really recovered from the loss of willie. >> it was not just willie. at the loss of edward, her husband, tad. >> and the loss of her mother that sent her to springfield in the first place. her life is shattered by loss. >> tell me how she served as the first lady to the president. her intuition about individuals is more accurate than that of

her husband. does lincoln listen to her? >> think that she tried to advise him but his advisers did not want her interfering. that was definitely the case when he was dying and they to occur from the room and would not let her in to mourn, which was a traditional thing in her culture. the wife stays with the husband until he dies. they robbed her of that. >> gary robinson asks, did mary lincoln create enemies out of social rivals? who was our main antagonist? >> she had a number of rivals.

the daughter of the secretary of the treasury made no secret about wanting to replace lincoln in the white house. kate was quite the belle of the ball. it is safe to say that mrs. lincoln had no great love lost for kate. part of the legend, and it is accurate, the stories of her accompanying the president to the battlefield near the end of the war. she lost it. the reason the grants did not go was because julia grant did not want to risk having another confrontation with this unpleasant woman.

>> what did the staffing think of her? >> they liked her. only four of the staff remained when the lincolns came to the white house. they brought in freed blacks. those that were interviewed talked about her in a very positive way. she got along well with them because they were the ones that helped raise her after her real mother died. >> lincoln's personal secretary did not use the best descriptions of her. >> as a young man, they have their own reasons to resent. they both had nicknames that the secretaries used to refer to them.

>> outside of washington, what was the perception of the first family? >> that is a great question. if you read the press of the day, there was a considerable amount of criticism. if she had been more press- conscious, we know how much time she spent visiting soldiers and hospitals. writing letters to soldiers that were unable to write themselves. taking food and gifts. and she never took reporters along with her. if she had been a little bit more p.r.-conscious, who knows what it might have done? >> the press followed her into every store they went into.

that is what they reported, those kinds of things. >> ron, you're on. go ahead, please. >> you have indicated that there continues to be great controversy among historians and biographers over the lincoln marriage. the first school of thought was initially presented in a biography by his law partner based on his post-assassination interviews with the multitude of lincolns, colleagues, neighbors, servants, etc. they reinforced the view that she was a domestic hell on earth with frequent outbursts with multiple instances of thrown objects including a piece of firewood that resulted in her battered husband having a broken nose. the other is presented as an appealing love story that reflects the deep skepticism over the veracity of the informants.

about the super abundance of evidence to the contrary for both the pre-presidential and a presidential periods. scholars have given more credence to her written as the -- in written testimony. this is culminated in the 2008 biography. >> in the interest of time, do you want to know which they think is more correct? >> one more thing i want to add. james mcpherson criticized the relentless hostility towards the lincolns which marred the image. my question is, what is your assessment of the depiction of mary lincoln and what is their assessment of the motion picture's portrayal?

>> are you familiar? >> michael is hostile to mary, certainly amassed a great deal of evidence to support his view. eleanor and franklin people, and they are pretty much abraham and -- mary people. there are people that will not set on the same stage at scholarly symposiums. they are so committed to one or the other and how passionate these historians feel. >> abraham seemed committed to mary. >> and that is the ultimate test, in some ways. >> i wonder if he has read catherine clinton's biography of mrs. lincoln where she engages him. you have to really look at the

reasons why people write biographies or books. he was angry. and later took it out on mary. from what i have heard, you have to look at the motives behind the books. >> he asked what you thought of the modern portrayal. >> it was wonderful precisely because it transcends all of these camps. >> i agree. from mary lincoln about her own view at the public perception, i seem to be the scapegoat for both the north and the south. we will show you next, another

video. a woman at her summer cottage not very far from the capital to call the soldiers home. >> president lincoln's cottage was a seasonal home for the lincoln family. mary lincoln really pushed for the move out here to the soldiers home because she thought it was a place for her family to have more privacy than at the white house. we are in the mary lincoln room which is not part of our typical experience of the cottage. we call it the mary lincoln room because when they moved here in the summer of 1863, she is involved in a pretty serious carriage accident. some believe the carriage had been tampered with and this was an early assassination attempt. when she suffered that accident, the driver's seat separate from the carriage and the horses are startled at take off, she had to

leap out of the carriage in order to save herself. she suffered a head injury. she is treated at the white house, and she comes out to the soldiers home to make a recovery. not only is it the most isolated of the bedrooms, but it is the only one with windows allowing for better cross-breezes. in 1862, there is the imperative of having a more private place to mourn and grieve after the death of willie. mary lincoln was going about the traditional cultural and social expectations of a woman in morning and felt like she could not do it as effectively at the white house.

for her, there was a personal imperative to come out to this home to grieve the loss of her son. one of the best documented events that actually took place is a seance hosted here after the death of willie. noah brooks writes about that account. lincoln felt that mary was being taken advantage of and that she might be subject to blackmail. he asked for some of his colleagues and friends to check out the situation and see if they could figure out what the medium is doing and figure out how to make the noises he was claiming were spirits. here at the soldiers home, he recounts noises they were hearing in when the lights turned on, they were able to prove he was a fraud.

it does not seem that she was aware that she was being defrauded. after it was revealed this man was a fake, she was quite embarrassed by that. and there was an attempt to conceal or cover up the incident. whenever she writes about this place, she talks about how much she was looking forward to coming out here. she sought as fulfilling her dream of what her family would experience in washington, d.c. even though death and of the war were surrounding them, it gave them a little bit of respite from the chaos of downtown washington d.c. >> it is available for public tours, put it on your list of out of the way spots, a time capsule for history. you were visibly wanting to react to the spiritualism.

>> this is in some ways the lincoln president in miniature. there is a school of thought that says her condition worsened after that very severe head injury that she experienced. the date is significant, july 2, 1863. the second day of the battle of gettysburg. the president's attention is focused elsewhere. gettysburg and vicksburg, he did not pay as much attention to his wife. >> is there speculation that the carriage accident was an assassination attempt? after the election, there was a document to the assassination attempt the pinkerton service saved them from.

there was a constant threat on the lives of these people. that stress we should take into account. >> she was living through all of that. it was a horrible time to be in the white house, i would think. >> we are in the midst of a five-year marking of the civil war events. we could not capture all of the tumultuous and significant events, but here are a few of them. 1861, the civil war began. 1863, they issued the emancipation proclamation. and as richard said, the gettysburg address. 1865, the thirteenth amendment abolishing slavery is proposed.

and april 9, the court house in virginia, the confederate army surrenders. it bookends the lincoln administration. you mentioned her unannounced visits to military hospitals. >> that goes to the controversy. there is a significant body of evidence that calls into question some of her conduct. for example, she was surrounded by people that very clearly were there to take advantage of her. she needed money. never forget the fact that from the day she arrived there, she needed money. she needed money because she was $27,000 in debt to her dress makers. the president had to be reelected because if he was, she

could keep those bills at bay. if he was not, who knew what might happen? she was spending public funds on the white house proper. there were always people around her that were eager to serve their own interests by appearing to serve hers. there was a shady character by the name of henry, a chevalier of the new york herald. he befriended her and the president's annual message to congress in 1861 appeared in the new york herald the same day it went to congress. you get the picture.

there was no shortage of people like the chevalier that were eager to line their own pockets or serve their own interests. i think the legitimate criticism of mrs. lincoln has nothing to do with her mental condition. you can only feel empathetic for that. but legitimately, there is criticism about how she conducted herself in ways that were always a danger, if exposed, of embarrassing the president. >> it was the gardener that took the letter and gave it to the press. >> that was the story that was >> and then the gardener leaves for scotland. he must have been paid to do this. >> the other side of the argument is that it was the story they created to cover up

what happened. >> candace in fredericksburg, virginia. >> i am enjoying the show very much. i have a question regarding the broken first engagement and then they got back together a year- and-a-half later. why do you think they broke up? and did they get back together? did lincoln love her throughout their marriage? >> i will hold the question because as the program progresses, we will go back in time and answer your question, i promise. let's take another from chad. >> my question is about elizabeth keckley.

she served with mary lincoln, i'm not sure? >> she made dress as for a variety of people including jefferson davis's wife. was very popular. she had her own shop. she did not live in the white house. she had her own residence, a place that she rented. and she was very popular among congressional wives that recommended her to mrs. lincoln. she bought her freedom in st. louis through dress making. >> as the lincolns traveled back and forth, they had contraband camps. >> people escaping from slavery, in particular, with their families. or enslaved people that were emancipated but had no place to go. there were several contraband associations across the nation.

mrs. keckley was one of the founders of the washington of contraband association. >> we have many people on facebook and twitter asking us questions about her views on slavery. since she was friends with henry clay, did she also prescribe to the gradual emancipation and colonization of the slaves? or did you follow lincoln's change of heart and scrapping the colonization efforts? was she anti-slavery and support the 13th amendment. >> she was anti-slavery and certainly supported the thirteenth amendment. >> they say she influenced the

president into the immediate emancipation, but i think it was a war strategy. >> i think you are right. >> she was encouraging him to go ahead and do it. >> henry clay, in some wasy, what brought them together was to be shared love of politics. again, a lady of the era and in particular, henry clay was a neighbor and good friend, lincoln's political hero. in some ways, he is the political matchmaker behind this unlikely union. >> our next visit is to springfield, illinois. the place where abraham and mary would meet.

let's talk about the collections to the lincoln library, the first lady artifacts. we will learn more about how that city preserves our memory. >> here we have some things that mary lincoln had in the white house. she continued to be interested in books. here are two volumes of what we think was a 27-volume set of the works of sir edward bulwer lytton. not a name recognized today, but this novel is remembered. "the last days of pompeii." signed these books 1864. she was a pretty good writer of letters.

monogram m.l. on it. notice no "t" in there. she never called herself mary todd lincoln, she never called herself mary t. lincoln. she was mrs. lincoln, mrs. abraham lincoln, or mrs. president lincoln. mary todd is a 20th-century invention. this is the letter that shows some of her difficulties in the sense that her reputation suffered. she is writing to the assistant secretary of the treasury. asking if he can find a job for her dress maker, elizabeth keckley because she does no longer need the services and wants to get elizabeth onto the jobs list at the treasury.

"i promise i will never ask you for another favor." of course, she did. over and over. personally, it was the death of willie. this was a piece of sheet music that we just acquired, only two copies report it anywhere. we suppose there are a few out there. it is hard to imagine how many people would have wanted to buy this outside of the lincoln's immediate circle of friends. a substantial publisher in new york, william hall, printed it. he was the first child to die in the white house and not one of only two presidential children to die in the white house.

>> from springfield, illinois. going back to her need for money, abraham lincoln was a very successful lawyer in springfield. he worked the railroads and made quite a bit of money. what was his income? >> that is a great point. it is interesting. if you go back and look at the accounts, her money seems to be something that started with washington. there are friends and neighbors that talk about how thrifty she was. what a good housekeeper she was during his legal days. we talked about it a little bit already, she was a national

figure representing people. people were condescending to her and her husband. she had a place of status and an appearance to maintain. i think it was as simple as that. i think it got out of hand. $85,000 was in his estate at the time of his death. his widow would inherit 1/3. you would think that she was in debt $27,000. >> she got duplicates, hundreds sometimes, of parasols and things.

>> that is true, that is the nature. over time, it became more pronounced that she would go and buy dozens of sets of gloves at a given time. >> wearing gloves in washington with all of those people coming in, i am sure she was aware of the germs people had. i think that was a significant thing. mrs. keckley kept some gloves of the president that mrs. lincoln took off of his hands and gave to her. whenever there were meetings and people coming by, they wore gloves. this was in the movie, this was real. the movie showed his servant saying that mrs. lincoln wants you to wear these gloves. she knew about the disease.

>> but she did buy 300 sets of these -- >> one of the touching and counterpoints to this is that lincoln loved to see her in beautiful clothes. it was one of the few extravagances he was comfortable with. >> indulgent on one hand and critical in the other? >> i would say he is more indulgent than critical. >> we can't do justice to the tumultuous years in the white house, but was there a question he was going to seek reelection? >> there was no question he would seek reelection but a profound question of if he would be. it was wholly dependent on the course of the war. atlanta had fallen, it became very clear it was only a question of time that the north would win.

lincoln himself believed he would not be reelected. you can imagine the move upstairs around mrs. lincoln. >> he had bouts of melancholy. a lot of them. she was one of the few people that could bring him out of bed. >> here is what mary lincoln had to say shortly after the reelection. "our heavenly father sees fit to visit us at such times for our worldliness. how small and insignificant world honors are when we are so surely tried." >> there is still part of the debate about lincoln. clearly, mary was a devout churchgoer. she had some doubts planted by

the death of willie. lincoln himself never joined a church, but even as far back as springfield, he spent hours and hours with the minister going over the bible. he knew his king james bible front and back. in some ways, how he taught himself to write. >> 1865, they were pretty avid theatergoers and to make a decision to go to ford's theater where he is assassinated. tell us of his death and mary's role. >> she witnesses it. she cries out, the president has been shot.

people assume that it is part of the show. they take him across the street to a boarding house. he is sick. it was very strange that his cabinet members are all around him while the doctor is there and she is hysterical. i guess that she would be, you know? they get one of her female friends to take her out of the room and a keeper there. it takes him all night to pass away. >> 7:22 in the morning. >> right. the sad thing is they would not let her see him at the end because they did not want to hear her hysteria, from what i gathered. >> the secretary of state took charge of the house that night and said, take the woman out of the room.

robert todd lincoln was at his father's bedside, but mary was not there. >> let's hear a call from st. petersburg, florida. you there? >> yes. first, thank you for taking my call. i have enjoyed the entire series and i have followed it with margaret truman's biography of the first ladies. devotes quite a bit of time to mary todd lincoln and remarks that she ranks at the very bottom of the list. i don't agree with that, and i wonder how your commentators would also rank her in terms of first ladies.

>> oh, boy. put it this way. i certainly would disagree with those that would rank occur at or near the bottom. it is a less than compassionate thing. i also think her years and her story is really unique in the annals of white house history. i think she is a unique figure. hundreds of years later, we are having this discussion and still debating her motives, it tells you that she is an important first lady. i will leave it at that. >> important because of the man to whom she was married? >> important because of the man, important because of the part she plays in the story that is still being debated after all of these years. we still feel as if we do not know who she was and we are not

having this debate over angelica van buren. >> she is one of my favorites. not my true favorite, but i divide them up into eighteenth, nineteenth, and 20-twenty first century. among the nineteenth century once, she and abigail adams would be my favorite. i rank her quite high. you have to look at her vision as a partner. there were several first ladies that consider themselves to be partners with their husband. not that they were trying to tell them what to do, but to advise and take care of them, whether mentally, physically, or politically. i think she was a very significant influence.

>> she is a tragic figure. part of the tragedy is that very partnership that helped contribute to him becoming president was destroyed by the war and what they hoped to achieve. >> the vilification. >> devlin. >> this is a wonderful program. i watch every night. carl sandberg's lincoln television movie in 1974. today's is good, but people should watch this type of movie. you can also talk about his body almost stolen from his crypt at the time. there is so much information about the lincolns, it would take a year to earth up.

i would rank her with roosevelt and kennedy. >> 100 years later when john f. kennedy was assassinated, jacqueline would look to the plans for the lincoln funeral to guide her through the decisions of the kennedy funeral. >> the lincoln funeral, was nothing like it before or since. 20 days, they retraced the inauguration route from springfield the washington. with a couple of exceptions, they retraced that route. there were 10, in effect, state funerals along the way.

1/3 of every northern american either looked upon the president's face in his casket or saw the train go by. it was an extraordinary pageant of grief. very victorian. mrs. lincoln got along for any of it. keeping with tradition, she stayed at the white house grief- stricken. >> elizabeth keckley ascribes her missing the celebrations and wailing with grief repeatedly. >> i can understand it. considering all the things that she had to go through in her early part of the marriage, getting to the white house, the triumph of that. the death of their son, his assassination in front of her. i can understand that. maybe this blow on the head might have exacerbated her emotional state.

she was letting it all come out. it was very sad, but i can understand it. >> kentucky and illinois claimed the lincoln's as their own. mary todd was born in lexington, ky. we will visit. >> we are at the mary todd lincoln house, where she lived from 13-21. this is not where she was born but her birthplace no longer stands. this is the most significant property still standing relating to her childhood.

we are in her bedroom, she shared with various sisters and cousins that live with them. they had a family members that came to live with them and lexington. that was primarily so that family members could attend school. lexington was known for educational and cultural institutions. she had nine years of formal schooling, attended the academy within walking distance of her birthplace. as she went on to attend an academy where she learned everything that was expected of women of her class like needlepoint and dancing. they also learned higher levels of traditionally male subjects like literature and arithmetic. her formal education made her one of the most educated women of her generation. the popular image is often very dark.

her childhood, many of the stories associated represent a typical childhood. she had a pony she rode around town. she and her siblings would catch minnows in the creek. she and her cousin attempted to create their own hoop skirts and wear them to sunday school. mary, parents, and her siblings would spend the evening together. in addition to the family members, there were enslaved african americans that this column. on average, they had five slaves that provided all of the household labor. it included three women and two men. we had a portrait of mary's stepmother's mother. she is said to be a formative influence on mrs. lincoln.

she was well-educated, she spoke french fluently. she is also interesting with her views in regard to slavery. in her will, she chose to provide for the gradual freeing of her slaves after her death. this represents her political position of gradual emancipation. this is the dining room of the home. this is where they would have entertained other prominent families of the day, including politicians. one of the greatest politicians and a neighbor of the todds was henry clay. leader of the whig political party. her father was also a member of that political party. they shared some political ideas, especially in regard to slavery. they supported the american

colonization society, the movement to re-settle blacks back to liberia. this is what she was exposed to as a child. this was the gentleman's parlor, a formal area of the house. according to one of her cousins, she would sit in on some of the political conversations that what happened here when her father was entertaining prominent men of the day. she might have taken an interesting politics to garner the image of her father that was very active in state and local politics. >> our next caller is from lexington. your question or comment. >> thank you for taking my call.