to run the --e, and maybe, maybe i was i told that reporter, if my skin color was an issue, that was everybody else's issue, that was not mine. eastern,00 p.m. jillian thomas talks about her got a booke of sex, tv or the complete weekend schedule. next, a conversation with former vice president dick cheney. former attorney general ed meese, and constitutional law deen douglas about choosing a running mate, the balance of power, and reflections on nancy reagan and justice scalia. this is one hour.

[applause] >> thank you ladies and gentlemen. let's get right to it. we heard a presentation from dr. larson that suggests your role as vice president was a political expediency, that it was a prize that could be given away to earn political credit for the president. we saw interesting proliferation's in the electoral college, where people were casting their ballots in a way where so many people would cast ballets, and an unexpected presidential candidate would emerge.

they were undesignated originally. what do you make of that history? is it a history you are comfortable with? or do you find yourself dissenting from it? i thought it was right on. my wife has written a book on james madison. the impression that dr. larson presented is very much in tune with my wife's interpretation. it was an afterthought. partly an effort to deal with so

many problems as they arose in the electoral college. the fact that you have a couple prominent members of the constitutional convention, it hadn't been addressed into the creation of the vice presidency. it felt it was a band-aid. an effort to deal with a short-term problem at a time. >> when we get into this, you quickly discover how much the vice presidency is tied up with the perception of the electoral college and the the changes that take place in it. one also discovers a supposition from our first president, who receives treatment as the saint of the republic.

he viewed the operation of government in a nonpartisan way. he said in his farewell address, he wanted to warn us about the dangerous effects of party. when you ask washington for his conception of the presidency, it's much different than the role that we associate with the president now. we associate him being the head of his party, the international leader in terms of laying out policy programs that congress will follow on behalf of the constituents that elected him. washington's conception of the presidency was much narrower, it was more managerial and executive. members of congress would ask the executive branch for their opinion on certain matters.

he worked assiduously to prevent members of his administration from answering those. we have to the reasons from not answering letters from congress. but the madison supposition is that it confuses the role of president. that he was to take what was delivered to him and to take care of the laws faithfully executed. if you assume that as the nature of the presidency, does it make sense to think of the vice presidency as where there is more going on than a juror to be added to someone's political treasure box? v.p. cheney: one thing i remember, there was confusion on what the executive role would be. you look at washington's first address in congress, he had--

[indiscernible] it was submitted by the president to congress. madison wrote the congressional response, the executive's message, which he had written himself. again, washington used him to

respond. there was confusion about who was writing whom. imagine that the president of the united states called on a congressional leader --[indiscernible] they were making it up as they went along. >> a strong executive was a concern they had in terms of too much power. when they did that, they were not fond of state executives. they were appointees of the crown. they were very much resented and resisted. it became different, because you have popular sovereignty and some portion of the population selecting the governor. you are right there was a profound concern with abuse of power and unity of power. which brings us to what i mentioned in the introduction, a perception that something has to explain the votes we have seen in the primary. there is a certain rage among the people that the government is simply not on the job. i don't mean this to be in any way partisan.

i think it is a bipartisan exercise.

i remember the slow process of confirmation proceedings in the senate, handling those matters. now that the shoe is on the other foot, obama is making the same complaint. why isn't the government delivering what those guys promised to me when they ran on the stump 4 years ago? from a more intellectual perspective, it is threatening to the separation of powers, is it not? if you have key appointments not being made, legislation not

being addressed, there is a tendency on part of the presidency to go around the problem with executive orders that you don't have authority for without legislation. the separation of powers --[indiscernible] is this dysfunction issue a service one, or would you describe it in a different way? v.p. cheney: i am not sure how much it has to do with the role of the vice president. [laughter] i'm not the only one. we ended up on the republican side with candidates running in a rich field-- what we're left with at this stage, all those supposedly establishment candidates aren't really a factor anymore.

it's taken on a different tone and style than i have seen before. >> i would argue it has something to do with the vice presidency. as you mentioned, even on the issue of the presidency, there is uncertainty about that. this was a new office. they did not want a king. they wanted leadership and management, but they did not know how much. how does the problem of reuniting the powers into an effective government-- the powers are not just to be

divided and separated, but interspersed and integrated when necessary to build a working government. if the vice president, who has this unique role, is in the place where these two interests have to meet, what substitute is there for getting agreement to move the government forward in a positive way? v.p. cheney: the way i look at it, based on my own experience, i was reputed by some to have an especially powerful position. >> one said when you hear the president's voice, you hear

dick cheney's. v.p. cheney: i wondered why it did on my watch. i think there are a lot of reasons not related to the constitution. >> more of a personal dynamic? v.p. cheney: personal. it was work with congress. i had been a number of the house for 10 years. shortly after i was elected vice president, i was visited by the speaker of the house. the speaker of the house was a good friend. i helped him when he first came into congress.

we think of you as the man of the house. the chairman at that point had 2 very nice offices. huge office, table and cabinet. [indiscernible] he said i could have either one of those offices. because of my background in the house, and my relationships -- [indiscernible] i had an office not only in the

west wayne, but -- west wing. we had a significant legislative impact. that was all based on personal relationships and background with the house and senate. >> i think that is a great story. i think that's a demonstrative

story as to the significance of the vice president. i want to get back to the founders. they got you that office to some degree because it opened the door that you would be president of the senate. and yet it was dick cheney that took the presidency of the senate and found the most aggravating office to occupy, and fun ways to have -- and found ways to have conversations. isn't that interesting, that this office they created

[indiscernible] so instrumental in terms of what you would point out to be your success as vice president. i think the framers get a little tip of the hat for that. [laughter] >> they had an office in the west wing, so they could never find you. [laughter] >> looking at the vice presidency through the years, as recently as calvin coolidge, i don't think there's much thought of the vice president as a big role in the executive branch. when eisenhower came in, he was used to a military structure. he talked about being an executive vice president. that the vice president would have more of a role in the executive branch. is that your recollection of how the office changed? v.p. cheney: by the time i got

the job, one of the reasons i said no when it was first offered was because i had never met a vice president who was happy. projects, and we were --a time when our policy he left, and was never happy.

[inaudible] was a step up in terms of the group that worked closely together, mondale played a more roman numeral -- prominent role. i think that continued in my case and with respect to joe

biden, i do not know enough yet about his function. there has been power and responsibility and influence. >> there is a story of the meeting vice president quayle. i think your response was i have a different conception of the office. understanding, we have from the late

justice scalia. not that you should lose a lot -- a lot of sleep. [inaudible] [laughter] obviously, there were times when i played a significant workedut the reason it as well as it did for us, he had spent an amazing amount of time thinking about the united states.

i discovered years later, after he left office, that in 1992, when i was secretary of defense, and his dad was running for reelection, that he had gone to his dad and suggested to him that he make a change in his running mate and replace dan quayle with me. eight years before he been .hinking about this he had a very carefully thought out plan of what it was he wanted.

when i first version of those .eing vice president, i said no he asked me to help him find somebody. , as i wasrough a few not interested in becoming vice president. we worked through a 2-3 month process finding various candidates. he thought if he could get me involved, he conveyed what i should be looking for. i absorbed his perception. i offered up everybody i could think of. he turned to me and said, you

are the solution to my problem. he told me i was what he needed. there was never a contract or handshake. i had a good understanding what he was looking for. >> he became not just the model, but the candidate. >> a legislative mix-- the others pointed out are those with legislative experience.

even if they did not have the executive experience. like lyndon johnson for example, his effectiveness as president, drawing upon legislative talents. when adams tried to throw himself into his work, it was too much for the senate to have him there on a day-to-day basis. george w. bush was persuasive when he tried to get daniel webster to take the vice residency -- presidency. , "no sir, ias > wouldn't like to be

vice president, i would rather be dead before i get buried." [laughter] >> putting aside the legal particular your precedent, you did do something other vice presidents haven't done, which is a letter of resignation. that's interesting because one of the things you were astutely read a nice or is for the present be able to serena's understanding that he had control in the executive sense, he needs the ability to dismiss someone if necessary. of course, vice presidents who disagree with their presidents are not as thoughtful as he were.

>> we had our differences. certain disagreements. there were occasions when we had differences of view. part of the process that we had , and that lunches was strictly one-on-one the president. we could talk about anything. it was important to have that privacy.

there were other occasions where we disagreed. i'm trying to think. example, we had discovered there spring of 2007, were photographs on the table. there were pictures taken inside a nuclear reactor in a syrian desert, built by the north koreans. all of a sudden we find not only they have been working on a

nuclear device, but a nuclear reactor in syria. there was a major concern in terms of proliferation. the place is now controlled by isis. the prospects there were pretty disturbing. what happened is the israelis went in and took it out. was,ifference of opinion is i wanted to take it out. i wanted us to back up what we said about the proliferation of nuclear weapons. had taken such a strong position that i felt we had to

back it up. one. the only the national security council along me to make my pitch. they urge me to deliver up the rationale for why the thought we should take up this reactor. the mask for a show of hands, how many members of the security council agreed with that. and nobody -- [laughter] >> it would have given meaning in substance to our strong state about proliferation. reactorovery of that and the israeli action was very strong.

that is an area where i would argue i had the best policy option. he made that argument entirely internally. >> i did not go publicly. although it got out eventually. it wasn't secret. for the time being we did not talk about it. it was several months before the even acknowledged that they had a nuclear reactor. know the history of the electoral college, and the way it changed from where you cast differentiated votes.

the same reins of talent statur. jefferson himself when pointed out from time to time. when the system changed so you ran on separate ballots you created a second-tier of people who would be aiming at the second office only. therefore you would attract a different quality of people. it was a lafferty we describe somebody as a retirement spot. you are example just now that enough substance to take on the president of the united states, even when you were the only voice in the cabinet. had is a presidential candidate that you wouldty

put high in the list of qualities for vice president? a lot of times the reasons people do things might have to do with gender or race or geography. one thathere was only matters more than all the others put together. the capacity [indiscernible] i think if we look back in history you will find there been a number of selections were that.y it doesn't meet there are a lot of pressures.

for jerry ford, after rockefeller step down in 1976 we had have a replacement. search based on guidance from jerry ford. search based on guidance from jerry ford. >> the qualities necessary to step in at any given moment. is a breath of experience? virtues? to ofobviously a certain degree compatibility. another thing that was important in terms of my role in my ability to operate was i took myself out of contention. it was clear i was not using the vice presidency as a stepping stone to becoming president itself.

to 1993 iack considered running for president. they concluded after it was over with that i would not run for president. by the time i had gotten to that point i had a coronary bypass. i got into a campaign which was a long shot anyway. i lost. i knew i would immediately be heart c and i bad would put a -- and that would put a cramp on future prospects. one of the reasons i think george bush was comfortable with me and give me as much latitude as he did was because he knew i about what myd

standing was going to be in the iowa caucuses. i would be taking myself out. i think it was a very important part of building the degree of with me, the staff and the folks on capitol hill. it was not because i was trying to influence the outcome of the iowa caucuses. remind the audience if they have questions they are welcome to interject with a question. i have an exhaustible supply in my head. [laughter] cards werning to the got this anomalous legislative

during thisn confidential discussions of the executive branch. we know as a matter of law executive privilege depends upon maintaining that confidentiality see you can use it outside the perimeter of the second branch. have you handle this difficulty when in the middle of it this person who is not part of the branch and an active sense but only in a waiting sense and is -- there is a serious constitutional fly anyone on that one. >> i think the idea that the as two or of powers three separations is the wrong

concept. idea that the power be dispersed among three bodies. but not the two bodies could require further limitation of power. they would have to agree to have something. the whole concept behind the founders was a limit power. they found the key to having executive ability to do things, and at the same time not at the expense of the liberty of the people. they key was -- when they limited the power between the three branches and further limited each branch to operate individually on some things, legislation requiring two branches to cooperate right president tow the

determine what powers it think the vice president had. that's what it says an article to. -- article 2. with the vice president has been saying is his power as vice president in an executive nature depended on what the president said needed to be done. the thoughtsything of the founders were exactly in line with what they intended to do and i was limit power. >> the branches are not hermetic resealed as we would say. >> there are no firewalls today in that sense. >> in that sense the vice presidency, if you want to call it an afterthought or fortuitous circumstances, by uniting those two goals encourages

cooperation. >> it may have been an accident. the manipulations of the college. if we do not have the vice president, what would you do? there have been numerous incidents or something happen to the president for one reason or another and he did not have a vice president. what would you do? would you turn to the totally unelected secretary of state as the primary -- first among equals? have you fill that gap? itself hasand of been the line of succession as we know it thank the outstanding hagel -- alexander hagel. it has changed several times. >> he was wrong.

the speaker of the house is next in line after the vice president. no vice president would be the speaker of the house. did you have a person was by at most the citizens of one congressional district becoming the president. probably the lowest electoral majority anybody has had to lead a country. >> there are cabinet officers not elected by anyone. a question from the audience with a think is a good one is since 1940 presidential candidates have chosen a vice president of candidate on their own or sometimes in consultation as you described with close political advisers. inthat enough accountability the democratic sense or should they be an alternative such as a primary for vice president or perhaps opening it up to a ?arger convention

the delegates would choose the vice president and have the president narrow it down to three or something of that nature. what is your thoughts on the accountability in the selection of the vice president? i wouldn't consider the ability of vice president to be active on the terms of the president wants. look at lyndon johnson. this cap is a legislative genius. -- this guy was a legislative genius. if you remember about his vice [indiscernible] everybody here today wasn't born then.

it was a classic case with a confident or experienced man image in running the senate effectively became vice president and then he had almost nothing to do. we start tackling the process of the invention on a choose, ultimately for him to be effective it has to be with the approval and support of the president. it does not matter how he is selected. i'm not sure if you're going to get something to make enough difference. you may say the president did not take well his vice president , but if he's not satisfied with that choice, that individual will be relegated to duties --

[indiscernible] how your lovely wife spoke. a number of times vice president weather away from the president. surprised when i got into the history to find all these examples of vice president's casting a vote against the presidential nominee, casting a vote against presidential programs. most of that happened in the 19th century. some of it was closer to today. is that part of the vice ability to not necessarily count on that vote when you send them over there? >> that certainly would put a strain on the relationship. [laughter]

ever member nelson rockefeller and a debate in the senate. reducing the number of senators give-and-take to break a filibuster. rockefeller got actively involved as a vice president in the chair taking the position and didn't really want to be involved in. rockefeller got actively involved in addressed the chamber. in the final analysis he ended up having to go back and apologize. it can happen.

you have to be wise enough to know when to be a little more aggressive. and in the final analysis you can go over and jump off the boat. head in a totally different direction but it's probably not a good idea. in the end is the president's administration. >> as far as the countries concerned is with the president does not take the vice president into his confidence. trumanas a story that did not know about the atomic bomb until he became president. it seems to me in terms of lack of preparation, that's a rather extreme case of the president

not advising the price president -- vice president what was going on. fortunately there are a few situations where the president and the vice president have not had close -- >> the recently published remarks by bush 41 about your .ole in mr. rumsfeld role we will use this as the way to describe the characterization -- thank you very much. [laughter] highly of think very president bush. i am not looking for your reaction necessarily to that particular comment other than to ask you as you reflect on your own vice presidency are the things you would of done differently? >> [indiscernible] [laughter]

john matrons book -- biography of george h.w. bush. presidentversation bush senior made the comment that i had undergone a change from defense secretary to vice president. >> about 9/11? >> i interviewed into 9/11. -- i attribute it to 9/11. i became much more aggressive and hard-nosed. whatever you want to call it. in the aftermath of 9/11. it was not a law enforcement problem as it had always been treated. it was an act of war. i spent a good part of my time is vice president doing everything i could think of to

make sure it didn't happen again . established procedures. i admit he was right. he then went on to say something that -- say some nice things. it's been in business for over 100 years in washington. we meet once a year. lots of laughs, jokes and so forth. he came this year even though he is in a wheelchair. i got the invitation to sit next to him. i like this move over the relationship.

feelings on either side. there are a few questions that go a little bit young the vice presidential topic. it's an opportunity to have your thoughts and i think it would be good to do that. would either of you like to reflect on the recent passing of anti-reagan and what she meant -- passing of nancy reagan and what she meant? say isone thing i will she did not try to usurp the powers of the vice president. [laughter] here's a lot of talk about being the voice behind the throne and it's not true. she did try to have don regan fired. they did not get along well. [laughter] the president decided it would be better to keep him.

she was devoted to her husband. a tremendous source of strength to him. being anyears of advisor and chief of staff in california and eight years at the presidency i can't think of an instance where she try to interfere in policy or anything, or in any improper way try to influence and whatsoever. there is no doubt she had ideas and he probably talked to him at night about some of the things. she was very alert to people she did not think were serving him well and let him know that. the main thing she was concerned about quite frankly was as the oldest living president at that that he did not get overtired or do other things for travel too much or kept him from being a confident president.

at one time she would call over to the white house office and talk about scheduling. writtenshe was important to him and i think very important to the country. and the things she did such as taking on the drug campaign, in terms of talking with kids on education, it reinforced what he was trying to do. most of that came out at the funeral. tom brokaw spoke. the former prime minister of canada and people like that. but the general buzz through the crowd was that she had been a real asset not only to him but to the country. >> speaking of someone who did everything i could to keep up with reagan in 1976, she was always -- she could not have been nicer to me personally.

my family, social invitations. there was never any sign of retribution or anything like that. >> the person i want to ask you reflect on fellow duck under scalia and what he brought to the constitutional understanding. was a giant.alia the history of the court, american jurisprudence, a major, major role. he will sadly be missed. our careers began around the same time. we got to know each other over the years. friends and we spent a lot of time together. a moment when things sort of

came together, there was a suit before the supreme court. minas chairman of the president's energy task force met i put together an energy policy. i refused to do that. congress would ask -- >> and advisory committee act? .> yes, the advisory committee i argued the president and the vice president don't have to tell numbers of congress or anybody else. it went to the supreme court. ultimately they ruled in our favor. during the course of this justice scalia and i went on a nt with the duck hu sierra club. i mentioned there was something improper about the two of us

going hunting while this case was going on. duck's perspective. [laughter] the speaker was demanding that scalia withdraw. wrote a beautiful tellingelegant document him to stick it where the sun don't shine. [laughter] just a good guy. always tremendously impressed with his friendship. interesting that even with the ability to separate policy differences from the personal relationships. he in justicect ginsburg are probably the

closest people on the court of any of the two justices. it's an indication of that fact. >> i was just thinking that myself. there was a ceremony a little while ago. a bust was unveiled of the vice president as is tradition in the capital. interesting he is in the capital and not in the white house or the old executive office building. in terms of that kind of , vice president biden came and had some nice remarks that afternoon. we started our discussion about the concern that mr. biden has raised about his function. since we have been talking about the supreme court vacancy occasioned by the responsibility to find someone to replace justice scalia. is it in your judgment the appropriate thing to do to leave the vacancy until the next election? >> i agree with the position

that the majority leader of congress. they will not consider a nomination until after the election. obviously -- there have afford for the senators rejected a nominee. i think it is probably a tactical move by the senate leadership. andou start down that have will hold hearings or bring the vote to the floor at this stage, there can be a lot of difficult political pressure on members who are going to have to protect them from taking that position here. it so important in terms of the future of the court.

was a conservative , replacing him with somebody very different. it will shape the court for the next 30 years. be the debate and the argument on both sides. obama will argue his point of view. the republicans will argue their point of view. i'm not surprised there is controversy there. >> it's interesting to notice that this issue first came up in my recollection during the george w. bush's last term. chuck schumer, joe biden, and harry reid all are very vociferous that should there be a vacancy on the supreme court they would never confirm anyone during that last year when he was in office. i think we just look at this as

the schumer ruled that the republicans are now following. >> i suspect that are folks out there that would call it a bipartisan direction that they will not go in. the cost as we all know to the other branch is the cost being paid in the past. that has been a vacancy should be awarded in the interest of justice. it's been a wonderful discussion and i think of 70 clips about the vice president. one that comes to mind is thomas marshall, vice president the woodrow wilson -- two woodrow wilson told the story of two brothers. and oneone went to sea became vice president and neither were heard from again. [laughter] thank you both. [applause]

[captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2016] >> coming up next your calls and comments live on washington journal. a consumer financial protection bureau richard cordray testifying at a senate oversight hearing. after that a discussion about training the workforce for jobs in the digital economy. >> a signature feature of both tv on c-span2 was taking you to book fairs and festivals across the country. this weekend we travel to the university of southern california for the 21st annual los angeles times festival of books, one of the most celebrated festivals in the west. our live coverage starts today at 1:30 p.m. eastern featuring national security with author sarah chase in her book "these of state --thieves of state."

"lapd. and the battle for american policing" and women in politics with nancy cohen. eastern more0 p.m. from the l.a. times festival of books featuring discussions with areata huffington. also national syndicated talkshow host dennis frager, author of "the 10 commandments." and a discussion of religion and politics. "zealot" talks about jesus another -- of nazareth." join us next saturday for coverage of the annapolis book festival. this morning, david cooper for the economic policy thistute and james sherk guy's recent increases in the minimum wage at state and local levels. of christian weller, author

"retirement on the rocks" looks at if americans are sufficiently saving for retirement. we will take your calls and you can join the conversation on facebook and twitter. washington journal is next. ♪ host: good morning to you. it is a cold saturday in washington, d.c.. today we look -- we will spend the entire program talking by your financial health. we will discuss the increase in the minimum wage to $15 an hour in california and new york and new government regulations designed to protect your retirement savings. we want to hear about your financial situation. data from the pew research center shows the middle class is tracking. how are you doing? if you feel like you are getting ahead in this economy, call us at (202) 748-8000.