let's to start right there. >> what about the state state, and the other groups, youinterest mainly talk about the big corporations. have, isem democrats this identity group interest group. where one identity questions more than others. i am a federal official. i think the federal government will set the tone, particularly for democrats in 2016. what i say applies to state governments as well. just as the middle class needs help, there are things these states can do to be helpful.

it is not just big corporations. there are lots of interest groups. we have to focus on the middle class. we have to discount interest groups and ask if it will in effect the average of voter. politics, notr through intermediates, i've tried for 40 years to talk directly to the people. the averagealk to voter and say this is what we are doing, and not worry about the intermediaries. >> jerry? >> high, jerry. >> regarding what you said about health care being the wrong priority for the party in 2010, e.g. make that point clear to others within the democratic party at the time? >> yes. >> what reaction did you get? >> lots of people thought it was the one opportunity and it was

very important. we should have done it, just not first. we were in the middle of a recession. people were hurting and saying they were losing their job. it wasn't health care that bothers them. their income was declining. were fine americans with their health care in 2009. mainly because it was paid for why the government or their private-sector employer. they weren't clamoring. middle-class voter was not opposed to doing health care when it started, but it was not at the top of the agenda. that allowed the opening for the tea party. they were playing on the angst of the deep recession to say they are not focused on what you are dealing. in true people to the false conclusion it was governments fault. >> do you think anything you're saying good play into the

republicans repeal efforts? i don't think they need anything else to play into their repeal efforts. 2014, look at the ads in very few republicans call for repeal. it was different than 2010. it is not that it is seen as a positive issue. their strong messaging in 2010 is still there, that it has less weight and may have moved on to other issues. >> past unlike to the yellow shirt. >> charlie clark with government executive. how much success do you think republicans will have next congress in cutting programs and eliminating agencies? >> here is another thing about the 2014 elections. many republicans were harping on the deficit and government spending.

it was not at the top of their list. this is an advantage of the health care bill. i don't know if it was an issue in this campaign. health care costs, the slope is going down instead of going up. that has brought down our deficit significantly. the biggest reason the deficit was going up was medicare and medicaid. it has had a positive effect. i think it is a good bill, and i'm proud to a voted for it. it just should have come later. the --tor schumer, with what the democrats consider a strategy of giving the republicans rope? >> i've never liked that strategy. we have to be true to who we are. we are a party of average folks

in the middle class. and the republicans want to put something on the floor that would help the middle class, i think we have to support it. we are a pro-government party. we have been all along. you can't run from it. that has what has divided the parties from 1932 to this day. that mansion is probably more pro-government -- on the economic agenda you referred to. specifically the things that can get done. and we demonstrate the government could do things. yearong is the window next , and what can be done? would have to sit as a little bird in the republican caucus, and have to see how strong the republican leadership

who knows the tea party when passing billiard pass to overcome this. congressional districts, and in a large number of senate districts, the tea party is dominant. it is hard for them to do. interestlooking at the of their party in 2016, versus the individual policies of their states. they conflict. where they come out, i don't know. i deliberately didn't get into specifics. we will have lots of discussions, that we have to come out with the plan i outlined. not immediately, because i don't think our republican colleagues will fill the void. 2016 i would like to have all of the things outlined and the democrats united on them. -- christies hughes.

from reuters. i wanted to ask about the trade agenda. >> i won't get into specifics. go ahead. >> i wanted to ask about the trans-pacific partnership. and if that was something democrats could support. >> i would wait to see what the proposals are. the view of the average voter, and most democrats, is that trade overall has heard wages significantly. what do we do about it? have -- i schumer, i wanted to ask about a topic of the day. you a question about the president's executive order on immigration? i wonder if that order you think will incentivize people to come to the country illegally.

even though the president has specifics on who will be eligible. >> i don't think it will, no. >> hello. i wanted to ask about the likely provision that you talked about in your speech. how do you do fine likely? you can look at what will get ed, or politically. >> because of how i have described our politics, the democrats, if we come up with a strong middle class agenda we inl have a large victory 2016. onhave to be prepared to act the things that matter and will lift middle-class incomes. if we can do that, we are not

the same as roosevelt, but that is a great model. .hings are a big mess bigger than most people know. those of us who are talking to people every day realize the anguish of average voters. the great thing about america is our optimism. that is dying. when that dies, other recessions were shorter. people said i'm having tough times, but it will be better. they don't say that anymore. they don't believe their children's lives will be better than theirs. the bottom line is, if we can reverse that and convince people we can, which i believe we can, we will be the majority party for generation. 2015-2016 look at the time and play it by ear. if the republican party will work with things to benefit the

middle class, we should go with them. to answer your question directly, i don't think we should minimize our policies because we need not -- we may not be able to pass them in the house. we need to concentrate on creating the next generation. to cementing a democratic the jordi for the next generation. i don't think the republicans can do that unless they abandon their belief to let the private sector do more. >> cnn. my question about your speech entitled 2016. it will be aimed toward the 2016. i know you have endorsed secretary clinton, but issue the right person for this? >> a lot of it will depend on the balance between the republican leadership. --wants " nk once

>> we have lost the signal from senator schumer's remarks. if you messed of anything he had to say, we will have it in its entirety later on our website www.c-span.org. senator schumer returns to his policy chair. in addition, senator debbie stabenow was elected vice chair. a new congress convenes in january. we have senator schumer back. we will return for the remainder of his remarks. >> i hope she runs.

if she runs, she will win a huge majority. she is just right for the times. >> yahoo! news. can you hear me? >> i can. thank you, i appreciate that. it was announced there would be at they can see at the top of the pentagon. the first thing the republican majority might do is to confirm a nominee. one thing we have heard is that sequestration threat have unduly affected the military. i am wondering if you are new republicane majority may roll back those cuts without talking about cuts to social programs that were paired with them. >> the budget deficit is in better shape than it was three or four years ago.

they don't have the velocity to make the same magnitude of cuts on the defense and nondefense side. democrats believe in 50-50. the president feels strongly in 50-50. should they try to violate the 50-50, they face a president who would not support with a past. hello, senator. globalization and that you are talking about is not static. it will continue to increase and accelerate. i wonder if there is a sense among you and your colleagues, that to way the american economy works is shifting. if so, what does the policy response to look like? is there a fundamental restructuring? fundamentally shifting.

this loss of income. america has never had a loss of median income for such a long time. suchhave never had it for a time for the gdp between 2001 and 2014. two thirds of those years, or gdp wasree quarters, going up and middle-class incomes were going down. that is because technology allows capital to get the benefits of productivity more than labor. sooner or later, you cannot have labor go down, politically or substantively. we willof the things propose, they will not just nibble at the edges. they will be significant changes. not to stop technology. productivity, efficiency, technology has many benefits. asked, ison i have

why with all of this new not gotion have costs down for the middle class person? that may involve restructuring. a number of the problems you listed at the top of your speech that led to losses in 2014 go with the administration. youmuch responsibility think the obama administration carries -- the world changes. there are difficulties in changing. the administration adopted quite well. , history willonse look back and say it was excellent. there has been very little spread. day anedy airport, every large number of people arrive from the west african hotspots, are monitored, and looked at.

the cdc has instructed new york had a do it, and it has worked. no offense to anyone in this room, but you cannot prevent the press from focusing on the negative and a sensationalistic way. the average american watching ebola stories thought they would get ebola. nowhere not come out of . if you have a strong middle class agenda, the number one thing is the average voter said make my life better. when the middle-class incomes are rising and people have hoped, these negativities play less of a role. >> questioned should the administration be doing to help the democratic minority? >> working with us on what i said. , you designed the democratic agenda. the fair shot agenda.

policies that you named were in the agenda. >> i didn't name any policies. >> like the minimum wage. when you look back, was there anything that went wrong? >> no, that was a big success. the greatest success that our candidates had in the deepest red states were from that agenda. >> are you suggesting an option for democrats may be to oppose some of these agreements -- some of these trade agreements? >> i'm not getting into specifics. most people think that trade has hurt wages, not increased wages. even if it has increased gdp and productivity.

that is it. thank you, everybody. >> thank you, this has been a wonderful and successful meeting. i have to hurry. >> we are adjourned. >> new york senator schumer wrapping up at the national press club. in the recent leadership elections he was reelected as the democratic policy chair. if you missed any of what he had to say, you can see it in its entirety, even what we messed -- what we missed through technical difficulties on www.c-span.org. president obama will talk about

immigration in chicago this afternoon. live coverage after 5:30. today reports the 2016 democratic national convention will be held in brooklyn, elidel fear, or columbus. they also announced they intended to hold the convention --. republicans will hold their convention in june or july. candidates cannot raise money for the general election until after they are nominated. members of congress who will not petri in january, tom is retiring after three decades of representing wisconsin. he reflected on his time in events thatuding happened during his term. congressman tom petri, you

have been in the house since april of 1979. you're are now down to your last few weeks. what is that like? >> it has been a good run. there is a sense of moving on. i'm in transition. i am told you don't use retirement, you use transition. >> will you stay in washington or go to wisconsin? >> i want to do both. my wife is from indiana. we met here. she is originally from wisconsin, but she has a job here. emily to keep the together. here and at our house in fond du lac. i will meet a lot of people from different walks of life. we do a lot of constituent

service working with organizations trying to help people and organizations in the district work through the , beington maze competitive in their businesses, and the rest. this, is a social connector job. you learn about different things, that you would never -- you specialize in a particular area. here you have to learn a little about everything. it is amazing the things that become a concern as you are doing a congressional job. >> what will you miss the least? .> i've enjoyed this job a lot i've not sure anything is particularly rest rating. one thing is that there is not enough time in the day to deal

with all the things you would like to deal with. we are fortunate that each congressional representative 17000 people.0 or it is basically impossible to do all the different things involved. had good ande have able people in our district offices who carry most of the daily burden. >> your arrival is almost completely wanted and with the arrival of televised congress. you came in one month after it started. about your observations on the changing media, and how it has affected this constitution. we went from a televised 24-hour news, and now

social media. how does that affect your work and your ability to do your work? >> i've never been in a congress when it was a televised. work when we did not have automatic voting. , many of theyears procedures that were followed before electronic voting, where people had to stand up to get a roll call, that gradually went away. roll call votes are now automatic if anyone requests it. before they were rare because they took so long. twice. 435 names people would gather if they had already been called in the house. could takerocess

three or four hours. electronic voting can do it in a minute or two. there has has been been a proliferation of votes and procedural issues. we are casting thousands of votes at congress, where before they may have cast a couple of hundred. i'm not sure the quality of the thing has gone up. i've talked to people who served in the congress before television. change.ot fight you have to figure out how to work it to your vintage. in washington, the supreme court has been rely and to televise their proceedings. tohas been very reluctant televise their proceedings. it is now broadcast over radio.

they are edging into it. before television, representatives would negotiate bills on the floor of the house and talk akin fourth. forth- and talk talk and forth with back and substantive talks. now it is a show for television. they don't want to deviate from what was prepared by their staff. here, there was some question as to whether you were allowed to use written material when speaking on the floor of the house. you could put things in the record if it was written. it was supposed to be, you are speaking, not reading. now, of course, it is different. >> now speakers can bring

ipads on the forward. >> they are taking selfies, which is against the rules. a few years after televised congress, cnn had a televised news cycle. now it is instantaneous. has that had an effect on how you legislate and do your job? all kinds of institutions are in the process of trying to adjust to the changes in technology. this has been going on since the telegraph was invented. it is going on in an accelerated fashion. why does it cause problems? you are in the business, the news business, other than being an intermediary, what is important -- what is important is in context.

you earn your keep i accurately summarizing and prioritizing information. availableenly all instantaneously online. it becomes flat and messy. you get all kinds of good, bad, stuff on the web. that is a problem for people in the news business, and other businesses. there's something to be said for the old adage, act in haste and regret at your leisure. back in the days when we were a colony, it would take a few weeks to get to europe. then a few weeks to get back. you would have a couple of months between sending letters. you had time to think about what made sense, and what didn't. to focus on things.

people are trying to figure out how to get space so they can get depth rather than just reacting. as a kid i can remember, they said people are impressed in awarea of people who are -- are impressed in america by whoever was president when they first realized this. i was in the eisenhower generation. the thought of dwight eisenhower getting up every morning and getting on air force one and flying somewhere. getting a 15 minute speech. to be a part of the news cycle giving back. you wouldn't think of it. not in a debate or any tv news shows.

he was a very great leader, that people wanted as president. skilledot particularly as a manipulator of images. that is a whole different approach. now they are building him a memorial because he was a great president. is not what is going on now. you when talking to you have had news in your own career. about an ethics investigation you asked for. the committee has decided they will continue it. i will invite people who are interested in the details to go online. i want to talk you about process . when you asked for it and you have a reasonable expectation it would be judy gated by the time you were leaving -- it would be

adjudicated -- it would be judy time you were leaving. >> by the time i asked for the ethics investigation, i had gone to the committee to ask stock, to make sure i was before and congress. well i owned several corporations, it was it i was deliver my own pocket or as a representative. if we try to help themin congressional things you festival had to get approved from the ethics committee. stocks are not

down, aas well as ups i have i haven't sold any. that investigated because questions were raised, it happened about eight years ago leads to the question of whether congress to review and other congress. he was thrown out of congress then he was re-elected but the supreme court said that the voters were the ones that had to decide. anyway, we do not want to raise in procedural questions. i have followed the advices. >> since the ethics committee how does that work when you will not be here any longer? february to ack in

review it, they still have not appointed a committee to do it. there are other panels who also purposes to review things and a statement to the ethics committee is a think there is anything there to look at. they did do that. they have not indicated against it. >> so if three years you can find out a jurisdiction on this? >> no. the limit of the jurisdiction is the congressman. served on the s committee. back to speaker right. that a the first time

sitting speaker resign and give his position, his speech very dramatic and historical that people can watch. the lens ring through of time. how that whole speaker investigation seems to it had on at impact congress? thought the ethics one ttee had two jobs, someone obviously if did something wrong in a violation of the rules of the house or brought discredit upon deal ouse you have to properly with that. members of the house against unfounded accusations.

when people would send things to the ethics committee, a two before the election, we said if you feel it ongly about this you do after the election. because it was just a partisan political stuff going on. i do think it shows that the speaker of the house, he is the leader and most powerful person in the house, the ethics by equal is made number of both political parties. about the only committee in congress like that. used for it is not political vendettas that as an act on the to merits and not in the politics of different things. effectively as it never in that case,

did reach a conclusion causbe the speaker resigned. >> there are analysts that look one of the moments hyper partisanship really began, that led to the republican revolution ultimately. things have been pretty intense between the two parties almost every sense. they have any sense that i was the watershed moment? >> i think -- in may of been terms of the n in committee, it was gillian who was a strong democrat from los angeles. he said don't worry we'll take care of everything. if it was a part of something on the committee nothing could be done. because the investigation went to the ethics committee and

especially in intelligence committee, it led of his own party to make him resign. >> if not that then what are the big contributors to the state of partisanship in it has today? bit of media chatter. in the committees i have served members get on very well. if senior member on the trust are praising ittee the work of the chairman of the committee for working in a bipartisan fashion. case in e that is the most committees, and is still the armed e in services committee. they have a bipartisan staff.

really gone nged from is addressed more autonomous political to bills being done in the majority and minority leadership offices. to results -- their job is be party leader and to build a team and keep it together, that is fine. the chairman's job is to get something done in the areas of jurisdiction. any of the committees. what we ax law -- but

have seen interests away from committee, from that follow the party leadership and scheduling bills because of the cycle business. reacting and trying to get on top of, it is very short-term staff. the quality of bills that come result is abysmal. you have to look at obamacare, which never intended to be a bill. had passed thing i a lot of e with patches and then suddenly they lost community they needed

of election in than chusetts and rather pass it through the house, it has a lot of holes in it. that is different for other bills like transportation one. not just the members, the committee staffers and there is members of more than 50 years. which know a lot. we have tended to move in the almost passing press releases and trying to call it legislation. in the short run but

it causes more and more frustration and problems. >> how has the tenor changed inside a republican conference for last year's? >> not a lot. yourself as a e pragmatic conservative. the moderate voices seem to be dying out? >> i don't know if i am a moderate over everybody else is an extremist. [laughter] both parties have this kind of think, my democratic colleagues that are always complaining because their party or district

were calling them dinos. then you have rhinos. a quote about you. >> her mother was my eighth grade science teacher and her was the high school gym and basketball coach. >> she said good things about your. "she's one of those kind of old school republicans which has an for government and institutions, aalso tries to get along with people with make the views to government better". is that oold school? >> now i think it is trying to do your job.

some of the people involved in in the 1860 trade. these people were struggling desperately to try to work out to keep the union aavoiding splitting up and issues like abolition of slavery and others. they compromising until got more angry, if you cannot compromise on principles and i think those are representative south who went over -- of the r to live for one southern states there were each re-elected by reclamation.

the psychology of that was that they do not want any more they want confrontation. what happened is that more people are killed in any time in history. the abolished slavery in brazil tours without a war. this was a big international movement, slavery was on its way. is a came a symbol, it terrible thing we have been through much worse times. in the rvation is that political process people put everything on the ideological spectrum.

a lot does not fit enough spectrum and we have a lot of divisions in our country with a dangerous than ideological divisions. thought the civil war, it was not left or the right ideology it was over different economic interests. and whistle have big they rences like that but the to get forgotten under left right debate. tax, which is n different in the west and the east. in tennessee that will be more tension on the front.

it is much easier to be a hero this kind of thing than in southern illinois. >> they talk about some major the od during your time, first is 911. what was it like? the was happily reading morning newspaper and debbie keeps the door open, it or my gosh, there has been a terrible thing in new york. could this have happened? be less control.

later, it utes happened again. then everybody said, oh, oh. >> did you have to evacuate? >> i think the pentagon was a bit later. my reaction was a little different than a lot of people. they wanted to evacuate, my reaction was that it was not going to be a war they bombed every building. leave if you want but you know better get paid if you do. if you mince later they came and they ordered us out of the building. noel firetrucks could get from

dc to the pentagon. the close to schools for some reason. school at r was in to get my i managed the garage here it are merely lumped together and she was one of the less kids to get picked up. tthe irrational panic which some kind of people stirrup. some bureaucratic and other interest, but is not the things iate response to of this sort which are done by a few people to create exactly

the kind of response. the british response during calm and ii was keep carry on. work behind the scenes to get after these guys is a much more the opriate response than one we had at 9/11. in clearing this building. they do this repeatedly after 911. if we were all in the street they could shoot us. of protecting the people in those situations. the first outcome the first o

iraq war. you initially votedthey had concerns about guantanamo bay. >> we were told this business about weapons of mass destruction, it turned out that they never found much. saddam hussein was from a secular communist air movement but there were certain things -- ccertainly not religious fanatic type of thing. >> where does the country stand after we have gone through all this? >> we use our emotions rather than our head. stop and ask ourselves, terraced movements are nothing new, they have been the beginning of time. how do they end? to the end because you bomb from the sky? the people study this and the answer is they win, they are up, there , they give are isolated.

this is something that is not necessarily best dealt with by tanks, planes and armed forces. on a y has to be dealt political way and possibly on an intelligence level. a little below we do with organised crime. the other great traces was to the 2008 meltdown. i was worrying about the response and how does that seem to you? do as a country? at the time, ppeople were asking to bring back people from the reagan administration. they try and save some banks. of the underlying issues on

not think, because you are scheduled bills -- they could not close down the savings because if they can not pay up the deposits they would be panic. but have to provide more money insurance so they could pay off the deposits is a close. keep business open. finally, that was dealt with and some of these stations were closed. they set up the reconciliation trust. lot of us felt that there was a muddled which was appropriate for the housing site of what it is called crisis. and was as not followed

lot of individual mortgage the way it was do not , because they look at what had been dented a few years before. discussion wall street which on wall street problems. they had been engaging in all of these insurance and the like. consulted partly use ing. major lawsuit going was etween greenberg which

a great patriot, he believes government violated the constitution. million he's sewing for. may have a chance. in a few minutes we finish. back across your career what are the things you're proud of being part of? to the first, i signed education committee. am happy for that because education is somebody that affects everybody. put in a bill because we had

recruiting people and believed white that we give for ent loan forgiveness people who serve on the military. people who serve different and ches of the reserves the military forces, if they to offer that y introduced it in subcommittee, they do not say was a bad idea but they said you in the education committee and this has to do with the armed services. should onal congress we all be working on national interests. the troduced it to committee and they voted it down unanimously. of those days the committee

chairman was pretty they could cannot decide. they believetheir bills should contemplate the whole rule, let any member offer anything they wanted. now it is much more controlled because of this change in the way things are done. it was an open rule soil for dead on the floor. i was frightened to death. seem to be adopted 2-1. so it became law, i thought i was very persuasive. tv said he is watching on and he thought this young man had a good idea.

i later learned he was the the defence the defence n subcommittee.

appropriation subcommittee. it turned into a fight. the appropriation committee and the education committee, my bill was adopted. it was an introduction to the congress and we had all the different wheels went on at this. another thing i worked on was modernising the tax credit. i think it is a better way to go the minimum wage, tto help people who are low income and who need help. who are trying to support the families, with the minimum wage we feel good because we order a businessman to pay more to the worker. they are often unable to pay much for themselves, under the earning tax if somebody support a family and we all chip in and to the earning tax credit it goes in. others supported this offer, so we increased and modernise the tax credit. the idiot is that it would move from the minimum wage, as a better way to deal with it. never talk about the fact that really a minimum wage. it is all very weird. serve the interest -- bbig corporations do not pay minimum wage directly. wage jobs are normally

in government. would have a deficit, earning from tax credit seems to be a better way. create as an effort to and get right interest to the long program like something has been taking years under the contingent repayment part. good think and a something that we have to adopt the house of representatives. during the clinton administration was expanded. the guarantee program has been moved to the side because people believe that the county program is a private, not a government program.

the reality is that taxpayers are on the holcombe both programs. is a private company, began to think is done by the banks- a loss, the taxpayer suffers the loss. time has evaporated her, you planning to give your papers anywhere? in the state senate for years before was elected to the house representative congress. i did get my state senate they were to s working with the wisconsin society to do the same with the congressional papers.

all that stuff what they would like, aand what not. get your little soldiers of being guardians of the treasure. >> thank you reflecting on is 35 of politics. >> we have another interview mccarthy, wwhere she was there for 18 years. are about to become former representative . are you thinking it? >> in my mind i am already there. looking forward to retiring, i love my job as you know i had cancer last year.

i am doing well, but myself weird nurse we have a sense of humour, so i had to say yes. my family want me back home. people don't understand that her, et on the plane from he had home, you get the plane you're doing district work. >> what will you miss the most about this place? >> my friends on both sides of the aisle. i know they say we are very dysfunctional herebut many of have worked very well, and when democrats were in charge and the s chairwoman

education committee, i worked with my republican colleagues and we got bills done. would come to me to sponsor bills on the democratic side. us to work together, it the old days but there are many members here which still work together. ones ig things are the make the news, but we are still making the government work. the other e impressions that the public might have about congress that might not be true? >> it is damaging for others when a member cross the line and do something wrong. say 99.9% of the members are good people. there is always good to be people who put a bad name on us. it is a shame.

i have money in stock so now we have the pudding -- i don't e sold pay attention to that, that is why i have a broker. did anybody self, ever mention somebody that we could have inside information. i do remember in my 18 years anything or anybody approaching me on that. before s that we have you did scandal, if something wrong he got caught. caught, you got punished. youeither had to leave congress at your prosecuted and have to go to jail. believe the house ethics has encourage good behaviour?

>> i do. i believe they do a good job. you always good to get a member who does something wrong. dinner with democratic women, there was a time when i was three or four scandals going on at the same time. why would they think that would ever get away with? thank god, no woman has ever brought up on charges. that is a good thing, maybe women see things differently. >> in what other way is this institution different to the one you walked into in 1987? >> various differences, we can have debates on the floor and it would not be personal. what we have seen for last

years with speaker boehner, it is really personal and aggressive. we should all be on it that we are here, i am certainly honoured to serve her. attention have this in your heart and certain people back home who you are don't know you should stay. >> why do you think that is? >> i do not believe that a have made this -- 97% of democrats in a district. seat, also considered my a swing seat. very proud, especially

now, how many republicans and democrats would come up to me did a great job. you balance things. maybe that's just who i am, i you a to think it makes better person. other looked at districts before that, my area was very compact and it was always a republican district. when i ran the first six times was a republican district, now i started to get some more democrats. i was fine with that. >> your biography says that you you got publican before to congress. why was that? was the gun issue,

there was an incident when my husband was killed my son was other ly injured, two people were killed, my son go through and the other families, i decided to really get involved to make a d try difference. time, he ssman at that told me he would vote to keep assault weapons in place. i was here watching that debate. voted to repeal it, and i got mad at him. so i decide to run. i don't know how many years it was but i never changed my regiistration. i never thought that way.

people will say that, being conservative fiscal issues and probably being liberal on social issues. >> so having that background to make it easier for you when you got her to work across the aisle? >> i think it is my nursing, earn that everything will as a nurse, working on the had to take care of a lot of patience. they were not feeling well and you had to hold their hands and tell them it was good to be okay. literature to push them to do things they do not want to do. that was the perfect formula for working than her. going member to member, when sign a o get people to bill, taken the time to explain

what it was and how it could help the people back home. people who have been around a while it is hard to if 21 years since ferguson took fire. well, in is doing very hhis at the gym every day to try to keep body has, i pressed him to go swimming. said that me back, he so that ical therapist i should swim. >> has he managed to put together a normal life after what he went through? >> as normal as he possibly can. she went back to work after two he did very rs and well.

with a brain injury, stress is probably the worst thing that the patient can go through. we saw that wearing on him. he is working part-time, but he's not in a stressful situation. the beginning, he said their luggage to pay me enough. i told them that it was not about the money it was about socialising. >> you came to congress as gun as his signature issue, in your nine terms what have you managed to accomplish in the area? >> i think i have accomplished several things. people ly educated around the country, trying to say that we don't want to pick to own a gun but we want to look at tighter

controls. guns have a loophole where go one by one without going through a background check. those things. back in my shooting district, a priest and an elderly women were killed. the person that did the was mentally ill. he should not have been able to gun but he did. take the that not adjudications into the system. we had a bill and it did not pass. then virginia happened. that was a horror. within a couple of weeks i was get the bill passed and

president bush signed it. >> you look back and a belief accomplished you in your time? -- and never forgot, everyday i have been here that has been all the killings. warrant a little bit of me away. it doesn't matter how many when as a killing you go back to that moment when you find out. every victim goes through this. tv all the time, me some nasty

things, tthat has taken advantage of the tragedy that was unfolding in front of our eyes. than happy to say, hopefully other people will get on. also become an -- tthat other and lies the winters experience speak to you? >> when they started coming down here to lobby, and each there was a terrible tragedy of this families came lobby for gun bills. i was the one i had to lead the highs and lows.

if republicans were in control to y were not even allowed bill to start. it was hard. about the legislative process? the came hard because to me thinking that i could -- cure all, aand i couldn't. i can not saving all the pictures i had when i was a nurse, but that did not stop me going back. >> do you have any sense of appreciation or understanding this second amendment issue? >> try to educate my colleagues be using ou should certain terms. my opinion, the nra were

getting very bad misinformation. much better job educating those members after newtown. we started having hearings here we brought in hunters, many did not know so thousands of people do not go through a background check. the majority are laid legitimate gun owners. when i was laid up with a was watching discovery channel, watching everything that has to do with hunting and you can appreciate it. that is their sport. my husband and i used to go skiing all the time. all our friends in vermont were

hunters. i just did not like it is a sport. i could rom new york probably not even tasted. my colleagues now are looking at the issue a bit differently. is from newtown -- all the different people that try to reduce gun violence this country came together with one voice, i think that is the most important thing i can get do, but i everybody together. and then his job trying to to get thousands of supporters is extremely difficult. mayor bloomberg made a big difference.

those who have been trying to change the gun laws never had any money. you had mayor bloomberg coming in and said okay i will support you to come together. that is what we see now. long way to go, i happen to believe we should on a state level colorado and washington. members of ke the her comfortable, because all petrified of the nra. nra says something, they listen. >> is there any other lobby that has as much influence on aisle as the f the nra? get a bill passed. together to get past.

do sport more y funding for the courts to upgrade the computer systems, but then there's some other gun groups. they became very militant with though message. they were scared. you have a lotta people who earn a lot of money at the top of the nra. they get the money from them gun manufacturers. i'd still understand why the gun manufacturers are with us because gun safety should be one of their priorities. >> this was a signature issue but not the only during your time in congress, was it difficult to break through the of being an etition advocate to accomplish other things you wanted to do?

>> actually not. i know i keep but my ack to my nursing republican chairman's they always respected a lot of the amendments that i was able to get through the different committees. this only as who i was, yes, this is my issue, and some would have liked to devote with the ut that is not what came here for. every re-election, my opponent is one lways say she issue candidate. was proud to say yes, at least i have an issue. and the other one is, i do know one woman on earth who only has one issue. to do with m had

children, mainly because i in the education committee. because i thought i could work with young children in my district. it also way to try to not get them going to gangs, use drugs or other was in community. that inded my community the mass killings there were a midwest, where there was no minorities at all. and save s also to try the children, for them to grow up and have the best opportunities in life. >> some other pieces of legislation which is sponsored, you most proud of? >> getting the nation bill passed with president bush signing at.

that was the only bill passed in 14 years. the children and nutrition, i have a nutrition bill. that bama came and made her main focus. number of my schools got together programs. the grandmotherswife in the kitchen and made fresh food for children, worked out terrific. have that bill signed, working with the late senator kennedy, made me proud. can accomplish a lot. i'm sure even the majority of my constituents have no idea how many bills i got past.

probally the biggest faults, yyou do something and you get past, and they moved on. the board asked me what bills i would have to d i stop and think. i was always working. >> what were your message speed to incoming members of congress about how to be effective in getting legislation passed? >> it is very good to get to know your colleagues on both sides of the aisle. even when somebody is totally a guest: for what you came in and do, find other ways. couple of my a colleagues which nobody would have thought you could work with them.

i happen to a foxx, like. of a commuter ad college, i had a great interest because i had to do with education. with y to work together legislation and amendments, and financial services. things that i believe in. after the great crash, as i we voted for tarr. there are some pieces of that need to be which fixed. a republican and myself were together to fix that, don't just hate somebody because the fraught yelling. and out their interest work with them. sitting in your

office, there was i going pretty empty, what is your stuff going? >> one of the rest is back home in garden city, they approached i announced my retirement. i have worked with the delta so versity for many years, they came down and asked me to do an exhibit next spring. they came and took everything. a lot of things are going to be i loan to them, some things want to keep, not for myself but for my grandchildren, to look back and think look at all the stuff she has. -- reminds mantic of

the opportunities i had. the t to know all politicians around europe, come back and educate my constituents why i have to do something. things they took away was basically, travelling. they were members who said they were so proud they do not have a passport. on a u look at what we do daily basis, members should get to know why they are voting for something. money that know the we spend, especially in third world countries. growand helps them to be lifted up. to be self sustaining and we have seen that. and world bank internationally policy fund, to give $100 to woman to open up her own listeners.

-- business. that is wonderful and disagree to see something that has grown over the years. i know my constituents, why we are given all this money away. to make those countries self sustaining so we would not have to give them some much money on the future. >> there were leadership for the new congress, for the new congress,

questions asked about nancy pelosi, by the press, aabout the freshness of the leadership team. it then had to be new voices. what are you thinkable of the institution you are leaving behind and the leadership team that has an aspiration in the majority again? >> i think they are equipped. i also think we have many talented younger members. i think nancy pelosi has been a great leader and she's very good at raising money. that is not one of my forte's. pages that training young people and bringing them in. one of the things that i suddenly believe with all my heart and soul, you have to know when to leave. when i look around, is anybody

ready to replace her? is a hard job, i give her a lot of credit for what she has been able to do. time that the is leaders start looking, who's to fill my spot? there may be some bumps on the by the always believe it to see young people take the responsibility with fresh ideas and new ways of doing things. paris progression, normal progression. >> saying your family wants you back home, the intent to stay involved in politics? >> i don't know whether i would the politics of it. i think i ce to those taking political science that what they are reading in the books is not real.

we get interns here from all the local universities. after they are here three weeks they say, this is nothing like we are learning in school. we don't asked the young interns if they are republican or democrat. i don't even ask my staff. i think they need to learn that whether it's a republican issue or a democratic issue, what is best? i love getting them my knowledge that i learned all these years. i will probably dip my hand a little bit into nursing. and teach nursing. you know what i don't want to , say teach nursing. i want to say that with all the technology that is out there, which is terrific for the patients, you still have to go back to holding that patient's hand. you have to go back and educate

the family's and tell them that it is all right to touch the patient and hold them. work with them. that makes the patient heal so much faster. i know i keep going back to it. my colleagues said if you want a friend, get a dog. i didn't find that at all. when i was ill last year, republicans and democrats called me. they would send me cards and flowers. my place looked like a funeral parlor. i'm a gardener, so i loved it. i can say that you have to reach out if you want friendship down here. i know everybody gets tied up with going to the receptions in the evening. you have to do some of that stuff. take time out to make friends with people here.

they're good people. >> we will close on this issue. they have to go to receptions because of money in politics. as we close, what do you think about the current state of the need to raise money in order to capture the seats and what that does to the institution? and to those who serve here. >> that's one of the saddest things we are seeing. if you look when we go to our committee hearings, a lot of members are not there. mainly they are out fund-raising. i think that is a sad part. >> what would you do about it? >> i don't know what you can do about it. i was lucky. the first week i was down here, we were having a committee hearing in education. my chief of staff said you have to leave. we went in and i said what we

-- where do i have to go? she said you have to make phone calls. i looked at her and i went this is my first hearing and your telling me to leave? how my going to learn anything? that's what committee hearings are supposed to be about. she never asked me to leave or take time out from seeing my constituents. i was way ahead of president obama and a lot of other members. we started e-mailing lists. people from around the country would donate a dollar or five dollars. i think the average was $44. that was probably 20 hours a week that i did not have to do fund-raising calls. i hardly ever made fund-raising calls. i don't know what you can do about that. there's too much money in the whole process. we as members should not be worried about raising money. to be able to do a job.

i know everybody thinks that lobbyists come in here. most of my lobbyists were nonprofits. i would remind them, you are here to talk to me about alzheimer's or cancer or any other disease. lobbyists, educate me on what you're trying to do. some of them are better than others. i've only had one lobbyist ever lie to me. that person was never allowed in this office again. >> do you have any anticipation of what it will be like when you walk out of here for the last time in a couple of weeks after all these years on capitol hill? this is it, this is the last day. >> i think it sad. it's been bittersweet. the last two weeks and then right before we went on the break, i'm going to miss a lot of friends. i plan on coming down every once in a while.

it was a wonderful experience. those are memories i will have for the rest of my life. will it be bittersweet? of course. it's time to move on and i'm looking forward to that. there are a number of us to get -- that get together every day. other members come back. saying you guys are smiling too much. >> the ones who are leaving? >> yes. i don't think anybody realizes the pressure you have when you have this job. i have more energy now. i'm sleeping really well. from talking to my colleagues, they feel the same. i don't think he realized the pressure until it's gone. i got involved in the elections back home and i did my district work. there was no pressure. i was doing my job and loving it but i did not have to worry

about the speech. i didn't have to worry about any of that. i will miss it terribly. >> soon to be former member of congress, carolyn mccarthy thank , you for spending time with c-span. >> thank you for doing this. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] >> i was democrat tom harkin -- harkin,ocrat tom followed by north carolina coble.can to first, harkin on senate rules. then, coble on working with newt gingrich. >> get rid of the filibuster. on the other hand, i've often said the republicans have a legitimate argument here.

they are not been allowed to offer amendments. they're not being allowed to offer amendments because they filibuster bills. they filibuster because they are not allowed to offer a minutes. get rid of the filibuster and newantee to the minority rules in the senate that the minority will be allowed to amendments to any bill on the floor. germane amendments to that legislation with reasonable time limits for debate. ef you do that, then we can mov legislation and the minority will have the right to amend. the majority does not have the right to prevail, which they are doing now because the minority can control the filibuster and stop things. the minority actually prevails. it is not letting the minority prevail. it should be the right of the minority to amend or offer amendments, to have full and

haveous debates, and to votes on those amendments. if we did that, i think the senate would begin to operate very well. time we hadr one the contract with america, newt gingrich had as working until 11:00 or 12:00 at night. i had a pretty good rapport with newt gingrich. one of my buddies said why don't you go to the speaker and see if he can make this 100 days 100 legislative days. give us an extra four or five saturdays, sundays, maybe even fridays. i went to newt, i said the troops are restless. they are wondering if we can ine to the 100th day timel 100 legislative days. he said get back to work. i said waye aye, sir.

>> see those interviews tonight starting at 8:00 eastern as part of our series of conversations with retiring members of congress. president obama heads to chicago. he will be talking about immigration. live coverage of the president is scheduled for just after 5:30 eastern on c-span. coming up at 1:00 eastern, live coverage of a pentagon briefing with the rear admiral john kirby. the first news conference since chuck hagel announced he would be stepping down. here is more about yesterday's announcement. house reporter for "usa today. good morning. we want to get the white house reaction to the ferguson decision last night. spoke.sident was he expected to speak? is he expected to travel to ferguson? guest: in terms of traveling, they will see how things play out.

the secret service would be leery about going down there. someone asked him about it and he did not rule it out, but he said he would have to wait and see how things played out. he spoke for about nine minutes. it was a carefully written, carefully planned address. avoiding --cannot weter of waiting area host: have seen headlines about protests around the country in the wake of the decision. how is the situation out senator whitehouse? -- outside white house? the time i left, there were about 200-300 people, holding candles, chanting, protesting the fact that the police officer was not indicted.

no justice, no peace, don't shoot, things like that. there was also a very heavy police presence. what do we know about the travel schedules for the president's top justice's surrogates? guest: he is talking about the things he has ferguson than the president. the federal investigation is ongoing. it would not shock me if we saw officials go down there as well. host: i want to talk about the other big story that happened yesterday morning before the decision came out. chuck hagel announced resignation from the department of defense. was this expected? guest: i think pretty much. you look over the last couple weeks, you see that he is

talking about the things he has done and it sounds like someone on the way out. canceled a trip to vietnam last month. people were talking about the future with the administration. it is something we have been looking for for several weeks. host: was he pushed out from the white house? the white house suggests that he was. the pentagon said, no. i think there was a lot of mutual frustration. they didn't felix the secretary was up to the job, quite frankly -- feel like the secretary was up to the job, quite frankly. there was a lot of finger-pointing going on. the white house said president obama has been bringing all of in and asking if

they plan to stay for the rest of his presidency. host: who could replace him? what is the timing? michele flournoy emerges. she is highly regarded on the hill and is considered to be more aggressive against the islamic state. she was the runner-up for the post several years ago. there is a man named ashton carter. he is also in the mix. we will get a decision next week. host: >> we heard mr. jackson reference events in ferguson, missouri. we went to know what you think it means for race relations.

from our facebook page. john patrick says "racism will never end." meis from kathleen,"tell where shoplifting is punishable by death." leave your thoughts on our facebook page. facebook.com/c-span. a pentagon briefing coming up in half an hour in the meantime. aom "washington journal," discussion about chuck hagel's announcement and his relationship with the white house. that briefing coming up in 15 minutes at 1:00 p.m. eastern. "washington journal" continues. with andrew tilghman is is atary times" he pentagon reporter. how surprised were you by the news yesterday?

not surprised. this was under discussion for a few weeks and it was conventional wisdom secretary hagel's days were numbered. host: explain the timing coming just a couple of weeks after the midterm election. guest: the timing did surprise me. i was not expecting it to happen yesterday. -- after theing on election there was a sense the administration wanted to have a shakeup or at least the appearance of a shakeup of the national security team. the president is coming toward the end of his second term and there is only so much time left. it is hard to get someone to take the job unless you give them a certain amount of time to settle in and get something done. if the president waited another six months, it would be hard to find a successor to take the job at the pentagon for potentially 18 months.

right now it looks like the follow-on secretary will have the most two years. host: was this a mutual decision, or was secretary hagel pushed out? intrigued.e was the white house and the secretary portrayed this as mutual. host: who was portraying this as not mutual? i think the white house was priming the gossip circuit to suggest it was not mutual and the president was not happy with secretary hagel. not from the press, but from the back rooms? important that it reflects the change in how the world looks in obama's second term. when hagel came in, it looks like the main task would be to finish cutting the budget, wrap

up the war in afghanistan, and, basically continue obama's core national security policy which is a reluctance to use the military and hagel has antiwar views and was tracking with that. or we have seen with a civil war itsyria, the rise of isis, is a different situation and the white house is having to go on something of a war footing, and the guy they picked in january, 2013, they are realizing is not a good match for the challenges they are facing today. host: defense secretary chuck hagel spoke at that announcement yesterday, stood beside the president, and spoke after the president made the announcement. here is what chuck hagel had to say about is a competence during his time at the pentagon. [video clip] >> i am immensely proud of who we accomplished during this time. we have prepared ourselves, as

the president noted, our allies, and afghan national security forces for successful transition in afghanistan. we bolstered enduring alliances and strengthened emerging partnerships while successfully responding to crises around the world and we have launched important reforms that will prepare this institution for the challenges facing us in the decades to come. i believe we have said not only , the-- set this department department, and the nation on a course toward prosperity, and if i did not believe that, i would not have done this job. host: that was chuck hagel speaking yesterday about his a congressman's. statements from those in congress who oversee the department -- here is one from john mccain --

yeah, i think that is the alternative view coming from capitol hill, particularly republicans, and everything has nt, but republicans casting thisin are as the white house has been micromanaging, and chuck hagel was too independent to continue on. it is hard to know what happens in the private conversations between the president and the secretary. we have seen the secretary side with the generals in their slightly more hawkish views towards isis and operations there. host: we should note one other statement on this topic -- this

is the chairman of the house armed services committee, buck mckeon, who said thise taking your calls on topic, the resignation of defense secretary chuck hagel. the phone lines are open. democrats can call (202) 737-0001. republicans (202) 737-0002. .ndependence (202) 628-0205 we start with frank in fort lauderdale, florida, on our line for independents. hi, there. i went to school at george washington university a few years ago, and i also wrote for "cold war times here " one of

the things that bothered me was ."en -- times one of the things that bothered me was when someone hearing --ut chuck hagel not being being named secretary of defense, it was that he was just a sergeant and that was not a good choice. what bothered me -- this person that said it, i could say he is will rogersn's or either. i think hagel did a fairly good job. i am not sure about some of the differences going on. there is a noninterventionist versus interventionist debate going on in american policy, particularly as the mideast is getting more widespread. can you comment on some of that, particular the sergeant remark that person made? sure. i did hear that yesterday. -- ion't think i heard who

don't think i heard who made that remark, but i did hear something to the effect of that is you get when you put a sergeant in charge host:. -- charge. firstchuck hagel was the enlisted combat veteran as secretary of defense. guest: he had two purple hearts. comment, i think that comment was made somewhat in just, and it would also be -- jest and it would also be offensive to some of the crowd with the senior enlisted military. mention, chuck hagel -- i do not want to say he was set up to fail, but he came in at a difficult time, even before the rise of isis and the civil war. decliningdgets were in a way they have not in decades and that limits his power to execute an agenda, and

he came in under a president that has had years of tension between this president and the senior pentagon brass that goes back to the surge in afghanistan decision in 2009. the president and his team have always been skeptical of the maneuverings of the senior military officers and chuck hagel had to balance those two and it is a next remain difficult job. it is not surprising he very much struggled. how: you bring up isis -- central was chuck hagel in crafting a strategy currently being deployed against isis and is the strategy considered to be successful so far? guest: i do not get the sense chuck hagel was that central to that strategy. that strategy was largely driven by a brokering of an agreement between the white house and the pentagon brass. the white house, basically, does

not want to put boots on the ground and wants to limit the use of the military in the execution of its foreign-policy as much as policies -- possible. it is a fundamental tenet of this administration. some senior officials want to send troops in there to do what they do, which is execute military operations. thosek hagel balanced two, but i do not think anyone sees them -- sees him as an author of the strategy. in the last few months, martin dempsey has emerged as the spokesman for this strategy and has been more forceful in articulating what we are doing and why we are doing it. jean from grenada, mississippi. you are on with andrew tilghman from "military times." caller: good morning. you will have to forgive me.

i will try to squeeze this and. i practiced law for 36 years and talking for just a couple of minutes is hard. first of all, i admire chuck hagel. familyup in a military and my two sons were officers, and i admire chuck, number one. number two, if you would allow me, i would like to ask your guest and you your opinion on the following -- my concern, as thatyear-old man, is this, and theheads on tv people they put on to express we have -- i realize freedom of speech and freedom of you cannot yell

fire in a crowded theater and get away with it. i am not too sure that the press has the right -- well, they have the responsibility to not do some of the things they are doing. this is my opinion. i guess my question is this -- should we all just shut up and go to work a little bit of time during the day and not give our opinions? i had a double amputation of a , and iover a year ago have been watching you all since then, as the lady says about the folks cooking the soup. do you all think that we should opinions ando many let the american people get the news and develop their own opinions about chuck. let's let's let -- host:

let andrew tilghman jump in and talk about the press coverage on secretary hagel before the announcement and immediately after. guest: i think the press has been relatively fair to secretary hagel. he has had a good relationship. the worst thing you can say about secretary hagel and the press is he has receded a little bit. his profile for a secretary of defense has been a little lower. donaldlook back at rumsfeld, robert gates, for better or for worse, these were really towering figures that dominated the voice of the building and really dominated the discussions in the national security council. i do not think you have seen that with hagel. icon and my colleagues up in the press room, we talk about this -- i, in my colleagues up in the

press room, we talk about how chuck hagel will do a briefing and will basically -- we will basically end up writing what chairman dempsey said because he articulated the current situation a little more forcefully. value not making any judgment, but as we type up a short story that editor say has to be 12 inches long, we use his quotes instead of the secretary 's and that is different in the past. host: and the secretary's profile is lower. guest: right, and it has receded a little bit. it is unusual. ago, the secretary primarily articulated the policy and the chairman in a supporting role. host: from twitter

in particular towards isis and iraq and syria. i do not get the feeling there is going to be a massive change in that policy. you mentioned the issue of readiness. the condition the military is in. there's been a lot of battles .ver the budget the top brass is always saying we are on the cusp of a readiness crisis because of the budget cuts. readiness is such a big, but somewhat nebulous thing. there are not solid metrics to put behind that, but it is a real question as to whether in the next couple of years the military's readiness is going to

drop. there are a lot of questions about the budget that will have to be resolved this spring, this summer by the new secretary. which is another ring of the three-ring circus on capitol sequestrationof them will bewer deal which will expire next fall, putting all of those issues back on the table. host: the new secretary will be secretaryent's first of defense -- she will be the first one to have four secretary of defense during his office. alicia, clinton, maryland, on our line for democrats. caller: yes, i would like to completely support the caller before talking about the talking heads and the spin doctors.