sexy issue. like.at i did not but i never received much coverage for it. but we toured the country, we , and passlegislation the mental health assistance act of 1980. it passed through congress one before jimmy was involuntarily removed from the white house. it was one of the greatest disappointment of my life when the incoming president put it on the shelf. on "first lady is," we have two exclusive interviews, hearst, former first lady rosalynn carter shows her work on mental health issues and her continuing work with her

husband, former president jimmy carter. and then steve ford, the son of former president ford and betty ford. he talked about his mother's struggles with substance abuse. you can watch rosalynn carter at 9:00 eastern time and steve ford at 955 eastern monday night on c-span. our "first lady's" series returns this month with five episodes on the most recent first ladies from nancy reagan to michelle obama monday night starting january 13 live at 9:00 eastern on c-span. houseong with a low white is oracle association, we are offering a special edition of the book, first ladies of the united states of america. it includes biographies and a portrait of each first lady. it is available for the discounted rights of $12.95 plus shipping at www.c-span.org /products. >> c-span -- we bring public affairs events from washington directly to you, putting you in the room at congressional hearings, white house events, briefings, and conferences, and offering complete gavel-to-gavel

coverage of the u.s. house -- all as a public service of private industry. we are c-span -- created by the cable tv industry 34 years ago and funded by your local cable or satellite provider. now, you can watch us in hd. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] intoday on season, women congress talk about their work in public service. followed by a discussion about women in leadership roles and the workplace. later, the confirmation hearing for federal reserve chair nominee janet yellen. programr "newsmakers" with heritage action ceo michael needham. next, fema members of congress joined politico to talk about the importance of public service. speakers include minnesota senator amy klobuchar, florida representative lightman, hawaii

congressman gabbard, and misery represented and wagner. this is about 25 minutes. >> good morning. seniorggie haberman, political reporter for politico and i am july did -- and i am delighted to be joined by ms. palmer, a woman who really truly and simplify. ath us this woman we have democratic congresswoman from whitey, senator amy klobuchar, democratic senator from missouri, we have a republican congress woman from florida, and a republican from missouri, and wagner. do not forget to tweet questions and comments using #womenrule. anna has a nexus on stage and we will be tracking your questions. with that, panelist, thank you for joining us on this

conversation. let's begin. >> we want to start the conversation with you, senator. there have been so much talk about how the women in the senate get along, have dinners, how well do you know the other women in the chamber sitting with you? >> we are really good friends. when people talk what the days of old, when people his work together, that's what we had going with the 20 women senators. our numbers held. for a walk, we were 16, and that was unfortunate because people would call it the sweet 16. now we are over 20, and as i pointed out in a tweet, we made u.s. history when there was finally a traffic jam in the u.s. senator women's bathroom. a great achievement for all of us. and i think it probably came to light the most recently with the shutdown where we had half of the women in the group of 14 that actually pushed the leadership on a deal it was half republicans,

including kelly ayotte and lisa mikulski and myself and senator high camp. we worked together and it made a very big difference. the trust that we have is genuine. we get together for dinner every other month. at my house, we had a minnesota potluck dinner. before that was senator mikulski and her husband actually fixed the salmon and froze it and sent it to her. we allow the meant to be hunter gatherers. [laughter] >> great. i would like to ask all three congresswoman -- have you seen this spirit that the senator is talking about? we haven't heard about it has

leading to the house as much here and has there been an effort to translate it to the other chamber and what kind of partnerships have been formed? >> recently have in the freshman class. we just had a great dinner this week with the freshman members from the democrat side of the aisle and the republicans. i won't tell you how many bottles of wine we went through. [laughter] and what we talked about was coming together and getting things done. women are born networkers. they are born communicators. we are multitaskers. we are solution oriented and i think there are lots of opportunities for us to come together and make things happen. that is why i came to congress. i am somewhat discouraged with the level of dysfunction, to be perfectly honest. we can be vehicles of change in moving the ball forward on behalf of our constituents and

the country. that is what we want to be a part of. >> i'm an old timer. i've been here longer than many of you have even been alive here . [laughter] we used to have these large dinners. if they are going on, maybe i am not invited anymore. they were every month and they were really very good. they were wonderful dinners and we got to discuss whatever legislation we were working on, trying to get more cosponsors for our bills because we all have power groups from our own party. but it is hard to get bipartisan support because we are always meeting as political parties. so we have more french up within our own party. so these get-togethers were really a great opportunity to move our legislation along. and they were very helpful. i need to check my schedule and make sure that i am on that dance card.

>> you are the newest of everybody sitting up here. does anything surprise you? >> what has been unique about our class that was just elected is the recognition in a very uncoordinated way that we were here to get things done and get results. in the best way to do that was to work together. what we found after being here for a few months and coming back from town hall meetings and district visits and kind of exchanging stories was that the message we were delivering back home are exactly the same. even in spite of the dysfunction, even in spite of the frustration that was there, the hope that we have for going

forward is the fact that we have enough people of like minds who are interested in working together and building those relationships from the very beginning that have allowed us to do that. on the more fun side, i got to know a leader in the women's softball game. amy was our mc for the game. >> i was cheering alongside with a torn rotator cuff. but i was there. >> but we learned a lot about each other as people and our families and it was a great time to build camaraderie and establish a a lot of friendship that have blossomed into other things. >> and i know all of their r.b.i.'s. [laughter] >> a little more seriously, republicans have had issues in terms of having the same kind of numbers in congress. can you talk about the recruiting efforts? >> that is an absolute passion of mine. there are 19 republican women in

congress. we have a conference of 232. it is a failure. and one absolutely must be addressed. i look out and i see susan molinari and i see susan comstock and i have worked for a long time with getting women involved in politics and we are doing this now. i am working with the and icc. reaching out to women, talking to that 37-year-old mother of two who is try to make it to the 15th or the 28th of the month. of the 40 to 50 key competitive races that we are looking at as a committee right now, over half of them has fielded a woman candidate. we are working with them and doing real recruitment, not just mentoring of women that will enter the race. going out and finding that teacher, that military that, -- military vet, that small

business owner, the leader who wants to step up and be a part of the process. we are working very hard on this along with many of my colleagues and members. it is a true passion of mine. i hope that we can't up those numbers in the next congress. >> a follow-up to that. a lot of talk since the last election about how republicans don't reach women. can you go into a little more depth what you hear back and what kind of feedback there is? >> i get so aggravated. women, you all, we are not a coalition. we are 54% of the electorate. we rule during truth -- we rule. we decide the elections going forward. we decided a lot of things. we are the ones who are balancing family and personal budgets. we are the ones making most of the spending decisions. we are on the frontlines of health care. you talk to any medical

provider, they will tell you. you are talking to a daughter or daughter-in-law. we are involved in energy policy. we know what it means here and it is time that we step up. we are all involved in this to change public policy. we don't do that unless we are in power. i am tired of others and there are politicians across this country that are making a decision on your behalf everything will day. the involved as a voter, as a participant, as an activist, but also as someone who will run for office. >> if i could follow-up on this, just to get the sense especially given the partisan divide and the gridlock, and i've seen all of the complaints from your constituents -- what is the number one complaint that you hear from women constituents that they would like to see dealt with directly in congress? >> they are all interested in jobs and security in the next

generation. i don't believe in women's issues. there are issues that women have a great interest in and are involved then at all levels. and it has to do with jobs, the economy, safety, security, the future of our families and our nation. they want to make their lives a little bit easier. let's face it. there are women across america who are just trying to make those tennis shoes last another six months longer than they have to. we have to make their lives easier, better, and more functioning. >> i represent a district where the majority of our are hispanic. they classify themselves as hispanic americans on the census form. for them, even if they have the immigration status approved and they don't have to worry about it, in my district, immigration reform remains a priority. so there is a great sense of frustration that the senate has already acted and the house has yet to act.

we hope that we will pass with speaker meters leadership piecemeal a bill to solve the legality of the immigrant and get them on a path to citizenship. but we have to first secure the borders and that is what i hear a lot from our constituents and let's get immigration reform done. that is a priority. but first, let's make sure we won't repeat this mistake and this remedy 10 years from now. so that immigration and also jobs are tied together in my district in south florida. we had a big boom financially a few years ago. now construction is at an all- time low. tourism is still the driving force in south florida. but they construction jobs will not be coming back and we are getting a lot of money coming in

from venezuela and other places that are unstable. but we don't know how long that will last. there is a sense of insecurity about the economy in south florida. and i think those two issues are what is driving the voters. the third thing that we discuss in congress is that we are glad to be the unifying force. i don't know about the 6% that doesn't approve of us because they are not in south florida. [laughter] >> immigration reform is something that we also talk about a lot in this congress. you have been one of the key players in the house. talk about your role, as a woman, as a peacemaker, try to get agreement and try to work across party lines, something we haven't seen a lot of. >> we do have bipartisan leaders who are leading the charge. we have paul ryan and we are working with folks like luis gutierrez.

so there is a lot of movement on the immigration situation. i think the press sometimes look at all of the negative parts that are not moving along, but there are a lot of conversations and sidelines moving the for so long. so i am optimistic that we can get it done. i know we are hitting a lot of bumps along the road, but it will be all right. i am optimistic about that. >> just a follow-up on what she said. is there an example in negotiations where you can say you handled it differently than your colleagues, your perspective as a woman. >> i came to the united states when i was 8. i am a refugee myself. i have dealt with refugees and immigrants families and see how much it impacts women because, so often, many times, the male is not there. either he is deported or the debt is not present and immigration is really a woman issue. it is a family centered issue. and i think we need to focus it

more that way and look at it more about how it impacts the mystic violence also because, if you are an immigrant it -- an immigrant that does not have papers, it is more likely that the person will not tell the police that you are being abused in some way. definitely, women are greatly impacted by the lack of immigration reform. not that they are women issues. i agree that there are no women issues. but this issue of immigration directly impacts women and is usually the mom and the kids. >> if we could go back to the senator and a congress woman about what you're hearing in your district. >> a lot of what the countless women have been saying, first of all, the economy is what they care about the most and maybe a

little different way in my state. the and implement is now down to 4.8%. we have a lot of thriving -- the unemployment is now down to 4.8%. we have a lot of thriving businesses and we have an educated workforce and we focus a lot on exports. the issues for a lot of our constituents about how much things cost, the concern about the cost of gas being down a little bit, the concern of the cost of college, concern about the cost of health care -- those

are the issues they are really focused on right now. the second thing he mentioned about unity on wanting congress to work better together. they are very angry about this gridlock. they know that we are out of the downturn and things will stabilize and there are things that we should be doing, like immigration reform. i thank you for that. i am on the judiciary committee and we have seen the provisions of the business side of that can we are proud of that immigration don't want to get it done. on the senate side, there are some major things we have gone done there. and maybe part of it is that nearly half of our leaders, the chairman in the senate, are women. but we have moved ahead i a lot of bills and i think that the shutdown really brought everything to life for people in the country that this is ridiculous. they are actually holding us back instead of allowing us to move forward as a country. that is what i hear the most from the people in the state. what i love about the women up here when i think about her military background and the work we are doing on immigration reform and the work that ann has done internationally as an

ambassador, and when they come in, you just have to work with them together and you need to look at the backgrounds of the women in congress. a lot of them have come from those kinds of results-oriented fields. i was a prosecutor. that was my job. i couldn't ask any victim with their political affiliation was. i just had to go and get the thing done. i think that has helped us were together and get these things done. but we are ready to move on immigration reform. patty murray is working on it with congressman ryan. i hope we will see a new day in the next few months. >> regardless, from hawaii to florida and everywhere in between, the issues of people are worried about are the same, whether it is the economy or jobs or making sure that we are providing good education to our kids and making sure that we have a strong and sustainable future. but the underlying common thread throughout all of that, from women, from constituents as a whole, is not understanding why we are not getting things done. finding it somewhat inconceivable, when there is so much commonality between the issues that we are hearing from at home and there is so much commonality in the things that we would like to tackle collectively regardless of

party, why are we able to actually sit down and work out the differences? what she said is true. there is a lot of great work that is happening that doesn't make the headlines. there are a lot of small groups of members meeting, talking about democrats and republicans, not those classified as moderates, but people who represent a broad spectrum of views on policies and politics and how to find solutions and saying how do we figure out this budget deficit issue? how do we deal with the debt ceiling? and figuring out. the coming ground that is there. a lot of the work -- and figuring out the common ground that is there. a lot of work is creating the pressure from within to bring these initiatives to the floor and get some movement. >> what has been the biggest surprise for you in terms of being the rank-and-file. you say you have meetings in hawaii and you, to the belt way. -- and you come to the beltway. >> i had the opportunity to work

with senator caucus here. i worked with him between my two deployments to the middle east and our two senators from horry were great leaders in many ways from hawaii were great leaders in many ways. they set examples and taught me a lot about building relationships, ones that are based on respect and would withstand the winds blowing one way or the other. senator inouye he and senator stevens from alaska were great examples of two best friends. they call each other brother. i laughed when they give their talking about an issue on the

house floor. after they were done, they tried to fist bump each other. [laughter] they ended up getting it on the second or third try. but regardless of what happens, they were able to disagree and still remain friends. i was surprised when i first came here, there were a few people and i was reaching out to some of my republican friends and i was criticized. you're not supposed to talk to them. what are you doing? are you kidding me? this is what we need the most. >> i think most of us believe that though more women we have a leadership the better off we are. debbie stepanov has gotten closer to reaching an agreement on the farm bill with barbara boxer, working with vendor -- with senator better to get the transportation bill done. and then leading the postal

reform. we have worked very hard to develop leaders in the senate. so i don't know exactly the timing. there is kind of a lineup in the senate. [laughter] but i think there is women right now in very important leadership roles, that is inclined barbara mikulski who is our de facto leader of the women in the senate and one of my best moments is when she gathered the women of the senate together before a vote and she stood up and she lifted herself on the couch and i felt like i was back in the 1970s. she said, get out there, square your shoulders, and get ready for the revolution [laughter] there is a lot of experience in the women of the senate that

passed on and we really stand on the shoulders of those who came before us. >> we want to close with a question for all of your. -- all of you. a lot of this series has been about being women oriented. can you give our audience tangible or a piece of advice to be peacemakers either in the corporate world worm or in the classroom or to take a message of their own from this event today. >> one of the things i have come across is that i have talked to other women who are thinking about getting involved in one way or another, either in elected office or another positions and i am often met with the response that i don't know if i'm qualified. as each of us looks into our

lives, there is so much uniquely qualifying about experiences that we have gone through, ways that we may not have recognized where we actually have had experience leading a group of people or leading an effort. i think our voices need to be heard more and recognizing and valuing the experience uniquely that we bring to the table, whatever that is, is important for us to recognize and be able to convey to others. >> my advice is really along those lines. sort of leaned in for women who want to go to politics. the negativity is part of the game right now and you will have intense debates and you will be attacked and in commercials and tv's. that will happen. but if you don't get involved, you won't be able to change it. one of the best ways to change it is if people of opposite hearties that may stand in the opposite boxing ring on some things that they can say that courage is no longer doing that. courage is standing next to someone that you don't normally agree with for the betterment of our country and for people to be

able to go together on tv to change things. not everything is negative. the only way you will change the nuances of it is by doing it yourself. >> for me, balance. in my 30 years of elected office, i am still try to find that balance between my professional life, my family life, and finding some me time as well. i'm am still juggling. we still feel like -- whether you are a teller at a bank or a barista or a member of congress or a member of the senate -- we still have our perfection allies. we have our personal lives. we never get it right. the key juggling and you will find that balance that fits you and it may not be the textbook definition of balance, but if it works for you and it works for your family, then that is a great thing and never forget that family is the number one, above everything else, that you've got going on. your relationship with god and your family. >> taking the balance analogy, i will tell you that women -- that what women juggle isn't a, a bowling ball and a chainsaw and then the cell phone rings. that's what women juggle is an egg, a bowling ball and a chainsaw and then the cell phone rings. [laughter] whether you are a democrat or

libertarian or republican, say yes. step out of your comfort zone. we need you. we need your voice. we need your leadership. we need your common sense. women, as i said, multitaskers, communicators, they bring people together. we listened. we are the ones who ask for directions when we are lost, right? [laughter] and i would encourage all women to get involved in so many ways. you are involved in your communities and your careers. you can have it all. not all at once. i have three great kids. i have drug them across the country. i have drug them across the world. and here to washington, d.c. and people say to me you are a great role modern -- role model to your daughter. and i say that i am a that her

role model to my sons. they see strong women who are willing to stand up and say, ok, i will put the flak jacket on. i will take it because i'm going to do what's right for them, for their future, for my constituents. it is just a joy. the kind of relationship building that we are able to do as a team is important to walking across that i'll, getting things done. i have seen it in financial services committee and the many different ways. i will leave you all with just say yes. >> thank you so much to our panelists for such an engaging conversation. [applause] >> earlier this month, politico held a summit called the women

>> taking a look at capitol hill this week, hours of congress repaired to return to work. about extending unemployment benefits as one of the items on his agenda. >> with regard to unemployment insurance, i have always said i am not opposed to unemployment insurance, i am opposed to having it without paying for it. it is wrong to borrow money from china without putting up ways to pay for it. i do think, though, the longer that you have it, it provides some disincentive to work. many studies support this. we have to figure out how to create jobs and keep people from becoming long-term unemployed, which is why i supported the long-term freedom zones. >> are you saying now that if the extension is paid for, you will support it?

>> i have always said that it needs to be paid for, but we also need to do something for long-term unemployed people, creating something new that would create jobs. when we get back what i would like to do is -- one, if we pay for it -- if we extend it, we pay for it, but number two i have been promoting economic freedom zones, any area with unemployment 1.5 times the national average, we would dramatically lower taxes to try to create jobs there. >> today a group of senate democrats held a conference call with reporters to urge republicans to support extension of unemployment benefits. chuck schumer was on the call. here are some of his remarks. >> republicans blocked this. i think that it will have an affect and hurt their chances in the 2014 elections. the tectonic plates needs our politics have shifted over the

last several years. for the first five years of the president's term the biggest issues were the deficit and obamacare. not anymore. it is middle-class incomes, creation of jobs, getting the economy going at a better rate that it has been going so flocked -- so far. if republicans blocked this, it will chase them far out of main street in terms of fighting for average folks and the middle class. issue that we bring forward in 2014, our colleagues are not siding with average families? it will be a strong indication to the american people where republicans are headed. when i say out of the mainstream -- the last time that this round of unemployment benefits the way that we have them now was renewed, it was under president president.ublican unemployment was only five point six percent nationally. that shows you that in the past this has been a bipartisan issue

, that with support from mainstream republicans, like george bush, and not having that support now would again show you how far over our colleagues are moving. as jack andssue, others said, we can get the three-month extension and we will try to work something out, but i have a suggestion that most of us i think would support , eliminating the tax break against corporations that benefit shipping jobs overseas. we could pay for this for three months doing that. ofcould increase the number jobs here and actually decrease unemployment at the same point as helping our colleagues. the final point i would make is our republican colleagues say -- unemployment benefits prevent people from insulting to is

the american worker. the american worker wants to work. there is a great deal of pride in work. you do not have to be the ceo of a big company, a nuclear physicist, an artist, or musician to experience that. average folks have pride in the job they do, whether it is keeping university floors clean or delivering things properly on time, all the way up the line. rand paul, i was on a tv show with him earlier. he said that he thinks that are sortent benefits of insulting, almost. the word that he used was -- i cannot remember the word. he said it was bad for american workers. that is insulting to american workers, because they want to work. >> both chambers of commerce returned -- both chambers of

congress return tomorrow to consider the three-month extension of unemployment benefits. they will continue debate on the nomination of janet yellen to be the federal reserve chair with a vote at 5:30. there is a simple majority needed for confirmation. live coverage on c-span two. the house returns on tuesday for a pro forma session, recessing until 6:30, holding a vote to establish a quorum to mark the start of the second session of the 113th congress. week, plans to vote on bills related to the federal health care law. live coverage on c-span. >> the deadline is approaching for the c-span student kim competition. answer the question -- what is the most important issue that congress should address this year? include c-span programming in your five minute to seven minute response. the grand prize is $5,000.

entries are due by january 20. get more info at student cam.org. next, a discussion with the authors of "compelling people." iny talk about women leadership roles in the workplace. this is from part of political's women rule series. it runs just over 20 minutes. >> i want to make one note you all should know. we have had four evens, and this is the first time we have let loose on the stage. i know you think they have things to say. i want to introduce the co- author. it is a very hot the book right now. with them is a friend of ours who has cofounded many of these, the list, which is a great tool. we are going to have some fun today. these guys advise executives and politicians on how they can be more compelling.

also the issues women face trying to be more compelling and their voice and all these things. the core of their book is advising people on high to -- how to find strength. we know women have difficulty with that. i am going to let them take it away. strength and war, please tell us about it. >> i am john. where shall we start? the idea of strength and warmth. when we meet for the first time, we pass judgment very quickly. everyone remembers the book now can gladwell wrote. when he didn't answer because nobody had it figured it out,

how did we meet these judgments? it turned out they were on the forefront of how we judge another person or somebody judges us. strength is your ability to get stuff done in the world. whether it is your poker skills or whatever that may be, you can change the world around you. when you have strength you demand respect from people. warmth is not just being friendly. ......warmth is being on the same side , so you may have a grouchy person, but they may seem warm to you if they seem like you're grouchy person. these criteria of what we are looking for, the tricky bit is a lot of it is judged nonverbally

by facial expressions and posture. if you are more assertive, you seem stronger, and if you are more accommodating, you seem warmer, which might seem more like a pushover. balancing these things seems tricky. >> the research that went into finding these qualities has its root in cultural stereotype research, and it has its role in gender. when you think about strength and warmth they have resumption that speak to gender. they're all -- there are cultural presumptions around strength and warmth, where men are presumed to be strong. we lift heavy objects and things considered to be strong. women are presumed warm. these cultural presumptions attach themselves to us as part

of what people see when they make these snap judgments, the same way they make judgments based on our age, our body type, our ethnicity. we are focusing on gender, so this resumption of warmth is where this begins. once a woman shows she is strong and assertive, that is where the tension runs in. it is a hydraulic affect. strength goes up. warmth goes down. this is not news for anybody. the question is what can be done about it? >> that is why i am on stage. as a matter of fact the work was triggered by a number of things, one being how hillary clinton was treated at the media during the election but also my own experience as a woman who had

opinions and was also a warm person, but one of the biggest triggers for me was the first time i was told to watch my tone. how many of you have been told to watch your tone? i was told to watch my tone after firing off a brief, to the point instructional e-mail about how women would react to this situation, and i was surprised i the pushback. it took a while before i realized this was a common pushback women get when they have authority and start to exercise it.

that is why i was interested in the subject. >> how many of you know the name ? many of you know her personally as well. she is an entrepreneur and has been so successful that harvard business school has written a case, and one day a professor had a thought. he was going to teach this case, and he taught, i am going to do something interesting. he took half of his class and gave them a case. he took the other half and gave them a case, except one thing changed. all of the pronouns changed, so he had them read the case, and then he did a quick survey. what do you think of this

person? howard, everybody loved howard. howard was dynamic and doing a great job. howard was awesome. nobody liked heidi. take your favorite adjectives, but she did not know her place. this was both men and women who found her to be not quite laying by the rules she was supposed to. if you think about that in strength and warmth terms, when guys project warmth, it is good. a little strays straight, a

little warmth. that is great. when an, what happens when they project strength? i don't know about that, so that is the conundrum. when women projects drank, -- project strength, the b word flies. >> what are we going to do about that? >> one way is rather than trying to hold back strength, that is not the answer. the answer is to project form on top of that strength. what you see is actively projecting strength to overcome this hydraulic effect i mentioned earlier. you have to bring warmth up as well. when you look at oprah winfrey the richest people in the world, the people who have been really achieving this balance of a lot of strength and warmth, they are bringing warmth actively to the table. we talk about it a lot because one of her famous lines during the convention speech,

which was she quoted a line. everybody talks about what a great dancer fred astaire was. ginger rogers did everything fred astaire did, only backwards and in high heels. that talks about strength and warmth. you presume warmer and may be less strong. to overcome that you have to project some strength to be taken seriously, and you are a danger, so you have to reject warmth to keep the -- project warmth to keep the b word away. you have to do twice as much. >> for those of us who find this depressing, for those of us who want to be great at the things we are great at and not worry about who we might be offending by being awesome --

[applause] what is an easy thing we can do. and i'll always says, smile, but that is true -- my mom always said, smile. that is true. that was good advice, and she had to smile through a lot. >> mom was right. we forgot how much of our professional lives we spent

telling men to stand up straight and smile. don't discount me. i am not a wallflower. anybody from the south, they are like, how are you doing? there is that expectation. we are talking about actually smiling, actually being happy. that can be tough. finding some way to be happy in that moment reflects a lot of warmth. that is the basic advice we give everybody. there are some pitfalls for

women. >> i want to say there is also some good news. women are seen as that are leaders than men, so when women use strength to stand up, the studies show clearly when women stand up for norms in the workplace and they are strong on behalf of either behaving fairly or keeping social norms, they are seen as better leaders than men are. >> this lease of research is so great. when women got angry, what happened? the basic advice is, don't do it.

this is not true for straight white guys. they talk about getting angry on the floor of the house, and everybody is like, go get them. that is not working. if you seem out of control of your own behavior, that is very bad. the root word of hysterical is connected to being female. there is a long line of cultural association of women being run by their emotions and out of control. what you can do is what moms and

teachers know well, being stern. stern is ok. if you are stern, that means you have decided what is going on is not cool, and you are going to express that as opposed to just react to. >> sometimes we cry. >> john boehner has made a career of it. [laughter] if you think about where john boehner is, he is a guy. he is a congressman. he is a republican. all of these things say strong, strong, strong. he could get away with it.

it was very tough. there was one famous episode we should talk about a little bit. >> that was very compelling. hillary clinton. >> one of the archetypal case studies of how this stuff works is hillary clinton. we talked about this in the book. hillary clinton when she first showed up on a lot of our radars was back in 1992, and the first thing we knew about her when she was first lady was this was somebody who wasn't interested in baking cookies. there was a role she was auditioning for, first lady, and if you think about women and warmth, first lady is almost the mother of america, 20 years ago almost more so. hillary clinton said, i'm not

that. >> she actively rejected that. >> the decade before that she was the first member of the walmart board who was a woman. she had been doing strength for the better part of a decade, so there was no way to say, i am going to sit around and do these resumption. and then there was health care, which didn't reflect a lot. it was secretive, and i think by 1996. >> they mention the word that came to mind, the number one word was strong. it was not a surprise. it was about the low point as far as her favorability with the public. it wasn't until monica and the sense that hillary was undergoing something that things started moving in the direction

of people filling warmth for her. >> do you remember how she started that off? the beginning of that campaign she was very clear of what her challenge was. she did that and succeeded. if you fast-forward after a few years of doing a bunch of strong stuff, there was this glass ceiling. she had to think about a woman could be commander and chief. -- commander-in-chief. it was confidence and strength, and it didn't work in iowa. when the scene shifted, she

choked up, and the question was not about politics. the mask cracked, and she was just a human being. she talked about chelsea. she talked about wings everybody could relate to. suddenly there was a human being. everybody saw that. >> there are two important things that set that up. two men held up signs that said iron my shirt. that made her more sympathetic. there was something everybody

saw, you are likable enough, hillary. that made her warm by comparison. >> she did fantastically well. >> that was a pivotal moment for her. >> we have continued to see her as warm through the secretary of state role, where she is a goodwill ambassador. text with hillary? she is cool now. >> we are running out of time. i want you to give these women

three takeaways, whether it is body language or a thing to do or say. i am going to start with you, rachel. three things to take away? >> i think watching how you present yourself, one of the things i didn't know but they pointed out, when i am not sure of myself, i up talk because i don't want people to think i am being too sure of myself, because i am not, so don't do that. if you ever want to raise her hand, don't do this. we hit up. it is a big swing. that was signed for c-span. the third thing i would say is notice who is being negative or victimized. there is an argument thought of that turned out to be a hoax. it turned out to be a hoax, and

he created a universal antagonist. she was an older woman wearing long jeans, and i found that interesting because in addition to addressing gender, they talk about all the other elements. age, class, ability, disability, so those are things to pay attention to. when you start to notice them you will be unable to stop noticing them, so that will affect how you perform as well.

>> we talk about standing up straight. the thing we often do when we are a little unsure about something, standing up you cross your legs. you are prattling in some way -- wetzel -- pretzeling in some way. basically you are telling your fight or flight hormones to surge instead of retreat. what you want to do is take up a little more space and be a little bigger and take up a little more of the room then you probably were comfortable doing. if your instinct is to pretzel, be a little bigger. >> there is a great ted talk that talks about research and the idea that you want to stretch out a little bit ahead of time because it will raise your testosterone.

it is a confidence booster and lowers the cortisol, which is the butterflies in the stomach. we get a lot of questions from women about posture, particularly from women's studies. posture is the most important thing, so you can dress modestly. stand up straight and be proud. >> with that i am sorry we are going to have to and. thank you so much. it is very good. >> we look ahead to some of the key congressional races for 2014. see that event live thursday, 9:40 a.m. eastern on c-span 2.

is >> later that day, a discussion about cybersecurity and the threat of cyber warfare. a group of journalists from the new york times, wall street journal, and foreign policy magazine will be part of the discussion. we will have that live at 2:00 eastern. >> we are focused like a laser on innovation. innovation is a national strategy. we dominate in so many areas. global innovation, and we want to stay that way, requiring great innovation policies and a rational patent policy so that you can invent

things but are not being sued all the time. monday, onapiro, "the communicators." we started years ago looking at census department data and something strange comes out. when you look at the profits of multinationals, looking at a map germany, you see france, ireland, italy, but if you look at the data on where the profits are, ireland is just of -- a hugely disproportional amount of profit went to ireland. that was one indication that something was going on. >> more with marty sullivan, chief economist for tax analyst, "q&a," at c-span's 8:00 p.m.

we want to love them james jones, former chair of the house budget committee and a ranking member of the house ways and means committee. he served the johnson administration and served as u.s. ambassador to mexico during the clinton administration. on the war onus poverty. let's begin with this sunday morning headline. later, war on poverty is a mixed bag." "too many, the war on poverty has largely failed. the property rate has fallen from 15% to 19% in two generations and in a different way, they have succeeded in preventing it from climbing higher. when president johnson made the announcement in his poverty rate in the

united states was 22% of the population. in the 5.5 years he was president, he reduced it 12%. i would say that it has had its successes are a lot and a few failures, but the practical matter is down even today from in poverty rate that existed 1963. >> president johnson became president in 1963. aw did this become centerpiece of the state of the union address that year? >> the war on poverty meant several different things. it included the civil rights legislation, voting rights legislation, educational reforms, various things like that. so, his major goal, and it stems from the time he was a young boy growing up in the hill country of texas, his major goal was to take away the artificial

barriers that kept people from realizing their full potential. that was the essence of his war on poverty. unleash the human capabilities and the whole country improves. >> january 8, 1964 am president johnson. [video clip] declareand now we unconditional war on poverty in america. [applause] i urge this congress and all americans to join with me in that effort. it will not be a short or easy struggle. no single weapon or strategy

will suffice, but we shall not rest until that war is won. [applause] the richest nation on earth can afford to win it. we cannot afford to lose it. host: from january 1964, james jones, you were in the house of representatives, you heard that speech, what were your thoughts? guest: i was an assistant to a congressman from oklahoma at that time, and i was on the floor for that speech. i thought it was very ambitious. it was a refreshing thing to me because as a public matter, we do have two faces issue, too many people living in poverty, too many issues because of race, whatever. host: it really has been a mixed result. e of race,

whatever. host: it really has been a mixed result. why? what has failed that president johnson put forth 50 years ago? guest: there were some programs that did not work, models, city programs that do not work, but overall, what he proposed has worked for a will for the country. for example, the civil rights legislation in the voting rights legislation. that unleash a great deal of human potential that had been held back by artificial barriers. the head start program has been a massive success, and it has brought people out of poverty through their education years and let them become very productive citizens, very productive taxpayers in the u.s. so there have been a number of programs that work, but if you just look at the overall totals, as they said when he proposed this war on poverty, 22% of all --ricans who live in poverty were living in poverty in the richest country in the world.

office, 5.5 years after he proposed it, only 12% were living in poverty. we have had ups and downs since then. we're just coming out of the hadest recession we have since the great depression, so it is not unusual that that poverty rate would go up a little bit, but when you percentages are today, versus where they were when he proposed the war on poverty, it has been a great success. host: we have some photographs courtesy of the lbj library as lyndon johnson travel to appalachia and saw firsthand what you indicated that he grew up in as well in texas, in rural -- abjectect property poverty. guest: yes, he really grew strength and knowledge from being out among the people. he was not one to look at reports and make decisions on that. fromew his information talking to people, so he went

around the country and went to appalachia, went to other areas, he sent many of us on the white house staff out into the country to see what it was like to live with the homeless, for example, to go to places where the education was inferior, particularly where young kids, before they even started school had so many strikes against the before and they could even compete in school and would drop out. that is what he did to understand what was going on in the country. has athe "new york times" list of poverty from 2012 based on age and race. it focuses on the race issue, the asian-american population is about 11% with 1.9 million in poverty. higherse, significantly among african americans, accounting for about 27.2% of the poverty rate, that is equating to nearly 11 million african-americans. hispanics, 25.6% of the poverty

rate with a 13.6 million and whitesn poverty, about 9.7% of the poverty rate, nearly 19 million in poverty. true, one ofit is the things that is very important to getting out of poverty is not only the programs that give you the tools to get out of poverty, but also the family structure. in many ways, the family structure has broken down in various parts of our society. where that has broken down, it also leaves, in my judgment, leads to an increase in property rates. poverty rates. host: it goes to single-family homes and how that contributes to the poverty rates. 1.7 million households living on an average income of less than $2 a person a day. guest: i think that is a stark

statistic. actually, when you consider people who are making minimum wage today, the current minimum wage, it is very hard for them to get by. many of those are living in poverty, depending on family size, etc. so one of the things that the obama administration is going to propose, i understand, is to increase the men wage level -- the minimum wage level. clearly if you know people or have seen people who are struggling to feed their families on a minimum wage today, it is something that needs to be done. years in spent 16 congress of a democratic representative from oklahoma, but back in may 1960's, you graduated from the university of oklahoma then attended law school, then entered the johnson white house in 1965. how did that come about? guest: a lot of accidents like

that happen in life. any nine to 64 campaign, i had graduated from law school, and a friend of mine from law school, a great attorney here in washington, said that they needed to have advanced people on an old was. train tour with about -- an old whistle stop train tour with about 18, 20 stops. i ended up being in charge of the entire operation. rode the train all the way down. lady bird johnson seems to notice that, and she mentioned it to her husband that there is a young man who are to be on the staff, and the rest is history. host: you are now a member of the board of directors of the johnson foundation. guest: the lbj foundation, yes. host: it is the 50th anniversary of president johnson's war on poverty, a speech he delivered in the state of the union

address in 1964. our first call, good morning to you. caller: good morning. we have lots of snow here and ice underneath it. oh, well. i wanted to talk about -- i am 85 years old, and i am a military widow. i have lived through poverty. but wea large family, always had something to eat. roosevelt came down to get my he went to a then work,in nebraska to but he had a little land of our grandfather's, and we always had something to eat fro. runningre no deer around in those days. here in chillicothe, ohio, i married, and i live in ohio, i have been married for 40 years, and so the deer are running rampant in ohio.

we cannot have a garden here because of the deer. poverty could be erased if the deer were eradicated or sold to the farmers. take half of what they cost to charity. backed when i will -- back when i moved to macarthur, the farmers got a great big sum of money to keep them from having crop on the ground. they took that money and they oflt themselves big mansions houses, they took the money is that their kids to college, and so they still are doing that. they get paid for not growing crops. host: gladys, thank you for the call from ohio. let's take her second point about the farm subsidy issue, which is part of the debate that lawmakers will undertake when they try to tackle the farm bill this month. anst: yeah, this has been evil thing matter over time,

whether it is farmers, particularly very large farmers, should be paid a subsidy for not growing crops. as i understand it, and the farm bill that is going to be before the congress, there will be an effort to reduce those subsidies and to reduce the cost to the government. i think that is a move in the right direction. host: i want to go back to the debate of president johnson's in the trickle- down economics of president reagan in the 1980's. how do you assess where the country was under these two, really social issues that became part of the american political dialogue? guest: both of them reflected the views of the american people at that particular time. president johnson was able to tap into a sense that the country was not quite being fair with all of its population and support to rally public for the programs that fell under

the umbrella of the war on poverty whether it was the civil rights legislation, the voting rights legislation, the headstart programs and what have you. president reagan came along and in many ways, in many ways the refused to give up on some of the great society programs when they were not well well, henot working tapped into that frustration of the american people and was able to win an election. one of the things about lyndon johnson that i always respected is that he was always in a hurry to accomplish things that work for the good of the people. many programs were not working. when they were not working, he was not afraid to change them or even abandon them. party tomistake of the say that if we just cut a program that was not working, that would be the ruination of everything. as a result, the public opinion

turned against those kinds of government programs, ronald reagan was elected, the publicans were in office for 12 years, and it changed values. of time,in that period some poverty did increase because some people fell through the cracks, and there were no safety nets for a lot of people in this country. so i think we as a country do adjusts to the needs of the time, and we adjusted to public opinion at the time. which really makes us unique in that respect. host: one of many photographs from the lbj library, president johnson in a ceremony from the rose garden to the white house, and if we look at that, at somebody who spent four years in the johnson white house, what was he like to work with, what are your thoughts? the most complex, interesting person i think i have ever met. when robert carroll finished his

first book on president johnson, and he interviewed me sometime after that, i told him that he hea very good writer, butured a lyndon johnson, he missed another 13 or 14 lyndon johnsons because he is one of the most fascinating people i've ever known. he is a complex person. he can be very tough, always in a hurry, he viewed that his life is not going to last a long time. he used to say that his father and grandfather both died at age ageand he would die at 64, which is one of the reasons he did not want to run for reelection. he didn't die at age 64. -- he didn't die at age 64. because he had a premonition, he always went to work to help people. can be tough, drive you are, he can bring more work out of you then you ever thought you are capable of, but at the end of the day, it was a very

satisfying experience. he could be crude at times, but -- and to some people would say mean anyway he would drive people, but if he overstepped that, he was also very much willing to do nice things for you to make up for it. i found him to be a very warm, a very real human being, and he was just absolutely a pleasure to work for. host: in case you are interested, the "new york times" writes about the war on poverty, 50 years later, calling it a mixed bag. eric from denver, independent line with james jones, a former member of the johnson's staff, later a member of congress will sub good morning, eric. caller: -- up congress. the morning, eric. to touch on the

proposal that we should be celebrating the concept of jubilee. if you sit back and look at everything, that is a problem we are experiencing here. 50 years, startle over. and the comp or a -- start over. corporations need to start over. we are people, we passed on, but these corporations are staying here and controlling everything. we have to step back and take control of everything. if we simply did resets every 50 years, wiped everything out, it is somewhat make-believe, and you're stuck in this reality of the debt, but until we step back and wipe it out, and start over, we can do all types of things to get it paid off, citizens were campaigning to this stuff off, but we the people have to regroup, and by doing it, it would bring equality to everybody. host: eric, thank you for the call. let me share with you a michael

kantor writes in the policy analysis put together by the cato institute pointing out despite nearly $50 million in total welfare spending since lyndon johnson claimed the war on poverty back in 1950s -- 1964, the poverty rate is perilously close to where it was more than 40 years ago. i should say $15 trillion. guest: the poverty rate, that said, when president johnson made the speech, 22% of the population were in poverty. after he left office five years later, it was 12%. now it is 15%. it has gone up some, but it is clearly better than where it was when he declared the war on poverty. host: springfield, massachusetts. good morning foci caller. caller: i want to thank congress jones for the work he

did during the johnson administration. i am glad that the son has -- iody on to talk about am glad that these men had summary on to talk about the johnson administration. i do not know if anybody was at significant during the time as lyndon johnson was during his time. his understanding of the situation of the poor in this country was very important to what he did in his proposals. one of the things, mr. jones, -- i am 80 years old, by the way. was born in 1933, so i lived through the whole great depression, and i've seen the recessions that have happened since that time. but the issue around combating poverty and health care and education, which mr. johnson emphasized, are as important to national defense of the united states of america as the defense department is.

now, the other thing about the war on poverty -- one of the things that really set it back with the green amendment. i know that you remember the green amendment because prior to that the legislation required maximum participation of the poor, but when a green amendment was passed, it allowed for only a third participation of the poor come of the people that were affected by the legislation, and then it included appointments by governmental officials for two thirds of the board, the different community action agencies around the country that was running the program. the program was much more thective at the time when poor people were running the programs, quite frankly, because they understood with the particular needs were. host: benjamin, thank you for the call. we will get a response. guest: thank you very much for the call in the comments. let me point out that the great society programs, the war on

poverty, was not giveaways. thatwas a set of programs were designed to take away artificial barriers to people improving their own lives. for example, head start, that was one. , the model cities program to help rebuild the cities so they were good places to live for all the people. along, people like, presidents like bill clinton improve those programs by having a welfare worth e -- a welfare hic for payment. lyndon johnson would have supported that. in some ways, programs of the reagan administration, a sense of self responsibility, and lyndon johnson would have support that. he was not for giving away money without any kind of

responsibility being exerted by those who received it. i think that is an important ask but i want to bring about. host: this is from one of my viewers, -- one of our viewers, wow, 25% in poverty when johnson took office and that was rogue poverty. -- that was real poverty. no safety net. programscial security were very modest, nose for retired persons who had paid into social security, but for example, medicare was part of the war on poverty, and medicaid, if you were an older person and you had medical problems, there was really no safety net for you at that time. that is why medicare came into effect. there really was very little social safety net in the 1960's until the war on poverty program started being passed. host: when they ring the bell on

wall street and make record highs, from whom are they making that money? your thoughts. guest: the record highs reflect investors all across the country who invest in corporate america and into our stock markets. i think it is important, again, one of the tenets of president johnson's war on poverty is that if you allow people to have a better life and to improve themselves, but also increases the economic value of the country. they are able to purchase more, they are able to do things to keep the economy strong. so that was also one of the aspects that president johnson believed if you allow people to improve themselves, then the whole economy and the country would improve too. ont: another comment -- war poverty, war on drugs, war on terror, etc.

why are we always in a war, and we are good at it? guest: i think the program has been -- i mean, the words "war overused since. on war in iraq, the war drugs, it was less a war then a set of skirmishes. the word "war" has been overused. -- ourur congressmen conversation with congressman james jones, a member of the lyndon johnson foundation. caller: good morning, and thank you, c-span, for tackling this topic. upon yourus based experience, congressman, why do you think there is so much negative disdain for poor people? andhear undeserving poor, 46 million plus people are poor

in america. it just seems so vindictive. i would appreciate his comment on that. host: stay on the line and we will follow-up. caller: first of all, a think a lot of that disdain comes out of ignorance. if you have not seen how those who are living in poverty are , you cannot have any kind of sympathy or empathy for them. if you have not seen what it is legal immigrant in this country and the way they have to live, you cannot have any kind of sympathy or empathy for them. once you have seen them, for atmple, i've had people talk golf clubs about illegal immigrants working at the golf club, and they get to know them as human beings, they have a different view on a responsible immigration program. if you have a family that is struggling on minimum wage and working for you, they become human beings and not just

mythical people. and you have a different view on that. i think all of it is mostly out of ignorance. they are looking at the numbers, they are looking at certain kind of reports, and they are not considering these folks human beings. host: your follow-up? caller: one thing that has happened since lbj is as growing income inequality. of the 1%lf, the 1% that are doing really well what would you, say the government could do to address his income inequality? code is think the tax one way to kind of address that question. issues, to me, the big on how you get people out of poverty and how you have a more fair distribution of income

starts with education, and i think our education system has gone downhill in the last several years, so it has to be improved and there have ts to be ways to get through these in the education system, get the attitude of wanting to succeed in having hope. the second is health care. i think you have to have good health care as well as education in order for people to be good, productive members of society. i think those are the to basic cornerstones of how do you improve income distribution. in the final analysis, i think you also have to look at the tax code, how we are taxed and who is being taxed and how much. that is another way to look at the income. the last is proper distribution of income. host: a couple of points from today's "new york times" piece, about 30% of single women raising their children live in poverty. they also point to the high

incarceration rate of african americans, and they break down of the families as leading conservators of poverty. these are social issues. how do you deal with that? guest: i personally think the break down of the the family structure is a major problem for poverty, for society in general, and that is something that two or threee last decades in this country. i think the government cannot force families to be families in the old way i grew up with, but i think there is a moral persuasion that's government leaders can talk about, that community leaders can talk about, to improve the respect for a family structure. so i do think that is a major problem and something that we have to tackle as a country. it is not going to be done by a law. host: peter joining us next from new york, republican line. caller: hey, steve, how are you

doing? i think you do a great job, i think you are the best host there. i would like to make a couple of comments if you give me the grace to make them. number one, the war on poverty -- you have had people on the show before who talked about poverty in america, and they hurting. maybe .5% are we have the income tax credit, and, youood stamps, know, welfare and so on and so forth. the showu have had on before say that most of them live pretty well, they have a roof over their head, they say they have enough to eat, in fact, they say that they live basically like middle income people do in europe. so to me, that is kind of a ruse as far as people actually suffering. the numbers are very small in america. my second comment is that we

import poverty to this country. you mention illegal aliens, they come in and they are poor, no education, and so on. this is a very cup located subject, -- a very complicated subject, and i know you cannot give me the time to go into it in detail. host: thank you for the call. we will get a response. guest: first point is our cost of living in this country is very high, and so what looks like a reasonable income or a basic minimum wage income barely lets a family get by and provide the food and the kinds of services that they need. on the question of importing immigrants -- we don't affirmatively import immigrants, but all throughout this country, we have been a nation of immigrants, and they have come to this country in masses. i mean, the germans, the irish,

others, they have come, they have made good, they contribute to society, they contribute to our economy, and that has been the history of the u.s. so the people who come to this country over the past couple of decades, particularly hispanics, have come because they want a better life. they have contributed, in my is a very rare situation that an immigrant coming to this country, legal or up on a welfare role of any kind. i think we have to view these folks in terms of our history, we have to view these folks in terms of the human aspect of it, and what we can embrace everybody, i think we can still embrace the fact if they are energetic, hard-working, and

want to build a better life for themselves. host: a number of tweets regarding welfare reform signed into law in 1996 by bill clinton, you served as u.s. about her to mexico during that time -- and welfare reform for single moms into the wor kplace and away from parenting? guest: that is a good question and i cannot answer that. i have not studied up to kill or aston villa. the welfare reform did answer a noterned that the -- i have studied up and cannot answer it. the welfare reform did answer a concern at the time. dealing with education so they can have a better life, that has had, what i know, a substantial effect on improving that situation. undoubtedly, there have been some families, some situations where it has not worked, but overall i think it has worked. from cheri's joining us florida on the democrats line. good morning. caller: good morning.

thinking about the comment that he made earlier, education, family structure, and talking about immigrants like irish, european, german people coming over and how they have actually contributed and become successful people. well, you know, it is funny how you never mentioned african- americans because even hispanics get props, they get recognized as contributors coming for the american dream, see, we forget that african-americans never chose to or had a choice to come here for the american dream. they were brought here to help everybody else get their american dream. they were denied education, they were denied anything as far as whites to become a citizen. they were denied actually being able to have a family, to get

married, it was against the law for people of color, and i am hispanicng about descent, i am talking about african-american people who were brought here to help everybody else in the american society to famous and not only famous but prosperous. guest: i think that is a very good point. what a lot of people forget is that a major part of president was to's war on poverty pass civil rights legislation, past voting rights legislation. at the time, the principal beneficiaries of those were african-americans who had been denied, legally denied an opportunity, as this person has pointed out. and so part of the war on poverty was to unleash those bounds, those chains that kept the population of african- americans down. did that, forson

example, in his own appointments. he appointed the first african- american to be on the board of the federal reserve. he appointed the first african- american to be on the supreme court. he very much that african- americans had been denied the opportunity of other americans. in education, for example. so he was the voice of legislation, through voting rights, he encouraged and empowered african-americans to be a more central part of the u.s. promise. host: one of our viewers who calls himself a communist obsessed social security and medicare will keep 65% of baby boomers out of poverty since they did not save enough. guest: i think the savings rate in the u.s. today is unfortunately very low. that not only contributes to

problems when baby boomers come into retirement age, but it presents problems in the economy today. you have to have savings in order to invest in the economy so the economy can grow and that all people can prosper. problem.t is a i do not think it necessarily ties into the war on poverty of president johnson, but the savings rate of have to be increased and has to be encouraged. host: we have a few minutes left as we look back on the 50th anniversary of president johnson's speech, the war on inerty, as he delivered january, 1960 four, we are talking with james johnson served in the johnson administration as a appointment secretary, later a member of congress will solve i want to share with you what he said in a conversation, part of the lbj about how president johnson was going to pass his legislative agenda. [video clip]

say this is not going to solve poverty. 30 years ago, we talked about one third, today we are good talking about 1/5, but it is the beginning, and as president kennedy said, "let us begin," and this is the beginning. works, as the peace corps works, then we will improve it. if it does not, we will correct it, but let us begin. host: that goes back to your earlier point about how he viewed legislation, what worked and what did not. guest: yes. that was one of the very interesting things about him. he knew that the government could not solve all the problems , but he did want to begin to address the problems. he recognized that our country changes over time, and as a government, we have to change with it and try to solve the problems as they exist. he recognized that some government programs are not going to work. if they did not work, they could not be corrected, then they

needed to be abandoned. he was a very radical person. --practical person. at the same time, he was motivated to improving the lives of all the people. commentis is another from irish eyes -- they have not and pace with inflation only include the cost of food. let's go to rhonda for our last call, springfield, massachusetts, independent line. caller: good morning. i have been a single-parent all my life and i have never used any kind of government entitlement programs to help take care of my family. in the city that i live in, we have more african american women who are homeowners, single parents, and very successful, however, none of that information is given out to the public. my home is paid for. another problem with we as blacks were african-americans, whatever you want to refer to

us as, when you took us out of those segregated schools and put us into the -- out of the desegregated schools and put us into segregated schools, those white teachers who are educating our black children do not have racial problems with educating us. host: we will get a response. thank you. guest: i think racial prejudice is something that cannot be justly wiped out by legislation, but legislation can make it socially unacceptable to publicly talk about those racial prejudices, and over time they actually disappear. not in everybody, but in a whole lot of people. host: finally, if president johnson were here today, how would he viewed his legislative agenda items and where they are in 2014? guest: i think he would view them as those -- those that still exist would still be considered successful, including medicare.

i think he would be tackling the medicare andncing make sure it was on a sound financial footing. bemoan the fact that some of the programs did not work and had to be abandoned. he was a very practical man in that respect. i think he would view the use of government as an instrument to help all people at something he still would strongly support. host: james jones, who is a member of the board of directors of the lyndon b. johnson founda next we will look on what is the session as they return from their winter recess. wall streete journal jenna hook will join us. then at least talks about the

health care law and what has happened in the last few days and they started receiving health care coverage. will talk roscoe about a we sent report on revenues from oil and gas companies that drill on land. we will look for your reaction iphone and e-mail. live every day at 7:00 eastern on c-span. >> our message was this. lady's were committed and that citizens of the world, we pledged to do everything possible. appear,er different may there is far more that unites us than divides us. we are here to find common ground so that we may help bring new dignity and respect to women and girls all over the world.

>> all of you are such a vital part of that very conversation. years, all of you will be building the businesses. you will be making the discoveries that drafting the laws and policies that will move our countries and our world forward for decades to come. >> monday, our original series, influence and image returns with the five most recent first ladies from nancy reagan to michelle obama. it is live on c-span and c-span three. >> c-span, we bring public affairs events from washington directly to you, pinning you in the room at congressional hearings, white house events and conferences in offering complete gavel to gavel coverage of the u.s. house as a public service industry.

it is funded by your local cable or satellite provider. watch us in hd. tomorrownate returns for more debate in a vote on janet yellen to replace outgoing chairman ben bird nagy. next her confirmation hearing before the senate banking committee 20have a policy who -- . this is about two hours and 20 minutes.

>> i call this hearing to order. today we consider the nomination of the honorable janet yellin to be chair of the board of governors of the federal reserve system for a term of four years. dr. yellin is an extraordinary candidate to lead the federal reserve. she currently serves as a member and vice chair of the board of governors. she previously served as a

member of the board of governors in the 1990's. she was a chair of the -- of president clinton's council on economic advisors and she served six years as the president of the san francisco fed. in addition, dr. yellin has an impressive academic record. she is a professor at berkeley's school of business and was previously a professor at harvard university as well as a faculty member of the london school of economics. dr. yellin graduated suma cum laude and received her phd in economics from yale. the nomination is especially timely as our nation struggles with high unemployment in the wake of the great recession. she has devoted a large portion of her professional and academic career to setting labor market,

unemployment, monetary policy and the economy. dr. yellin also has a strong track record in evaluating trends in the economy. her academic analysis has been spot on. the "new york times" recently noted that she was "the first fed official in 2005 to describe the rise in housing prices as a bubble that might damage the economy. she was also the first in 2008 to say that the economy had fallen into a recession ." these forecasts were not an anomaly. the "wall street journal"

recently analyzed 700 predictions made between 2009 and 2012 in speeches and congressional testimony by 14 federal reserve policy makers and found dr. yellin was the most accurate. this accurate economic judgment would be a tremendous quality of a fed chair. dr. yellin has proved through her extensive and impressive record in public service and academia that she is most qualified to be the next chair of the federal reserve. we need her expertise at the helm of the fed as the nation continues to recover from the great recession. complete wall street reform and continues to enhance the stability of our financial sector.

i'm excited to cast my vote for to confirm her as first woman to serve as chair of the federal reserve and when we vote on the nomination i urge my colleagues to do the same. i now turn to member crapo for his opening statement. >> thank you. today's hearing is an opportunity not only to examine governor yellin's qualifications but also her views on role and direction of the federal reserve. in recent years the fed has engaged in unprecedented policies including purchasing trillions of dollars in treasuries and mortgage-backed securities. current fed purchases total up to $85 billion a month. as a result, the next fed chair will inherit a balance sheet that currently stands at

approximately $3.8 trillion, four times higher than before the financial crisis. as i think everyone knows, i have been a long-time critic of the fed's quantitative easing purchases. now that a reduction in asset purchases seems to be on the horizon, i'm concerned that markets have become overly reliant on them. it is essential to know how dr. yellin, if confirmed, would manage the process of normalizing the monetary policy. the fed indicated it would hold short-term interest rates low for an extended period. governor yellin stated the policy rate should be held lower for longer. how long is too long? the extended period of low rates is hurting individuals. the international monetary fund cautioned that the actions taken by central banks are associated with financial risks that are likely to increase if the policies are maintained. how would the fed ensure that the risks are avoided under dr. yellin's chairmanship?

in addition to unprecedented monetary policy, the next fed chair will finalize several regulatory reform rules that must balance the financial stability with the inherent need for markets to take on and accurately price risk. they must be done without putting the u.s. markets at an undue competitive disadvantage or harming consumers with unintended consequences. the chair must understand how different rules interact and what impact they have on the affected entities and economy at large. just as some worried that we did not have enough regulations on the books to prevent the economic crisis, some of us worry that the post crisis response will result in a regulatory regime that stifles growth and job creation. the chair of the federal reserve must know and understand the need for that balance and how to carefully manage competing demands without harming the economy. u.s. banking system and capital

markets must remain the preferred destination for investors throughout the world. during previous hearings i asked chairman bernanke what parts of dodd-frank could be revisited. chairman bernanke also commented in july that legislation is needed to allow the fed flexibility to deal with the collins amendment and tailor appropriate capital requirements for insurance companies. i look forward to hearing dr. yellin's views on what dodd- frank fixes congress ought to consider and how she intends to achieve an appropriate balance between the regulation and economic growth in confirmed. in addition to the previously mentioned issues, the makeup of the board itself will change in the near future. governor sarah bloom raskin nominated. if governor yellin is confirmed as chair, the fed will need a new vice chair. moreover, dodd-frank created a vice chair of supervision which has not yet been officially filled. the appointments will shape the direction of the federal reserve policy making for years to come.

i look forward to working with the chairman to see that the positions are filled in a way that provides the proper balance and expertise at the fed. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you, senator crapo. we have agreed, to allow for sufficient time for questions, we are limiting opening statements to the chair and member. all senators are welcome to submit an opening statement for the record. we will now swear in dr. yellin. please rise and raise your right hand. do you swear or affirm that the testimony that you are about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you god? >> do you agree to appear and testify before any duly constituted committee of the senate?

>> i do. >> please proceed. >> please be sure that your written statement will be part of the record and i invite you to introduce your family and friends in attendance before beginning your statement. dr. yellin, please proceed with your testimony. >> thank you. i would like to introduce my husband george, and my sister, and my friend and a former san francisco fed director carla chambers here with me today. chairman johnson, senator crapo and members of the committee, thank you for this opportunity to appear before you today. it has been a privilege for me to serve the federal reserve at different times and in different roles over the past 36 years. and i'm honored to be nominated

by the president to lead the fed as chair of the board of governors. i approach this task with a clear understanding that the congress has entrusted the federal reserve with great responsibilities. its decisions affect the well- being of every american and the strength and prosperity of our nation. that prosperity depends most, of course, on the productiveness and enterprise of the american people but the federal reserve plays a role, too, promoting conditions that foster maximum employment, low and stable inflation and a safe and sound financial system. the past six years have been challenging for our nation and difficult for many americans. we endured the worst financial crisis and deepest recession

since the great depression. the effects were severe. but they could have been far worse. working together, government leaders confronted these challenges and successfully contained the crisis. under the wise and skilled leadership of chairman bernanke, the fed helped stablize the financial system, arrest the steep fall in the economy and restart growth. today the economy is significantly stronger and continues to improve. the private sector has created 7.8 million jobs since the post crisis low for employment in 2010. housing, which was at the center of the crisis, seems to have turned a corner. construction home prices and sales are up significantly. the auto industry has made an impressive comeback with domestic production in sales back to near their pre-crisis levels. we have made good progress, but

we have further to go to regain the ground lost in the crisis and the recession. unemployment is down from a peak of 10%, but at 7.3% in october it is still too high. reflecting a labor market and economy performing far short of their potential. at the same time, inflation is running below the federal reserve's goal of 2% and is expected to continue to do so for some time. for these reasons, the federal reserve is using its monetary policy tools to promote a more robust recovery. a strong recovery will ultimately enable the fed to reduce its monetary accommodation and reliance on unconventional policy tools such as asset purchases. i believe that supporting the recovery today is the surest path to returning to a more normal approach to monetary policy.

in the past two decades, and especially under chairman bernanke, the federal reserve has provided more and clearer information about its goals. like the chairman, i strongly believe that monetary policy is most effective when the public understands what the fed is trying to do and how it plans to do it. at the request of chairman bernanke, i led the effort to adopt a statement of the federal open market committee's longer run objectives including a 2% goal for inflation. i believe this statement has sent a clear and powerful message about the fomc's commitment to its goals and has helped anchor the public's expectations that inflation will remain low and stable in the future.

in this and many other ways, the federal reserve has become a more open and transparent institution. i strongly supported this commitment to openness and transparency and i will continue to do so if i'm confirmed and serve as chair. the crisis revealed weaknesses in our financial system. i believe that financial institutions, the federal reserve, and our fellow regulators have made considerable progress in addressing those weaknesses. banks are stronger today. regulatory gaps are being closed. and the financial system is more stable and more resilient. safeguarding the united states in the global financial system requires higher standards both here and abroad. so the federal reserve and other

regulators have worked with our counterparts around the globe to secure improved capital requirements and other reforms internationally. today, banks hold more and higher quality capital and liquid assets that leaves them much better prepared to withstand financial turmoil. large banks are now subject to annual stress tests designed to ensure that they will have enough capital to continue the vital role they play in the economy even under highly adverse circumstances. we have made progress in promoting a strong and stable financial system but here, too, important work lies ahead. i'm committed to using the fed's supervisory and regulatory role to reduce the threat of another financial crisis.

i believe that capital and liquid rules and strong supervision are important tools for addressing the problem of financial institutions that are regarded as too big to fail. in writing new rules, however, the fed should continue to limit the regulatory burden for community banks and smaller institutions, taking into account their distinct role and contributions. overall, the federal reserve has sharpened its focus on financial stability and is taking that goal into consideration when carrying out its responsibilities for monetary policy. i support these developments and pledge if confirmed to continue them.

our country has come a long way since the dark days of the financial crisis, but we have farther to go. i believe the federal reserve has made significant progress toward its goals but has more work to do. thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today. i would be happy to respond to your questions. >> thank you for your testimony. will the clerk please put five minutes on the clock for each member? dr. yellin, you know as i do that unemployment is not just numbers, we are real men and women who are ready to work if given the chance. if you are chair, how will you lead the fed to continue to reduce unemployment aggressively and improve the prospects of young americans and others who are unemployed? >> thank you, senator. i would be strongly committed to working with the fomc to

continue promoting a robust economic recovery. as you noted, unemployment remains high. a disproportionate share of that unemployment takes the form of long spells of unemployment, around 36% of all those unemployed have been unemployed for more than six months. this is a virtually unprecedented situation, and we know that those long spells of unemployment are particularly painful for households, impose great hardship and costs on those without work, on the marriages of those who suffer these long unemployment spells, on their families. so i consider it imperate