tiny compared to what it was during the second world war. we have spent millions of dollars and much training time to make aviation, even combat aviation, much safer and more effective. the modern air war, no matter how it is marked by high speed aircraft or remotely title -- remotely piloted vehicles, or technology, computer guided weapons, as long as it has a human dimension, a human element, it is going to be subject to the same kind of uncertainty of physical exertion, chance. and an atmosphere of war and danger. when there is a human element and that atmosphere, you are going to have a reaction. stress and anxiety. and it is something that commanders and physicians will have to deal with. >> the c-span city's tour

tomorrow has to key west, florida, the southernmost city in the continental united states. we will visit the ernest hemingway house. h historyut the jewis and talk with the author of the book "quit your job and moved to key west." the tour of key west is wednesday at 6:00 p.m. on c-span. florence harding once said that she had only one hobby, and that was warren harding. she was a significant force in her husband's presidency and adept at handling the media turned despite her husbands infidelities, his death in office and her own poor health, she would help to find the role of the modern first lady. florence harding, this sunday night at 8:00 eastern on "first ladies, influence in image: examining the public and private lives of the women who filled andposition of first lady"

their influence on the president for martha washington to michelle obama. sundays at 8:00 p.m. eastern on american history tv on c-span 3. ♪ >> so thrilled and excited to be here. and i want to thank c-span for covering the national book festival. we have a beautiful sunny day, and i hope the camera shows behind me how huge the crowds are. i'm excited. >> one thing to remember about exceptional presidents -- cannot be said too often -- is that they are the exception. [laughter] today.k you for coming this is a wonderful event. it has been said that heaven is a library. heavenf that's the case, has gone outside today, and we are in heaven at the national book festival. >> young people are not the leaders for tomorrow. i am at say to yourself,

youth lkead -- leader for today. >> that was an article for "the atlantic" trying to show that we had this red-blue, that when he went and interviewed people, the divide was a little to buy. politicalwere scientist just in town. the idea that the country itself is as polarized as washington is just wrong. i do not know a single political scientist who believes that. willhope that all people realize that whatever they have done an life, there is something that ought to be recorded and ought to be passed on to the next generation. that is the way we learn. we learn for the future by trying to understand the past. and all of us have a past. >> you talked about when they were -- in guam. you really only focused on taipan. you did not talk that much about guam. >> this is a great question. it goes to the heart of all of

the questions we have been talking about. it is actually to the point. we realize that there was no way we could tell the whole story. there is no way we could be short of an in cycle. , or hav -- an encyclopedia and having the story reads like a telephone book. to list and do justice to everything. >> all think all of the opportunities are open for women now. ien i was in law school, graduated in 1967, there were 13 women in my clasped her today the law schools are 50-50. >> i think the key to understanding what g.r. -- t.r. did, is he never liked people that put profit above the public good. his view with these parks and wilderness areas belong to the american people for generations unborn, and they needed to be handed on as places to awaken the spirit. >> i made a career out of my love for books. and to help spread that love, i helped to found the texas book festival and then the national

book festival. but while i love reading, i never thought i would write a book. certainly not one about myself. a sense is in some ways of -- for the book, a sense of urgency to go to the oldest people and our families and to get the story before that -- it's too late. to be able to -- i've had a father and a daughter in los angeles you came together and after hearing the -- about the book, the daughter said to the father, i am taking you to the coffee shop and you are going to tell me the story. >> when history looks back, 30 plus million people -- added to our health insurance rolls. that's going to be quite a change. quite a -- martin luther king said, the moral -- of the universe bends slowly but it bends toward justice.

i think that was a bending towards justice. there are things wrong with the health care bill, but you know what johnson would've said and he said it about the civil rights bill which was a very flawed -- once you pass it, it is easier to go back and fix it. >> i believe the narrative historians to calling is to bring back the dead. i try to do that not only with the outside - -the figures you are familiar with, the eisenhower's and patenton -- pattons, but also generals ted roosevelt junior. >> at this stage of my life, i do not think i can afford 10 years on millard fillmore or franklin pierce. no big person to go back to easily. so i am bringing all my guys in the room at the same time. and i'm going to write about leadership. that is what i care about underneath it all. so -- thank you. i just started >. >> c-span is going to have questions called in.

and c-span will now answer. >> a congressional budget office billionasting a $426 deficit next year, which would be the sixth straight year of deficit reduction. the head of the congressional hallt office keith ahl announce those numbers today. this is 45 minutes. director hall: good morning, again. i am keith hall at the congressional budget office. we have released a net day to our previous economic projections for the next 10 years. i will briefly summarize those projections gaining with the budget and then turning to the economy and i will be happy to take your questions.

the federal budget deficit we predicted for 2015 -- 2016 will be smaller than we predicted in march. specifically, we estimate that the deficit for this fiscal year will reach 426 billion dollars, $59 billion less than last year, or 2.4% of gdp. this will be the sixth straight year of declining deficit relative to gdp. however, the debt will reach 13.2 trillion million dollars -- trillion dollars. it is slightly less than the ratio last year, but higher than any ratio since 1950. over the next 10 years, the outlook does not defer substantially from the one we

described in march. under the assumption that current laws generally remain in place, deficit as a percentage of gdp are estimated to remain low for the next three years, but then begin to rise. at the cbo's current baseline, the deficit falls to 1% of gdp in 2013, but in the next decade much higher. those deficits occur because significant projected growth in spending on health care and retirement programs and rising interest payments on federal debt outpace projected revenues. by the end of the ten year baseline, rising debts push public health debt up to 7% of gdp, roughly 20% of the last five decades. under current law, both spending and revenues would remain higher as related to current levels of

gdp. both will be for the next several years above the 20% average they have been at the last 20 years. outlays would total 22% of gdp. spending on three components of the budget will grow faster than the economy. the major health programs, including medicare and medicaid and subsidies for health exchanges, and social security and net interest payments. in contrast, mandatory spending other than that for major health care programs and social security and both defense and nondefense discretionary spending would shrink markedly relative to the size of the economy. outlays in those categories would fall to the lowest percentage of gdp since 1940, the lowest year for which

comparable data has been reported. federal revenues as a share of gdp are expected to rise to 18.9 percent of gdp in 2016, primarily because several tax receipts would increase relative to gdp, largely a result of real bracket creep with smaller effects of changes and other factors. payroll tax receipts would decline relative to gdp, especially over the next several years.

reflecting several factors, such as declined to unemployment trust funds. corporate tax receipts would decline, mostly because of an anticipated drop in estimated profits as a percentage of gdp and the effect of recently expired tax provisions. remittances to the treasury and federal reserve, which have been written -- have been very large since 2010 would decline to more typical levels. beyond 2025, is current laws remain in place them same pressures that contribute to the rising deficits in the next decade would accelerate that -- would push debt up sharply relative to gdp. when interest rates return to more typical higher levels, federal spending on interest payments would increase substantially. because federal borrowing reduces national savings over

time, the nation's capital profit would ultimately be smaller and total wages would be lower than if debtor smaller. lawmakers would have less flexibility to use taxing and spending policies for changes. for the economic outlook, our budget reductions are built on the economic forecast leverage anticipate that the economy is expected to grow modestly this year and a solid pace through the next few years. although real adjusted inflation grew weekly in early 2015, the economy now appears to be on firmer ground and we expect the pace of economic activity to pick up over the next calendar year and the next few years. after that, we expect to see moderate to constrained early growth in the workforce.

real gdp will grow by 2% this calendar year, by 3.1% in 2016, and by 2.7% in 2017. above its potential or maximum sustainable rate over that time frame. the economy will grow at an average rate of 2.2%, equal to its real growth rate. this will be driven by consumer spending, business investment, and residential investment. over the next few years, the faster pace in growth output is expected to reduce the quantity of underused resource, or slack, in the economy. the estimate was about 3.4% in 2014. cbo next to narrow that gap to its historical average by the end of 2017. although labor market conditions continue to improve significantly, in the first half

of 2015 there is still significant slack in the labor market. key measures include the labor force participation rate that remains about 1% below its potential rate, the employment rate, which is 0.5% higher than it was the beginning of the session, and the share of those super for part-time over full-time work, which is about 1% higher than the last session. the direct consequence is that wages continue to grow more slowly than they did before the recession. we expect that as slack diminishes, increased competition for fewer available workers will lead forms -- firms to increase wages more rapidly to attract available workers. we project further hiring will reduce unemployment further to 5.0% in the first quarter of 2017.

currently however, most of the labor force slack that can be seen is in the low labor force participation rate. we estimate that the current employment shortfall with the number of people who would be employed if the unemployment rate equaled its rate in 20 -- in 2007 is about 2.7 5 million people. people. the unemployment rate accounts for only about one fourth of that amount. the depressed employment rate accounts for the other three fourths. that development will slow the long-term decline in labor force participation, which is attributable to the underlying demographic trends and federal policies, but it will also slow the following unemployment rate. over the next few years, depressed slack in the economy

will put pressure on upward interest rates. nevertheless, cbo expects the rate of inflation as measured by the price index for personal expenditures to remain the same through 2017. an outcome that is consistent with some remaining, but diminishing slack in the economy and widely held expectations for slowly rising inflation. interest rates have been through -- have been near zero through 2009 will rise to 3.4% by the end of 2019. the rate in 10 year treasury notes, cbo expects, will rise to two point -- to 4.2% by the end of 2019. those rates rise with the increase in the federal funds rate and the improving economic conditions. we are now happy to take questions.

if you could say your name and/or news organization. -- and your news organization. >> how do you account for the $60 billion or so drop in the deficit beyond that revenue is hard? and why is revenue hard, as thought back in the spring, and also your projection on when treasury will run out of room for extraordinary measures, the difference between what you set now and you said earlier. keith: the tax revenues have been higher than anticipated,

and we now forecast about $70 billion in tax revenue this year. the slower growth will go away. we expect about $10 billion in revenue, so we did that net increase of $60 billion. >> why? keith: it is not because of the slower growth. it just seems to be that tax and this higher forecast of revenues in our estimation is pushed back until we run out of money between mid november and

keith: it is actually from both corporations and individuals. both were higher than expected. >> john nicholson with bloomberg be in it. -- with bloomberg bna. in recent days, we have seen the stock markets particularly going through some troubles. to what extent -- in the event since july 7, where would it shape the forecast now and what would you expect to see on paper now? keith: economic growth has been stronger than we thought since july 7. if we were to change things, probably stronger growth for this year and then a little

weaker for the next two years. with respect to the stock market, i'm not sure we would change anything yet. fluctuations in equity markets are fairly common. they affect something like when julian dollars worth of wealth -- one trillion dollars worth of wealth that has been lost up to yesterday. but that does not translate into change behavior by either consumers or businesses right away. >> how much are you worried about those gyrations at best? -- at this point keith: -- at this point? keith: economic fundamentals, at least so far, have not been changed. i don't feel too worried about it. >> steve with tax notes. the report make the comment that tax revenues are lower because expired tax revisions did not get renewed at the end of last

year. as you know, congress is you need to think about extending those provisions again will stop -- again. can you make the case by passing -- and you have done it here several times -- that the section 19 business expansion, that has been renewed and will bring the debit closer. there is more spending and the limit will be closer than estimated in november. keith: that is right, we expect that the spending provision will not be renewed. and if it is, obviously will have an effect on revenues. >> [inaudible] sooner? keith: i'm not sure, to be honest. we would have to sit down and count. i have to be honest.

>> federal health care spending, it has been growing faster than the economy, of course. do you see any differences in that trend? do you see a faster rate of growth for federal health care spending, or do you see? it slowing down at all any changes -- see it slowing down at all? any changes? keith: we do not have some of the data yet. we will probably have that by the and in the year. we do expect premiums to rise anyway. and the uptake in exchanges is always a big unknown in our forecast to my because we do not have any experience with that yet. >> just to follow-up looking at the larger picture, there has been in the past several years a slowing in the growth rate in the federal health care spending.

the question is, will that continue or will the growth rate return to a faster pace? do you have any better sense for that growth rate is headed at this point? keith: it is certainly part of our forecast that spending on health care will increase significantly going forward. it has been a long-term trend, and then of course, the effect of the subsidies is a big unknown in the exchanges. we do expect that health care spending is going to continue to rise. >> any differences in your projections between now and march traceable to the health care law? keith: no, it is pretty close to the same right now. >> on your revision of the increase and potential labor force participation, what drove you guys to make that change?

has there been any interplay with the afford care act on your projections with labor force participation? and could it inform any thinking about slower wage gains so far over the past 18 months or so? keith: i think our notion of a slightly higher labor force participation in part comes from the pattern. we find people returning to the labor force a little bit faster than we would have anticipated. it makes us think that the cyclical impact of the labor force is bigger than we thought before. that is the main reason. i don't know that we have seen any impact on the labor force participation from the aca. it is hard to know how much that is going to affect things. certainly, you want to keep monitoring it and get an idea of what the impact would be. one of the big issues is that

the employer mandate is only partially kicked in this year and we have more to kick in later. we will have to see what impact that has. >> on interest rates, in your changes from the market a sign -- from the market baseline, you indicate 3 million plus downgrade in interest payments. can you explain that? talk about why that is, because i thought you made a decision on lower than historic rates previously. what new information is there that is lower, or is that just fluctuations in the forecast? and how does this play into the idea that our interest will become such a big word and that we will have trouble in five or 10 or 30 years paying our continued interest?

keith: the change in the interest rate forecast really came from a look at the financial markets and the expectations in the financial markets. we are beginning to expect a little lower growth in interest rates than we did. we made an adjustment for that. but we still anticipate a rise in interest rates, a significant rise in interest rates. in fact, the picture is still up there. we will also have a very large increase in interest payments as interest rates go up. >> on the interest rate question, or related i guess, there is a line about no

expectation for a cola for interest rate inflation. do you have new data on disability and when that will be exhausted in your estimates? keith: the social security is set by law to follow the consumer index. i forget exactly, but it's a one or two your time change. -- or two year change. the way it looks now, there will just not be much inflation on the cpi to give much of an index on social security. that is what we anticipate. and the other part, i'm sorry? >> on disability insurance. keith: i don't recall what it was last time, but i know we talked about it in our long-term

budget outlook. but i don't recall. >> if they haven't already, democrats will probably use this report to say, look, no need to cut spending. republicans will argue long-term we need to do something about it. who is right? [laughter] keith: this doesn't change our long-term projection, or even our 10 year projection. the pattern is very much like it was in march, very much like it was in january. under current law, the growth in debt is not sustainable. at some point it will get to a very high level. obviously, you cannot predict tipping points, but at some point this becomes a problem. the wave is going, it is not just that the debt gets to a high level, i think something like 70% of gdp by 2025.

but there is also the trend. 70% and growing. that factors into things as well. this is an unsustainable path here for the federal debt. >> does your point take into account any kind of economic boost from cutting taxes? in other words, do we use dynamic scoring to indicate revenues would not be as low as previous they suggested? keith: implicitly there is dynamic analysis in this work all the time. it is sort of been nothing new in the economic force that we rely on, the current law that we rely on, and part of the fact -- part of this is the growing debt probably having some effect on crowding out investment and

slowing economic growth going forth. >> speaking of dynamic, since you brought it up, you guys just recently issued your dynamic estimate of a particular bill, the extenders back in early august. i wonder you could give us the aspects of how that decision was made in terms of the formatting, the table and so on. and also, how much of that was made in discussion with the budget committees, particularly the senate budget committee? keith: they certainly requested the estimate and i believe it was large enough for the automatic dynamic analysis to begin. we did that analysis along with jct. part of the analysis is figuring out how to effectively communicate the impact. we did our analysis on that particular tax extension relief

act of 2015. we estimated it would increase the deficit by $87 billion over a ten-year timeframe. we also put in the estimate that without the macroeconomic effects, you can see where those effects are. >> in terms of the fort amounting, was that -- the formatting, what was -- was that decision made here? keith: oh, it was our decision. we also anticipate it will improve the quality of our estimates to be able to improve that -- include that. there was perhaps an issue of our estimates not being centered without having the -- the

macroeconomic effects included. that is probably true to an extent, but there is always uncertainty in terms of forecasting the effects. we are kind of used to the idea of uncertainty in our macro forecast. >> you mentioned center. could you go over that issue again? keith: sure, the tax extension -- the tax relief extension act is a good example. the increasing deficits with by about $97 billion, but you expect the lower income tax rate will have some sort of macroeconomic effect, reducing a little crowding out and such. we anticipate an increase deficit by less than that, by about $87 billion. we had a shift of about $10 billion to our point estimate to the impact, if that makes sense.

>> how much of a challenge has it been to -- i mean, it is easier probably to do a range of dynamic estimate. you estimate a range of the dynamic impact of inflation as opposed to a single number. has it been a challenge or an issue to do a single number rather than a range? keith: in my mind it really happened in, because we are asked for our best estimate. we could put a range around estimates without macro effects just like we can with one with a macro effect. i think we are doing a good job to give a pointed estimate. this is our best estimate. but it is also probably true to communicate the uncertainty in the range. we can do that at least wanted

to play. it is hard to do it numerically -- we can at least do that qualitatively. it is hard to do it numerically. >> was the range what you expected, or more than you expected? keith: i think it was pretty much what we expected. i did not sit down and try to predict it, but we have been using the macroeconomic effects for a while now and we have the models down, so we have a feel for what that will look like. as estimates continue forward, it is important to be transparent on the modelers so we can get some discussion about how we do the estimates and maybe we can improve that over time. >> how much more uncertain is this tax extenders bill, how much more uncertain is this dynamic score of $87 billion than the standard score of $97 billion?

because we hear the score is less certain. this is only a $10 billion difference. what would your thoughts be? keith: on the difficulty with the macroeconomic effects and really, almost all of our estimates, is that there is an unknown thing there. we all know how accurate it is, what the ranges. when we do our forecast, especially something like the long-run forecast, we will do a parameter of values to give you a feel for the accurate a. but that is not released this is the goal standard error -- that is not really a statistical standard error or something like that. hopefully over time we will get a better notion of that and be able to begin communicating that a bit better going forward, what the likely range will be. >> do the tax cuts pay for themselves? keith: no, the evidence is that

the tax cuts do not pay for themselves. and you so -- and our models show that in the tax extension relief act. we are hoping the estimate is more centered now, that we are going to get into the right -- that the point estimate is being more accurate. >> there has been uncertainty lately. not to be a pessimist, but we do have a fed at the zero lower around. we do have an historically high and growing amount of debt to gdp. what are the risks to these two conditions should there be a global recession, which is presumably not unthinkable given what we are seeing in some of these markets. keith: i'm not sure the markets are suggesting anything about a

global recession as of yet. as long as the long-term economic fundamentals remain and change, then this is not some we should worry about stop and what i have seen -- what we should worry about. and what i've seen from the fed is that the fluctuations in the equity markets, that's not the same thing. that is one of the reasons why we are concerned about the growing debt, because as debt continues to grow in handcuffs the government if we go into another recession about what they can do policy wise to work through it. we lose flexibility. and to give you an idea of how important that is, i will repeat something that you probably know. but keep in mind the jet to -- the debt to gdp ratio in 2007 was something like 30% of gdp. we are now up to 74% and that is a huge change.

that is a difficult thing. starting at 74% would be a difficult thing to do with another downturn like that. >> there was something in the changes about -- between march and last week about the $200 million in related health care. -- $200 billion related to health care. it was reclassified in march and then reclassified again this time. can you walk us through? keith: i think it was a technical change, but the fact that it was in our forecast in march makes it a change that affected our estimate of

revenues, but it did not fall into the technical category. >> what was the original thing to come up with $200 billion? what was the treatment in march and -- the treatment in march versus the treatment now? keith: that i do not know. i have had too many things to look at. >> we can follow up. keith: so it is absolutely clear we have left you with no questions? >> seems like there are not as many changes in this update as in a lot of the previous reports. it seems like minor changes. keith: i don't have experience with previous reports, but certainly the economic change, the drop in and disappointing first-quarter with growth had a

bit of an impact. and even now it looks like since july 7, even less of an impact than first thought because the data looked a little better going forward. and then, i guess, the revenue rise. but other than that, we really haven't changed our views on the potential of gdp in the long-term view of the economy and the budget going forward. we have not changed that much. we still have a tricky time because we are still looking at significant slack in the economy. we've got until the end of 2017, at least by our forecast, until that slack is gone. and until that goes, we don't anticipate the wage growth will be what we would like it to be, what it should be until that slack goes away. i think that will be a challenge going forward.

>> this may be outside your purview, but any thoughts on what kind of policy changes could accelerate that growth and reduce the slack? keith: i wouldn't want to set speculate -- to speculate on that. it is oh is difficult to imagine imagines difficult to what will spur the economy in the short run. we are doing now is the setting of the automatic stabilizers. the demand has faded from that. that is what we are dealing with, but you are always dealing with that in a recession. one of the things that i think looks like a real almost unknown challenge right now is productivity is not growing like it usually does through a business cycle. and i think that is probably a real concern not just to the united aids, but around the

-- the united states but around the world. productivity growth being strong. it is actually part of our forecast that we will get a bounce back in productivity, but in some ways it is overdue right now. >> is it that worldwide productivity growth is weak? keith: it is. there is no real clear answer. hopefully when we see it bounce back we will figure out why it was this low. -- so slow. but that is an important part of this forecast and the revised forecast, productivity. when he gets back to something like it usual long-term range of growth. -- like it's usual long-term range of growth. >> can you walk us through where that potential gdp has been to where it is now to where it

could go? keith: something like potential gdp, it requires a number of things. you get back to full use of economic resources. you get your labor force balancing back -- bouncing back and unemployment to bounce back. we've probably got some catch up in capital investment. in fact, part of our forecast is a little ketchup in business investment. in his news investment. actually, that is one of the things that we differ a little bit from some of the other forecasters. we are a bit more bullish about a bounce back in investment. but you get labor force back and investment back, and in you hopefully get this productivity back. that is sort of the at -- the recipe for economic growth going forward. and although we've had some disconnect between productivity

and wage growth, a number of years ago growth in productivity is now following labor compensation. they still are related and we are still expecting you will need to have growth in productivity and competition. and that is one of the things, too, the share of gdp is still low. that needs to bounce back. that will be part of getting rid of the labor market slack and increasing demand for labor services. more questions? >> one completely -- well, not completely unrelated. the friday release of the economic analysis of obama's budget, one thing that struck me in that is that you talk about

the gmp will be higher, but per capita gnp will be lower because of the immigration aspect of the president's budget. my limited reading of that is that there are more poor workers and therefore lower wages. i take it if that is not -- i take it that is not that simple. would you walk me through that? keith: part of it is that immigrants are below average in their earnings, their income. if you increase immigration, even if you increase employment with immigration, because they are below average you lower the per capita gdp. and that will be a challenge going forward when we have this declining labor force to begin with. we are obviously slowing our forecast for gdp growth in the future.

and we've got the issue of a ratio of people working to not working in the economy as the population ages. if you have slower gdp growth and youth have still a large -- and you have still a large population, population, you will have maybe a slowdown in per capita gdp growth. but that will be something a lot of economies will experience because of the aging population, the aging labor force. >> to follow up on that, the immigration proposal, let's assume that is passed and we have more low-wage workers in the country. that would reduce the average wage. but would it necessarily reduce other people's wages? i mean, middle and upper income wages, -- it could reduce the average wage, but does that also mean it could reduce the wages of some existing workers who

were working before the change in the law? keith: our reading of the economic literature is that it doesn't, it doesn't reduce other wages. that is part of the forecast. and the analysis of the president's budget. i hope i have that right. other questions? you've held up great, though. thank you. is there any reason to continue? i guess i could ask you questions now. [laughter] >> that could go a long time. [laughter] keith: thank you. thank you for coming.

[captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2015] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [indiscernible conversations] ♪ >> i am so thrilled and excited to be here and i want to thank c-span for covering the national book festival. we have a beautiful, sunny day, and i hope the camera shows how huge the crowds are. i'm excited about that. thing to remember about exceptional presidents is that they are the exception. [laughter] >> thank you for coming today. this is a wonderful event. it has been said that heaven is a library. if that is the case, heaven has

gone outside today, and we are in heaven at the national book festival. >> young people are not the leaders for tomorrow. i am at say to yourself, leader for today. let's see what i can do. >> there was an article in "the atlantic" trying to show that we had a red-blue amp. but the divide -- --red-blue map. the divide was a little divide. there were political scientists in town. the idea of the country itself is as polarized as washington is right. i do not know a single political scientist who believes that. >> i hope that all people will realize that whatever they have done in life there is something that ought to be recorded and ultimately passed on to the next generation. that is the way we learn. bylearn for the future trying to understand the past. and all of us have a past. >> when you talk about when you were made in taipan and guam.

you really only focused on taipan. you did not talk that much about guam. why? >> this is a great question. it goes to the heart of all the questions -- it is to the point. we realized that there was no way we could tell the whole story. there was no way we could be short of an encyclopedia or theng a story read like telephone book, and the telephone book is not a story. to list and do justice to everything. >> i think all opportunities are open for women now. when i was in law school -- i graduated in 1967 -- there were 13 women in my class. today, the law schools are 50-50. >> i think the key to understanding what t.r. did i she -- is he never liked people who put profit above the public good. these parks and wilderness areas belonged to the american people theyenerations unborn, and

needed to be handed on his places to awaken the spirit. >> i made a career out of my love for books. and to help spread that love, i helped to found the texas book festival, and then the national book festival. it while i love reading, never thought i would write a book. certainly not one about myself. >> the goal is in some ways a sense of -- for the book, a sense of urgency to go to the oldest people and our families and to find them and to get the stories before it is too late. to be able to, i've had a father and a daughter in los angeles who both came together and after hearing the talk and hearing about the book, the daughter said to the father, i am taking each of the coffee shop now and you are going to tell me the story. >> when history looks back and says that 30 plus million people were added to health insurance rolels. that is going to be quite a

change, quite a -- martin luther king said, the universe bendse is slowly but it bends toward justice. i think that was a bending towards justice. with the things wrong health-care bill, but you know what johnson would've said? he said it about the civil rights bill. the important thing is to -- past it. -- pass it. it is easy to go back and fix it. >> the narrative historians to calling is to bring back the dead. i tried to do that not only with the outside -- you are familiar with, the eisenhowers and pattons, but others that are less familiar like general ted roosevelt junior >> at this stage in my life, i do not think i can afford 10 years on millard fillmore or franklin pierce. there is no big person to go back to easily. so i am bringing all my guys in time, and i'm going to write about leadership. that is what i care about.

oh, thank you. i just started. >> c-span is going to have questions called in from c-span, and c-span will answer. this week, c-span marks the anniversary of hurricane katrina with special programming. we ask your thoughts on the lessons our country has learned from the experience of hurricane katrina. concert -- the conversation on facebook or twitter. our special program continues tonight with a look at the city of new orleans one year after the storm. that is followed by testimony of hurricane katrina evacuees and a 2005 senate select committee hearing. next, a look at the city of new orleans one year after the or