>> the sovereignty question is one that i have been taking about a lot through the year. bruce jones and i have had several conversations about this. more often than not, one of the countries will be asking for you when support, thinking they have the more -- u.n. support. they think they have more legitimate claim. hard to findt is an entry point. we might not be able to look out x isee that country having an ethnic problem in one corner of the country that seems to be spreading and we get a warning. that government, that member state of this organization that

i served might not think it has a problem or may not think it needs a solution or wants to -- or does not want to internationalize a solution. we are an organization based on membership. there is a sovereignty reality we have to accept as a member state-based organization. what do you try to do? you try to find mediators -- intermediaries that have legitimacy on their own. you might send out somebody who you knew was close to certain government leaders from another country who could talk quietly behind closed doors without a big deal. graduatere is a u.n. resident coordinator on the ground that could target an entry point. you always have to be looking at this.

one of the reasons i want to make sure we have brought a financial backing for -- broad financial backing for mediation tools is so people can say if this many countries of this many persuasions are behind using the mediation tools, it must not be a western imperialist agenda, and we have no agenda other than trying to address a conflict. that is why having a country like india, board -- they were sensitive to their sovereignty, but they see a role for these tools. it is a good selling point for parts of the world. >> bruce? >> it is an important question. we are in a stage with new actors on the international stage -- india, turkey, brazil, china, etc. one of the dominant themes is

they will challenge for international order, and what is the most important principle for international order? sovereignty. the united states on the -- and the west are saying not so much with sovereignty. it is finally stabilizing in india, turkey, brazil, etc., who, for most of their history were the subject of sanctions, etc. it is an incredibly sensitive topic. we saw in libya that countries like brazil and india could get halfway there. they voted for the application of the concept of the responsibility to protect in the case of libya. when they came time to use force, they had to abstain -- sort of, halfway there. to what the u.s. can do -- this

is a place where the united states has not played its cards very well. the united states has to do more work with brazil, india, turkey, these powers that are on the fence about ways this issue is going. sometimes they will side with the pro-sovereignty stands, or who have interest that mean they have to get engaged. there, we are on the fence. i do not think we have done nearly enough to work with them and bring them aboard to these concepts that will be central to what we do in the near future, especially at a time when there are regions where relations are very tense. asia is a zone of great tension. the united states is not engaged -- indebted nations is not engaged in the -- united nations is not engaged in that

at this point. there are counter-issues. positions in syria, unified action on mali. we have to pay a lot of attention to this question and build up consensus with brazil, india, turkey -- the swing states around this question of sovereignty. >> there is a perception among smaller states that have been subject to colonialism, etc., they say look at the p5, which says do not touch my sovereignty, the we will touch yours. p5 themselves have a responsibility to overcome that perception. , you have a hell of a job. i speak on behalf of everybody on the panel and in the audience to say i am glad you are where you are, doing such a

great job. >> july, or. -- thank you, martin. [applause] >> i live look outside of the u.s. capital. thehouse returns to debate mandate under the healthcare law. the senate recessed for tonight just after 6:00 p.m. so that senators could attend a closed- door meeting inside the old chamber. senate majority leader harry reid just referred to that. they are discussing proposed changes to the senate filibuster rules. dispute arose last week among the delay in the consent of executive nominees. majority. the -- majority leader harry reid cut off debate on seven nominations including top spots at the labor department, the epa and the consumer financial protection bureau.

all cameras are outside of the old senate chamber in case any senators wish to speak after the meeting. tonight on c-span -- a discussion on immigration policy with chicago mayor rahm emanuel and americans for tax reform president grover norquist caret then, -- norquist. " seriesr "first ladies focuses on the evolving role of the first lady. now, a conversation on immigration policy between chicago mayor rahm emanuel and americans for tax reform president grover norquist. that said -- they said down with "the atlantic does quote washington editor at large. washington, d.c., this is just under one hour. >> thank you for being here. i have a privilege to engage in conversation with two people that are extensively to of --

ostensibly two of the most powerful political leaders. it is slightly an out of body experience. i did not know whether to sit here and have grover and rahm right next to each other. rahm, former white house chief of staff, three term member of congress, and now mayor of chicago. we do not do advocacy, but if you look at cities and their mayors and what kind of aims the chief executive -- kinds of things the chief executive of the city does -- what rahm emanuel has been doing, synthesizing the equation of what you're city will look like, it is an impressive arena. groverse, we have norquist, president of the americans for tax, encouraged by ronald reagan. i do not know whose idea the old was, but it worked -- both

was, but it worked. i was with amy klobuchar recently. we interviewed her and she was telling us how grover was now getting hate mail by some of his own base because of committee testimony he provided on the joint economic committee that was very positive. i thought today "crossfire" is coming back on cnn. you have people with differences that bash each other without thinking. i thought today we would have a conversation. >> i am out of here. [laughter] white houseget your role, but we are in chicago, thinking about how the equation with immigrants. as a mayor, how are you trying to change the game customer

works a couple of the -- gain -- change the game? >> a couple of things that are fact, in the city of chicago, about 50% of all new business applications for licenses are by immigrants. that is why you cannot be pro- small business and anti- immigrant. they go hand-in-hand. denialscut our licenses by 60%, making it much easier to , makingbusiness -- 50% it easier to start a business card nearly -- business. of all new startups are by immigrants. those of you who know chicago, you know the magnificent mile. the hispanic area, 26th street,

the two magnificent miles, i call it, it produces the second- most amount of sales tax revenue for the city of chicago and the state of illinois. outside of michigan avenue, when you pull out high-end shopping, the most productive area from a sales tax revenue has6th street, and it people from all over the midwest that come in. on the weekend you cannot find parking in the city of chicago near or around 26th street because from as far as minneapolis, minnesota, to columbia, ohio, people come in on the weekend to get things they cannot get in their respective community. in terms ofal fact what is happening in the city -- today, we send an executive order, creating what i call citizenship corners in every

neighborhood library in the city of chicago. librarians are being trained to help people get their citizenship. we have kits that they can take home to promote the effort. i will close by this one example if i can. one year ago we held a forum with robert f kennedy -- the first time here in america, their foundation, and all the nobel peace prize winners in chicago. i happen to think chicago is the most american of american cities. we didn't add a -- did it at a high school where my mother went to school, all jewish. your mother's high school, my mother's high school, this might explain a lot about our relationship. second, i introduced a young yemen to is from

introduced gorbachev. to america in fourth grade and is now at northwestern on a full paid scholarship card -- scholarship in the student body -- scholarship. the student body as 120 different nationalities. she was number one in her class. she did the interview with gorbachev. she is on her way to northwestern on a full paid scholarship. how can that be against our interest? she has decided she is an american. it is in our interest as an economy and as a city when you look at all the relationships that are intertwining, going on, bringing the world to chicago and chicago to the world. it is a huge economic

opportunity for the city of chicago and the country. , letfore i jump to grover as mayor, if you are on a national tour and you stop in kansas, a place where i was born, and it is not bending over backwards to be welcoming to immigrants -- what would you tell parts of the country, particularly those that have representatives that are not moving in a progressive manner. what if they say this is not our story? how do you reach them? >> that might be true, although i do think immigration is changing what used to only be an urban story. i am not so sure -- and, it also it is quickly becoming a rural story.

that is cultural impact. ,y appeal is one on economics then -- but nobody should ofmiss the cultural piece that, which can be disconcerting. for the city of chicago because my grandfather came to chicago in 1917 as a 13- year-old to get away from eastern europe. that is the history of chicago. that is the history of our city and holds true for every city in america. this is also true of any state, there is a history of immigrants that are given opportunities. you cannot give them a national story, so there are anecdotes in

the history of kansas you would have to we've yet and i would disrespectfully. i could tell you a story about chicago hundred different times in a hundred different languages. there has to be a story from kansas you have to find. i cannot give them a chicago example. they have to find a kansas example where they find an opportunity to see their future. >> coming out of that that story -- [indiscernible] driving off to do early meetings and we saw karl rove driving by. the drivers were left wing liberals and they said i want to

take that guy on. i said he was speaking at 8:00. he said karl rove made a lot of sense. corner of from your the woods, somebody walked into -liberals den of hyper and talked about immigration reform and i bet he got a couple of gop sign-ups. , am wondering given your role the role of karl rove and george w. bush, where were you a few years ago? is this not a cynical move by some in the republican party to say now it is pragmatic because we are a dead party if we do not bring in hispanics, or is there something deeper than that? >> if you go back into american history, the chinese exclusion act, historically, going up to

the 1980's, every anti- immigrant impulse was driven by organized labor. the modern democratic party. there has been movement all the way around. interestingly, the business community did not get organized. .n 1999, i was in a meeting 12 pair -- people. i was meeting with the head of the republican party -- sort of a check up, what is important to you this year? they went around the room, and everyone was in one of those two places. then he finishes, got up and left, and like in the last couple of moments of "columbo those quote television show -- theymbo" television show

said what is it? they said immigration reform. everyone said it was a bigger issue. they talked in terms of hundreds of thousands of evil that -- of people that they needed. none of them felt comfortable or confident with somebody else's issue. two thousandhan seven, because it did not get organized in that way. is for theess group legalization of the 10 million or 11 million that are here, genetic -- germanic increases in future -- dramatic increases in future flows. they could switch in a generation because you are bringing in talent and opportunity. the business community is there very the southern baptist convention has strongly endorsed comprehensive -- the

roman catholic church, the mormon church, the national jewish organization. >> so, why are you losing? george w. bush, bill clinton, rahm emanuel -- last two will not be persuasive to that crowd. >> if you look at who has lined up on the reform side, i do not think i have ever seen an issue with everyone on that side yet it does not seem to be percolating. you were with the greater boston tea party patriots. how did that go? >> every 20 people>> if you lood up on the reform side, i do not think i have ever seen an issue with everyone on that side, eved one said very consummately about immigrants and applause lines all the way through. it is boston, which helps.

the campus chamber of commerce brought me out to speak with the governor, the most pro- governor, and the chamber was trying to make sure and canada legislators were thinking about doing -- who were thinking about doing something like arizona were clamped down, and they will probably move more along the lines of utah, which is the opposite of arizona. kansas is very active in moving in the right direction. this has been an issue where radio talkshow host have driven it to a certain extent on the right, and you can get wealthy with five percent market share on the radio, but you cannot get elected dog catcher with five percent market share. we have had that conversation here at -- conversation. take a look at the list of people that might run for president on the republican

side. .> that would be helpful >> make friends. [laughter] >> why don't you just they focused? [laughter] >> scott walker of wisconsin has come out strong on this. rand paul talked about a pet reduces steamship before john bush, before marco rubio. chris christie -- the leadership moving forward, it is exactly where ronald reagan was and where the traditional party was, being more open to immigration. for 30 years to these press conferences arguing with the afl-cio, which was always the group we had to fight. bipartisan stuff.

i thought here was one we can -- let's- what sign sign a letter that soviet union groups can leave the soviet union, and unions would not sign it because they thought they would come here. they're still not there on future flow of guest workers. we are making progress. >> the emmys question, in your tax work, where you have been so popular and maintained a caucus to veto a deal -- >> we got a deal. we just did not have tax increases. >> many were influenced by tea party voters, the same voters

taking these positions, and it raises the question of whether there is a corner of this that has a veto ability driven by -- i will just say it, racism. if you look at the work of gregory rodriguez or those that the the the assimilation rate of hispanics in particular, it is phenomenal -- all the things that rahm emanuel was laying out, it is among all immigrant classes the lead. i am wondering, at what point that in." stuff begins to matter to jim demint -- that empirical stuff begins to matter to jim demint. >> 20 years ago, historically, the anti-immigrant position has , connected with restrictionist in terms of

number of people working. interestingly, this is not ,bout opposition to immigration and that is why republicans have moved away from positions they were yelled into my radio shows. when pat buchanan ran for president, 70% of republicans thought there were too many immigrants. we thought there were too many immigrants since the germans started sneaking in. nine the first thought, too many immigrants. second thought, i'm not really against it. kamran, 70% of the people ,elieved -- pat buchanan ran 70% of the people believed, and he got 1% of the vote. the idea that there is a deep- seated anti-immigration reform vote in the republican party does not show up.

from arizona,rs jeff mccain and jeff flake, the two most pro-immigration senators. it does not always show up in the vote. >> if you direct this question at me, i would say that is all true, what grover said, but the party has allowed itself to have a few voices described and defined its position, which is where the political fallout as -- if it is not averted soon will have a huge import to local and national politics. all of those data points are true. where the screening -- i would say that volume does not reflect depth. that is true in our party. leaders have allowed

the voices that have attraction to define who the party is. howan you walk us through you are trying to position chicago as essentially the friendliest city to immigrants customer you make a case of white -- immigrants? you made the case of why economically it matters, and if you look at the 15 points you have would in place that you think are game changers for immigrants coming in, is your aspiration to create a template for other cities? pc as --sure how much washington, d.c. as in terms of impact. >> it is a huge impact, but it is less and less, it is declining.

the state of illinois past the dream act. may 16, 2011, on and it was the only piece of legislation that i called for. i have raised $250,000 for that fund privately, and we have a little over 100 people now going to college that could not go otherwise. that is one example of where you can do something different. recently we passed the drivers license -- four other states have done it, allowing immigrants who do not have a legal status to get a drivers license, which allows them to get employment, get their kids to school and go around. it has a lot to do with public safety, safety on the street, and have integrated people come out of the shadows.

>> how did they get over the fear of being tracked down and deported? >> we are a sanctuary city. i passed it by ordnance. sanctuary city status does not live by the whim of the mayor. fourth, and most interesting, what led to today's event, is i created an office in new american and i put it in the mayor's office, and they spend all day going through hell this will impact immigrant. we have 79 -- going through how this will impact immigrants. signed an agreement with the immigration office. we are in the process -- we have already done 50. we are training all librarians with a special room called citizenship corners that has a

process on how to help people become citizens and the neighborhood library is helping people become citizens. that office thought of that policy. andy, we sign the order, with an agreement between the immigration office in the city of chicago, on this process, they literally go through every regulation, every office. it is not just does the website have english and spanish -- important to do, but they go through every part of the city government and it says what are we doing to promote immigrants? i think it is in the city's interest. we focused on the mexican- american community. chicago will be the fifth largest city in mexico based on our population. that is a huge economic capacity when you think about what nasa has created for the

united states, but we are outside of warsaw the second- largest polish city. a huge amount of trade back and forth could happen when you think about how poland is growing. [indiscernible] i know that. that is why i gave a shout out. it gives you a sense of the size of the city. it will not be true everywhere, but based on the mexican- american population, we are the fifth are just city in mexico, and we are the second-largest city in poland. that is part of our history, but when you think about remittance, trade, opportunity, travel, tour is a -- at every level -- toward at every- tour is hi

level, it is a huge economic opportunity if you are looking thatarket and for a city is still the headquarters of what i call the flat roof manufacturing, it does not have an export strategy because these are family owned businesses. the historical immigrant roots is a huge economic opportunity for what they can export and that is one way we can grow. we could go on, but i need the federal government to change a problem. short of that, through the new american office, the library, drivers license, the dream act, we can -- have done what we can do short of the federal government doing the final bit. everywhere we can press, we have at the outer limits of what

you can do -- we have pressed the outer limit of what you can do. youhe economic watching -- went right into that, jim demint and some of the folks in opposition to the legislative direction on immigration said the 50-your cost of creating a -- 50-year cost of creating a citizenship track is $6.3 billion. the cbo has argued that is not the case. when you look at illinois as a state, they have bond problems. they have not been exactly a leadership in solvency to a certain degree. >> that was gentle. [laughter] addingou see these steps to the economic bottom line, looking at them as economically toal, or is there validity

the fact that when you look at infrastructure, health care and all the cost that jim demint argues will be loomed out -- the ballooned out -- >> so many of the services we pay for come from property taxes. you get a new group of people buying home, and another of the people paying property taxes. you pay for schools, police that way. take homeownership and what would happen on property tax if all of a sudden people said i am here, i am now going to buy a home? we pay our libraries that way, just that a city level -- all of

a sudden people say i do not live under the threat i will be deported, we can now buy a home -- it is a game changer for the city heard part of the revenues -- city. part of the revenue stream comes out of property tax. ,> look, at the national level the reason why we are the future and japan is not, europe is not, and china is not, it is because we do immigration. that a kick out of people say should we do immigration -- it is the same as saying should mcdonald's do hamburgers? if it from the rest of the world was 1777 we were of our income in taxes and we had open borders.

where we had a lot of immigration and lower taxes, we grew faster than everybody else. people wanted to come here because they wanted to be here. the idea that people are coming from some country they do not like -- we do not tell people --m cuba i cannot come, they cannot come, we tell them they want to come because they want to be something if it. it'll are coming -- something different areas -- different. --na cannot do that could cannot do that. they coast for we do not do immigration. has is why japan disappeared -- is disappearing relatively in terms of overall strength. immigration is what makes us the

,uture, not europe, not japan and onwe do it better track to have historically been, we are significantly stronger as a country. ask any of you to come to the city of chicago could -- chicago. there is nothing like the dedication of a child of an immigrant to their studies and their this. -- purpose. they know they are here, they are lucky and this had better not get screwed up. [indiscernible] i give you this young woman from yemen. she came in fourth grade. she is now at northwestern. in her home, this is a unique

opportunity -- you cannot do this anywhere else. do not mess this up. that is the rejuvenation of the american dream -- people consciously left somewhere in to come someplace because they can do what they do only in america. there is nothing like the child of an immigrant trying to make something of their parents dream. x-unit have to cycle out and -- >> you have to cycle out come back. >> 126 nationalities -- that is a gold mine. i would not trade it for anything. >> you are the best political strategist in washington, d.c., that i know, and everybody is scared of you -- he did win funniest poll of the year in the improvisation thing, and that is coming up again.

john lovett one. i do not know who you imitate. [indiscernible] >> i am the funniest celebrity on c-span. >> does john boehner ever call you and say this is talk, -- tough, any ideas on what we can do? you are the strongman in the gop on so many of the issues. you fought admirably for inclusion of gays in the republican party, broad immigration. do john boehner and eric cantor call you and say how can you help us elbow renegades into this? republicansth all in the house and the senate to encourage them to do what reagan

did. this is the reagan republican view. this is not compromise, moving to the left or something. the mobility of labor, mobility of capital, this is what they teach you in economics. it should be second nature for republicans and conservatives, and the good news is we're making a lot of progress. we should do more. there will be a public vote for this. [indiscernible] >> you have had so many fascinating positions, chief of staff for the white house, and now mayor of chicago -- if you were to be asked for the white house, what would you put on the table? what you think democrats need to do that that they are not doing today to make this more salient or to get more traction? >> first of all, this is not a problem or an issue for

democrats, so that would be that advice. an issue in the republican party and in their hands. i do not think this notion that members of congress are running in specific districts and if you're them will think about the parties future. they really think about their own. cynical thingis that if you never get a deal the democrats terminally get the hispanic vote -- permanently get the hispanic vote. >> that is a cynical view, but i think there are two parts of the conversation and only one part is being engaged. it is important to have grover, talk radio, the religious community engaged, is there is a group that needs a permanent slip to say yes and no democrat

will create that. how to create a permission slip for a democrat to have a republican vote on it is really dumb. that is number one. the other part of the conversation that i would engage in is how to persuade someone to go from here to yes. i think this is where john boehner's problem will be, how you permit a vote and do not expect people to vote yes. they allow people to happen. they do not mind becoming roadkill. part of the discussion is to get someone to go from here to the yes column. there's another part that is not a conversation publicly -- how you allow people to allow a vote

to happen, and that is not a public conversation. , is what,ou ask me kratz can be helpful in creating -- democrats can be helpful. >> we have another border in canada. .> we know that instinctively ,hris in canada -- >> in canada the majority party does the outreach, and they win those votes. they were attacked by the left more for promoting immigration to get more votes. there is an example of how to win those votes. they have done it in canada and we have done it historically. we used to carry the asian- american vote and we should have

that again. >> let me open the floor. council on from the foreign relations. get the microphone. just did not bring it near as. >> grover norquist, the notion that immigration should be second nature to republicans -- you and others in the party spent a lot of time persuading voters that government does not do anything well -- it is not effective, waste taxpayer money. you have this bill that requires the government being effective -- securing the border, there are find employment for every work waste, weeding out the fraud -- how will you persuade the public and the government is capable of -- republicans the government is capable of doing that? >> that is one of the challenges. we were taken from 80,000 people getting arrested down to 40,000.

we know how to police the border. more government. that is less government. >> i have no question. i knew there would, time when i agreed with grover and it came. that is all. >> do you feel better now? emma? in the back. i am with "the atlantic." you said your city is a sanctuary city and in that way it is in conflict with federal policies. are you hoping your city will move the dialogue on immigration? >> let me say this, what we do in the city of chicago i do

because i think it is in our self interest. do i think that what happens at a city or a state does not have -- does have a ripple effect -- yes. sanctuary city, but it was done by executive order. i do not know what elections tomorrow are going to bring, and i would rather have changes repealed or not reauthorize. i think we have done things the right way for our city, and i would draw a bigger example out of the dream act that we passed -- meet these 100-plus kids that are going to college. it is impressive and tell me it is not in our interest. number two, on the drivers license, it allows parents to take their kids to school

safely, allowing them to get to employment, church -- those are examples -- and they are all driven, especially the last one, about safety on our roads. there is nothing worse than driving around with someone -- on the road with someone that does not have insurance. you cannot get it without a drivers license. ?> margaret carlson mayorver, as opposed to emanuel, you do not really have to do anything. you can flip to issue to issue and you are not accountable, yet you hold the hill to your pledge. >> what is the question. >> you must feel powerful, but at the same time you have more power than many people in the

senate or congress. >> the taxpayer protected -- wasection plant -- pledge assigned to their voters, not to me. it is an important issue going back to the forming of the country. when they make that commitment to their voters, they tend to keep it. on the republican side we have ivory soap percentages signing the pledge and taking it because they intend to keep it. republicans signed the pledge because they do not want to raise taxes. it is not that they do not want to raise taxes because they signed the pledge. it highlights that commitment. the power remains with voters and they have spoken harshly with people to break the pledge. >> you have rooted the tax pledge in the tax revolt, but also in the founding there was

lots of different people from lots of different religions aligning themselves under a contract. is there some methodology to grover norquist that could be applied to the immigration debate that we are not seeing today -- a binary, yes or no punishment for those on one side and reward for those on the other? >> when you talk to people who think they are against more immigration or no immigration, if you drill down a series of issues to people worried about situation -- for every dollar put in, you get three dollars, so we should have fewer immigrants, but that is actually an argument against having children. most think that immigrants can go on welfare. they tag immigrants with other things they are focused on, including education.

at our schools they do not teach you american history. i was here. they do not teach you american history very well. it is not just the immigrants that are not getting as strong of a public school system as we would like. you can explain to people what bothers you -- let reform the welfare system, as clinton turned to do, entitlements, school choice -- that is the way to fix things, not yell at 3% of the population and say it is their fault. >> jim has a question. john always has a question. ? >> most of -- jim the viewers in this room would agree with the proposition that all three of you are advancing. >> i'm just probing, not advancing. >> i am advancing that immigration mixing it states different -- strong, vital --

[indiscernible] you canthe evidence show us of people moving on this issue within the republican party and becoming more excepting? >> before we jump to grover, do you have thoughts on that, rahm? you are not just a democrat. you had to deal with republicans. [indiscernible] are there republicans in chicano western it has to be a few -- chicago? there has to be a few. thatt me not answer question but use it for what i would like to say, which is -- you have two major things going on here at a cross. when ronald reagan was president, republicans had a lock elect orally on the map,

and the democrats had a -- electoraly on the map, and democrats at congressional lock. cultural issues are switching to democratic strong suits. if you look at the history of where houses are going, florida where it was 10 years ago, when it will be 10 years from now, true about arizona -- go through it. then you have what has been a detriment. on the congressional side it is not the republicans have a lock, but we have a system where people are to pick the representative, but we now have representatives taking their voters. basically, people will be republican members of congress immune from the argument, which

issues thateal with has to be a permission slip to allow something to happen that you oppose. >> you have seen a lot of shift. for most of my life, i thought organized labor, which was against more immigration, against allowing iraqi translators to come here because they were threatened over there. that was immigration, that was bad. somehow the democrats have muted the unions, and they are still the problem on future flows. they are the sticking point. they are why this bill does not work as well as it could. on the republican side, it is a bottom-up think. the southern baptist convention weighing in on this -- this is not unimportant to republican

tenants -- the roman catholic church, latter-day saints, orthodox jews -- this is important for republican candidate running for office, and add to that the business dairy industry, which cannot function without , the high-techn community, it is critical for speaking to republicans and explaining this to them. it has taken longer than i would like. it took a long time for the democrats to mute the labor unions, but we will get there. quick final question, -- >> final question, john. ask both ofike to you -- [indiscernible] a situation where you have republicans that do not trust their leadership enough to go that argumentand

has been advanced because they do not go to conference because they will get rolled in conference. the second is that legalizing immigrants will exert downward and ifes on wages markets work and we have a shouldhortage, wages come up and that is how we solve it. soon the economics, it is clear that when you have more people moving into an area of economic growth you actually get more growth. people are an asset. the argument that immigration depresses wages is the same as you should not have children. ourle that talk that way mouth means and they are also anti-people.

how do you argue with people that think that people are the problem? that is not something that sells as well as they think it does. i think a more open and free economy at all levels, including , makes the labor country stronger, the economy stronger and everybody better off. , 2%rew at 4% reagan levels obama levels, $5 trillion in additional revenue. that is a huge shift in revenue. a more open immigration bill would increase growth about 1%. that is a lot of economic growth and opportunity, even if run by the government, and is a step in the right direction. i think there are voices that are shrilled arguing for not

having a vote are doing so because they understand the republican caucus is moving toward yes. they will do their own border theg, their own h1b thing, house will not take directions from the senate or do a law that trust obama because he changes the rules and that scares them. i think boehner is making the move forward correctly. >> mayor emanuel? >> it is hard to take that question up on the gratuitous hits on obama. my dna is kicking in. i cannot wait to get a flight out of here and back home. the fact is that i think i am optimistic for a different set of reasons why republicans will get there and get this issue dispensed with.

i do not think they think it is in their self-interest. i think it is a lot of party interest coming out in the members. if the members were there, they would be there already. you could have the vote now. i think they will get there through internal republican caucus politics. i did not have this data point on small business and sales, but in illinois, out of the university of illinois, which is one of the number one -- the number one computer science and engineering school in america -- 40% of patents come from immigrants, so it is a classic a lote of what votes -- of people are trying to look at small businesses, whether it is a restaurant or whatever, and there are a lot of high tech entrepreneurs that are also here, and it is not just meaning in immigrants and shoving wages down. there are a lot of entrepreneurs, inventors, people

with start up capacity. we did this one example -- micro-lending, people starting businesses that were too small without any background or history in banks and financials institutions. most all of the applicants were immigrants in the micro-lending space. those are businesses that the, second restaurant or another dry cleaner. there is a huge amount of entrepreneurial energy. the notion that this depresses wages -- i would have to see it is a great stabilizer of neighborhoods for economics. >> in conclusion, i have had the team at "the atlantic" scan hundreds of policy issues and we might have found one other issues where they would agree, so maybe we can have you both back. >> do not tell anybody we were hearing together. it will now work at home for me and it will not work for him in

washington. >> thank you to the chamber of commerce, the team at "the atlantic, grover norquist, mayor rahm emanuel, thank you very much. good to see you. [applause] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] >> next, a discussion on the many changes in the role of first lady from martha to michelle obama. we'll hear from women authors, journalists with an introduction by the former communications director for first lady, laura bush. under two hours. >> hi, everyone. thanks, anne, it is so good to

back. .hank you for all you do from someone who went all across this country visiting all sorts ofschools and all kinds conditions, we really appreciate children. for when i was preparing for today's lecture, i thought of a lot of different stories i could possibly tell, but then i got so wrapped up in the research. what probably most americans do and i googled it. [laughter] so i got a little obsessed, to honest. i have a 5-year-old. so i was staying up late, getting up early, trying to out.e this and as a previous press secretary, i probably should not have been surprised, but i was, at how many times i read a aereo typical presentation of first lady. even if it was martha washington all the way up to mrs. obama and

now.ork she's doing so it seemed that if you had ores of being a first lady if you were a first lady, you buckets.t neatly into some of those buckets won't surprise you. you had to be traditional or modern. you are low-key or aggressive. you were ceremonial or very political. you were like eleanor roosevelt or like bess truman. also struck by the know yesity of news reports that projects surprise when a first her had influence over husband. to guess that none of them were probably married that.ote other cases they were actually outraged when a first lady might engage in politics.

hear from the very first, marriage i can't ma, accounts of that every single one of them were engaged in politics. me, evena surprise to though i witnessed it firsthand that the public might be a first ladyn takes on a public policy issue maybempion a cause or goes to a podium and speaks her about something that's happening in the current affai affairs. elected,he wasn't that's sometimes thought to be out of place. i think you're going to hear a different perspective from the have here today. this afternoon's session, "a of the touch, the role first lady" we are joined by a panel.uished i don't call them first lady historians because if you going don't --hat, they google that, they don't come up. to learn more good b a first morans about 'tis their husbands as well because they have to goly to a lot of

that documentation to actually those firstts about ladies. so as anne mentioned, we're going to hear more about abigail adams, dolley madison, mary todd lincoln, and, of course, martha washington. so i will introduce our panelists by name and then tell you a little bit about them. repeatng to try not to the bios that you have in this your hand, but i'm going to use my great researching style that these historians will get very upset for my googling. brady, cokie roberts, catherine al gore and clinton. i'm going to start with dr. brady. say, my first and probably favorite search in return of her work was an that came out four years after her book. probably -- it was probably along the lines that was happening here at mount vernon, the 250th anniversary of george washington. this article that was front page "the washington post," i should

look at martha left frump, more lady." i thought this was really interesting. in this article it's frequently marthausing facts from washington's letters and records marthael an image of washington that was reported in this article as the, and i mousy, fat, rich widow dashing washington married only for her money. was also -- i also read a lot of wonderful reviews about the "martha washington is is american life" which i then bought. embarrassed to admit i didn't have it before then. i told the awrnlgor that. i agree with this quote probably most. this review from a reader that i choseon the internet, i to read patricia brady's biography of martha washington

because she was someone about whom i knew very little. overshadowed by the magnitude of washington's image, it seemed that her life had faded into obscurity. discovered an amazing, determined, vital woman who fullestr life to the and contributed immensely to the formation of the united states. be the frumpy, mousy, fat, first lady. so, pat, we sure do look forward to hearing more about your that determined vital first lady, martha washington. roberts. if you're like me, it's such a fresh air on that ridiculous commute. i go from mount vernon to bethesda. is on npr, i feel like i get that straightforward, old-fashioned style of reporting. she's a commentator. and whether she's reporting for abc or npr, you know -- whether

house,alking about white congress, nominations, and the fights about all of them, you count on miss roberts to give you truly both sides of withargument aauthoritative facts. and as accomplishes as she is in business, ms. roberts is extremely expected in her effort to tell the history of women in politics. book, which just recently was revised in its 10th anniversary, by we are mothers, daughters, you'll find easy to divest chapters about all sorts of women. and i have to say, i personally enjoyed your edition of chapter is on ms. bush. of "ladies ofthor liberty" and "founding mothers" both of which are here. are going -- they're all going to do book signings after. so they're wonderful books if chance to pick a them up. and last year i had the opportunity to spend some time panelist, and another catherine al gore in an event hosted by mrs. bush at the white

house. to their visit, i was researching background information on katherine because time you have a guest, you have to put together briefing paper what did she do, what did she say, etc., etc. so i found this one quote that made me laugh out loud. for those who might have thomasaffinity for jefferson -- i pulled this out because as a former mount vernon admittedly have a very healthy competition with monticello. jefferson was a bastard" -- you did the internet said you said that. [laughter] i could source it beyond that. quincy adams would have been a dream date. and then she said she liked complicated men. would like katherine. in her book, "a perfect union"

she reveals a dolley madison loved by her contemporaries, demonstrated the power of partnership and articulated what i didn't find anywhere else, how a political wife's role is so important in helping their husbands achieve their goals. often much more than what they wear. having read her work but never having the pleasure of seeing her present, i'm personally looking forward to it. clinton, your portrayal in your writing and quotes of mrs. clinton are and your biography is such a beautiful tribute to her. all know the history of lincoln and when you reflect on his wife and all of through,dies she went losing her husband, really her house,ng at the white and you just think of everything that she went through when she was first lady, when she's as the kind of crazy,

depressed, first lady and that's see, well, iand would be, too. enlightening when you see someone who takes a deep dive. there was a wonderful biography 20 years ago that no one's match.ed to try to and she took on that task, which i think was a challenge, and year wherein a there's a lot being said about lincoln. and then talking about stereotypical buckets, i found your quotes in the news article mrs. lincoln which was titled "health cat or health mate." only be one or the other. very enlightning. so you were reported in one of interviews as saying the reason why you tackled this is lincoln, mary todd lincoln, was being lost in the shuffle of the new lincoln literature. think sadly that that is probably true. and it happens to a lot of first ladies. we thank you for giving us more insight to the tragic and

unconventional life of mrs. lincoln. panelistentioned, each will spend about 15 minutes telling you about their research books and how they got there. and then they will come up one at a time. end we'll take a little bit of a break just to get situated. up.yone will come and then we have q and a's. as each analysts presents, we you hold your questions, maybe write it down. then we'll moderate that and try can.t in as many as we thank you. with that i'm going to introduce our first panelist, dr. brady. [applause] >> thank you, sally. i think that was one of the most in introductions i've heard a long time. and i have to say, i do agree with the quote about thomas

jefferson. [laughter] i was happy to hear it here. i meant to the way begin, but i feel i should just throw it in. if one writes about women, first ladies or that that's somehow second class history, that it has to have a modifier in front of it, a women's historian as historian.just an when you write about women, you write about life. it's the same as if you write men and neither should be favored over the other. you think 500 years will go by with peace and wonderful life. and many historians say, oh, there was peace. fivehen there will be minutes of a war, and it gets two or three chapters. who's write one about daily life. think real ways i life is what we write about.

talk about place to martha washington than here at mount vernon? the firste first of ladies. so of course, the title had not been invented at that time. the pace. and then she's been largely forgotten until now. about her, knew basically, was the gilbert stewart portrait that she was an elderly lady who happened to be married to george washington, years old as 70 far as anybody could tell. [laughter] i went back to find out who was the real martha dandridg custis washington. that's why the cover of the book. we did an age regression to find was.ust how beautiful she again, not that it would have mattered if she was plain, but it was certainly fun to find out was, in fact, quite an historical hottie. washington. martha skipping over many years of

the timees, we get to when george washington firstably became our president. successors, her martha washington was a very reluctant president's wife. she felt they had given up eight years of their lives with the american revolution. on earth should they go spend more time on politics when at mountd be here vernon, at the perfect place, and enjoy another 50 years of relaxation, hard work, life.n general, daily washington, however, was talked into it. a nephew abouto her famous husband. much too lateas for him to go into public life again. had given old and we up too much of our time. i had hoped to grow old in tranquility together. but as she said, it wasn't to

be. deranged, andt be she started packing up to go to capitol, new york city. how differentst things were at that time, she did not go to the inauguration. no sense that an inauguration was anything especially exciting or that it.e was much hoopla to nor was there an inaugural ball. she didn't come until a month month later.han a and the secretaries and the aides were write and saying, we you, the president misses you, please come. and she didn't bother to write was coming when she was coming, which was later on. she got there, has she discovered the first presidency washington clearly saw, world.ve new the constitution laid out the general duties, but there were figure out.to and life is made up of details, after all.

precedent. set a if you do a, then there are certain circumstance that follow. b, it's something else altogether. and washington wanted to be very to set the correct precedent. as well, he wanted his wife to same. what is the president's wife to do? it's not as though she's in the after all.n, nobody says if you want to be wisely 30 marry very years before. thatust -- you discovered when you get there, what is expected. but she was the first one. could it be? well, one thing she found out when she got there was that george washington, in his usual hurryingghtful, not into things, had consulted carefully with the leading men with madison, with adams, with john. thethey had decided what first lady could and couldn't

do. furious. she said, "i think i'm more like a state prisoner than anything else." not allowed to entertain her friends or to accept private invitations. and when she arrived in new york on a wednesday, she was told the hostess ofbe a large reception on friday. a surprisewas quite for her. she, of course, made the best of it. for the whole first year that they were in new york no one that shee guessed hadn't been longing all her life to do this. was gracious. she was charming. she was friendly. man.umanized the great she made him much less of a udolfd figure, of the statue, and much more of the and bloodrth, flesh hero. she loved him and admired him. others showed a way for to enter into that same kind of

feeling. discovered what a public figure she was. and theay up, as she children, a nephew and various and assistants and so forth came up, every passedcross road they there were people standing there waving and shouting. the great parade that was made for us all the way that we came. first taste of what press and celebrity could be like. now adays women in politics understand that this will happen. but she had no idea. she thought being the president's lady would be like being the commanding general's lady that they would gather with their friends and supporters and meet people things in ant informal way. she was shocked to discover just were.ry formal things i think the idea of the dinner party is one of the worst things

really, from my point of view, that can happen to a hostesses. afternoon aty 4:00 there was a presidential dinner party. invitedington carefully people in a balanced way. who had thisple point of view, half the other. partly northerners, partly southerners. of these men didn't even know each other. they didn't have a lot in common. and it was almost all men. because at this point no one governmentng the would last. no one knew quite how long they york.still be in new and so men many had left their wives back home. there and would be a dinner and martha andge two aides and 14 men who didn't and didn't talk to each other very much. she was hard put to keep that going, but she did it because that was part -- that's part of the role of the president's lady, being not just the hostesses to the actual

dinner table but being hostesses to the nation. and that's what she started to see. one thing that she did have an advantage of, she was the first and only first lady who was not press.zed by the [laughter] last long, did't it? abigail adams immediately -- but the second term, washington was severely hurt by of thingsand the sort they published. they actually, at that point, it appropriate to attack the president's lady as a way to get at the president politically. which, of course, is what has topened from abigail adams michelle obama with hardly a pause in between. no white house when the washingtons left the back home tod came mount vernon, mount vernon was

the symbol of the presidency. there was no white house -- they were building it. but there was no white house that they lived in. and it was quite a few years house took onte that symbolic weight. was stillafterward it celebrations of george birth night. to abigail adams' great despair, she couldn't believe they didn't do john adams' birth night. you out'm not cutting here. but it was still washington's birth night. and people still flocked to vernon as they still do, by the hundreds. first to see the great man himself. after his death to see martha washington. ladies, like many first martha washington in the popular husband.esented her and even after his death they still wanted to meet her, to to her, to touch her hand. it was a way to have a sort of

touching the past and the great days of the nation. wasartha washington terrific. she was friendly. she was generous. she was kind. charming. she set precedence of dignity, duty and devotion that are well followed. she was the worthy partner of georgeomparable washington. and she set the standards for others to follow as the first lady. thank you. [applause] >> thank you. and, sally, you're so right. crazy, basically, that people say all the time, is be alle obama going to traditional first lady? my basic answer is, yes, traditionalause a first lady is very involved in politics and has a huge amount

husband.nce on her and is usually pretty controversial. a traditionall be first lady. sally workedded for laura bush. and at that event that katherine and i were at together, mrs. bush said -- said she had thatin the newspaper morning that she was prim. and she said, i don't know what that means. she said, i think it means librarian. [laughter] what's so interesting about it only first lady in history who went to the white house briefing room, grabbed the microphone herself, and use it had to call for the overthrow of government. it wasn't exactly shy and retiring. but we developed these myths about first ladies that we really have about all of them, starting with martha washington. i think it's the cap though. her always said the cap did a disservice. withy perrianally furious mount vernon over this. george washington's mount

vernon. [laughter] [applause] i mean, yes, i bet he was really care of all the food stuff and all of that. rate. she, of course, succeeded by the very feisty and somewhat adamsmatic abigail whom -- and i might say, pat talked about writing about women. lucky with abigail adams, unlike martha washington, because we have her letters. and we have thousands and them.nds of the theory is that martha burned with georgendence for which we can be angry with her. whatever -- that probably did happen because we don't have it. every pretty much have grocery list the founding fathers wrote.

likely that that's the case. i will say, to continue on the theme, though, about women's history, it's not just that when you write about the women you have the other half of the human is also that you learn about the men in a completely different way. become three dimensional. you know, these founding fathers self-aware. and they knew what they were doing was extraordinary. they succeeded that their communications with each andr would be saved published. so they had that in mind as they wrote. so they did -- they wrote with pompocityrpose and whereas the letters to the women freer and open and filled with their loves and their fears and their predicaments and their ambitions, and humor.

john quincy adams said if anybody intercepts this mail, i'm going to be so allrrassed because it's gossip. and to whom but his wife with the great john marshall have written when he found himself in without north carolina, his britches. he said, "i immediately -- he set out to get a pair made. thought i should be [inaudible] only one day. raleighthe tailors in were busy. so he said, "i had the extreme mortgage fiction to pass a whole term without that important article of dress." i have to tell you, i've never been able to look at him again. gaze becausert my i'm worried about what he's got on. abigail, we are blessed. we have so much that she has written. is much that she has written

quite difficult from the perspective of politics. wonderful advisor to john adams throughout his whole she became first lady. and i don't think that's, by the way, necessarily all that unusual. it was particularly unusual in thecase because of situation that she was in. but throughout his time, first in philadelphia and then on all of his diplomatic missions and president, he just depended on her mightily for information, for political advice. political tenere. and then when he became was reallyhe desperate, just desperate for in philadelphia because i just felt like he couldn't -- he just couldn't do her.thout i mean, he wrote her he's letters, "i never wanted your

more in myassistance life." the next day, "i must entreat can."me on as soon as you a couple of days later, "i pray you to come on." a state oflive in separation. another day, "you i must and have." "the times are critical and dangerous. i must have you here to assist me of the. do nothing without you. we must redesign everything but our public duties. will" she wasn't about to redesign the farm which she had shape. wonderful the only of the founders to die solvent of the original -- the terribles were all in shape except george because of martha. money. of martha's [laughter] and adams also died with money of abigail's investments. she didn't have money, but she made money. and she wasn't about to abandon farm. and also his mother was dying. hisshe was taking care of mother. and he says, "it seems to me

the daughterer and ought to think a little of the president." [laughter] "as well as the husband. his anxieties, his health. don't laugh." [laughter] then his mother died, and abigail got the farm set and on went. she got to philadelphia. just heard with martha washington, the minute got there she was expected to start entertaining. being monday from 12:00 to half past 2:00 i receive visits. ladies and near as many gentlemen. i shall have the same ceremony and thethrough today rest of the week. p.s -- she says her situation is one of splendid prisoner, splendid misery is the theme. the ladies of foreign minister

ownministers with their secretaries and ladies visited me today and add to them the house,f senate and strangers, etc., making near 100 asked permission to visit me so that from half past 12:00 to near 4:00 i was rising up and down.g so it was a lot of work. to just were expected keep doing it. and she was at a tremendous doing of disadvantage in this because she was not martha washington. way that john adams was at a disadvantage because he was not george washington. not the father of the country and not the great hero war and the little difficult man. she was a dissimilar being marthaof not washington, not only because she wasn't the first and because she married to the father of the country but because she was a new englander. was not a hospitable southerner.

easily not someone who had people in all the time. she didn't grow up with any issues, the child of a parsen. compare the houses, this house and the house before that house where the the washingtons were with the little box that the adams lived in in what was then called braintree, and the notion that the lady who was in that little, cramp house about the size of room was suddenly having t -- to tea is a stretch. abroad. had been she had been an ambassador's wife. she had been in the courts of europe. coming straight from braintree to philadelphia, but was still -- she was not the gracious southern hostesses who whole life with

and people that she was used to having drop in. she also didn't have nellie custis. greatllie custis was a addition by the time the washingtons left the presidenty. i remain so admiring of marijuana washington on -- of martha washington on so many fronts. she had little bitty children when she became first lady. i mean, on that famous arrival north, george washington custis got lost. that ands writing founding mothers, my daughter-in-law was doing a quick read and she got very nervous. what happened to him? i said, i guess i better get him found. and then nellie was a wild and thing according to martha. but she got her and it was one of the things she did like about york, she got her in a very good school, isabella graham school. grew into this very gracious, young lady.

and everybody in in philadelphia loved her. and that was certainly not the abigail and abigail's smith who came with her. philadelphia woman wrote -- sally mccain, daughter of a republican, but she wrote abigail had hawk's eyes. and she brought louisa, set up for the miss custis of the place but said louisa would never match nellie for she is not young and confounded ugly. yes. so glitzy philadelphia was really not having it with new england puritan adamss. and it is true, george birth night just sent abigail adams round the bend. wasjust thought it outrageous that they were celebrating his birthday. virginia could do that. ok. would be in her view if virginia did it.

but philadelphia, these people pretend to be so sophisticated, why are they doing it? but aside, of course, from all of that, all that that was going on, what was much more important her own interests was politics. and her meddling in. .nd in policy what happened and the reason i was not a good advisor that shelady is developed something i have seen in in pretty much every white house that i have known -- and sally it's true in if yours as well and it's happening quickly in this one, which is people inside very quickly mentality.unker we're in here doing the good the the just, work, long, long hours. .e're eating terrible food are taking shots at us.

don't you understand in a we're do what's best for the country and why are you being so awful to us? abigail developed that mentality. she had cause. the leader was their own vice the press was vicious. and i mean vicious in ways that made it up.sically of made up all kinds scurrilous things. katherine will tell you some of the things they said about goodness.y so she became an ardent, passionate supporter of the acts. she wrote to one of her sisters, "i wish the laws of our to punishre competent the stir up, the writer and unfounded base and calemny." then she was furious because she the laws were shaved eighth paired to almost nothing.

as they are,ak they were better than nothing. were af course, the acts huge political mistake. and the fact that she was so and sheve of them -- had been such a good advisor for long -- really colored adams' own view. now, he was not happy by any the press either. but her strong support really push him to a place that was him.ery useful for at about the same time, after hers writing about happiness, that the laws were go back toe and john the's now called quincy for

recess. and when they get there, john discovers he had gotten a hint the way that she had doubled the size of the house. him.adn't mentioned it to she actually -- she was working cousin -- not cotton mather. what was his name? anyway. tufts. and she had him write letters to her about all of the bills and repairs and everything and put them inside letters from her because she had already told adams that he could not open any letters from her sisters. gotten furious with him one day when she caught him doing it. so he was very much afraid to do that. so all of the home improvements thoseuried inside letters. and somebody did come through from massachusetts and let the bag saying the house seems to be coming along nicely.

amused.s was just but fortunately -- so that wa you somell, that gives sense of her place in the marriage. then goes back to philadelphia -- remember, he's only one term. quite sick and couldn't go with him. and while he was in philadelphia, she was dying to go to war with france and just pushing and push and pushing for him. while he was in philadelphia to try her he decides .gain for peace with france without con substituting anybody in his party, without telling anybody in the cabinet. and he writes to her and says, how they lament mrs. adams' absence saying if she had been would have never been named nor this mission her.tuted, he teased he said, "that ought to gratify you."anity enough to cure

and she said that she had heard the same thing in boston. feds who did not like being taken so by surprise said they wished the old woman had been there. they did not believe it would have taken place. the was pretty saucy, but old woman can tell them that they are mistaken for she a master'she measure stroke of policy. she didn't, really. think it wast going to work. and she kept pushing for war france and one of his her "not of the faction."t of a now, of course, everybody was in factions at this point. the of course, inside federalist party the faction adams was leding by alexander hamilton. the question of hamilton, abigail was spot on.

to him from day one. and she would call him in letters, cashi -- caesar, whichever roman she was mad at, at the moment. then, of course, gave her good cause to be of him when today go public to admit that he was affairan extra marital because he was being blackmailed and it was alleged that he was blackmailed for trading illegally in government securities. so he had to go public and say that, no, that wasn't the reason. he said he was having an affair with the blackmailer's wife. he says, "i say this not without a blush." aside, eliza hamilton then served in in the sufferingat long, woman we have seen way too many standingent months

behind her husband as he admits scandal andible saving his political career. learnedail, when she this about hamilton, said, "i not any confidence in the honor, integrity or patriotism does not believe that thou shall not commit adultery is a positive of god.ion i would not upon any consideration do a public wrong injury, but i can be guilty of breaking the most solemn engagement? and that to whom i am bound by affection and by honor to and respect?ove, " her basic view is give me a break. right. was hamilton then did go on the about -- against adams. the alienombined with

incidition acts really did him in. that they were very likely to lose the election. toy still had to move washington. a funnyington is such part of the story. you know, when i was writing of liberty"ladies which goes from adams to adams, people would arrive in say, where are we? what is this place? it's awful. here.s nothing it's mud. it's tree stumps. it's miserable. used to itould get and start writing letters saying, you know, the circus comes to town. [laughter] and there's a theater now. there's racing and all of that. arriven new people would and say, where are we? this is horrible. famouslyourse, she moved into the unfinished white was cold.it they couldn't heat it. really anything to make it habitable.

still, though, the minute they got there the ladies of quote/unquotee impatient for a drawing room bored. they were all they wanted somebody to come and entertain them. president's wife was the right person to do that. so she did, you know a little regular,tertaining, weekly entertaining in that drafty old barn. left town. of course it was no surprise was lost.the election it was happening at the same that their son charles was dying. and it was no surprise when he died, either. tell you, this was an interesting moment in that hbo series on the adams which i have very mixed views about. telling omission. that movie they have abigail,

saying about charles, "he was no man's enemy." was, "heactually said was no man's enemy except his own." very different meaning. a debotch did and he did die all at the same time that the electioning and having to pack up and go back home. course, what was a surprise to her was the tie, as everybody, between and aaron burr. it was a long, drawn-out process before that got settled between the time of the election and the time the house representatives broke the tie. and interesting, as you heard from pat, people would come here all the time. constantlygton was having to receive people because one of the things that a would do would be to go see mrs. washington.

be his bona would fide, you know, to have her him.ve co-say, oh, i was at mount vernon the other day visiting mrs. washington. what thomas jefferson probably didn't know when he came here to make the pilgrimage and while for the house of representatives to decide was that she had called him one of the most detestable of mankind. exactly shy and retiring about her politics. abigail was forced to town before the election was settled. and that had her completely crazy. but it was february. so, you know, the weather was getting bad. go through a vile cent snowstorm -- violent which made her very weary. "but not so weary as to have lost my curiosity about the fate of the election." to then when she got

philadelphia and the church bells started peeling to victory, the jefferson she was horrified that the bells an infitilg to for president. "it was a very dangerous trip. in lots ofw and ice places where it was quite dangerous to go on. and her niece louisa tried to her from traveling on, saying wait for some man to come and be with us. abigail said that she was accustomed to get through "many trying scene and combat many difficulties alone." was true. she had been. the advantage of leaving political, leaving life was that that would never be true again. that she would finally have the rest of her life. she died in 1818. with her husband, whom she loved greatly. and that she would not be on her again.r so that was some consolation.

wrote aink that she really wonderful sort of founding erao the as she left. she wrote this letter to her son thomas as she was leaving public office herself. often, -- as she did so she thought through what would come next. she understood the turning over, the experiment of america, thehe next generation, to children. which of course in their case was literally true, john quincy adams. was going to be a very tough moment for the founding generation. she wrote -- she contemplated that. to time the leave unfolding of a drama. to reflectposterity upon the times passed. to i leave them characters contemplate." and she was certainly one of those characters that we should to contemplate. thank you very much. [applause]

>> good afternoon. >> good afternoon. >> it is a pleasure and a of myege to speak to two favorite populations -- teachers vernon.rs of mount and i'd like to thank our me here andbringing baker.ancy, and debbie i would like to thank sally ,cdonough for her introduction her very well-researched introduction. [laughter] i'd like to thank her, but now i tow why i never get invited monticello. ok. [laughter] there's a mystery solved. i'm here today to talk about dolley madison in times of crisis.e and

dolley madison continued and upon the work of martha washington and abigail adams. was to put in practice the abstract series of menrnance designed by the of the founding generation, to translate the theories behind, the constitution into real life. usheredican revolution in morning just a new form of government, transforming what would call society and what we would call culture was essential to a republic that was invested in political power virtuous citizenry. springboarding from the ideas of the sinkers of the scottish enlightenment which included thed hume and adam smith, founders theorized that in a new nation manners could be more laws.ant than and they counted on the women of the ruling classes to secure the manners.rough and that's the context within which we can understand the work

and we canrst ladies talk more about that context later, if you wish. let's situate dolley in a time frame. thomas jefferson won the johnion of 1800 over adams, and brought james and the newadison to capital city in 1801 so that james could be his secretary of state. accurate to say that doll ye served jerch son as his lady. his plan was to limit society in keep women outto of it. in spite of, or perhaps because. policy, thes madison's house on f street became the social and political center of the city and the government. so when the madisons came to the executive mansion in 1809, dolley had been building her bases and her network for eight years. and that's a good thing. because one could almost

twoacterize james madison's terms with a theme of our panel crisis."e and his presidency was full of them. james' primary political goal was unity in all forms and contexts. beenurse, unity had always a goal and a concern. tom the first decision declare independence, all through the revolution and certainly after, new americans worried whether the republic would hold together whether united states.a this concern became more, not decades went by and with ample reason. administration, james and dolley still worried about external enemies. case, the proked if iious great britain and the with finerance aided play troublemaker. but they were much more worried divisions.nal thomas jefferson was not alone in considering his state rather

whole united states as, quote, his country. such awareness of regional difference made for a fractious and uncooperative congress. troubling were the political divisions and partisan congress not just in but throughout nation. such division was supposed to out --eingsed by 18 ceased by 1809 but it was accelerating. remember, these are men who did two-partye in a system. for them there was only one common good and one obvious way to rule. and anything else was not, you but, an informed to dissent treacherous. and the problem with early america is there's two groups that.elieve party didn'the know what to do as he and jefferson had seen it, politics thedeteriorated from unanimity under the great washington, veering dwang russly -- dangerously away in the federalist waters.

but the victory of thomas in 1800 should have eliminated the opposition as he safely steered the ship of state course. but instead, the violence and partisanship increased so that in 1809 james and dolle ye had the supposedlyad victorious republican party disintegrating under their feet and it would continue to do so through the two terms of the madison presidency. and what was happening, though nobody really understood it, at the time was that the political system was developing its two-party arrangement. and they also didn't understand that this was necessary to build state.ratic nation dolley tackled this need for unity in practical, demonstrable ways. and benjamin lenry latrobe restructured the mansion, known as the white during her tenure, there was no one place in the city where all members of government, thealone their families and local community, could meet.

mrs. madison's weekly wednesday night drawing rooms were the only place that legislators, families, and their could gather. and under her watchful eye they learned to work together in bipartisan ways. she brought them together to not out their differences, in the harsh spotlight of congress but in the soft candle light of the unofficial sphere. and as they chatted and danced, male members of government surrounded by families could notn to see their opponents as caricatures of evil but as their owngs with ideas of the public good. andas at dolley's house nowhere else that members of what would become two parties could begin to build a ruling class. dolley's social sphere is even more important when you consider violent politics really was. as i think cokie alluded to rival ran unchecked, and there was real violence. this was an era when men beat

with canes and shot each other over politics and, just in thet streets but on the congressional floor. and they could do so. male congressmen could act out in the house and the senate. but they had to be on their best behavior at a lady's social event. dependley did not just on conventions of civility, she insisted on them. civility anded unity. she became famous for not brooking any contention in her presence to the point that if people were speaking badly of they would cease when they heard the click of her high heels. republican representative from pennsylvania's jonathan by her noted, quote, deportment in her own house you cannot discover who is her or foes. friends he was seeing dolley's policy in action. dolley was a political genius because she turned authentic

arts of herself into political pe persona. she made personality a tool of policy. make no mistake. dolley madison was a fierce but shean partisan, tempered her private feelings for what she saw as the public good, her husband's goals. indeed, she became so skilled a hertician that some accused of hypocrisy. as young francis hugh observed, i do not think it possible to know what her real opinions are all men. all things to and if that isn't a description of a politician, i don't know it. [laughter] ases had identified unity the chief crisis of the nation. her personaled feelings to smooth contention and bring people together. evidentere is that more than in the role she played in of 1811 whencandal virginia congressman john enraged,of roanoke, so

fellow virginian john epps in the house over a debate over a restriction bill that f called him out. loathed john randolph because he did say terrible things about her husband and spread those nasty rumors again to which cokie allude. i would tell you what they were, promised nancy and anne i wouldn't talk dirty this time. a dulallenging someone to was a shame and shocking event most of the world dualing a sin. so she probably would have let him bleed to death on the capital steps, dolley converted the duel into a accommodation, amazing everyone according to the minister of france. national pride was salvaged and war was arerted -- overted, and as the minister said, all of the honor of the affair remains with

mrs. madison. and we have a lot of stories that. but there's another areink i can't i think we have to pay attention to -- arena we have to to.attention look at dolley's work because this was the business of the federal government, which is diplomacy. early government, the major business of government was foreign relations. and actually, she began that james was jefferson's secretary of state. infamous mary affair when jefferson so insulted the his wifeinister and elizabeth, they swore off going to the executive mansion altogether. but they would attend private dinners at the madison's house street. and this is not because they james madisoned more than they did jefferson. indeed, they saw him as jefferson's henchman. by casting the dinners as social and by making herself to the merries, dolley made it permissible tore them to attend. the years before the declaration of war of 1812, the

all-important business of diplomacy with great britain took place not at the table but at dolley's. again, it is important to stress was a successful diplomat not because she liked people but because she worked at like a professional politician. she didn't particularly like merry.th she thought elizabeth, quote, a strange lass. withardly associates anyone, always riding on horseback. missed a chance to dolly gave it to her. dolly was so successful that ill months after the merry affair, elizabeth nurse and rself her dolly's actions intensity iffed

and theecame first lady country headed for war. one could see the war of 1812 declare in the madison administration as the ultimate unity. of european declarations broke down and the war itself as a way to government.he such efforts culminate in the artford convention when federalist new england threatened to secede. continued and heightened her work. she provided more social events. to the unofficial sphere, unprecedented access to the president than ever before. she celebrated the few heros of and two ict washitonians resident or visitor and to americans across the the symbol of me disinterested patriotism in an the hen no man could be symbol of patriotism. gain, we can talk about why

that worked. quickly eason that became legend is because she had very beginninghe of the conflicts. indeed, the wartime efforts and sold the useless treaty of peace helped americans as the war not effectiveless waste of treasure and life, but an expression of nationalism. one of the puzzling things that blessed with hindsight do is we uniformly madison's presidency as a near disaster as he became countryse to losing the both inside and out. so in the cnn polls that we see is e george washington number one, james madison is oing to be plightly in the bottom third. in 1817 when the madisons

retired in the a blaze of glory. hat they were pratzing the man for, the man who presided over he breakup of the republican party and the most useless war in american history -- unity. adams, who i think we have seen is not the most generous that the madison administration, quote, acquired more glory and established more washington, adams, and jefferson put together. how do we explain this? dolly.swer is again, like many first ladies, about this.y talked she often acted as a lightning rod for the criticism of james. assessment of his legacy, her persona projected and achievements on to him. as a politician, james could not dolly work for unity, but could. if, as contemporaries and istorians agree, the country was left with a sense of nationalism, pride, and good

was as , the victory much dolly's as it was james. must conclude i about the lessons of dolly madison in crisis. one of the reasons it's been hard to see her work and to she didn't because win. failed,rts at diplomacy the country went to war. and except in individual cases as john randolph's duel, the efforts did little to exaggerated masculinity of the political culture of the day. win because she didn't doesn't mean she wasn't right. and this is the second point. the r words and deeds, in way she behaved and treated people at her parties, dolly the ht a new language to table of an early american politics. vernacular of sentiment and feeling with an civility. on she brought love and empathy in

the political discourse and in modelled for us a political behavior that allowed participants to see each other as full human beings. bipartisan process, one that emfa sized cooperation coercion that built bridges instead of bunkers with an civility and empathy proved necessary for building a nation-state.atic the men of her day could not envision bipartisanship. they did not even have a word it. for them, politics was an all or nothing zero sum activity where regularly fought and murdered each other over ideologies. that dolly could envision power sharing marks her as the most modern politician of her time. the way of facing crisis and channel is her lasting gift to the nation. thank you. [ applause ]

>> thank you. very kind and generous to be here on my first visit to mt. vernon. as a lincoln scholar, we are very aware of these polls and i'm so pleased to be among such distinguished olleagues and be so warmly welcomed by such a beautiful historic site. so thank you. i would like to try to give you he crises of mary lincoln's role as first lady. but as there's been a book a day since appamatox on the american civil war, a summary wouldn't if it in my time slot. on some things because last year the abraham incoln presidential library museum in springfield had an exhibit on mary lincoln and

lady of the first controversy. indeed, she is still someone who the public as y someone who had a good bit of the le in her tichlt asting legacy is still in the year of the president's bicentennial, president lincoln 200th birthday and people still feel mrs. lincoln a characiture, ridicule and hat might have been a seed planted in her husband's presidency. not predict their role in entering into the white house. political one observer who commented at the 1860 election that mary started when he was a n poor young man and no more idea of being called to the residency than of being a cannibal. however, i try to lay out in my

an educated guess that mary lincoln wouldn't let a little sacrifice come between her and her goal because she was a very determined woman. about mr. lincoln's role, perhaps, of entering the white house. a she was someone who was true political partner. why is it, then, that so many of lincoln biographers continue to talk about her as someone who blamed for many of lincoln's problems, blamed for some of the controversies. i can cite several of them, but give you a to history, a graphical explanation controversy other than to say she was unusual. she was a daughter of the blue grass. were esteemed and political. she had ambassadors, senators, governors in her family. she indeed believed that when he did finally marry mr. lincoln after an interrupted and great deal of

controversy, her family suggested that mr. lincoln came where his family wasn't much better from the dirt floors they came from. marrying into an aristocratic family came with problems but she stood by him as his partner. had ten years of formal education to his one. she had political connections over illinois. and after two failed senate votes were the counted for the presidential election, and lincoln did, win, he told the men at the telegraph office that he had said, home because he gentlemen, there's a little woman at our house who's in this more interested dispatch than i am. and when he arrived home, he aid, mary, we are elected, which i think truly signals the lincolns ch the conducted their marriage. even though lincoln's election was a triumph and you could look to a glittering inauguration, it was quite a

trial. ropes and ts, aintings of lincoln's death by many who didn't welcome his election. once they were safely ensconced hotel, lincoln was preoccupied with the business of reorganizing a lincoln had d mrs. to face her trial. after all, she was the wife of the first president to be a state outside of the original colonies. suspect and harriet niece whos buchanan's was the hostess met with the ouple and said that lincoln resembled the irish door keeper. i do have to tell my students in not meant as a compliment. nd it's reported that mrs. lincoln is western, loud, and unrefined. so this is what mary lincoln was up against. i will say i use the term mary lincoln because we did have

wonderful h a occasion to get to meet and of dolly e biography madison because we were talking todd connection that isn't a real connection but it seems that everywhere mary todd lincoln is the name. i first started working on the research and said i was mary lincoln, people said who? i would say mary todd lincoln. this name.know the early 20th century when the todd family began to commission the work, including painting that now hangs in the that house of mary lincoln "todd" got inserted. not to say that mrs. lincoln was family d of her heritage. she indeed was someone who the southern red her tanl. oneas abraham lincoln said, god and good enough for the todds required two.

he did have some trouble with family. the inaugural ball in 1861 was a great coming out party where the dwellers of washington were going to observe mrs. lincoln measured up.w she the tent in blue silk bedecked with gold diamonds nd i'm especially fond of the pearls that she's wearing and a famous portrait of her bedecked on the front piece of my book. we see it's not known exactly know that e do abraham lincoln slipped into tiffanies when the train was to ng in on the way washington and he bought for his of a seed pearl set necklace, earrings, bracelet, brooch obtained at the cost of $530. e know he was in some way honoring the way in which she ad pledged herself to him and after more than 20 years they were headed for the white house. lincoln left at midnight.

wife and her party stayed on dancing polkas into the night. elizabeth elette, a very observer said mrs. exquisite admiral ease and grace won the love of thousands. the exalted station to which she's been so strangely advanced from the little inland capital of illinois. that she was on trial during this period. there was a boycott at the white at this time of the southern women. but shortly there after, the continued. her receptions were emptied out. british journalist found it was rather late before i could get to the white house. ladies in only two the drawing room when i arrived.

afterwards that the attendance was scanty. have not gton ladies yet made up their mind that mrs. the fashion. they draw comparisons between vulgar yankee women now in power. lincoln's call to arms the first was drawn into a more dangerous whirlwind to a severe disadvantage. about divided houses in this era, the white house was seen as a house that divisions, notse mrs. lincoln's loyalty, which was to her husband. mail was w that her read in advance. everything that went in and out f the white house both to protect her, but also from scandal that there was a rebel in the white house. she had half brothers in the onfederate army and half sisters married to confederate generals. this led to disasters of mammoth

proportion. i do suggest in my work that millions clint con was the first first wife of a president to have that term. but she feels the first person pursue with med to such vigor. t was said that the telegraph would tril every time she left the white house. her refurbishment of the white 1861 with some of the furniture from the monroe family were still there. with young ng in children. she wanted to have a house worthy of the nation that was siege. certainly, she thought it would be more populist, more large ball o have a rather than the receptions that were held. i know you mentioned the adams being much larger than this, i can assure you the lincoln house in springfield was smaller and mary lincoln would invite 300 to parties. keep ought she would people flowing through. as the wife of a president and the first lady, she wanted to at homes-- she had her on saturday afternoon. she had her weekly public

it ption, but she thought would be nicer to have a ball. he first ball in february of public the again, a relations disaster. in oor soldier allegedly attempt to listen to the glittering intertake tanment and at the ball that the illness of her son willy would e prolonged and he would die shortly after. but i do want us to try and keep n mind the context of the times. i was up in the berkshires lecturing and went to a home built by a member of the morgan family. there on the wall was a portion morgan with his japanese bride. and i was trying to imagine what it would have been like if we see.d what if it had not been a sign of the morgan family, but rather the roosevelt family who was in the white house with his 1941.se bride in

what would the nation have thought of having someone enemy. to the the tragedy was that she was so severely mills understood. as a southern , partisan. on the other hand, charles boycotted the white house, indeed, he was the one struck down on the senate floor. abolitionist who was so concerned with this question slavery.bolition of but he was invited into the white house, a great friend of mrs. lincoln. she did attempt to play artisan politics but never quite found her way. always a misstep ahead of the game. and say, let's try contextualize her legacy today. if of my friends say what booth had been a bad shot. but my suggestion was if mrs.

incoln had been the one murdered that fateful night in april of 1865, how would we view first lady. how would we look at her. would there be a notion of reconciliation in the wake of the death of this southern woman who stood by her allow him to to become the savior of the nation? know what nnot lincoln's newly invented legacy prudent e become, it's to imagine that filtering out all of the comments about her sad leaving of the white house. years gic wandering, her as a widow were such that she could find no peace in the wake of her husband. what would have been the of the role if we could take out the shadow of the assassination and what followed? sterling, i would suggest. and moving up the ladder to latinum with each passing anniversary. she would achieve the honor and to y that she never dared

dream once her husband departed realities of widowhood hit her full force. i do suggest she spend her many years championing her husband. of her about the episode incarceration in the sanitarium hen her only remaining child, robert, fearing his mother might do herself harm thought he would confine her and the public trial and confinement to an asylum was a deep humiliation which, again, i don't believe she recovered from. at war with herself. and with social convention and polite society. she had failed mitz rabblely in the court of public opinion. but she was flawed and brilliant at once. she never rose to the heights of husband ianism her achieved and we don't have the thousands of pages of records. we just have a few letters. sonave the letters from the

robert who collected the letters. e have the rumors that the grate at his home was filled with the ashes of correspondence. have mary lincoln's letters talking about reading and rereading her husband's letters. we know they disappeared. we don't have much in which to her wit testimony of and her intelligence. ut from her writings, i assure you, she was a woman who loved her husband deeply. she sustained his growth to greatness. she was a woman who stepped the boundaries of her time and suffered for it. endured someone who more personal loss and public humiliation than any other woman of her generation. near the end, she dwelled on the remembrance of that stormy day lincoln as her husband in springfield against the wishes of her family defying

all odds. slipped the ring on her finger. love is eternal. pledge, eed, with that lincolns made their path forward. we know his legacy grows and year. with each passing now that he's eternal, there's no reason to regard her as infernal. we might look and say the glory f his legacy is in some way attributable to her passion. on s quite struck inauguration day in 2009 looking at the inaugural luncheon where there is a gold encircled by blue and gray ribbons which mrs. lincoln chose of her husband's presidency. there it was, a reproduction but

triumphant in 2009. you, very much.

>> i want to thank you for this wonderful panel. to be the opportunity between teachers and hills torrians. i am going to do my very best to conversation. so we're going to hopefully take some questions from the audience. ask you to speak as loudly as you can and i will try to repeat your questions so it.ryone can hear our first question? someone it started if doesn't want to. yes, ma'am? we hear about mary todd lincoln's lavish wardrobe. you elaborate? was she aware that the press was criticize ing? >> indeed. she was very aware of press criticism in that time. secretary's daughter was so concerned that he wanted hospital with the

press which she was doing to ately and he wanted them be brought back to the white house to eat cake. i thought it was a wonderful line.secretary she -- she decided no it to let them eat cake and she refused -- refused to advertise her good -- her good work. go in 1861 to look at furnishings for the white house indeed brought shawls along the way from a.p. stewart's and was quite excited by this. ut in my research, i found mr. lincoln was the only member of the lincoln family to have store-bought clothes before they washington. she had all of her dresses made and made them herself, many of them. hired elizabeth heckley as her dress maker. she was the first person in the after the inauguration. ut this lavish spending much reported in the press, i to be , needs

contextualized. needs to be put up against other kinds of spendings. for example, i do tell a story where i'm quite concerned one particular historian portrayed her lavish spending in the weeks leading up to her husband's death as if she hoarding. and -- so that's what struck me first. buying that was so alarming? gloves. repeatedly her concern was taken as someone as gauche unrefined wearing dirty gloves at receptions was something that would take people aback. she would stand in long lines, she was there when the thousands went through the white house. the major eed one of crimes against her is that she dozen gloves in march of 1865. and i suggest that rather than part of a as criminal conspiracy, what many of us who buy know that it's

buy in bulk. and she feels looking ahead to the next four years in the white house. we can imes i think contextualize them. on the other hand, i do suggest that like her son, robert, she suffered from spend and purge. criticism and looking at shopping is something characterized as she very muchmia, regretted the spending and after her widow hood she tried to get what she had bought in her time in the white house. and what had been given to her. in very different times. people would give her a diamond brooch. of the southern style of gift giving. we may today say oh, no, it's bribery. lincoln himself took hats and gifts. a different context. to ome ways, i tried contextualize it. she did go wild -- being able to not as a poor lawyer's wife, not there with the children, but there as first

ady having all of the storekeepers come out to her carriage with the lovely goods bill her later. and when the bills came due, like many women, she was to share the costs with her husband and did try and her spending pattern. and that led to what i think is learly -- she feels characterized in the press as having a shopping disorder in the 1860s. question about dolly madison. heard she likes to go, the supreme court is in session and ear the cases and the justices were always excited about her being in the court. why would you think she would do that?time to >> if i could -- >> absolutely. madison is very famous for washington on the

scene. what she would do is take of ladies into the government, to watch debates urnover floor of the house or to watch the supreme court cases being argued. and historians have now begun to -- and you're very astute to pick this up, how the men who are being active on the floor were affected by the presence of ladies. altar their style and at one point made some mrs. nt speech and then madison and her ladies came in so she started it again. did it for her. and the -- the person commenting n this said with a few more flowers kind of thrown in there. who interesting to notice doesn't care for this. i have to bring up john randolph again who once commented on the ladies in the gallery he had -- he must have been unhinged. he was totally crazy. >> he was crazy. public mpared them to

women. so -- so what we're looking at pioneers in a way the idea of bringing women into the forefront of government. i'm always terribly anxious d to see who's and fearful because i do think 24r's something up. she was a public woman in a good way. of the but it's true there's nothing else to do. >> a lot of the women of to congress and to the supreme court. that's what you did. debates they were being like the missouri compromise or something which is after she had town, they filled the floor so much that there's no room for of congress. and there were a couple of public women who were let in. and it was something of an embarrassment. >> yes. >> this is why -- have to look at the public women. ecause i remember being at a history conference about 15 years ago and saying i was going women.te on public

and one of my colleagues said that's good, they're out in public, good. words, the term, "public women" used in the 19th century, a woman stepping boundary was then labeled a "public woman," and public/private divide that is artificial when we know there were parlor politics. women were influencing, not whispering on pillow cases actually having passionate when maryolitics that steven attracted to douglas, she said she didn't like his politicings, couldn't someone with those politics. she didn't vote and have that a lot of the work elucidate.fails to many times -- came to mt. vernon. 'm wondering if you could

address, was martha washington a financial wizard? manager?al how did she maintain the estate years without him? visitors came to mt. vernon. the question is was she a inancial wizard, how did she entertain them, what did she do to receive them? she hostess, how did accommodate that? >> was she a financial wizard, probably not? financially astute and very careful? yes, she feels. nd that is shown from the time she feels a young woman in her 20s when her first husband, the died.husband, and she was left with the -- plantations. to run and take caref as well as a great deal of cash and a lot investments. she made very careful investments and she kept books lawyers acted n in ways that she didn't like, she called them to account.

to their office and confronted them. and, again, it's the whole uestion, i think, here, of the public woman that she hitched up town.orses and went into and actually confronted the lawyer in his office. d i think he was more scandalized by that than by what she had to say. said you didn't have to go out in public, i could have come to you to talk about this. financially feels smart. in the later days, you know, she didn't really live that much than he. it was just 2 1/2 years. so it wasn't that there was a lot to manage. were relatively good shape. hostess.was a fabulous and she saw herself as a private historian of the war, the rivate historian of the presidency that she was there at the foundation and she could about it.e and that's what visitors would say.

with mrs. urs washington and she brought it all alive to us. how it was.d and that's what she thought her ob was, to, again, publicly in her house, but none theless how cly to strangers tell it was, what the foundation was. know, if i can chime in for a second. this is the second time we we all this up, cokie, alluded to it. what do you get from studying the women. we talked about how it makes the founders so much more human than imagined. the whole thing about no pants, i don't know if i eel ever get over that. me, you won't. >> i'm traumatized. eluded what it does, pat to it -- the power of the everyday. when people are grappling with trying to put them to everyday practice, all kinds of interesting things come up. would think of is if you look at the women and

power of the he every day, you kind of discover secret of early american politics which is the incredible attachment that the americans have to aristocracy. so they had all fought this big revolution against the monarchy and against everything that the old world stood for. but they still secretly craved it. and they craved it for a very reason -- it was the only vocabulary of power that they knew. he only way to show a new nation could be legitimate. ou have to have like an aristocracy. so we have an observe moment for john adams is arguing titles. now they're realizing they won the war. the nation. n suggested.undadry was >> probably why he dropped it for that. we see this when we look at women. call george washington the supreme highness, president.him mr.

but we called mrs. washington lady washington. ames madison was mr. madison, properly uncharismatic sober man, but hisrtuous wife was queen dolly. the 's in looking at everyday, looking and you can only see it through these women that you can uncover the other part of the are american story. >> well, and the first ladies to great extent put a human face presidency. the idea of the presidency is a wonderful idea. pictures.e to look at we like to think about people. t's why i think there's such obsession with what they wear. how many -- what can you say navy blue suiter and b red tie? you know, that's just -- there's a limit. women, there's a personalization of almost a feeling of knowing them. >> but see, that's another place where martha was so smart,

though. shows up in new york to become the first first lady, loved her sat ins and silks but she wore homespun. i mean, that is just such a pr stunt, it's wonderful. time.st for that she didn't do it all the time. >> once is enough. arrive in new york on that barge in homespun is brilliant. we talk about the old washington. we talk about how everyone's republicans, here, for these first ladies, their families were there. they couldn't travel home. would be an imposition. washington, senators on the families s, their weren't there. chiefs of staff go home on the

weekend. dehumanized possibly the political scene? has, it's too bad. tend to o true that we used to be.how it i do believe the immediate growing up, the immediate postworld war ii period, i think it had everything to do with the war, was a time of really now that i've read the history has not een that at any other time in our history. people killed each other over politics. duelling ground in bladensburg. duel was one of many averted in that case. out thomas jefferson's son-in-law. but he was crazy.

>> and busy. >> the sitting vice president of united states. his burr murdered political enemy over politics. the last president had a little gun but ith the wasn't -- so i do think we rosy hue. have a we're at a -- we've been going hrough a bad patch in the last 16 years. but i don't think it's anything like the period we're talking or more so the period of the civil war. >> can i also answer a question slightly different way because you're touching on something that's very important people in the ur 18th century understood for need the o work, you official sphere of action, which would be the debates and the reaties and the pieces of paper. but you need what they call the social sphere. unofficial the sphere, which is sort of the sphere of process.

social events. the dinner parties where people could compromise or discuss things and opose the could blame the wine or dancing if it didn't work out. you needed that sphere. because dern world, that sphere is almost always associated with women, as women men d into the workforce, haven't taken up the importance of that. to ashitonians still have learn that at some point, you have to stop work, go on a pair of high heels, change your out to dinner. you need that unofficial sphere of politics to make it happen. women knew hese that, even as abigail adams was best at it. they understood the duel nature of that. that's what's gone. >> can you please speak to what drew you as 21st century women historians, back in time and to your women and research

so ve written about beautifully. what drew you to them individually or collectively. century at the time. >> the question is just so what was eard that is the draw for each of the panelists to go back in and be arch these women and work?rians of -- of their i think in some way i'm doing penance. a young feisty graduate student at prince ton graduate doing my work in civil wars seminars and didn't know what little big top was, i got in serious debates about civil war history. very passionate debate, preparing documents and ne of the documents was the emancipation proclamation. and the other was mary lincoln's list.ng i remember this violent argument

over it. years later going to lincoln dinners, i would hear lincoln and his career and the contribution and leading up to the bicentennial, that the cartoonish image of mrs. lincoln needed correction. short next project is a book on the emancipation proclamation. it.t's what drew me to i have done other books in the field, i thought it was time to millions er look at lincoln. >> i came to mt. vernon 30 years think. it was a very different place then too. the changes in 30 years that mt. vernon in terms of interpretation and education and been available have incredible. about nellieriting custus. he was cute, young, in the middle of everything. she wrote pep by letters and she it was all them and

good. but actually i remembered exactly when -- at the bicentennial of the white house which i came up here for, i was sitting with some people from at everybody king on the stage saying mm, they're mostly men. ones representing women were dolly madison and abigail adams. to my friends, where's martha washington. and they said nothing's been done yet. thought, you know, i could do that. then i thought for the first time, she feelsn't actually born 70. she before gilbert stewart got his hands on her. kind eally did -- it was of -- i didn't start knowing a lot because nobody knew a lot. out and once i found out, then i wanted to tell everybody else.

>> i can't claim the title of historian. but i write ist women in politics and women as voters. earlier, i grew up in politics, my fachter was in congress and then my mother. and i saw the tremendous my uence of the women in childhood. the people like my mother and ford and on and mrs. all of that doing everything. i mean, they ran their husband's campaigns. they ran the political onventions, the voter registration trials. they ran all of the social service agencies in washington. figured the women had to be at least as influential. to deal with the founding era all the time. if you cover politics in have, you long as i have to constantly go back and debates over things like the right to bear arms or the place of religion in the tolic square or why you have

be born in america to be president. up.whatever it is that comes and the -- the founders are the d to constantly on floors of congress almost always inaccurately. and so i figured the women of era thatedibly crucial i was already spending a lot of time with had though be at least influential as the women of my era. started e time that i doing this where neither had a katherine'sartha or book about dolly were out. they had other wonderful books really with the exception of good abigail adams biographies, there were not good biographies of the nothing this period and with the exception of katherine's book on parlor politics, no one had pulled it

together. o when i started to find out about the women, i realized i actually had to write about them no one had. mothers and ladies of iberty taken from before the generation to john quincy adams was a way to try to pull together the women of that -- women of that terribly important generation of our history. >> and for me, it was a moment of drunken bravado. i like to tell you differently. -- i was a as at graduate student at yale university and was at a tea in party. i had taken a few lady-like sips f sherry and a very tall professor came up to me from fordham university and he went history, about women's you know, and how it was good, about d tell us stuff midwifery or life in a shoe factory. but what could it tell us about

politics. he had gone on for so long by the time he finished, the sherry in. kicked so i said, oh, i bet i could find that out. it.said you do you find out about women in real politics. had already met louis saah and katherine johnson political ife and partner about john quincy adams. wrote an article about her in russia, how she was very influential in russia and i sure it was very different in washington. let me go look. it was exactly the same, the social circles were incredibly influential. why i studied e political women before they had the vote? easy.the vote, that's doing it before, that's harder. so -- husband a with my weekly newspaper column and i louisa adams in my column because of what's going on in washington scandal-wise

lately. she -- the issue -- most of her unpublished.till katherine did a lot pof work on them but didn't publish -- soon. y're coming out >> yes. historical societies. really nice. his letter had never been published before. i was sitting and reading it in my basement. and i suddenly realized what had been said. and i went tearing upstairs and to my husband because it was the year the missouri compromise, congress had stayed in session. much longer than usual. everything was a mess. of food and all that. finally they went home. she goes to the meeting of the of the orphans and is told that they're going to need year. building next why, she says? because the session had been very long. phatevers of the nation had eft 40 cases that would likely

need our assistance -- 40 left behind.n by the 16th congress of which members.e only 232 and so she was so furious. he wrote the letters to john adams, abigail was dead. she wrote the letters and said i a gested that we should have petition to the next congress leaders ough our great should establish a institution vote the $2 additional in had given themselves to support the institution. it doesn't get better than that. >> one more question. sir?

humanize ffort to these four ladies, whose love was most vibrant? >> talking about the love life. whose was the most vibrant? write about their love lives. thank god. abigail would say to john when we need that's right, a weakened government. she'd -- she would write to him and say when he was worried his s letters were going to be intercepted and he was afraid to lovy dovy because he was afraid he would be made fun of. she would basically say, don't worry about the british, me.ry about i can't take these letters. lack re you, some frozen

lander? but by in large, they did not life. about their love >> i will say this i mentioned there were very few lincoln letters. but during the time when mrs. lincoln followed her husband to gave out their home in springfield for a boarding house life in washington. but she brought two young children as well. it didn't work out. she had to go back to kentucky family. we have these few tantalizing this period and they are collected in her letters. and i love he's asking about the asking about the headaches, and then jokes with are so says, "oh, you well, you will marry someone who's rich in the next "weigh d then says, yourself, mary." a husband that could joke about his wife's weight? a really good relationship. in here were many insights

reading these letters and intimacies. i was writing against a backdrop, did lincoln love his rutledge.he love ann did lincoln ever love a woman because a lot of scholars books about his homo erotic relationships and/or that e might have been gay and didn't even know it. o there are many kind of speculations on lincoln's love life. and the rumors of the 19th 21st y are with us in the century. >> well, you need to come back mt. vernon in november when happy posium will be on ansd misery because i plan to myth of the beautiful sally fairfax. that, in fact, washington chose quite rightly when he chose martha. adored him, he adored her. and she was also adored by her

first husband. and just to be a little crass -- how do you -- what can you say about people's love they're so masked in those days. one of the things i looked at is how much time they spend together when they can and what their bedroom situation is. upper class people had separate bedrooms, for example, the washingtons. you look at the tantalizing bits they werereally think happy. >> i would say the same for the madisons. there's love and then there's sex. the madisons loved each other because they were so very often together. they weren't apart. we don't have that many letters between the two because they liked being together. do have show the madisons full of love. but as we end the session, it's with politicings. now i have to break my promise

and say and talk dirty what's interesting to me is i would love to know more about life, but the love use of the love life for political matters. reat speculation in the press about this couple. man, very tiny. and the large robust healthy woman who had a track record. a widow of having children. and much speculation on what their childlessness meant. so even in the deepest, darkest, most intimate recesses in all political.s lincolns did have separate bedrooms. i have discovered many of the on the had been out circuit with complained about the snoring, talking in his 6'4", 5 foot,gain, bed.le in the each of us can have our own interpretations and other politicings. to get t passageways from his work space to his home. that.u have to remember

i want to thank each of our panelists for joining us here today. [ applause ] and the event was co-hosted with historical use association with john riley in the back. so we want to say thank you to the white house historical association. [ applause ] and we're going to ask each of to teach your children about the work of the first ladies. rom starting with martha washington all the way up to helping them interpret the news obama is t what mrs. doing and all of the work she's doing for the nation. ecause it's not clearly understood. she wears sleeveless and she looks great and she should wear can.if she but she's also wearing a lot of

work and sometimes it just gets in the headlines. thank you. >> thank you. [ applause ] >> the second season of first adies influence and image begins on sunday, december 9. follow us on twitter. conversation@c-span. >> at 6:00 p.m.'s tern, senators met in the old senate chamber to proposed changes to the fill bulser roles. fter more than three hours, senators concluded the meeting without reaching an agreement. thune and harry reid spoke briefly.

>> our view is they were illegally and unconstitutionally appointed. a difficult thing to turn the other way on. a lot of republicans would vote two new nominations if the democrats were willing to do that. i didn't see evidence that would happen. mcconnell are nd talking as are other individual senators that were having weekend andover the maybe those will yield results before it's said and done. any of those bratz specific proposals in the back and forth? >> none other than the obvious give us six republican votes for cloture and this can

all be avoided. do the nuclear option. >> don't do the nuclear option. > and if this were to happen, does this mean we won't have another threat to change the congress? session of and there aren't any -- nobody make those hard types of commitment at this point? >> what about the mom knees nlrb. han the >> it's the real point of contention. i think that cardray, for could be sift republican votes to move him. but i think the two nlrb are really, really difficult for republicans who believe they were illegally made. and that comes back to an issue of a separation of powers and we're going to concede to the executive the powers of the congress and whether they are in or is not in session. >> do you think they would have the rules of the cpsb just to move him?

>> i don't know how he's got up tomorrow? how does he have it cued up? >> cardray first. conceivably, yeah. >> do you believe there's this know, hat changing -- you going nuclear could be bad for executive nominations going forward. the rules that it could be bad for the institution and change how presidents think about the nomination? >> i think going forward, this -- this is a new precedent, obviously. and i think it creates all kinds of potential questions about happens next. but for sure if this happens it's clearly going to be a practice that gets continued in administration. and i -- evidently, there are -- lot of ff democrats who accept that. many are for that. hey're fine with executive nominations. most draw the line at judicial nominations or legislative fill but i think once you blow that door open, it's hard to go back.

it's much easier. everyone, the night the late. i'm anxious to see how we're the home run derby. okay, i can't hear anyone. late. said is it's we've been no breaks. we've been going steady in there. good had a very conversation, a conversation is going to continue tonight. the votes are scheduled at 10:00

in the morning. changing the rules, sir? u.s. senatee of the on c-span 2. the house also returns tomorrow this week tern and will work on a bill that would they certain mandates under health care law and 2014 defense spending. house here e at the on c-span. >> on the next washington journal, a look at the filibuster rules regarding

nominations.nch we'll talk with congressional norm ornstein and two senators join us, bernie sanders barrasso of nd john wyoming. then we look at wikileaks. guest is journalist josh meier. washington journal is live on every day at 7:00 a.m.'s tern. -- eastern. morning city democrats called on the justice department to launch civil rights investigation surrounding the death of trayvon martin. after george ays zimmerman was cleared of murder harges by a florida jury, several members said it was clear that martin had been the victim of racial profiling. justice department suspended the investigation in the trial. t says federal prosecutors are examining the evidence before deciding to move forward. this is just over a half an hour.

i'm joining these men to talk about the case and the way we've and we're pleased been joined by two additional distinguished members of the new delegation, ional andress member jerry nadler congress member jose sorano. the heart felt thoughts and prayers as they continue to be with the family and note that in they've conducted themselves dignity and we appreciate the lead that many over the country have followed. verdict.ct the jury's

but the state prosecutorial chapter has now been closed. and a new federal chapter has been opened. it's my hope that will be the result of a consideration by a george ry as to whether zimmerman violated our nation's civil rights laws. trayvon martin did not have a gun. knife. not have a weapon.not have a all trayvon martin had was a of skittles. as a result of him going to the skittles, it ome set in motion a chain of events

him being shot dead in cold blood. that should not happen in america. and that's why there needs to be some accountability. believe that to his justice department investigation should proceed in results in grand jury consideration as it relates violation of trayvon martin's civil rights. t least in my view, george zimmerman identified trayvon criminal a potential because he was black. followed trayvon martin because he was black. he called the police entree von

black. because he was he profiled trayvon martin because he was black. should ultimately determine whether he shot martin because he was black in violation of our civil rights laws. closing, a grand jury would and neithercedented subsequent federal prosecution. 1991, rodney king was beaten members of the los angeles police department. a state prosecution was commenced. four white officers were acquitted.

level.state the federal government then moved forward with the prosecution charging with violating our laws and ivil rights the conviction was subsequently obtained. baez in the ony bronx was choked to death by livodi, a member of the new york police department. levodi was indicted under state law, try in the court.ounty he was acquitted under state law. the federal government then stepped in with a grand jury and subsequent indictment and right n this courthouse behind us frances was convicted of

civil ng anthony baez's rights. across the river in the district nadler, ed by jerry myself, and anied yeah velasquez. nelson stabbed yankle hacidic man in 1991 services. law.as indicted under state he was tried and he was acquitted. he federal government then stepped in with the grand jury indictment.quent prosecuted limerick nelson under laws, ion's civil rights and he was convicted. pleased that an investigation has been commenced. as in those hat other cases and many others, it

grand jury in consideration as to whether george zimmerman violated martin's civil rights when he shot him to death in cold blood. 'm pleased that we've been joined by the dean of the congressional delegation, a figure in the congress, a fighter for civil plus over his four decades of service, congress rangel.harles >> thank you so much, jeffries and congressman greg mooex for organizing this press conference. we're joined now by linda velasquez agree that we all

pray for the mother and father family of trayvon and respect the dignity they have dealt with the death of their son. but it doesn't mean that justice was done by a long shot and i on't think hardly anyone believes that had the roles been the black hat attacker who suspected a white would have a hood been arrested, locked up, and been in jail. so the legal moral of the story if you really want to self-defense acquittal, you have to kill the and have no one to creation of what happened.

having said that, this is not the first time civil rights had setback.ous we lost a whole lot in the recent civil rights and voting by the united s states supreme court. setbacks have these and this the greatest country in he world but it's made better by people who don't give up. they on't give out and continue to struggle for justice our people. o we can say that two fathers like i who have a younger son of being a good american, a part of what you're is to be able to alk the streets of this great country and not have someone predetermine your propensity to crime and to shoot and to kill you and to think that

the story. no, my friends, this is the of the story. grace will no longer be a word awkward in talking about. up. we cannot give we cannot give out, we cannot ive in nearly because of this tragedy. the families should know that have lost their dear son, that they have gained a americans who merely want us to do the right thing by trayvon. person who called me about was gregory meeks. gregory comes from harlem, was queens, and yet, no get r how hard he tries to away from the streets of lennox place that a s no young black male can go without

burden the additional of being a black male. he's been a prosecutor but he's known for etter defending the rights of those and e who are vulnerable want to thank you for your pull in giving us an opportunity in the house of representatives, in the are not, and others who here to make our case to the justice department and the attorney general. gregory meeks. you, mr. chairman, i want to thank hakeem jeffries congress and he stated early on that we needed to do this. and talking to mr. rangel of course. he joined us, yes, we have to do this. want to give my heart felt of mr. o the family

martin for the way that they've themselves in dignity in asking people to march but in dignity. i want to give my heart felt protesters all over america -- black, white, hispanic. all over america. as onee walking together country ough we are a although we know the jury has made a decision, we don't have to agree with that decision. and we're going to speak out to say that we do not. me feel heart felt that americans are coming to say, "we're going to speak out." in my estimation, as ongressman jefferies has

indicated, the investigation of that the justice department has begun must be completed. and it's clear that, you know, previously, ed me well, is this trying the case all over again? absolutely not. about mr. re talking martin's civil rights violations. that it was clear in the trial. i -- as mr. rangel has said used to be a prosecutor. not here to criticize or to play second guessing on how the prosecutor tried the case. but one thing that was clear hat was not done in this case, in fact, everybody went out of their way to say that race was factor, that race didn't atter when all of us really knew that race was a factor and was a factor and what we're asking the justice department to look at the race

issue. piece of testimony incentiverd and every that mr. zimmerman said to the police said that he acted the he did because of race. so race matters. and clearly for those who think it, race d not go for was not taken under consideration in this trial. it should be. as in other cases, as ongressman jeffries had indicated, this president said it. has not been had because mr. martin's race has considered. and what we need to make sure is that all americans -- this is hat i'm so proud of all americans that if you stood up and are marching together. we want to show that

in this society that we can, will, and have become a better united.en we're that's what's happening here, we're united. i'm so glad that when hakeem called me and i that my arlie rangel colleagues who saw the news release that we were going to do and said, alled us look, i want to be there. i want to stand up and i want to voice. i want people to know how i feel. make sure we're joining with you so they understand it's not just the black caucus or the black the congressional black caucus, it's all of us. o i'm delighted that jerry nadler who sits on the judiciary ommittee said he wanted to be here. and jose serrano who sits on the ppropriations committee wanted to be here. and velasquez the ranking member be here.wanted to i see my counselmen behind me.

congress called on -- we know that you and congressman rangel said you were calling a press conference, but we wanted to be there. up my eased to bring friend and colleague, jerry nadler. >> thank you very much, greg. congressman jeffries for calling this press conference. at this time. as the ranking member of the constitution and civil justice ubcommittee, the chair committee of the house, like watched the s, i trial, the aftermath of trayvon artin's death very closely and with deep sadness. several things are clear. it is clear that trayvon martin would be alive today if were not deeply prejudiced and did not perceive

walking lack kid through the neighborhood as a threat. just a threat that he was young, walking through maybe mr. rong neighborhood as zimmerman perceived it. be alive rtin would today if george zimmerman had ollowed the advice of the police. i'm sorry, trayvon martin would have been alived today if he had followed the advice of the police and left well enough alone. didn't. that an the altercation resulted in trayvon martin's death. fault.s his the second thing that's clear is that the civil rights laws were congress. the federal we have federal civil rights purpose isely for the of dealing with situations where the states have shown themselves ncapable of immediameading out

justice. congressman jefferies gave a number of examples where that the case, where the federal government steps in and uses federal laws after the states justice.ed to do the state of florida failed to do justice. that is clear. whose fault that is is a different question. that the justice department has announced that it will revise the ongoing determine on to whether the -- where the federal action should be instituted against george civil an for violating rights laws. i believe such an investigation nto federal criminal civil rights violations is well warranted. and i urge the justice to move forward expeditiously and thoroughly and o take the actions that are indicated. i thank you. >> jose sorano. >> thank you so much. thank you to my colleagues for

putting the press conference together. this was the only time or the first time something like this ad happened, you perhaps wouldn't see the outpouring of emotion that you see in this press conference and throughout our nation. but it happens too often. it happens too often for people us are stopped and ask questions. doesn't matter if you're a member of congress or not, some us as a ill see problem. and this is what we have to look at. i'm here today. i support the justice to rtment's decision continue that investigation they opened before, which they had tepped aside, as i recall, to allow the trials to take place and to find out if indeed mr. rights were l violated. this is what's important. fooled.no one be order, e respect law and while we respect our system and encourage our system to continue

knownction and to grow, we that trayvon martin was singled out by mr. zimmerman because he black. because he was black, he figured that he was a problem. be dealt ore had to with in some special way. and then there was the other to this story which states throughout the nation continuing tobelieve that everybody has be armed and everybody has to be a local sheriff. that e police departments handle these kinds of situations. e don't need to have individuals who may be hired by someone to do a special job to after people simply because they don't look like they belong in that neighborhood. what neighborhood is that? to say that we belong in those neighborhoods and we belong in these too.borhoods everyone belongs in every neighborhood. no one should be killled because belong in a certain neighborhood. i join my colleagues in asking

to justice department continue this. and i asked people around this nation to rethink the laws that a gun and e to carry be their own law enforcement agency. that's not what we have. have. not what we should thank you. >> thank you so very much, hakeem, and all of the members of the delegation for being here today. i can't help but about the safety of children of color. know, july 13 will be remembered as a shameful day of our legal system. in thing is very wrong a rica's legal system when is found a teenager man islty and this young

fot not good reason. our nation needs to have a conversation about the role of race. seriously. has to have a real conversation about stalk and risk. it is wrong. doesn't serve any purpose. and we are here with one voice voivoice to demand from the department of ustice to continue its investigation and to look into of civil rights violation mr. martin. for america.y proud an american, i am to see how many people are demanding justice.

all i ask is good in a way.ctful and dignified that's what america deserves. are here as members of congress pause we have a responsibility when it comes to ivil rights of the people in this country. to ave the responsibility demand that there is equal law country, noe in this matter color, religion, or affiliation. there's no closure for the family. it is our responsibility. to make sure that we get the of the department whether to determine

or not the civil rights of mr. in violation or were violated. deserves.at the family that's what the country deserves. can be there can be -- it's just so -- difficult. it's just -- when i watch the day ct yesterday, the before, after watching the proceedings, they just -- it was clear in my mind based on the -- look. i'm year -- this is what saying. something wrong in -- with our system. this man walked out free. last year a woman in florida

bullet against a wall -- --arning shot to her husband an abusive husband. if they were african-american, white, she got 20 years in prison. against a wall. no one died. if the justice system cannot understand the outrage that in this country, all, white, brown, purple, it's unfair. there's no way that you can justify this. maybe the law and the 1structions given to the jury give them any way out but to declare him not guilty.

justice department has a responsibility to make sure that the civil rights of mr. martin violated. thank you. >> i want to acknowledge council do nice rodriguez and council member jackson. questions? [ inaudible question ] >> to their lawyers. that was about it. >>. [ inaudible question ] >> we wanted to make it abundantly clear that we were that we t what role could play. our roles for the city council, the state legislators. the spiritual leaders. we are member of the congress, -- egislative boughteddy body of the country. we're making a plea to the general and to the president to continue and to

conclude the ongoing this case as on soon as possible. i think i speak for the group lot of we can do a things but we've come together to target where we think we can do the most good. get to that, please? to uld add one other thing that. that. walking down was the street and is dead because of the actions of george zimmerman. it's now up to the justice department to see if they can make the evidence that they were and convene olated a grand jury if that's the case. [ inaudible question ]

>> important to make sure this reseeds a complete and comprehensive manner and we're here as guardians of the ation's civil rights laws to emphasize the fact that this investigation should not be an afterthought. the state made the opportunity case based on its laws which included, by the way, a stand your ground defense. many of us believe is inappropriate in a democratic society. but we respect the state process. now, there's a federal process. and we're here to emphasize that to proceed in a comprehensive fashion and at the i believe result in commencement of a grand jury so decision can be a made as to whether trayvon martin's civil rights were violated. me say this also -- as representatives of congress, we

make sure that all american civil rights are protected. we have a duty to speak up if we some of their rights have been violated and it becomes clear in this case that we trayvon martin's civil rights have been violated. and therefore, we have an to sit on the sidelines silently. obligation to speak up and let people know as the people walking the streets america that they mr. martin's rights were violated. stayed inr. zimmerman the car and listened to the law enforcement authorities told them to do, the people who are protect the law, if he had just stayed in his vehicle and stayed on the phone them, mr. martin would be alive today. showsact in my estimation ivil rights being violated and thus needs to be a grand jury trial o be held and a

needs to be held as mr. jeffries justice be had. [ inaudible question ] >> we have a dual system of justice. and in this particular instance, legislature in florida and the governor had the opportunity was an e what they felt appropriate standard of law to be put into place which gave mr. this defense. and a jury drew its conclusion presumably based on the standard of law that existed under florida statute. we now have an opportunity for civil rights investigation to proceed in the absence of the your ground defense being available along the lines of similar prosecutions that were indicated in the odney king matter in the

limerick nelson matter, as well as in the frances lavoti matter. we're here to emphasize the mportance of that separate, sovereign, investigation proceeding and coming to a conclusion. thank you very much. >> attorney general eric holder trayvon martin case today at the national convention here in washington, d.c. here's the first look. > now, of course as this celebration unfolds, we are also mindful of the pain felt by our surrounding the tragic, shooting death of trayvon martin in sanford, florida last year. and we are cognizant of the fact

the the state trial reached conclusion over the weekend as citizens, engaged and as leaders who stand vigilant against violence and country, s across the and eltas are deeply rightly concerned about this case. the justice department shares your concern. i share your concern. acknowledge last spring, we have opened an matter.ation into this independent of the legal made,ination that will be i believe this tragedy provides another opportunity for our honestly about the complicated and emotionally charged issues that this case raised. we have too as

often in the past, let this opportunity pass. this we will approach necessarily difficult dialogue with the same dignity that those have lost the most -- trayvon's parents, that they have demonstrated throughout the especially over the past few days, they suffered no parent should have to endure. and one that i as a father cannot begin to conceive. even as we embrace their example our prayers, we must not forego this opportunity to better understand one another han to make better this nation that we cherish. moreover, i want to ensure you that the department will thatnue to act in a manner is consistent with the facts and the law. we are committed to standing people of sanford. with the individuals and families affected by this and with our state and local partners, local partners

alleviate tensions to address community concerns, to promote healing. we're determined to meet confusion with understanding and and also with proof. we are resolved as you are to ombat violence involving or directed at young people to prevent future tragedies and to underlying e attitudes, mistaken beliefs, and as the pes that serve basis for these two common incidents. >> at around 6:00 p.m. eastern, senators met in the old senate discuss proposed changes to the senate's filibuster rules. than three hour, senators concluded the meeting reaching an agreement. john thune and harry reid spoke briefly.

>> i think it will be a heavy lift for republicans simply our view is they were illegally and unconstitutionally appointed. difficult thing to turn the other way on. there are a lot of republicans noms uld vote for two new if the democrats are willing to do that. but i can't see any evidence to going happen. but like i said, the discussions continue. enators reid and mcconnell are other and as are individual senators. > can you have any that flow back and forth? >> other than the observe -- votes forx republican cloture and this can be avoided nuclear option.

if this were to happen, does another we won't have threat to change the rules this session of congress? is weren't any -- nobody willing to make any commitment at this point. >> what about the nominees other than the nlrb? >> i think the nlrb is the real contention. i think the cardray would be republican votes to move him. the two nlrb appointments are who cult for republicans believe they were illegally made. and that comes back to an issue powers and ation of whether or not we're going to concede to the executive the congress iside when or is not in session. > do you think there will be votes to move him absent the the cpfb.the rules of >> how does he have it cued up?

cordray first. >> conceivably, yeah. >> do you think that going forward it changes the rules, it be bad for the institution in that it changes the way think of their nominations. >> going forward, this is a new precedent, obviously. t creates all kinds of potential questions about what might happen next. but for sure, if this happens its's clearly going to be a practice that probably gets ontinued in a republican administration. nd evidently not a lot of democrats are willing to accept it otherwise they wouldn't be for it. many are for that. on executive nominations. most draw the line at judicial nominations or legislative fill buls filibusters, once you blow that door open, it's hard go back. t's much easier --

>> okay. the night is late. i'm anxious to go see how bryce has done in the home run derby. okay, i can't hear anyone. what i said is that it's -- the late.is we've been no breaks. we've been going steady. we've had a very good conversation. a conversation that's going to continue tonight. votes are scheduled at 10:00 in the morning.

averting the change of the rules, sir? >> the u.s. senate returns tomorrow at 10:00 a.m. eastern ed the swearing in of markie of massachusetts. the votes on executive nominees after.heduled for shortly live coverage of the u.s. senate on c-span 2. the house also returns tomorrow eastern. and this week we'll work on a bill that would delay certain health care r the law. and also 2014 defense spending. live coverage at the house here on c-span. >> on the next washington ournal, a look at the senate's filibuster rules regarding executive branch nominations.

we'll talk with norm ornstein and two senators join us, bernie anders of vermont and john barrasso of wyoming. wick i at the group wick leeks. "washington journal" is live every day at 7:00 a.m. eastern. s' role innited nation diplomacy with jeffery feldman. after his remarks, mr. feltman oins a panel discussion with pleus jones, former senior advisor to the u.s. secretary general. and norwegian ambassador to the u.s., from brookings institute, and a half.our

he is the undersecretary general for political fairs at the nations. this is a post he's held for a little over a year. like i suspect it feels rather longer than that. he participated in quite a few forums over the years. today he's going to talk about very tough d some problem-ridden areas of the world that need the very best is.omacy that there both on the part of the united ations and on the part of the number of countries represented here in this room today and i'm

of those ine to one particular in a moment. jeff brings to his present job years as a ce of 26 foreign service officer. tours.had many i think it's safe to say none of them easy. reported.em e has been posted in and working on lebanon as the u.s. ambassador. iraq, rked in and on unisia, and the issues around jerusalem and its status, gaza. secretary of nt state for the affairs under of state retary hillary clinton, he rode the what we're calling one arab first to call the awakening. and he did so with great skill.

at the united nations, he's head of the he organization's diplomatic arm. to give us a the of the way in which united nations and his office is dealing with crises in a number parts of the world, including what i think we would all agree number one problem from hell in this period and that's syria. be touching on somalia and mall li and other issues as well. to begin the program with about 30 minutes of remarks and then we're going to panel discussion. ambassador me to spellman of norway. it's been almost a common place for me when i come to this

ecturn to recognize him in the front row. after five years as norway's washington, re in he is now the outgoing ambassador. is in two senses -- one he going out of washington. ols l oslo to be a political director. been outgoing in the way he gets around this town, hereding very often coming to these events, occasionally asking a question, but basically of the audience. and today it's our great good he's going to be a part of the discussion. before i turn to the other i just of the panel, want to say that you have also an extraordinary friend, eneficiary, supporter to the brookings institution. you have enabled us to work on a

issues that you and jeff and others will be talking about here today. and on a particularly personal you andwant to say that cecilia will be miss in this town. but both of you get around and us get around and we look forward to seeing a lot of you in the years to come. the panel, we have bruce senior fellow in the foreign policy program here at brookings and the director of managing global order project. in the imself served united nations in a variety of middle eastg on the peace process, kosovo, and some issues.ry tough he was also a particularly advisor al and trusted to the secretary general kofi annan. will be discussion indick who y martin

is the vice president and director of our foreign policy program. but i think that for purposes of today's event, his real claim to fame is that he saw in jeff immense talent that have already eluded to and counted on jeff's help as a olleague particularly in working on the economic issues he ng the gaza strip when was the economics officer at the embassy in tel an when mar tip was ambassador there, at least one of his two stints. a martin, after leading brief discussion among the panelists will throw the proceedings over to all of you. allowed to keep your

as they're inlong silent mode and particularly if ou're prepared to tweet the #u.s.diplomacy. >> u.s. diplomacy? >> sorry, u.n. diplomacy. right.ut i'm showing my own background, i guess. thank you. >>. [ applause ] me riends, colleagues, let begin by thanking brookings. to player thank martin and bruce for the nvitation to speak about the u.n.'s diplomacy in today's crises. alluded, i credit martin, in fact, on how my own evolved. when i worked for martin as a gaza watcher, from the u.s.

aviv, i had not planned to spend the rest of my state department career in the africa.ast of north but martin's passion and leadership inspired me to do just that. martin also had the good sense to encourage me to get to know bruce jones. then with the u.n. as strobe mentioned, with the idea that we were to explore how the u.s. and the u.n. could work together to chieve israeli-palestinian peace, a goal we still need to work on, bruce. given the leadership role that plays through funding and organizing u.n. mediation i'm grateful for his participation here today. here to easure to be see some friends. and to see such an interest in the united nations. it was exactly a year ago this month that i took up the the head of the u.n.'s department of political

affairs. an believe me, it's been interesting 12 months. as strobe said, it feels longer months. for those who don't know it, the department of political affairs works at ted nations the certainty of u.n. preventive peacemaking. and the peace envoys abroad and the u.n. support for free elections worldwide. it monitoring the split cam developments around the globe, it works hard at the international level to prevent and resolve conflict. one could say the department of affairs or dpa plays a similar role within the u.n. department plays within the u.s. government in hat we advise the secretary general in peace and political issues and manage the u.n.'s officesl and diplomatic in field. as i think my remarks will show, far. parallel only goes so today i'm delighted to be back in washington, familiar terrain. but my vantage point has changed. to illustrate my new u.n.

going to e, i'm attempt to answer two questions -- irst, what are the main differences in working on peace and security issues in the setting versus u.n.-bilateral diplomacy. and second, what are some of the channels that the u.n. faces in doing this work? questions,ering these i'm going to open up with a few comments and give specific geographic examples to illustrate how we do that work. on the first question, the differences between multilateral bilateral diplomacy -- i'll i underestimated the time and the effort i needed to adjust to what was a far change than i had anticipated moving from new york. to as an english native speaker, assumed i had no difficulty in reading

united nsion at the nations. but that could not have been further from the truth. 193 nations are far more creative than a single one. proficient in ly u.n.-glish or s "un"glish is interesting even for those who grew up with oxford's and dictionary. until you leave the u.s. cannot fully u grasp what it means by walking n the room backed at all times by the untangible powers of the presidency, the pentagon, the thear, the voting weight of imf and world bank. the personal innocent membership council.n. security those sorts of things. these are assets. carry without noticing, i with me as u.s. ambassador to lebanon. of state nt secretary for near east affairs.

when you work before the u.s. government, one is vaguely aware of the power that you carry with this country.ng favorite e of the experiences is watching real foreign policy professionals, eople like strobe and martin, use those assets as real negotiations.e if you spent an entire dip lo career with those assets as part of the package as i did, t's something of a shock to suddenly be without them. you know, initially, i felt diplomatic se of nakedness. ou know, i mean i have to rely really on my own persuasive skills? ut at the u.n., i have also learned from watching my new colleagues that u.n. officials of wield important sources ower as they try to coax antagonists towards peace. but the u.n. powers are quite

different from what u.s. carry with them. learning to use intangibles, values, is ciples, at the top of my own education. placed on our own shoulders, for example, are the principles enshrined in the u.n. charter. and ideals that gave birth to the u.n. that's worth remembering derived in u.s. leadership and vision. another one of the u.n. carries is at one the u.n.'s perceived impar to talk hich allows us to all sides and play the honest others cannot.t here that helps. deploy s, we can negotiators and missions that are diverse. hey come from all over the world with reasonable and substantive expert teals. this can help win quick respect parties involved. more over, our goal is to

resolve conflictings, period. we do not pick winners and losers. while our reports can be and are criticized, the u.n. as an ability to shape international perception of an different from when the u.s. government talks about an issue when the u.s. government has a vested interest in how that problem is viewed. o this u.n. leverage that i'm describing, you might say is less tangible than some of the u.s. diplomats have. but the legitimacy that the u.n. decisions on peace and security cannot be replicated by any single nation no matter how powerful.

was as aphic experience i walked at the african union for the first time, i struggled grasp the troubles we faced or theral africa or mali places like katmandu. bottom viewed from foggy or from turtle bay is the nature of most conflicts and the centrality of political solutions to conflicts. yes, the u.n. can use troops. and often needs to destablize provide security on the ground. there's something like 110,000 .n. peacekeepers working globally. and yes humanitarian actors can of diminish the suffering victims of man made or natural disasters. lasting solutions require working the politics in tough places. i took office, ban my oon sat down with me in first meeting in that capacity.

to help the b was warning,better on early preventive diplomacy, and conflict mediation. general has in fact made prevention, talking about prevention of childhood prevention of conflict the centerpiece of his the u.n. nd this early warning, preventive diplomacy, conflict mediation, is what we're trying of o with varying degrees success in numerous arenas today. often we're working in evolving complex environments in which problems of state failure nd internal conflict have been magnified by cross border threats, terrorism and the rise military ed crime, by coups, by changing patterns of violence. trying to is, we're use established tools as effectively as possible while new approaches. it's worth remembering that the

u.n. was established as a result war between states. but more often than not today, from within ive states, meaning that our tools nd engagement needs to evolve as well. let me focus on a few of these cases and highlight on what the brings to the table in places.olitics in tough yria, somalia, the great lakes region of africa and afghanistan. nothing has been more painful watch the syrian crisis unfold more tragically every day. the instability in the entire region. the syrian crisis is the the u.n. faces paralyzingdivers are the security council. .n. tools might consider potentially useful. an arms embargo, sanctions, erhaps even reference of the syria filed to the icc.

simply aren't available. the security council is deadlocked. so what do we do? first, one important aspect without question is the u.n.'s work regarding mobilizing for humanitarian relief and delivering humanitarian by stance by those affected fighting in syria. the humanitarian efforts lead efforts but the political aspects as well. he u.n. league of arab states joins special representative has drawn on the impartiality of the to broker with government and opposition forces, localized sea varying ways of delivering assistance. weond, we're working as best can despite the cath provisions spillover.he we promote ways to support host

ommunities and government institutions particularly in jordan and lebanon to mitigate become ld easily stimulating factors stemming from the inflow of hundreds of thousands of syrian third, the u.s. has provided post planning. these efforts do not presume one sort of resolve or the other in terms of the political outcome, but they do assume that when the guns fall -- these efforts do not presume one sort of resolve or another in terms of political outcome. only the u.n. can offer the impartiality under which parties and supporters can arrive at an internationally legitimatized settlement and confidence that

their interests can be protected. but it has been an uphill struggle from the outset. all of our bleakest pricks seem -- predictions seem to be coming true. whenever a slight opening occurs, dynamics either on the ground or among international and regional areas occur. neither side has been ready to discussion in syria. there has been a civil war rooted in grievances as the result of a handful of terrorists. the area has remained mired in conflict and fragmentation. still, we remain convinced there is no military solution. the belief by some there is a military solution, seems to be pushing toward destruction. we are in support of the kerry-

lavroth initiative proposed. and i participated in two u.s.russia-u.n. missions. but with current missions on the ground, the traction keeps slipping. there is a need for diplomacy. every day hatreds rise and the united multieye cultural peaceful syria becomes an ever distant reality. if the key parties can help deliver peace to syria there is a chance for a negotiated transition in syria. let me turn now to somalia where we have reached a potential turning point. i was in mowing deesh ewe -- mogadishu earlier this year. the u.s. represents how in the

face of so many crises did demanding attention the u.n. can help sustain regional focus on a process -- that has the promise of real success but that still today needs to be nurtured. since the early 1990's, it has been perhaps been convenient to look away from somalia in despair. but clearly one of the lessons from kabul to mogadishu, is that a failing state provides a danger to not only their own region, but to the regions around them. so the task of ending anarchy and building stable government in somalia took on great strategic as well as humanitarian significance. the u.n. has invested heavily with partners, including the african union and key governments such as the united states to help turn the tide in that country.

for the first time since the 1990's, the mission for somalia operates in mogadishu not from nairobi. part of our task is to make sure amazon continues to receive financials up or it. the somali security services are not yet ready or able to extend authority across the entire state.

there is still needed logistical support from the international community. help has already helped pry open space for political work. thethe first time since 1990s, the un's political mission for somalia operates in mogadishu, not from nairobi. on political engagement inside of the country helps to address the relationship including - a special representative is helping to manage the evolving relationship between mogadishu and its neighbors whose support remains essential to somalia success. security is still a concern. a u. n. compound was attacked just last month. we do not underestimate. we remain committed and determined to stay.

others need to stay focused on somalia as well. in the great lakes region of africa, we can see how u. n. is addressing of the long-standing challenge. it seems almost immune to solutions. a new expanded approach that offers a ray of hope. the u. n. peacekeeping force of the congo is the largest. it promotes stability. the security tools along were insufficient the secretary- general concluded a political agreement among 11 countries. the neighbors and for physicians including the you in and the african it -- u. n. in african nations. the other national four organizations.

in addition, the secretary- general appointed the former president of ireland and the high commission of human rights as a special envoy for the lake regions to use a framework to and the recurring cycles of violence including sexual violence. besides working at the leadership level, he is drawing on grassroots societies and women organizations. we recognize and welcome the deployment of the u. n. envoy in the u.s. commitment to work with special envoy profits and. -- envoy robinson. to add economic incentives and undermine the linkage, the secretary-general and gemma kim kim traveled on the

first joint mission ever. the security council authorized new intervention brigades within the peacekeeping operations and the drc. this intended for the diplomatic efforts. we are bringing our power and our diplomatic, peacekeeping and other aspects into play to encourage a comprehensive approach to the challenges in the great lakes. we cannot afford to let it fade away. regarding afghanistan, the u. n. is regarding it with the troops in the presidential elections of 2014. my colleagues in the u. n. have the lead in afghanistan. they are heavily involved as well with what is the u. n.'s role. it is a good example of how even the united nations with is universal membership lease to be

cystic concerns of national sovereignty. in march, the security council renewed the mandate in afghanistan for an additional year without any additional changes. this is a desire for continuity including good offices, reconciliation, and regional cooperation. many of our member states see a similar role for the u. n. beyond 2014. some of the actors and the government have indicated skepticism regarding the continued political role for the u. n. they argue a could interfere with afghan sovereignty. u. n. will require consistence among different actors of different interests to allow the

organization to continue to assist afghans the most effective way without being seen as compromising the sovereignty. one way for u. n. is to work recently.-- reasonably. a mission that reports to dpa is actively invovled in the istanbul project and working with the government of the region to identify common projects and approaches to build trust and prevent conflict and instability in the long run. to illustrate our work, i want to touch briefly on yemen and iraq. yemen in my view is an example of how the u. n. complements other organizations. a consensus blueprint for negotiation and peaceful transition.

the countries and bilateral partners such as the united states deserve our applause. the promoting the transition roadmap known as the gcc initiative signed by the former human president -- yemen president. the leverage by certain countries and the u.s. was essential in persuading the president to step aside. it was only one step in a long public in the process. a national dialogue had to be organized to drop the principles in which the constitution would be drafted. it had to be brokered. parties and individuals had to be persuaded to have their trust and the processes. although these couple can

aspects of implementation of the initiative have been overseen by the u. n. by the special envoy in baghdad the united states. considerable work remains as scheduled in 2014, the most heavily armed as of early troubled societies in the world not to mention economic. they remain by and large items of the effectiveness of multilateral diplomacy. to praise the relation between the two countries that lifted -- that was drafted with the full cooperation of both iraq and kuwait. moreover, those two countries

have this here demarcated the border together. this is a remarkable turnaround. it is an area where diplomacy complement and brokered made a real difference. both countries demonstrate the importance of reaction of a bilateral and multilateral diplomacy working together. we combine our strengths, lasting solutions can be found. ladies and gentlemen, as we do with tough politics and all of these arenas, a number of challenges emerge across the

board. first, going from early monitoring to early response. although we in the united nations and probably in washington are casually caught off guard. our single biggest challenge is not to improve but to find ways to mobilize early action. breath a unified diplomatic action as soon as opportunity -- rapid and unified diplomatic action as soon as it is on the horizon. especially when it is to prevent mass loss of life. it is far less costly in terms of blood. political space for early intervention is extremely limited. to concerns over sovereignty, perceived interference in political affairs. this u. n. cannot force themselves. sovereignty issues and other questions affect our ability to broker peace is currently at the heart of a major internal process of the united nations.

a process of learning from lessons of failure. second, professionalizing the service. there is an art to diplomacy. there will always be. in today's complex processes, one of the most skilled diplomats need access to a broad range of technical expertise are relatively new implements including a standby team of mediation experts who can be deployed anywhere around the world within 72 hours. this kind of mobile assistance on issues such as power-sharing, constitution making it in such demand we can barely keep up. let me salute norway again. norwegian financial and logistic support has made a standby team mediation team possible. security which is the subject

quite familiar to diplomats as well. our work is become more and more dangerous. mogadishu is the most recent reminder. when our mobility is restricted, our ability to deliver it is compromise. in short, we face the dilemma of trying to do effective political outreach while between razor wire. finally, let me end where i started. this is with leverage. equipped with a leader battalions or billions of available dollars, what leverage

does the u. n. really have? the road challenges is finding ways to build -- the real challenges is finding ways to build consensus and having the international community speak with one voice. when we are united, the leverage that the united nations has is high. in yemen, we have a united council. on syria, we do not. it is hard to overstate the difference that makes. doing politics into places is not easy. it is my strong belief that we have no alternative but to maintain the momentum around diplomacy and a sure we stay focused in every engagement on finding clinical solutions. in that -- while bilateral and multilateral diplomacy may work differently, when they combine their clout the results can be powerful to be at we need the best of both multilateral efforts and bilateral diplomacy to succeed in today's tough races in thank you very much. -- today's tough places. -- thank you very much. [applause]

[inaudible]

>> thank you very much, jeff. a very clear and fascinating tour of the horizon of your work and leverage that you have and for us in washington that is rare that we get this kind of insight. we are very grateful to you. you witnessed, display an important role would you were there to develop diplomatic tools for the united nations. as you pointed out, norway continues to play an important role. let's get your reaction. >> thank you very much for giving me the opportunity to come to brookings and say a few words about norway's attitudes. i have been there almost six years.

it is an embarrassment. i late part of the household here. you will get rid of me every -- rid of me soon. -- i am part of the household here. i am thankful for all of the doors you have opened for me and for norway. i will make a confession first. my own thinking on some of these issues go back. i work for the u. n. back in the mid 1990's, 1993-1995, terrible years. before any of these things were institutionalized. before i met bruce jones. we were in something called the international conference for the former yugoslavia. it was an ad hoc thing. we tried to do a little bit of

what dpa does now. when i was in new york, norway was on the security council in 2001, 2002 when i met bruce. we quickly figured out that the u. n. -- and those were activist years. the cold war had come down. we had a huge belief in the ability of the u. n. in a way, it was a feeling that it was a norwegian -- we never had the pentagon. [laughter] welcome to our world. [laughter] any room i walk in, nobody will connect me with a pentagon. the u. n. was a natural extension of our way of ending.

you come to realize even if you try to do some good in the world by being active in solving violent conflicts or at least make an effort for peace and reconciliation, unity to draw on the different pool of people and backgrounds. u. n. was the perfect place. it needed, it really needed to be institutionalized. it really needed to be institutionalized. i spoke a lot in those days. dpa started to take form and shape. i am not going to save the

intellectual leadership is overrated. sometimes, you think that. it almost this. because i thought it was an obvious thing for the u. n. to take over. there's nothing that can taken over. it means resources. this is my sort of main point. it really need to resources. norwegians always come in and talk about money. no matter how shiny your message and how you should do this and you should do that, all of that is fine. it gets complicated if you are costly talking about other people's money. the fact that to get as many as possible to show not only you believe in the u. n. and show support with coming up with the resources not only money but personnel and support systems and structure. like jeff told us what you will see there are advantages of their. -- advantages there.

they will play a number of roles. anything from keeper of the holy growth, any role you can think of. it is anyway important. sometimes it is the right thing to do. we will continue to support this. your efforts around the world and in the places you have mentioned are laudable. we know it is tough. we know it is hard. would like more resources. all i can promise is will keep our part for the future. thank you. >> when you talk about resources, we are not talking about peacekeeping resources. what other resources that are necessary for jeff's work?

>> in a matter of a few days, you're able to draw on experts from around the world. diversification is really important. what i learned in yugoslavia, i had a boss who was hindu. i never had a boss before that was not lutheran. [laughter] i got a hindu. it was a new experience for me. you actually understand after little while the ability to draw on the pool that the u. n. can build up. you have to have systems in place. they need travel. they need salary. one of the frustrations in mid 1990's is that before you can start talking, it was so difficult. when you got there, you were

almost exhausted. to get to these, you would be much better at this part. not only that too, with the big funds. >> to put things in perspective, all of the tools that we have, the rapper response and mediation -- a rapid response and mediation, it is voluntary contributions. it is not come out of the regular budget. we are not being appropriated. such as the rapid deployment i described, we are talking followed voluntary contributions. if you look at the peacekeeping operation in drc, that is from the regular budget. that's over $1 billion a year.

>> in somalia? >> our political missions overseas are from the regular budget. >> one of the points that just made very strongly that it so very obvious in syria, when the permanent members of the security council united in action, the bpa becomes much easier. what is your reflection on that kind of conundrum? >> and go straight central issue -- it goes to a central issue. something that strengthens the organization is that they have both. and blends principle with reality and power. they are able to float their power through the institution

when they choose to do so. you also have the universal membership and the charter under the principle that jeff talked about. what is interesting is how differently these two things get because of the conference. -- because of the kind of conflict. first tier, second-tier, or third tier. when you are in a small civil war in central africa where the great powers have no fundamental say, that is diplomacy that jeff is talking about, persuasion or principle or the ability to manage networks, those are the tools to become extremely important. much more important than people realize. there's been a long despite about how much states matter rated institutions. there are parts of the world where they are the main source of diplomatic action. drawing on the lead networks.

the tools of the charter and their own persuasive skills and etc. it makes a critical difference. >> syria is on the opposite end of the spectrum. no matter what the scale, the very best a can do is to facilitate some form. it is a matter how effective jeffrey feltman is. nothing will change. it is among the p5. among the most interesting place and you've talked about is what talked about is somalia. there are special force in somalia. there is a terrorist threat. they are not fundamental states such defenses as dictated -- such as the united states is dictating. you have middle powers.

the turks, the brits. you have sufficient power and leverage to move pieces around the chessboard. it really requires a dramatic talents of jeff and his colleagues to orchestrate those pieces and corral people in a common direction. when you have a number of players in the game for their interest may overlap. it takes the skill of u. n. diplomats to pull people in a common position and push the pieces in the same direction. that is where the u. n. makes a fundamental difference. davenport to roll -- and they have an important role. in shaping outcomes and that is where the protest lies. -- where the real test lies. with credit to jeff, what he is

already accomplished is building a much deeper ties to turkey, india, brazil, some of the merging powers area even the united states is not fully recognized how those actors are diplomatic plates in a lot of these games. jeff is ahead of the curve on that issue. >> do you want to respond on the difficulty of having so many different players with different interests? >> let's respond to the last point. about trying to find a broad funding base for these type of early warnings and mediation efforts. when norway has been extremely generous. in helping us statement of these mechanisms. they are one of our primary funders, $15 million to $20 million a year. if you look a source lent thomas germany, uk -- if you look at switzerland, germany, uk, it is somewhat predictable.

they will continue to support us. it is all western european. if a conflict is the merging somewhere there may be a perception that we have a certain agenda and trying to do preventive policy. i've been trying to expand our friend of dpa. we have managed to get funding from japan, turkey, india, morocco. in some cases, they are relatively modest sums. they start to change the perception of what we are, that we actually represent the membership base of the organization. >> jeff, one of the things that struck me about what you said is the difference between a u.s.

diplomat and a u. n. diplomats is the issue of legitimacy. something that washington does not always take very seriously. there are extreme cases. the u. n. has on the legitimacy and the world and the u.s. often does not react i wonder if you could address that issue. the role of the u. n. can play in legitimizing interventions. >> i have worked in both places. there is a pride in the u. n. i had not fully grasped about the

kind of legitimacy at a university-based organization can offer. when i worked in washington, i did not have a full appreciation for how much that means inside of the u. n. and member states. there are places that where we are able to play an effective role because there's legitimacy conveyed on the consensus that could be u. n. hats. this may be the second-tier conflict areas. there are p5 members who are extremely focused legitimacy and away of trying to define the scope for international action. it's a different aspect of the urgency question we have a p5

member looking very strictly of what legitimacy means in terms of any type of international action. it is also important to keep that in mind. those are the two aspects. >> can i say one something about legitimacy? we all know and i admire a man who must be in his mid-90s. he's the number two in the system. he was present and sever cisco with the charter was written -- in san francisco when the charter was written. we were accused of the u. n. has lost all legitimacy. that is something you wait here every day. i remember he said, we heard that in 1945.

does been that way ever since. and it will be that way forever. the truth is it doesn't exist. if you do not elect -- feel it, you will when you get to the field. >> left by syria for a minute. -- let's talk about syria for a minute. legitimacy of the constitution is being questioned as a result. we will start with you. what do you think to be done about the situation? >> i agree with what jeff said, a problem from hell in the

beginning. it is -- it is such a -- the sheer numbers. the horror of the sheer numbers. there are 100,000 people being killed. i will make a proper analysis of it. for us, when i was at the u. n. we weren't so much with central africa. the figures were even higher. the u. n. ends up with these horrible situations. what can be done? to be honest, i do not know. what i know in the wake of regional containment were i would've some credit to with jeff and the u. n. is doing. not a lot comes out in the media.

we tend to focus on the horrors. i am not offering any brilliant insight of what you can do. there are reasonable, sensible things that have been done in the regional context. refugees. stabilizing the neighboring countries. given the pressure they are under, the international support for them is at least not to the fastest, but reasonable at the moment. that's probably the maximum we

can do at the moment. >> i do not want anything to be taken to diminish the terms of syria. i will make one broader point. finishing a chapter of a book about order and disorder and i started the chapter about talking about the situation. half the population is dead and efforts to deploy a civilian a monitoring team. exiting search for a great power solution -- a continuing search for a great power solution. it is simply worth remembering that the fact we are deadlocked right now doesn't mean we will be deadlocked for ever. it is not meant the situation will change on the ground. it does not mean this one device --d the security council. securitynes the council. while we are deadlocked in the council and on syria, the council has been unified and it had an effective response in congo and a lot of the other areas were millions of lives

were at stake. it is always worth remembering this one of several plays and that the council is working. it's always the case that deadlocked attracts more attention. one other quick point. we should not focus on these issues much in this town. over the last decade, with a focus on two wars we were involved in -- iraq and afghanistan. in the same time, the mid 1990's until the last decade, the combination of u. n. diplomacy and mediation and peacekeeping saw the number of wars in the world go from 30 to 6 in 2010. from an average of one million people killed to 10,000. syria will spike those numbers back up. overall, you look at the postwar period and there is a huge reduction were diplomacy played a central role. not exclusive, but essential. it is always worth bearing that in mind. >> with can only choose a few--

we can only choose a few topics to address in the remarks. where the u. n. has had real success where i believe preventive what could be violent outcomes of conflict. the cameron/nigerian border, who thinks about that? they have almost finished the process to demarcate the entire border. there will probably be a ceremonial in september. a few months ago, it looked like a dangerous spot. let's talk about guinea. it was on the verge of what looks like a serious conflicts. we had a facilitator who was able to broker an understanding between opposition parties to allow legislative elections to take place. various compromises made. these were not headline grabbing things.

had carrie in nigeria alts over -- had they fought over their borders, it would've been headline grabbing. i'm looking at success. >> is syria, can more be done? >> is a real dilemma. working with the neighboring states and do what we can to broker humanitarian delivery across front lines, working on post conflict scenarios. this is what we can and will do. they do not get at the issue that you to sites in syria and backers on each side that are able to come up with a way for. even the post-conflict when it was controversial. i had to meet last year to explain with the foreign

minister of syria that will probably hear the u. n. cannot keep secrets, they are going to a post playing scenario that will be setting up teams to look at the sectors and what the u. n. response could be. i want to make sure the government of syria knew. he was taken aback. in the end, he concurred that the u. n. role would be necessary. he wanted to make sure we were not calling to post planning. >> let's go to your questions. please wait for the microphone. identify yourself. make sure you ask a question. >> i'm the director of political affairs. just a question getting back to the original hashtag. how could the united states most effectively promote the united

nations? what do we best do to help to achieve your goals and our goals? >> you do provide 22% of the general budget and 20% of the peacekeeping budget. that's a significant role. there are some structural issues that is not worth boring the audience with. the u. n. could take a different role. how we do the funding with special missions. that is a very arcane topic for this group. to the extent that the u.s. is able to help explain to the american population why the u. n. is important is what we need more than anything else.

things like 60% of the world's children are vaccinated from childhood diseases through united nation programs. in this era with threats, a multilateral organization can play a very effective role in being a force multiplier for u.s. interests to the extent that u.s. officials are able to help us make that case to the american public. i would be grateful. >> this is something the u.s. should do from your perspective? >> oh, yeah. [laughter] >> with the most powerful country, there's an interest of diplomatic, political dynamic that you can let the u. n. run you can take it back for a while. there is a need for a lot of

creativity. the u. n. is much more useful to the u.s. >> back on the side. >> thank you. will davis. thank you. great remarks today. dpa often suffers from the dog that does not bark. my question is just to a little bit about the question, you can walk not too far outside of our wonderful surrounded and find folks in washington who thinks the u. n. is anti-american. if you go to the other member states and the first thing he would here is the u. n. is a tool of united states. how do you reconcile these two views? the fact of the u. n. is becoming a target, it is more

challenging, etc. function of the u. n. being too closely linked to the u.s.? >> thank you and good to see you. when the most that one the most important partnerships we have inside of the u. n. family is with undp. we work on election support where we co-chair a syria task force. you're absolutely right. if you have 192 member states, which country x us the most influence -- which country exercises the most influence? it will be unanimous, the united states. the perception and the united states is based on some the general assembly debates based on what some the member states themselves are able to use the

u. n. platform to express. the organization is broadly overlaps. not 100% with the u.s. policies and goals. i'd need about no matter how talented we may be as individuals, what our experience and strengths are as individuals, we can do more by joining with family members, have a community groups, church groups. you can achieve more. i look at the u. n. like that. we may not always agree with all of the member states, we can achieve more by working in the organization. i believe we do achieve more that we as the united states could do alone. i expected -- i am basically in my position because i am an american and that plays an

important role in the u. n. i expect to be looked at with more suspicion for my colleagues. i think i do. we will see. >> bruce, you are a canadian. >> when i was chief of staff and --e peace process and keep, i peace process team for the middle east, i got a phone call every single day from an american diplomat who was not one of these two gentlemen tell me what the secretary general thought that day. i will amend, he often thought about the middle east peacekeeping process. to the crux about the concerns from an american concerned that the u. n. and anti-american businesses. anybody who was worked with the organization knows that united states occupies a vast space.

the united states is not dumb enough if it is visible, that is a good thing. obviously, it is good for the u. n. and they are able to work with a lot of actors and find a lot of common ground. it does take a wilderness to-- a willingness to stand up and say no to the united states. a key talent a diplomats is to know exactly when and how to say no to the united states which left to do very carefully. but you can do. striking that balance between using and caring of the weight of the u.s. behind you to some degree in knowing when to break from the essays really matters. >> let me add one more thing. the united states mission to the u. n. does not call me anymore

than any key missions. i do not believe i am being watched as an american. other missions call me more than the americans. there was one meeting when i had a very strong point of view every american had a different point of view. we had a very tough meeting with one of the members of the u. n. mission and the team with them. very tough. i made absolutely clear that i disagreed and why. i simply was not accepting the u.s. position as being the appropriate response to this particular issue. it was a tough meeting. it was a bit tense. when the american delegation finally left, my team looked at me and said those were the americans. [laughter] you talked to them like that. [laughter] because you aren't american you can.

>> it can be a good thing. this is diplomacy. how you play the u.s./u. n. we're going on a mission and everybody wanted to go. the discussion would have a little group. none of the small countries would ever volunteer, we are only here for two years. i was not ready to throw in the towel. finally the american said, to get this going, we will volunteer not to go. so the u.s. will not go to this place? everybody else has so much to contribute. we saw it a little bit strange. we told the parties it was going to be a smaller mission and so far the u.s. is not going.

the russians said they would not go if the americans did not go. the chinese were dragging their feet. the parties said we do not want you on long. [laughter] you are not going to come here unless you bring the americans. it is that serious.-- not serious. you have that side to it. all 15 of us went. [laughter] >> bruce introduced some words about the peacekeeping process. the absence of reference to palestine. tell us, what is the dpa can do when it comes to the hot potato issue? >> i had it in the earlier draft and i took it out.

what can i say? let me be honest. yes, we can play a leadership role that we can talk to people of that the united states and may not talk to. we humanitarian relief and raise the profile up for fundraising and certain programs. the fundamental political issues that they will have to take decisions are was in which we will have to play supportive role, not a leadership role. the secretary general has been on the record. he is absolutely delighted on the role that secretary kerry has played. he has made it clear that the you in -- u. n. is there to support him. we are a quartet. would be interested and having--

we would be interested in having a revitalized quartet. i have to say this is an issue on which we would like to support strong leadership and not be the leader ourselves. >> notwithstanding the secretary's efforts, there will be a situation that comes in september when the general assembly where the question of palestine is front and center again. does dpa have any role? >> we are the ones where people see us as the talking points. whoever it happens to be. in terms of questions of conventions and other parts, if

the palestine was to choose to go that way, what the particular situation is. the secretary-general has a great empathy for the palestinians. he is also forced a close relationship with israelis. the secretary-general would far prefer we come up with a way to provide a political solution rather than have one of the parties. the secretary-general has made it clear to the palestinians there are implications to us as an organization that would like the palestinians to keep in mind as they consider their own and next steps. >> i have a question. wait for the microphone. >> thank you. my name is alex. you spoke very clearly about being the key to the u. n.

ability to exercise power on the mission and went consistence does not exist -- and when consensus does not exist, the u. n. suffers. if you can shed light on libya. what the perspective is now given it as a place where consensus seemed to move in the opposite direction where it existed and multiple security council resolutions were passed and subsequently, there seems to me more divergence of nations and the international team. >> thank you. you are right. the debate over libya continues. there is discussion of what those resolutions were passed actually authorized. and it plays into the discussions, the mali discussions and what to do about

the cross-border situations in sahel and terrorism. the libya example looms very large. however, there still is security council support for the u. n. mission in libya. the debate about the libya has affected the discussions on other issues more than what is needed in libya today whether -- and a member who blocked political engagement and things like that. >> over here. >> i'm a medical student with

the ama. my question is, we all know that in times of civil unrest and international conflict, physicians and hospitals and medical services are often targets of a lot of the violence that goes on. i was wondering if the panel can offer a few comments for information about any roles or activities that to the u. n. and u.s. are taking or have taken to make sure that medical mutuality is kept as a priority. -- neutrality is kept as a priority. it is maintained by documents such as the geneva convention. any comments on that and that situation? >> the humanitarian actors and i

will highlight people like the high commissioner for refugees and coordinator for you humanitarian assistance have really tried to use their voice is to raise this issue especially with syria. it was quite a high profile appeal tabblet need to protect the neutrality of medical personnel and other humanitarian actors. there will be a debate i believe this week where the same key humanitarian acts are raising the profile on this. but of course the fact of the matter is if you look at some place like syria there has been significant damage, something like a third of the hospitals are not usable