e reserve for the states respectively for the individual. i know that state governments are more accountable to you then the federal government. but i am also an ardent believer in the 14th amendment, which says that no state shall deny any person in its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. there has been, and there will continue to be, an important and legitimate role for the federal government enforcing civil rights. too often we republicans myself included, have emphasized our message on the 10th amendment, but not our message on the 14th.

an amendment that bears reminding that was one of the great contributions of the republican party to american life, second only to the abolition of slavery. for too long, we republicans have been content to lose the black vote. we found we did not need it to win. but when we gave up trying to win the support of african americans, we lost our moral legitimacy as part -- as the party of linkncoln. as the party of equal opportunity for all. it is time for us once again to reclaim our heritage as the only party in our country founded on the print for freedom for african-american. we know what democrats will

propose in 2016. the same thing, the same thing the democrats have proposed for decades. more government spending on more government programs. and there is a proper and important role for government assistance and keeping people on their feet, but few presidents have done more to expand government assistance than president obama. today was and nearly $1 trillion per year's on means tested anti-poverty program. yes, black poverty remains stagnant. here is what i have seen in my time in public office. the best welfare program in america is his job. -- is a job. [applause] there is a fundamental reason why democratic policies have

failed to cure property, because the only true cure is a job and democratic policies have made it too hard for the poor to find jobs. just a this week, the president announced new regulations for overtime pay that will make it costlier for companies to hire full-time employees. companies are going to respond to this i hiring fewer people, -- respond to this by hiring fewer people simply because money does not grow on trees. my first priority as president of this country will be to reignite the engine of economic growth by performing the tax code requiring federal agencies , to adhere to strict regulatory budgets. a growing economy will give those at the bottom of the latter more opportunities to climb, just like we did in texas. many more americans went to leave welfare, rejoin the workforce, but because of taxes

and regulations it often makes more economic sense to stay on welfare then to take the full-time job. furthermore, federal programs and posts of one size it's all -- impose a one size fits all approach to fighting property. think about it. in california you may be substantially more in need for money to pay for the cost of housing. that is because of the high cost of housing in that data. in massachusetts, it may be the cost of vocational schools you are interested in. instead, we forced the poor to enroll in the separate programs for housing assistance and and for cal grants. if i am elected, i will send congress a welfare reform bill

that will take the money we are ready to spend on non-health-care related antipoverty programs and split them into two parts. the first part will be expanded and reformed on income tax credit. that's way, anyone with a job can live above the poverty level. the second part will consist of a block grant so that states can put into place the safety net for their population in a manner that best serves their citizens. as i mentioned earlier, one of the most important things we did in texas, while i was governor was to reform our drug related sense and -- sentencing laws so that non-violent offenders will stay out of prison. as texans got smarter about policing and crime prevention, we came to appreciate the importance of keeping promising

young will out of prison. -- promising young people out of resin. -- prison. just imagine how hard it is to get a job if you have a criminal record. we are working at to stop the intergenerational cycle of incarceration where grandchildren meet their grandparents behind prison bars. we can reform the federal sentencing laws. we can do this just as we have done at the state level to ensure more young people have a real shot at life. we can do that while keeping our low income communities safe from crime as well. we all know, we all know we have

to improve. this is an area where president obama has some substantial potential, but he caved in to the demands of the labor unions. it is a fallacy to assume that the vastly different student populations across this country can be adequately educated with a "one size fits all" mentality and policy. we need to empower state lawmakers, school boards parents to implement policies that address the specific needs of their students, and to keep those schools accountable and efficient. you know, enterprising charter school teachers, like moscow it's an new york, should be able to replicate their astounding success all over the country without the interference of the federal government.

we also have to attack the challenge we have with the exorbitant price of a college education today. one of the biggest barriers today into entering the middle class, whether you are black or otherwise, is the high cost of the college degree. a four year degree at the tip of at -- as the typical university in this country costs $170,000. compare that to the median home price at his country -- at $250,000. we are literally asking for students to mortgage their future in order to gain a college degree, and that has to end, it must end.

i challenge our universities to offer a four year college degree for less than $10,000. many thought that would be impossible. you just could not drive tuition and fees that low. today there are 13 texas universities that have reached that target. [applause] we are on the cusp of an online revolution in higher education but only if the federal government rolls back the rules that makes it almost impossible for students to gain accreditation for a bachelors degree achieved from online instruction. furthermore, just as with college tuition, we have to reduce the cost of living for those who need every dollar to be stretched as far as it can go. federal regulations like

like obamacare's employer mandate, are driving up the cost of hiring new workers. that means companies are hiring fewer people. it also mean price of a sick -- price of the basic consumer goods are going up. earlier this year, the competitive enterprise institute estimated the federal regulations cost american businesses as much as one point -- as much as $1.88 trillion per year. nearly $15,000 per household. when you add state regulations the problem gets even worse. i will suggest we will do five things. if we create jobs, incentivize work, keep nonviolent drug offenders out of prison, reform our schools and reduce the cost of having, we will have done -- cost of living, we will have done more for

african-americans that the last three democrat administrations combined. at the american cemetery in normandy above omaha beach there are 9387 american soldiers very. they are buried in row, after orderly row. if ever proved were needed that we fought for a cause and not a conquest, an american general once said " it could be found in these cemeteries." here was our only conquest, all we asked was enough soil in which to bury our dead. some of those gallant dead in

that cemetery are sons of the united states president, but most were ordinary americans. they were simply doing what their country had asked them to do. some of the graves do not even have names. they are simply marked, here rests in honor and glory, a comrade in arms, known to god. some of the most compelling graves in normandy are for african-americans who served in segregated regimens like lily -- like willie collins of the fourth battalion. he made the ultimate sacrifice for america, despite the fact that america did not always treat him the way he deserved.

brigadier general theodore roosevelt junior and sergeant willie collins grew up in very different circumstances. theodore roosevelt's ancestors had a coat of arms. willie collins's ancestors came here in chains. but the two of them joined themselves together. they did this with a commitment that every generation of americans have embraced. the promise of leaving america and the world a better place then they found it. of ensuring a better future for the children in grandchildren of those to come. i am a beneficiary of the sacrifices of sergeant colin and general roosevelt and so many others known only to god.

i grew up in this place called paint creek. when i was young we had an outhouse. mama bade best on the front -- mama bade us on the front porch in the number two washtub. we attended paint creek cool. some of the teachers literally lived on the campus. their profession was literally their lives and they inspired me. i can assure you none of them knew, had any idea they would be educating future and the captain of the united states air force and certainly not a future of the governor of texas. they have a motto at the paint creek school -- the endless possibilities for students. it says, no dream and too tall for a school so small. [applause]

many people today do not feel that their lives are filled with that endless possibility anymore. americans entering adulthood today have good reason to fear it will be harder for them to earn a living, to buy a home, to pay off their debt is the parents did. but if there is one thing we can learn from willie collins, and the millions like cam, from the tragedy of jesse washington, and the triumph of jefferson, it is that america has overcome far greater obstacles than what we face today. willie collins died in the belief that that america could become a greater country than the one he left home to serve, and he was right. it is up to us to be worthy of the country willie collins's generation gave to us. it is up to us to lead our country better off than we found it. america has never been perfect. but there is no country that has achieved more than the united states of america.

with new leadership in durable performance, america can be stronger, more prosperous than that it has ever been before. america can be an incredibly exceptional place where nothing in life is guaranteed, but where we all have equal opportunity to build a better life for ourselves, for our children, and for our children's children. thank you, and god bless you. [applause] >> thank you, governor perry. the congressional budget office has forecast for medicare and medicaid social security spending to grow precipitously in the coming years. these are programs that have had a role in helping the people that you describe in your

speech, as well as all americans that have been in poverty. if you were to become president, how would you tackle the growth in entitlement spending, while at the same time, protecting those in poverty you want to help? >> john i think i just that in , my remarks to some degree, but i will expand. i do think that "one-size-fits-all" is not the solution. i think as you will go back and recall in my remarks i talked about splitting the pots of money into two things. one of them to be to create the earned income tax credit where we actually get people incentives to work. and obviously, the other side of it is to make sure we have as many novel ideas and approaches. louis brandeis said that. he is not known as a hard-core conservative supreme court

member, but he said the stays were the laboratories of democracy. the are supposed to experiment and put novel ideas into place. that is where you will find the truly innovative concepts. he says, from time to time, the state will make a mistake, and will pay a price. when i read this, i think about colorado today. but i will defend colorado's writes to be wrong. -- rights to be wrong. but, that is where we will find the innovation in the country -- not in washington dc. but in the programs and letting those states in particular with programs and medicaid to come up with the various and different ideas about how to deliver to their citizens.

>> how about the overall growth in the size of the program? do they need to be means tested so people like myself that are a little bit better off retire? how do you handle the growth that i do not have a problem at all means testing. >> i am pretty sure donald trump can do about medicare. -- can do without medicare. and the seriousness of it, that is a, means testing does make sense to me. i think people who have enjoyed the extraordinary benefits of this country and have become wealthy in that -- the idea they have to be in line for all of the programs does not make sense to me. with all of the other entitlement programs, during the course of this campaign, i will lay out a very broad approach to this and layout a thought of

different ideas for how to address social security. how to address medicare, medicaid and all of the government programs. today is not that day. >> on the issue of tax reform, can you give us any more detail on how you would read on the tax code and how you would use it to reduce income in the polity -- in equality? >> again, i will lay out a very lengthy policy over the campaign. but we got the highest corporate , tax rate in the western world. lowering the corporate tax rate. two things attached together make a lot of sense. north american energy policy canada, united states, and mexico have more energy reserves than saudi arabia and russia. using those resources partly by lowering the regulatory burden that is there with a commitment from the white house that we are going to use north american energy, opening up the xl pipeline is an obvious way to do that. mexico has changed their

constitution to allow for the private sector development of energy resources in that country . i think there is extraordinary potential and mexico. obviously, domestic and shell gas with canadians. you couple that energy development. it will drive down the cost of electricity. you couple that with corporate tax policy and will send the incentive to the manufacturers who have left the country go offshore. we can have a manufacturing renaissance in this country like we have never seen before. [applause] >> governor, what would be your approach for getting tax reform done? it has been stalled on capitol hill. how would you go to washington and an act the tax reform?

>> well, this would not be my first rodeo, a term we use in texas. the 30 years i have been engaged in public service, whether it was a state representative through a statewide elected official and 14 years of the governor of the state of texas we work with democrats and republicans. we sold some pretty big programs in the state of texas. none of those programs were done with just republican support. not of one of them. not the most sweeping tort reform in the nation. that is not an easy sell anywhere to pass reforms to the legal system that really made a big impact. a decade later we had 35,000 more physicians licensed to practice medicine in the state of texas. it expanded by an extraordinary amount the number of physicians that were licensed to practice medicine. that meant ask to health care

that -- that meant that access to health care exploded in that state. that was not just passed with republican votes. as i have said, there are a lot of things we agree on to gather. whether it is living in safe communities, having good jobs, having good schools that are improving and giving children the opportunity to succeed in life. find the things we agree on and bring democrats and republicans together, and i will suggest having a job for constituents is important and a good thing. if we can lower the corporate tax rate, and that being at the result of having jobs for young people in the country, i think democrats and republicans can come together. this is about america's future. that is where i think we reach out and talk to. regardless of whether you are a democrat or republican, you are

an american and we are going to get this done. [applause] >> as you reach out to african-american voters, what about the confederate flag that has been in the news recently. should all of the flags come down, or not? another questioner asks how can the republican party appeal to african-american voters as it favors the state law that limits of voting? >> we have come out clearly to say the issue of the confederate flag in charleston is up to the people in south carolina, but we addressed this issue in texas while i was governor in a number of different ways. one was with a plaque that had the battle flag on it. it was removed from the capital over to another place -- more of

a museum setting. we dealt with the issue of the license plates and forbade those lessons plates -- license plates to be sold. we dealt with it straightaway. i think it makes sense to come up with ways to bring the country together, not divide us. all to often i have seen this president divide us by race, divide us by gender, divide us by economic means. we need a president who will bring this country together, with a record of bringing this country together. our bringing in my case our stay together on a host of different issues. i do not think there is more powerful way i can say to an african-american that i gave her child the opportunity to graduate from high school. what a powerful message that you live in the state where the number one-will graduation rate -- the number one high school graduation rate is. that is a powerful message.

oh, and by the way, we let you keep more of your money too. that is a powerful, powerful message. the issue of his ever concept it is that we are trying to keep people to vote, that is a false assumption. this is a protection of the very important right we have in this country, the right to vote and the right to keep that from being fraudulently used. in the state of texas, we gave multiple ways to get a photo id -- up to and including free. all you had to do was come up and get that id. you could use your drivers license, your concealed handgun license permit, your passports there were a host of different photo ids you could use to vote. keeping that from being fraudulently used means, as i go through tsa to play from here to

new hampshire in the morning, they are going to want to see my photo id. if it is important enough for the federal government to require a photo id, that if the state wants to have a photo id to protect the precious right of voting and make sure it is not fraudulently used, i think that is quite all right for the states to do that. [applause] >> i had some questions on reaching out to latino voters as well. will you and other republicans make an effort to this ethically -- to reach out to the latino voters. how can the republican field reach out and get the latino vote? >> let me say, i do not think donald trump's remarks reflect

the republican party. i think the republican party is reflected in people like me. it is reflected in individuals like the first latina appointed to the texas supreme court. to the individuals in our state if you are hispanic and live in texas, you are 40% more likely to have a job. you are 2.5 times more likely to have a job in that state. last november, the governor and lieutenant governor of texas received 45% of the hispanic vote in that state. this was a lieutenant governor that was strong on border security but what the hispanic voter in texas knows is that, the governor who had been there for 14 years, and the governor

who was coming in, cared about their family -- about their children. a cared about their children so much that they made sure they had an opportunity to succeed. they had the number one graduation rate in america. they had the ability to keep more of what they worked for. they knew there was a government in place that represented their values. that is a powerful message for the african american, asian, whoever you are identified with. we are all american. i have a record of keeping this country stronger. that is what i mean by this is a "show me, but do not tell me" election.

in the 12th largest economy in the world, unquestionable what we've done in the standpoint of creating a climate where people have a better polity of life. it is a better quality of life whether it is economically security wise, that is a powerful message across the country. i think we have a great message for the hispanic community, for individuals who want to live free and take care of their family -- who want to live in a secure world. the republican party is where they need to be looking. >> some questions following up on the supreme court decision on gay marriage last week. does the governor agree with ken paxton in which he said texas

county clerks can't deny the issuances of marriage licenses to same-sex couples on the grounds of religious beliefs? governor perry: here's what i agree with, i agree with four supreme court justices that thought the issue needed to stay with the states. we can have a broad, sweeping conversation about 14 versus 10th amendment, and all the intricacies of that, but i believe with all my heart, and i agree with those four justices that those decisions need to be left with the states, and the states will come up with the way to address those issues and a host of other issues, whether it is economic issues or transportation issues, i will suggest to you that we are creating a greater and greater divide in the country between people who believe this way and people who believe that way. with these very divisive issues.

i happen to think we will be a happier country, as well as more prosperous, if we will allow the states to be the arbiters of the issues because i'm pretty sure at some time down the road folks who may have agreed with the 5-4 decision may find the next time they don't agree with it. speaking of that, the next president of the united states could possibly choose up to three members of the united states supreme court. >> how do you intend to stand out in the gop field that is now i believe 15 strong? and what kind of challenges the that present as you are running, and is there a risk that the

candidates end up grinding each other down so much with so much competition that it weakens them candidates end up grinding each other down so much with so much competition that it weakens them for the general election? governor perry: then he set the national press club, thank you for the opportunity to stand up in front of this group and differentiate myself from the rest of them.

in all seriousness, i am a unique candidates where i come from. my life experiences of growing up on the cotton farm. my life experience of growing up as a democrat. my life experience of going to school and having the opportunity to go serve my country. i am pretty sure i will be the only person that is either a candidate or on the stage who has actually been a line officer, then deployed around the globe as a pilot in the united states air force. i've lived in saudi arabia in 1975, as well as turkey and many other countries in the middle east, europe, south america. i will have been the only one of these individuals who had the experience of being commander-in-chief during the entire year on the war on terror. seeing our young men and women deployed into those theaters of operations that i had been there with them, but more importantly have been at home to see the cost of this war, these wars. looked into the eyes of the spouses and the parents who lost their loved ones. looking into the eye of young americans who held their hand up and who have come home and feel like they have been left behind, because we have agencies of

government, the va in particular, that is not serving them well. they need a champion in the white house. they need a champion that goes to the oval office every day to defend their sacrifice. to deliver to them the services that we promised, and we're failing them today. those experiences are unique. no one has that background, has that experience, and i will suggest to you after eight years of a young, inexperienced united states senator with no executive experience, that americans are going to be looking for a leader, a person [applause] >> before i ask the final question, i have some housekeeping. the national press club is the

world leading organization for journalists and we fight for free press worldwide. for more information about the club, visit our website, press.org and to donate or -- to our nonprofit journalism institute visit press.org/institute. i would like to remind you about upcoming programs. wednesday, july 8 washington capital coach will address the national press club luncheon. july 14, tom young who served as the national guard flight engineer in afghanistan will discuss his book, the hunters. august 5, the commandant of the u.s. coast guard admiral paul will speak. i would now like to present our guest with the traditional national press club mug . [applause]

now, unfortunately it is not perfect for the campaign trail because it is still breakable, but when you get back to texas i think you will enjoy coffee at -- out of that. the final question you've said in that the show me aspect of running for president that really a governor is most suited, so if you are not fortunate enough to be one of the 14 that comes out to get the nomination, should it be governor christie, governor walker governor bush -- which governor would best carry the mantle if you cannot? governor perry: let me say i know all three of the individual and they are absolutely amazingly capable individuals. we have a great field. carly fiorina and i have known each other for a long time. carly is a particularly capable ceo.

i have negotiated with her as we moved hewlett-packard to operation out of california to texas. carli did a very good job. i will not say her being born in texas had anything to do with final decision. this is a very capable field of men and women. i just happen to believe the next president of the united state -- i will use words lindsey graham that the next president of the united states needs to have worn the uniform of the country, and i happen to think it needs to be an executive who has run something very large. thank you. [applause] >> thank you, governor perry how about another round of -- round of applause for hours eager to go -- for our speaker. [applause] i would also like to thank the national press club staff,

including our journalism institute staff and broadcast center for organizing today's event. if you would like a copy of today's program or to learn more about the national press club, go to the website, press.org thank you. we are adjourned. >> c-span gives you the best access to congress. live coverage of the house congressional hearings, news conference. meaning you the events that shape public policy. in every wednesday morning washington journal is live in has your comments on terror and

c-span.org. brought to you by your local satellite provider. coming up next, more on the 2016 national election. then, experian saints covering -- then, it experiences covering the courts. same-sex marriage and how it might affect religious freedom. >> for our next segment, we are going to take a look at politics. james from the washington examiner and the senior writer. how do you think, as far as we are in now, how do you think 2016 is shaping up. what is going to be different this time around?

>> the republicans have the tendency to give away the nomination like a company used to give away gold watch for retirement. it is difficult. this time it looks like the democrats are more in that position. they have a tendency to nominate unknown candidates. while bernie sanders seems to be surging, it does not look very likely -- it looks like we already noted the democrat nominee is. the republicans are a jumble of 10-15 candidates. a lot of them are pulling very closely together. -- polling very closely together. >> yes, it is a free-for-all.

that is partly because you are coming to the end of eight years of democratic administration. they are figuring out what their agenda is going to be. there is a lot of pent-up demand. people who have been waiting for their chance to reach for the brass ring. the chief party insurer washington-based establishment. maybe the neocon movement. different factions that all have the effect to try to burst forth. that is why you had 16 different candidates. it makes for a fascinating race. >> what do you think the largest forces are going to be to shape that moving forward? >> i think the biggest challenge

will be how you define yourself. that is what you define yourself on. they have been fighting for the -- how do you oppose brock obama? how deep is your loathing for him. what issues he is opposing? it is natural that happens whenever there is a party out. they have to figure out a way now to say this is what the republican party is that is not just how we hate everything barack obama does. >> is there tough a type -- is there some type of soul-searching? you said bernie sanders is a front runner. tags i think dating back to the

90's, there was some degree of progressive discontent with the clintons comfort and connections with wall street. they are more war-hawkish. some of this has come out with the clinton foundation. its ties to well-healed donors. i think bernie sanders is going to tap into a certain degree of that. he does not have a diverse enough coalition at this point to really affectively challenge clinton, but i think he could get a a lot of these issues highlighted and influence how hillary clinton positions herself as she tries to consolidate her support in the primaries. host: you heard from our guests about 2016. if you want to ask questions of our guests, (202)

748-8000 for democrats. (202) 748-8001 for republicans. (202) 748-8002 for independents. you can tweet your thoughts as well. donald trump. how much is he a factor right now for the gop? what role is he playing? >> at the moment he is doing pretty well. he is second in some polls nationally. i think the first thing he does, because he sucks up so much media oxygen, he will get a lot of attention by virtue of who he is and his propensity to make inflammatory statements. i think he also will affect the ability of under -- of other candidates to get their name out i think -- their name out there.

there is a conservative primary within the republican primary. i think a lot of trump's gains have come at the expense of people like scott walker, mcnitt it more difficult for maybe a marco rubio or other candidates to establish themselves as a front runner. it might make it in a way that jeb bush faces a less viable conservative challenger. host: do you think it forces candidates to nail down positions on immigration? james: i think it does to an extent it also makes it easier for republican candidates to take a wide variety of positions and still have rhetoric on immigration that is more

re-strengthen. i think that is going to be a big thing on how trump affects republican primaries. how do other candidates react? on the one hand, trump has the potential to defined the republican race as a clown show but on the other hand he gives republicans flexibility to look more safe in contrast. paul: one possibility is they are able to use him as a foil and say i am more moderate on issues. the other way it might play out, he is kind of an expression of the conservative id, taking a harsh personal terms in the way he talks about immigrants. there may be no challenger that will be more important in the transition from the primaries to the general, to be able to turn around from the primaries where there is necessarily going to be a lot of tough talk on immigration and to say to minority voters that i can be your friend and you can find a home in the republican party.

it is a difficult transition to make them when you have someone you're the top of the republican field saying all mexican immigrants are rapists, that sends a message to those voters that the republican party is not the place for them. a message of hostility that makes it so the nominee is going to have to work extra hard to be able to say, do not worry about that that happened during the primary, come and vote for me. it was a challenge mitt romney and john mccain mccain were not able to do successfully. host: brian is from louisville kentucky. caller: i hear the right-wing media talk a lot about hillary clinton and completely ignore

bernie sanders. do you believe that they are trying to push for hillary to be the elected candidate for the democratic party? it seems like bernie sanders is gaining steam. i see him being the candidate. paul: i do not think the conservative media are necessarily not paying enough attention to bernie sanders out of some sort of strategic calculation. the fact is, hillary clinton is somebody who has been hated by conservatives for a couple of decades now. you are part of that media universe you think she will be the nominee and that is where you'll focus your attention. sanders is starting to get more attention especially as he has huge crowds he is been gathering in places in iowa and new hampshire. i think it may be that people on the conservative media will pay more attention to him.

as long as they think henry clinton is the nominee, that is as long as they think hillary clinton is the nominee, that is where the focus is going to be. host: the wall street journal headline. what does that mean for hillary clinton? paul: he is sort of the perfect opponent for her to have. he creates a robust abate within the party on all kinds of issues -- debate within the party on all kinds of issues. we have seen her she has moved further on some issues than she has in the past. he also is not somebody who is going to be airing really nasty attack ads and being personal and creating a nasty race which often happens and will inevitably happen on the republican side when you have so many candidates. someone who has participated in a campaign, debates and she will have to fight for the boats but she will not -- fight for the votes but she will not be

splattered in mud. james: this member of right-wing media would love it if bernie sanders was the nominee. sanders is tapping into something that is real and he is demonstrating that there is a level of support for things to the left of what has here to for been the mainstream of the democratic party. raising a lot of economic fairness issues that i think resonate with primary voters. in many ways it is good from hillary clinton's perspective to have a challenger who is strong enough to make her nimble and give her some degree of preparation for the general but not so strong and hostile and negative that it does anything to drive up her un-favorability as a result of the primary campaign. host: what makes this time different for mr. sanders? james: bernie sanders went from being a single digit fringe, third-party candidate in his first statewide races and vermont and now he is a guy who could get reelected statewide in vermont with more than 70% of

the vote. vermont is an interesting state. gun friendly but also very progressive state in many other ways. i think we have seen a lot of progressive primary challengers emerge. what has generally been the case is that their base of support is too confined to affluent white liberals. they are not sufficient to beat a democratic frontrunner. barack obama assembled a perfect coalition to defeat hillary clinton in 2008. i think we forget because of how rapidly she fell how narrow obama's

victory over clinton actually was. i think we have seen from howard dean, bernie sanders, even bill bradley briefly, a number of candidates raise a more populist team in the primaries. it takes more than that to get over the top. host: this time is different for mr. sanders? paul: i think he is tapping into something that is real in the democratic party. there may be discomfort with people who are now turning out to sanders rallies, they will come around if she is the nominee. it is not out of some kind of dissatisfaction or dislike with her specifically. they like the fact that sanders is speaking to issues of political corruption and economic inequality which clinton is speaking on to. a lot of mixed feelings among liberals in washington with clinton. it is important to remember she is very popular

with the democratic base. once this primary plays out and she ends up being the nominee, those supporting sanders will come around. he is a great vehicle for them to express those feelings they have about these kinds of issues and their dissatisfaction with the way they have been talked about the last few years. he is drawing on something very real but it is not necessarily a revolt against clinton. host: john in kentucky is next. caller: i want to talk about the candidates. donald trump is right on. what he said is not offensive. he said some of them is good people. the good people is coming in this country legally. they get in line to come here legal.

he did not say nothing offensive. he is right. close to our town we got illegals coming in. they break the law and do not show up for court if they are caught. they do not follow fish and wildlife laws. they are all here illegal. he is a guy that will fix this. all you news people underestimate him. i run a business and i talked to thousands of people. everybody is tired of this. they want it fixed. none of the

candidates except him will fix it. host: we're underestimating donald trump. james: i'm not underestimating the way donald trump speaks to concerns the republican base has. whether he speaks in a way that is as articulate as it needs to be is really what i would question. in many respects if i am jeb bush i would much rather have an immigration debate with donald trump than with scott walker or jeff sessions. i would much prefer having my main conservative alternative be somebody like trump or ben carson or even a random paul. to a certain degree, jeb bush is well-positioned to pivot away from anything donald trump says if you the nominee so he does not have to worry quite as much about trump's branding of the party as some of the more

conservative candidates would have to be concerned. paul: two ambulance to this -- elements to this, policy choices and attitude and posturing people do. on the policy choices, jeb bush may have a mexican wife and kid to speak spanish and he speaks spanish and self but he offering essentially the same policies republican candidates are. this caller is a good example of why copperheads of immigration reform is so hard to get in washington. i promise you he has a republican representative and that representative knows his constituents are not interested in comprehensive reform. that representative will say, we do not want comprehensive reform. you get this gridlock that means reform never gets past. that is also something for the republican candidates to grapple with. they now have to say border security is the first

thing we have to do and eventually we will get around to the path to citizenship and see what happens. they will be required, in order to appeal to voters, to put emphasis on the border security element. even latino voters who get jeb bush and say, he does not have hostility to me that other candidates might have but he still is advocating for a set of policy solutions i do not really like. the question is how important is the policy part going to be and how important will be attitudinal part b? e? host: johnny in louisiana. caller: i personally would like to see bernie sanders. i could just imagine if the republicans went with either donald trump or dr. ben carson or even this ceo lady that is running as a republican, if they were to be nominated. i believe we need to send a message to both the democratic party and the republican party. i can imagine both conventions -- we need to send a message to both parties because all of these candidates that i see with

the republican party, including hillary clinton are filled with egos. they need a wake-up call. paul: there is always a limit on how far these outsider candidates like ben carson or donald trump can go. people say both for me because i am not a politician. it is like someone saying, i know you have leaky pipes but i'm the one to come and fix them because i am an accountant. being a politician requires certain skills and it takes time to learn and be good at it. that is why people from other fields do not win. there are few exceptions to that rule. i think what happens with a candidate like ben carson's they come in and there is something compelling because they are different at first and then they

hit a ceiling. we have seen this many times before. i think it is unlikely that he carly fiorina or donald trump, that any one of them will be successful. politics is not easy. it usually takes a few times to get it right. all of the most successful politicians in recent history all had a loss early in their career that taught them a lot. it was a learning process that happened over many elections before they got to a point where they could win a presidential election. i do not begin will happen for -- think it will happen for one

of these outliers. james: i think the emergence of ben carson has been an interesting phenomenon. objectively it is difficult to see in terms of what makes his political philosophy unique to other experienced candidates running. he does have a compelling biography. he is literally a brain surgeon. he had a high degree of success outside of the political field. he is resonating with a lot of grassroots conservatives carly fiorina does very well when she speaks to conservative audiences and is very well received. she has not really translated that much into scientific poll results. she is starting to do better in major conservative organization straw polls. it will be interesting to see if she qualifies for the debates and whether she can move into the top tier.

host: with so many on the republican side, does this mean a battle completely for the primary or will it come sooner? james: political journalists are always looking forward to there being a broker convention and the primaries lasting until the end and going past the primaries. you can look at the scenario and see with this many candidates and so many of them -- you have about six who are basically not far off from one another in terms of statistical significance. historically usually there is a sorting. if you have gone through iowa, new hampshire and south carolina and north carolina. there probably will be some kind of windowing. normally, the front runner for the republican is up by a wide margin.

they may be 20, 30, 40, or even 50 points ahead and then it narrows. right now, jeb bush is the closest a we have for a front runner and even the candidates in the back in the 1% or 2% of the vote are maybe 10 or 15 points behind and that encourages a lot to stay in the race. host: that is james antle you just heard from. also joining us is paul waldman, a senior writer for that publication. indianapolis, indiana, judy, you are next. good morning. caller: good morning. i just want to say that donald trump represents the republican party. there was no way that people can think this man does not represent the republican party. when you think about a party who has done all the things that they have done since they have been in power in the states, they have prevented people who are dying in their states from having insurance, they have squashed down pay so that people are having two or two or three jobs in order to have a decent pay -- these are people -- ok, i could understand the ones who eliminate abortion but why did they have to close the entire clinic?

because women have to have more medical care than an abortion. women have all kinds of medical care. i thank god i had my surgery before the loud people got in. these are people who have prevented people from being able to vote, these are people who house people who love the confederate flag, the kkk, these are people who have said nasty things about immigrants. that man represents the republican party. if people would just look and have enough sense to see how these people have been governing america -- host: judy, thank you. the idea that donald trump represents the republican party ? guest: i was look to democratic side to see who represents the republican party. yes, i think that will be a significant talking point the longer trump runs. any outlandish thing that he says or hyperbolic thing he says will be used to beat of the republicans and they will find other republicans who have won elected office to try and get and draw similarities.

i think that is really going to be the challenge for republican candidates. how do you differentiate and distinguish yourself from this kind of stuff? while at the same time not giving it more attention then it deserves? there are some republican candidates who i'd consomme say ignore donald trump because they say giving him attention is precisely what he wants and will feed the phenomenon and it is better to allow him his 15 minutes of fame and then to sort of have his poll numbers at trophy as we get closer, which is what i expect to happen. facts on the ground will determine that. host: mr. waldman? guest: trump is a unique celebrity, late-night comedians love to mock him, democrats cannot be more excited about him being in the race.

but as jim mentioned earlier candidates usually drop out when , they run out of money. whatever else happens and they get to the point where they cannot fund their campaigns is when they finally leave. the thing with trumpets, -- the thing with trump is, trump will not run out of money. he will stay in until he gets bored. it is possible he could be in for a long time if he does not get bored, even if he never gets above 10% or 12%. whatever it is at now. he could continue to be a headache for the republican field for a long time. host: john from florida. thank you for holding on. good morning. go ahead. i hope you give me as much time -- caller: i hope you give me enough time as you did that democrat there. donald trump made my day the other day. a lot of people is going to vote for him on account of what he said. just the other day, two days ago, and only -- deported seven

times, went down there and shot a woman off the street. and, san francisco would not turn them into the -- the -- federal people and they just turned him loose. this is going on all over the place. everything he says is the truth and jeb bush, i don't know how he got number one, i would not even let him clean my septic tank out. and this guy, he is something else. he is just like georgie junior and i am in my middle 70's. i voted for him and his old man. donald trump is going to be the guy to get. i've got people that i know, hundreds of them without a job these illegals is coming in and taking their jobs trying to get more jobs. now obama is trying to sign an executive order trying to let a

half-million more come in and take more jobs. they let 52 million people in here since 2006, taking all american jobs. i've got family that don't have any jobs on account of them. they are destroying this country coming in here, turning it into a third world country. host: ok, john. thank you. we talked about trump, we talked about immigration, now talk about jeb bush and the florida factor. what are the strengths and liabilities keep bases because of his government chip in florida? paul waldman? guest: he has successes to tout. some people would say he had the good fortune to be in there when the bubble was inflating and got out when it first. -- when it burst. it will be interesting to see the florida primaries, it is like one of the final big contest before the republican nominee, especially if he is really determined. we don't really know yet whether he will have more support their been marco rubio does. -- have more support their they are in marco rubio does. that is going to be really

interesting to see. obviously, there are lord of -- there are voters in florida who do not like him. it usually happens, as we talked about before, that in the republican race, there is somebody who is the established candidate and they have prevailed for a number of reasons. even though voters like that color may not like that, they end up not being the majority of the republican elector even though they may have the most intense the means and the loudest. i am sure that bush is counting on those people sticking around for a while and then it eventually slipping away or coming over to him as the candidates that speak more directly to their anger kind of fall off one by one. host: mr. antle? guest: i think there has been a lot of talk about giuliani approach with his campaign ended up being a disaster wants primaries rolled around. in this case, giuliani effectively waited insult -- until florida could really

compete in the state and rode up all the early states. by the time it got to florida, the entire race had passed him by. if the current thinking is that florida is going to be a battle royale between jeb bush and marco rubio and most of the candidates will sit about, there -- candidates will sit out there will be one crucial difference. either jeb bush or marco rubio would have to win lord at, -- would have to win florida so so somebody would win florida. , giuliani did not even win florida but he did get a respectable third place. there would be a possibility that that could be a more viable strategy. i think of that even if you are as well-known as a jeb bush and florida's a state you may be able to win, if some other candidate ends up sweeping those early states are winning the bulk of those early states that come before florida, the race could end up passing by. i think jeb is probably the weakest establishment candidate we have seen and frankly, it has been -- there has been better

campaigns since 2008 and 2012. there is a possibility mccain or romney would not have been the nominee, but that was not the case. host: he is weak because of why? guest: if you look at terms of support. if you compare the percentage of people voting for him or say they will vote for him at a point where his main identification should be in a -- should be benefiting him the most. i mean he is barely , distinguishing himself in polls from people like ben carson who are not very well known or my company. he is weak in that sense. i do not think other than mitt romney he has really scared anybody out of the race. i think the hope was that he would follow his brother strategy for the nomination. he would come in, raise a lot of money, consolidate a lot of support across the spectrum of the republican party, and most potentially viable candidates take a pass on the race and that is really not what is happening. host: john is up next. good morning. go ahead.

caller: good morning. i agree with the previous callars and i am glad to hear donald trump finally speak the truth. politicians don't say on either side what is going on, problems of immigration and it is conference of immigration reform -- what is that? they broke the law. there is no reform. let's enforce the law. let's adopt mexico's immigration policy. maybe that will not affect people so much? people finally hear the one politician speak the truth and everybody is ready to crucify him. thank you. host: anything from that, mr. waldman? guest: we hear lots of people talk about donald trump and those feelings about immigration are very strong in the republican party and candidates are trying to figure out how to speak to that and still remain viable for the general election. this happens on a lot of issues.

it is true in both parties but now it is more acute in the republican party that on a whole bunch of issues, if they really say the things that the primary voters want to hear then there will be a lot of issues that they have to answer for the general electorate that will make it uncomfortable. on the democratic side, it's hillary clinton comes out and says she wants a higher minimum wage and democratic voters cheer, that will not do her any damage when it comes to the general election because that is a generally popular position to take. every candidate is kind of trying to negotiate that. there was something interesting going back to jeb bush, there is an interesting generational divide where you have a bunch of candidates in their 40's, rubio scott walker, bobby jindal, you have these very, very young candidates that look different from the traditional person the republicans nominate. jindal, you have these very, very young candidates that look different from the traditional person the republicans nominate. jeb bush looks like the typical got a nominate, but one thing that barack obama showed things -- people like rubio and walker

and ted cruz is that you do not have to wait your turn. even if you have only been in the senate for less than a full term and you think you want to be president, you can go for it. that is the lesson they took from barack obama, and now you are seeing this wave of younger republican candidates in thing i do not have to wait even if i don't have many accomplishments this because, even if i'm still in my 40's, i can go for it. all but one of those people will be unsuccessful, but one of those different republicans may end up winning. host: lets you from johnny in oklahoma. democrat line, good morning. caller: good morning. host: go ahead, john. caller: yes? host: john, you are on the air, go ahead. caller: yes sir. i just wanted to stop and tell you about the price of gasoline seems as if everybody is going around saying there is not going to be any more taxes, but the american public is not stupid. if you are paying two times as

much for gasoline as -- then you are paying twice as much in taxes. they keep talking about minimum wage. they should start talking about maximum wage. there has got to be -- yet, the price of gas has to be four dollars a gallon? i think the republicans and the democrats and all the other people in the united states have lost their minds by letting these people make so much money while the people in the united states suffer for it. the governor of the state of oklahoma had the audacity to get on television and say, look, we have got to do something about the price of oil. it is going down and it is killing our taxes. well, what do you think is doing

to the constituents when they are paying three dollars or four dollars a gallon? diesel fuel is higher than gas and it is a byproduct? host: ok, johnny, thank you. let me ask you two things. first fall the candidates are talking about economics, and specifically mr. bush and mrs. clinton, their ability to address because of their wealth may challenge them going forward into the campaign, mr. waldman? guest: i don't think it is as much of an issue for clinton. if you are a democrat, you will be advocating things more geared toward ordinary people minimum wage, changing work roles to be more fair for workers and if you are republican, you will be an advocate for the wealthy and things like that. that is sort of the places voters start from. if you enforce that, the way mitt romney did, then it can be a problem. i don't think that too many people are going to vote against hillary clinton because she is too much on the side of rich people.

it will not be that big a deal. economics is the biggest challenge for both sides and it is to articulate some kind of an agenda that speaks to the way people are beginning to understand the economy. i think it has the real problem for republicans because their message is pretty simple. growth is really the end. if we can let the commission through on things like we advocate for taxes and regulation, then do will be growth and the jobs will follow. the problem now is if you look at what is happening right now we have very strong job growth and have had for some time, but people feel insecure. they feel like they are being stretched, so what a lot of people are looking for is some kind of agenda that speaks in a more complex way to the challenges people have with work , the difficulty of paying for health care, getting benefits, and feeling secure in your job and in your whole career that go beyond just, do we create enough

jobs last month? that is something both parties are trying to figure out how to do. it looks like the democrats are pulling -- are putting out more of an agenda, obama just change overtime rules, and they are trying to come up with this slate of things that says, we are going to change the conditions of the american workplace and adapt to how it has changed in the last decades. whereas republicans are still saying, if we just enact these policies, we will get more growth and jobs. the question is, would that be enough to convince people that is an economic agenda that will work? host: mr antle? guest: you have seen jeb bush say he will push for economic growth and that the percent or 4% growth will end up with more jobs and higher incomes and other candidates are making similar comments. you are starting to see some degree of tension in the republican party over how corporate the party is perceived to be. that has led some to challenge the corporate welfare and the

export and import bank became an issue over the debate. it is a factor in how some republicans approach immigration. jeff sessions has been trying to get more integration restriction to be framed and dave brat as well in his primary victory to be framed as more pro-worker and anticorporate rather than an anti-immigrant framing. we are starting to hear some republican arguments as to how approach things from a more populous perspective. the democrats, i think, are the have a much more detailed program that is trying -- that sort of fits into their populous frame, so it will be interesting to see how it plays out for the republicans. host: on weekends, this program is seen internationally including the united kingdom and that is where the next phone call comes from. aaron, hello. go right ahead.

caller: three quick i don't want to keep you too long. hillary clinton, i mean, she has been around for like forever. she was bill clinton's husband -- first lady, a politician in new york and we never saw the end of her at any point, so for me, there is no excitement around are being president. i am very side that i feel that way but bernie sanders, he sounds like an interesting guy. he has some good ideas. his social media campaign is really good as well, so i think you might do really well. donald trump, i mean, i remember a couple of years ago i watched the wwe and he was on wrestlemania 23 and i remember him having this really awkward storyline with one and it all ended with trump shaving his head live and i just thought

you know? something that ridiculous? how did he end up in this situation now? has everyone completely forgotten all of that and all the ridiculous stuff he has done in the last couple of years? host:mr. antle do you want to start? guest: jesse ventura is the minnesota governor. you never know. i do think an advantage for republican hats this time is that they have the possibility of nominating the candidate who is the pressure face. normally, it is the democrats who end up having the lesser-known, fresher candidate, the younger candidate. i think that is also going to be an obstacle for jeb bush because i think jeb bush is the viable candidate who was clearly cuts off that opportunity for republicans. i think that is going to be a big part of the argument made by

a lot of the younger republican candidates who are running. hillary clinton, i think, the main thing she will do to cheer up enthusiasm is the historic nature potentially being the first woman president, but i think that will to some extent counteract the staleness. i do think that is unfamiliar territory for the democrats. host: who is the strongest and freshest face in the republican field? guest: i think if they could design a candidate in the lab, it would probably be marco rubio. if you look at polling, rand paul is doing surprisingly competitively against hillary clinton, not only in national polling but a number of the swing states. both are very different approaches. i think rubio, his freshness comes from his relative youth and his biography, and his personality and i think rand paul in trying to reframe the republican platform in a way that is a little bit different without really deviating from conservative vegetables but using libertarianism --

conservative principles but using libertarianism to reach out to some voters, including minority voters that republicans have struggled to connect with. host: mr. waldman? guest: as we get closer to next november the prospect of having the first woman president will become a very, very cap -- powerful thing. i think hillary clinton has been around with us for a years now so we sort of forgot about how dramatic that might be. i think that once it becomes a real possibility, that will become a huge motivator for women voters and other people like male voters who would like to see the first female president, and it will bring her campaign and some of that excitement that we associate with those russia faces like barack obama was. host: that bring around the sander supporters? guest: i don't worry from the democratic standpoint whether or not voters will one to turn out.

those voters who are supporting sanders right now, they do not yet have a focus for their dislike. when you get tour that general election that is another thing that happens. a politician from the other side to may not have caps on feelings , normally, you get very strong feelings about how much you dislike them and that becomes important to get people out. republicans already dislike hillary clinton, so she comes pre-disliked. that is not a problem for the republican nominee, but that will happen with democrats for whoever the republicans nominate. host: one more call. cliff in san angelo, texas. the morning, cliff. caller: good morning. this political correctness is really driving everybody nuts. it truly is. let me just say this about mr. waldman a minute ago when he made a statement that donald trump said that all the illegals are rapists. that is what mr. waldman said.

that is a lie. that is not what donald trump said. he may have said some of them are, but he did not say all of them are. this is the kind of ring that with just common sense american people who have been used to america being the great country it is, it is sick and tired of. as far as the united states, the republicans saying that we just need to create more jobs and get the economy booming and that is their answer, you left out half of the equation. and that is we have also said -- our future is greece if we keep spending at the rate we are spending now. it is common sense. political correctness aside, it is just common sense. the other thing is, is that it is very difficult and makes my heart sick truly, even though i

am one of these mean republicans, how are we going to employ a lot of our youth today? i don't care what colors they are. i love all colors, but how are we going to employ them when they have tattoos, pierced ears, and they don't even know who the first president of the united states was? who is going to employ them? host: cliff, thank you. mr. waldman? guest: i don't think that is often too much what people took from him that they are all good people, but the whole issue of government spending has not been as intense as it sometimes is because the practice it has brought down significantly. it reached its height in 2010, about one year after obama took office but it is down about one third from what it was then. right now one of the next fights he will have is on whether or not we should be repealing sequestration. i don't know -- there are always

going to be people who have a sense that we are spending too much. when the rubber meets the road, it turns out that people just want to cut spending on the things a do not like anyway. and they want to preserve the things they do like. republicans always talk about government spending, but they want to increase spending on the military which all the candidates on the republican side one to increase military spending but the question of someone he do increase more than others. -- wanting to increase more than others. those are issues we talk about in fake terms but when it gets -- in fake terms but when it gets down to it, i don't -- there is a reason why you have not seen more progress in the deficit when republicans have been in office recently been when democrats have been in office because they find the same things. a campaign and say they want to cut spending, but when we actually have to, in real programs that you will cut that have constituencies and that people like, it becomes a lot more difficult.

i'm not anticipating the next president will make the medic spending cuts either. host: mr. anmtle? guest: i think democrats at the same do that they do not want to cut. barack obama campaigned in 2008 that he would cut taxes and have them be a lower percentage of gdp than ronald reagan did while proposing a lot of public investments. i think one of the things i think you're hearing from a lot of republican callers and one of the things i think is driving a lot of terms of peel is that many conservatives and republicans do not think the gop leadership fights for them. they don't sense they are particularly sympathetic to their interest and that they are insufficiently combative on issues branching from immigration to spending to obamacare. i think that any candidate that will tap into that, and that is of a driving force of the tea party, any candidate that can tap in will find a constituency. host: taking a look at 2016 with

our guests, james antle, a politics editor an >> a look at what the government and the private sector are doing to address distracted driving and other safety issues in the united states. with deborah herdsman. less we take your calls and look for your comments beginning live at 7:00 eastern on c-span.

tonight on the communicators, we visited a tech fair on capitol hill to hear what policy issues innovators wanted to discuss with members of congress. we spoke with ralph lauren crenshaw, and several others. >> that is basically when a business owner does not like someone and says i am going to sue you are threaten to sue you. they may actually go through with it, but because they shared that experience, you know it forehand. but you might not have the money to go to court over what you wrote about a chinese restaurant. so instead of going to court you'd take off your review. so what yelp protects and is

worried about is the killing affect that type of lawsuit or threat of lawsuit has. we were intended to deploy you about 600 satellites. stephen provide access for public safety am a military, nongovernment uses that would benefit the population in general. >> our hope would be that wireless to be treated differently in terms of net neutrality recognizing that it is a fierce resource and not exactly the same as data flowing over a fiber network. it should be given careful consideration. >> tonight at 8:00 eastern on

"the communicators." the supreme court term ended this week with major decisions on health care, redistricting and same-sex marriage. correspondence from the washington post, the new york times and the l.a. times talk about those cases, the rulings and their own experiences covering the court. >> good afternoon and thank you all for coming. welcome to the view from the press gallery program. i am arthur spitzer, i work as the legal director in the

american civil liberties union but i am not wearing that hat here. i am wearing my hat is a former member of the steering committee in that section of the bar. our thanks to arnold importer for hosting us again this year in the room. and thanks to marshall tucker and the technical staff for making the arrangements. thank you to c-span for covering us this year. if you have any problem with the back of your head being on c-span, you have this opportunity to slither to the side. many thanks to my former colleague fritz mulhouse are the executive producer of this show.

and all aspects of a lawyer's relationship to the profession. the section focuses on improving access the justices. it is one of 20 sections of the d.c. bar. they are listed on your program. the sections carried on most of the bar's work. they cover most areas of legal practice. if you are a member of the d.c. bar and are not involved in a section, we encourage you to become involved. if you are an inspiring -- an aspiring member, we encourage you to remember to get involved after you graduate. if you are not a member of the

aclu, you can sign up at aclu. org. we will be privileged to hear this year from a panel of journalists who have been covering the supreme court for a cumulative total of 112 years. on my right is tony mauro of the national law journal and media. he is covered the journal since 1999. he joins -- joined the washington times in 2000 -- i'm sorry, the washington legal times and continued as its supreme court correspondent after it merged with the national law journal in 2009. david savage has been with the los angeles time since 1991 and in recent years he has been covering the court for the

chicago tribune. the latest edition of congressional quarterly's guide to the supreme court. joan on my left is an editor in charge for legal affairs and has covered the courts since 1989. she is also the author of biographies of justices anthony scalia. in 2012 she was the supreme court reporter for the washington post and usa today. she is a regular panelist. this year she was a finalist for the pulitzer plies -- prize and i will ask her to tell us about that later. on her left is robert barnes joined the washington post is reporter in 1987 and since then he has been a national editor.

turned in 2005 and began recovering the supreme court and 2006. bob had been planning to go to law school. his bio says that it didn't occur to him -- he didn't realize he didn't need three years of law school to not practice law. on my far right, adam took over the new york times supreme court beef two years ago has a much longer history with "the times." which he first joined as a copy boy in 1984 after graduating from college and he went back for a law degree and in 1992 joined the times legal

department. a decade later he became a reporter covering legal juice to -- legal issues. this spring, adam service marshall of the supreme court just -- of le mans shut. they will be better this year and we hope to hear again next july. this is not a panel i get a -- this is not a panel of

litigators analyzing case law. to save -- i plan to save some time for the questions. if questions occur to you during the program, please jot them down and i will give you a heads up when it is time. f finally -- finally last term ended with hobby lobby.

this term ended with what seemed to meet much more straightforward cases. obamacare yes. same-sex marriage yes. medazelam yes. did you find the big cases easier to report on this year than last year? >> in this era adam and bob and i we have to follow stories

within a few minutes. i have done it long enough that i remember a time when i can read the whole opinion read the dissent and then think about -- now you have to move very quickly. fortunately, the outcomes were clear. not a lot of competitions. complications. we all wrote within 10 minutes and we are grateful to the court. [laughter] >> another thing that i thought i noticed about this year that seemed somewhat different was how much the front page decisions were spread out. for the most part, some -- one leading decision per decision day. june 1 was the abercrombie & fitch had covering. june 8 was the passport. june 18 was license plate. june 22 was the california raisins. then obamacare, same-sex

marriage and the death penalty each a separate day. do you think that was a complete accident or do you think the support -- the court has some interest in spreading those high-profile decisions around? >> i think the court is not very interested in making life easier for us. i think the only exception may be that they decided not to handle same-sex marriage and the affordable care act on the same day. i think they realized our heads would have exploded during -- exploded. apart from that they are quite adamant about saying they release the decisions when they are ready. there is a classic story of the prior chief justice rehnquist

after one day in june when they got seven or eight opinions on the same day, hundreds of pages we went to him and said could you please spread them out and he said, why don't you just save some for the next day? [laughter] shows great understanding of how journalism works. the new chief may be more sensitive to this but maybe others have different views. >> i thought the chief try to have fun at our expense when at the end of last day, there were three decisions that were big and we knew we would be writing about and when he finished he said i have two retirements to announce and i felt like i would throw up. but it was justice scalia's

secretary and someone else. >> the deadline was no picnic we had three decisions enemy afternoon the decided to let a bunch of abortion clinics in texas stay open. that is five legit stories. the very biggest two cases did not come on the same day. i cannot member a new term for the biggest case didn't come at the end of the same day. there we were on thursday of last week and friday getting same-sex marriage. we had mentally thought, if they

end on monday maybe that will come monday. sometimes a really big decision will come before the last day. >> so is like the grand finale of the fourth of july fireworks were there is a boom boom boom and then a lot. [laughter] >> last year we talked here about how the judges had a greater proportion of unanimous decisions than i have for decades. how dissenting opinion had fallen from 52% to 31% and whether chief justice roberts was making good on his promise to be a unifier. this term, just the opposite. unanimous done to 40% and 68 dissents. is the chief losing his magic

powers or what is going on? >> i think it is that every term is different. the issues presented to them are what is controlling about how they do things. who said last year that even though there were unanimous decisions they were not really unanimous. unanimous in the judgment but not the reasoning that the court was just as divided by ideology. i think that really has to do with what is up for him to decide every term. >> if the justices would take the same types of cases every year we could measure them but i think the statistics can be misleading. it was the nature of the cases.

next year we will be a peer saying -- the conservative tilt again. if they are going super narrow they will get more unanimity and then you will find in the details more splits. >> there has been some talk about the liberals being more disciplined this year and falling in line with a single majority for dissent and not having a lot of concurrences. i think that was notable but most justices don't feel that way. justice alito -- i asked him why he writes the sense when he could've just -- or why he writes concurrences when he could join the majority and he

said, it is like summit coming to your front door and asking you to sign a petition. would you sign a petition you don't believe in? they all have a responsibility to say their own piece. >> you think that goes for the same-sex marriage case? there was a line in the scalia dissent that even if he wanted to achieve that outcome he would hide his head in a paperback before joining the airy formulations of justice kennedy. >> i was going to answer about that. in justice kennedy's majority opinion, he extols the institution of marriage. he says it is a unique fulfillment to those who find meaning in the secular realm and

is essential to our most profound hopes and aspirations. yet justice kagan who has never been married a sign that opinion. i wonder if she thinks it is essential for her. justice sotomayor who was married a few years in her 20's sign that opinion. but i thought was most interesting about the footnote was what scalia said, even for a fifth vote he would not join in opinion. what we have heard as they do not trade votes and they express their own views. what's he lifting the curtain? >> kennedy was the one who wrote it and he would've been the fifth is a more conservative member but this is his area of the law. he was not a reluctant fifth.

and justice ginsburg at the american constitution society address the horse trading idea, at least among the liberals. >> you can imagine a decision were people join the kennedy opinion in full during -- full. >> nobody did and there were no concurring opinions. talking about how marriage isn't the only way to find personal full film -- fulfillment. >> maybe they took the advice justice ginsburg took that sometimes it is helpful to be a little death -- daf. >> they may have felt that since

it was a 5-4 decision already that something as momentous as same-sex marriage you want as many as possible. so why dilute with concurrences or half approvals so let's keep our mouths shut. >> there were a lot of odd lines in that opinion. john roberts said that if this institution was good enough for the bushmen, carthaginians and aztecs, who are we to change it? i thought this sums like a setup for stephen colbert or lewis black. the aztecs? [laughter] i thought they were known for human sacrifice not family values. [laughter] >> it turns out you can cite international law. [laughter]

>> speaking of expressing one's own opinions, justice thomas wrote 37 total opinions, 19 dissents and 11 concurrences. he is obviously of a reliever and not signing a petition to doesn't totally agree with and i wonder you have any theories on why he is writing for so much. is he trying to make up for never asking a question? how do they affect how you cover the cases? >> i don't have a great theory on any of that but i do think he has always been a contrary in the likes to go his own way. he always viewed himself proudly as i think for myself.

the entire time he has been on the court almost every year he writes some long separate dissent making a completely different view of why the voting rights act is wrong or a lot of separate short dissents. it is very much in keeping with him to say i will have my own say. >> the often writes to repeat what he is said that he doesn't think something is constitutional and he will not give up on it and make that point again in hopes that others will come to his point of view. is interesting on the affordable care act that justice kennedy joined the majority and did not write that the whole act is unconstitutional.

>> in addition to writing dissenting and concurring opinions, they express dissent and concurrence orally. do those serve a purpose in your coverage, they change her story or get more column inches from your editors? >> i think they are worth noting for sure. that is why some of us go upstairs for the announcement, in case a dissent is red. it had some drama and you get to see the demeanor of the justices. in the last day of the ceremony of the death penalty case, there

were two dissents and then justice scalia read from his concurrence, a lot of which was responding to justice breyer's dissent, a dissent from a dissent. they were so bitter and deeply felt that it was kind of awkward. there is no way to capture that if you are not there. i think they really are important to cover. >> you get a picture of what they think the importance of the decision is because they have to condense it. i-30 eight-page written decision within the decide what to read from the bench. a couple of justices will give us the written rendition for

later which is helpful. i think that tony is right. you can see whether they justice sitting next to the one reading polls back or doesn't. one of the better moments came when chief justice john roberts red for 10 minutes with much more vigor and confidence than in 2012. in july 2012 the chief was on a zigzag think this is what i don't and this is what i like. was very complicated. there seemed to be a little bit of hesitancy and cheapness --

she business you could hear the conviction and competence of where they were at. he picked up the sixth the boat from anthony kennedy to have the majority and he basically said look, congress -- problems, that is not why we are here. we are here to see what congress had is their intention. to read his dissent and he is sitting right next to him because you know by order of seniority, so scalia is going on and on trashing with the fellow next to him in the center chair has just done and then he reminds everyone up with the chief i done back in 2012 to uphold it and he said we might as well s call it scotus care. and then he says that, that is the only time that the chief gives a little bit of a grin. [laughter] and he says, give scalia a little bit of credit, but that's it. >> i looked at the way several

of you covered the case in the next days paper who do the daily reporting and they were talking about difference. let me ask you why you chose to write the way you did. david, in the very first sentence of your report, you say the first half of the sentence says the supreme court cleared the way for them to continue using the lethal drug cocktail but the second half of that same sentence was two liberal justices open the door to have a challenge for the death penalty. bob you do not get to the dissents until the fourth paragraph of your coverage and adam, you got to in the second sentence which is also the second paragraph but then ended your story with a quote from justice alito and the majority and the other two -- david ended more from the dissent and bob, your story ended with several

instances of botched executions which one might say leaned more toward the dissenters viewed than the majority vote. let me just ask, why did you make those choices? whoever wants to start. >> i will go ahead first. that is one of those cases where there are clearly several different ways to write the story. there is a 5-4 vote, oklahoma wins, the lethal injections can go forward. just breyer, delivers a very longest and same for the first time, joining with jonesburg saying that the death penalty is unconstitutional. i thought it was really interesting formulation which was that he said what we have learned over the last 20 years is there a lot of people who -- but we have learned over the last 20 years is that there a lot of people who are innocent.

it takes 20-30 years on average before anyone is executed, so he said, we could speed up the process but increase the likelihood that we are executing an innocent person, or we could allow these appeals to go on forever in which case there is no actual death penalty system in this country. and so i concluded, it simply cannot work. it was a really interesting dissent. i went back to the office -- though in the web works, you can write two or three different stories during the day. i think the first story i wrote significant because it really set the stage for a much broader attack