national instustute national drug early warning system or "ndews." its website provides special reports on synthetic drugs, webinars from leading scientists, a list linking 1200 scientists and criminal justice professionals from 12 nations in real-time. other key surveillances conducted by the ondcp network of investigative support centers as well as the european monitoring center for drugs and drug addiction, which is currently tracking more than 560 novel psychoactive substances including 98 new synthetics identifiedyied for the first time in 2015. finally, the radar system which studies prescription drug abuse, has recently identified counterfeit pills containing

non-pharmaceutical fentanyl in 12 u.s. states and across canada. states have enacted legislation to address emerging synthetic drugs but the current federal analog catalog needs updated to streamline the classification of constantly changing substances and facilitate prosecution of criminal activity associated with them. a parody issue could cut the supply of toxic synthetics will ban on my sales and exhortation. the most important thing is to reduce the demand for drugs and -- are, one, prevention, particularly at the community level, and two, a massive expansion of addiction treatment nationally. thank you very much. >> thank you. now, i have questions. before i ask my questions, i am going to ask my questions and then i have to leave for an

appointment and i thank senator klobuchar for continuing the meeting. thank you very much. mr. rozga, you and your family have become tireless advocates for education awareness. i told earlier how you were honored as an advocate for action by the office of national drug control policy in 2013. so, maybe too easy of a onetion for you but it is we have to know your feeling on. can you tell us more about what you and your family have been doing in this area and how you have been working with families of other victims? do you think there are additional steps the federal government needs to take to educate young people about the dangers of synthetic drugs? >> our family specifically has worked with different communities, the governor's office of drug control policy

through the state of iowa, and been invited into schools, communities, community groups, churches and so and so forth , just to speak to the people there or students of these synthetic drugs. what is really so sad is amongst the parents, a lot of our kids and grandkids, are sometimes all too well aware of these substances but it has not registered on the adult's radar. or some think, well, it is a legal so that means it has gone away. we really need to have, in my opinion, in addition to better tools for law enforcement and prosecutors, there needs to be an education element to this that gets out of the grassroots to our communities.

we have worked with other families and we keep in contact with other families that have experienced loss and bad situations. you know, what we do isn't meant for everybody. it is not easy to go and share and talk, and as my wife would tell you, when i do these things, i put on my game face. but, we feel -- necessary part, we feel called to do this, and some of it is our son's legacy as well. we don't want to see his death be in vain, and our hope and prayer is that others don't have to suffer what we have but sadly that has not been incase. >> chief lanier, i have heard synthetics compared to crack cocaine and their ability to bring violence.

last summer there was a spike of reported cases of synthetics. the district. there were a number of violent crimes that appeared to have bilin connections to the drugs including the murder of a young man on the metro. describe please specific cases or types of cases where synthetic drugs led to violent security district -- here in the district? i know you cannot talk about ongoing prosecution so your ability to comment may be limited. but could you confirm that synthetic drugs played a role in the young congressional staffer's murder last year? and finally, how is the presence of these drugs on the street affected your overall policing strategy? manyere have been many, violent crime cases and whether the suspect was under the influence of the k2 or a known user of the synthetics, sometimes

self-admitted, sometimes told in possession and sometimes told by family members. yes, the case you were referring to is one of those cases. we had a recent case, an innocent victim was also viciously murdered. i happened to arrive minutes after the suspect was taken into custody. as soon as i looked at the suspect and the way he was when the officers -- was behaving when the officers were trying to maintain him in custody, i knew immediately he was under the influence. that is how dramatic the behavior is. i would liken it more to pcp than crack cocaine. my experience here the district -- in the early 1990's we had an issue with pcp. the similarities in the behavior and violence to pcp is striking and i would venture to say more dangerous.

the impact on our policing strategy? it is so difficult to go after what initially started as something that targeted children then targeted the general public, then targeted the people that were the most vulnerable, homeless and poor, and now to even with legislation and regulations in place for it to continue to change, the strategy has to change daily. i have narcotics officers that are very, very good and very effective. we has seized literally last summer, 232 pounds of the stuff. it barely made a dent. it is now becoming established as a street level drug. when it is being sold in packages and variety stores are that was troubling. but now it is becoming a street level drug, very cheap, very easy to purchase, and the

ir consequences are just significant in terms of violence associated with it. >> thank you all for your testimony. now i will turn the meeting over. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. and thank you to all of you for your good work. i thought i would start with you, mr. coronato, you probably have seen that the prince autopsy is out and today is prince day in minnesota. it was his birthday. so loved in our state, and a musical genius. so, this has hit everyone hard, but we have seen synthetic drugs and opioid addiction hit many people that are not as famous in our state. i wonder if you could comment on fentanyl and what you are seeing in term of the increases and how that is playing out in the overall synthetic drugs abuse issue. >> when everybody says he died from heroin i do not think that

is the case anymore. i think you are finding fentanyl is a cocktail that is being included in the packet. i think the bodies can't handle it. i think what happens is it becomes a marketing tool, but clearly you could see because it is so inexpensive and prevalent right now that more and more people, when they become addicted to an opiate, are going toward heroin. but they don't know what they are getting. ist they are really getting fentanyl and a combination. it is a death consequence. >> you are talking about two ways. one it is prescribed or getting it illegally? >> more often illegally. the fentanyl is restrictive and usually for cancer patients. i don't think you see as much abuse there is you are seeing that is being synthetically produced and being used. i can only use one example.

when we hit a heroin lab that was in our county, they didn't understand how to even put the packets together. they had googled it. and they were just throwing the packets in, they were not weighing it. we got called in because we had four deaths in the immediate area and started drilling down on it and were able to determine this is where they were putting it together. the bottom line is is that they make money on it. they are predators. you need to go after the predators. it is clear to me that this is a death sentence people have. they just don't understand it. >> i was a prosecutor for eight years in hennepin county. i tried to focus when i was asking the director about our bill i have with senator grassley and senator lindsay graham and senator fienstein is

on it, to close the loopholes that make it harder to bring the synthetic drugs uses and that is when they slap on the not intended for human consumption. that is used as a defense because they say, we do not make it for human consensus. -- consumption. our bill outlines factors you could use to get around that erroneous claim to show that in fact that is not how they were really marketing it. >> national district attorneys association really supports it. >> supports by bill? as opposed to the loophole? >> yes. the key is we need that tool because we cannot bring justice. we are into accountability and we cannot get accountability without that bill. >> thank you. i was just having a memory of doing one of these. i did a form on synthetic drugs a few years back in morehead and fargo, communities right next door to each other in north dakota and minnesota. there were people in the front row and i made a judgment call they were the head shop calls and they were mad we were trying to do things on this and i

turned out to be totally wrong. they had a loved one that died from one of these synthetic drugs and they freely said this person had been taking drugs that were prescribed and then started taking the synthetic drug or recreational drugs that were the real thing, and when they started taking the synthetic it was nothing like the real thing. like you said, they deliberately did it intensely so people got more addicted and then they are beholden to them to buy stuff or they just didn't know what they are doing. and i think that is a ballot point. -- valid point. >> i live it every day. we had a death on sunday. a death yesterday. while i was here i was making arrangements for the mom to see the body before the autopsy. my phone rings all the time with regard to this. we are desperate for help. >> very good. thank you. i think there is all different things we should be doing with the prescription drug monitoring for the gateway.

which i think we need to do much more. then you go into going after the illegal drugs and law enforcement getting stuff out of people's medicine cabinets. and of course getting money for treatment which has been a problem as well. i don't know if you want to comment on the fentanyl, chief linier. >> i would add the synthetics and k-2, synthetic marijuana, it also laurels people in place -- lulls people -- it isn't like marijuana at all. i think that you have people who hear that label and think that it is going to be like marijuana. this is significantly different. impact onnificant people who sometimes don't have any idea what it is they are taking. >> you got it. that was the case in the moorehead area.

they thought they were taking that, and they were not. they were taking a much stronger, stronger dose. anyone else want to add anything more? dr. hall? >> yes. just quickly, the most recent the relevant in this whole field has been the counterfeit medications we mentioned by -- primarily containing non-pharmaceutical fentanyl. i was quoted with regard to the death of prince saying the real question is what kind of fentanyl was it? was it a counterfit pill? this is what is rapidly spreading and we have seen it in at least 12 states in the united states and has moved in from canada over the past two years. counterfeit medications are the latest version of tragedies of synthetic drugs. >> and again, we don't know what has happened and the investigations continue and i want to make it clear more than anything, while he was an incredible musician and

celebrity, i think people have to understand this is happening to many different people every day as mr. coronato figured out. dr. smith? >> these things are phenomenally dangerous. there are sold under the illusion of safety. sold in a convenience store and for god sake you're paying sales tax on it. you do not know what you're getting. sorts of things, the product varies day today and none of it is pharmaceutical. it is simply incredible the way it changes. buy that isyou identical to date to the packets next week may not have the same product at all. the fentanyl and opioids -- senator, have you taken a glass of water and poured a sports drink powder into it? you noticed how you can taste

that? that is a dangerous dose of fentanyl. that could be fatal. just that small amount. so these places, these labs that the officers are encountering, go,e places where others maybe children are now exposed to these products. they are changing. the chemists are changing these opioid molecules in ways that we are seeing with other things. so now, is our narcan going to work? >> because it will change and you don't know. first, i have to go to the gateways and we are seeing more people addicted. maybe once easier to get internet, and doesn't seem see illegal as buying things on the corner. but more and more people are

getting in different situations and branching out to find it other ways. we have gotten the stats for many years that four out of five heroin users got their start with illegal prescription drugs. something i never saw as a prosecutor a decade ago. that is why i continue to focus on giving you more tools and resources to go after this and stopping this gateway. that means everything from better prescription drug monitoring -- you have states where you just have to register and that sounds good but no one is entering the data. we have doctors and others that don't know if they have a doctor shopper in front of them or not. and i know this going to be rough because when we start clamping down on this and we must by eliminating the number of pills, by making it clear to patients that innocently come into an emergency room or get a wisdom tooth out, i've been

telling groups it is like you're taking heroin. let's be honest like this for a few days. you needed for the pain but unless you are at the end of as you said, this isn't a long-term pain solution. i think, with training of the doctors, and putting limits on the number of pills, which we will probably have to do, unless the medical profession itself does it, which it hasn't done, and doing more on monitoring, we will start seeing less of this, and then we will have this transition where addicts are going more and more to heroin and synthetic drugs. but that is going to happen because we have to start limiting the gateway which is, not always at all, but in the majority of cases now, is the opiates. i just think we are doing such a go invice when we do not the gateway in addition to giving you the tools you need. if we just do that, and don't do treatment, and don't see why they are getting hooked, we will

see more girls like casey, the champion swimmer out of rural minnesota, and she is a swimmer, has pain, crones disease, and start taking opiates, local doctor thinks it is okay, and within a year or two she is dead just because you got involved in a bad crowd because she started taking and getting heroin and doing everything else because she got addicted. i am just shocked at what we are seeing out there. how we now have more of those cases in minnesota, people dying from that than violent crime. we have rural emergency rooms overloaded. i have never seen anything more than the case where we own this. so, i want to thank you all for being here today and your good that ad just assure you lot of us have your back. we want to make sure the treatment goes not just to those

with opiates but also crack and other drugs, and perhaps use this as a way to start looking at everything differently when it comes to drug addiction. thank you, and we are going to be be record two weeks. one week? -- i will start having iowa succeed from the union if we are not careful to my can do anything i want. we're going to have the hearing open for one week. i'm looking for the gavel. with that, the hearing is adjourned. thank you very much. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2016] [captioning performed by the

national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org]

[inaudible conversations]

withday, c-span talks democratic senator from virginia. 6:30 and 9:40 eastern on c-span. this is an amazing family story if you think about it,

where the empire has increased, there are great love affairs. but it is also a family where fathers killed her sons, wives and their husbands overthrown and murdered. it is a family unlike any other. he discusses his book about the dynasty that ruled russia for 300 years. >> all the girls and the children, basically, we're wearing their own bizarre bullet-proof vest. romanov diaith the mond. hundreds have been sewn into their underwear so they could have money in case they escaped. months sewingent the diamonds in. tragically, this made their execution and agony much larger

because bullets do not stop diamonds. announcer: tonight at 8:00 eastern on c-span's "q&a." announcer: president obama talks about the mass shooting in orlando, florida for about five minutes in the white house restroom. -- press room. president obama: today, as americans, we grieve the brutal murder, horrific massacre of dozens of innocent people. we pray for their families who are grasping for answers with broken hearts. we stand with the people of

orlando who have endured a terrible attack on their city. although it is still early in the investigation, we know enough to say that this was an act of terror and an act of hate. as americans, we are united in grief, outrage, and in resolve to defend our people. i just finished a meeting with the fbi director and my homeland security and national security advisers. the fbi is on the scene and leading the investigation in partnership with local law enforcement. i have directed that the full resources of the federal government be made available for this investigation. we are still learning all the facts. this is an open investigation. we have reached no definitive judgment on the precise motivations of the killer. the fbi is appropriately investigating this as an act of terrorism and i have directed that we must spare no effort to

determine what if any inspiration or association is killer may have had with terrorist groups. what is clear is that he was a person filled with hatred. over the coming days, we will uncover why and how this happened and we will go wherever the facts lead us. this morning, i spoke with my good friend, the orlando mayor, and i conveyed to him deepest condolences of the american people. this could have in any one of our communities. i told the mayor that whatever help he and the people of orlando need, they are going to get it. as a country, we will be there for the people of orlando today, tomorrow, and for all the days to come. we also express our profound gratitude to all the police and first responders who rushed to harm's way. their courage and professionalism saved lives and kept the carnage from being even

worse. it is the kind of sacrifice that our law enforcement professionals make every single day for us and we can never thank them enough. this is an especially heartbreaking day for our fellow americans who are lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender. the shooter targeted a nightclub where people came together to be with friends to dance and to sing and to live. the place they were attacked is more than a nightclub. it was a place of solidarity and empowerment where people who -- come together to raise awareness, speak their mind and advocate for their civil rights. this is a sobering reminder that attacks on any americans, regardless of race, ethnicity, religion or sexual orientation is an attack on all of us and on the fundamental values of

equality and dignity that define us as a country. no act of hate or terror will ever change who we are or the values that make us americans. today marks the most deadly shooting in american history. the shooter was apparently armed with a handgun and a powerful assault rifle. this massacre is therefore a further reminder of how easy it is for someone to get their hands on a weapon that lets them shoot people in the school or in a house of worship or movie theater or in a nightclub. and we have to decide if that is the kind of country we want to be. and to actively do nothing is a decision as well. in the coming hours and days, we will learn about the victims of this tragedy -- their names, their faces, who they were, the joy that they brought to families and two friends and did -- the difference that they made

in this world. say prayer for them. say prayer for their families.go bear the unbearable. i do give us all the strength to be there for them -- that he give us all the strength to be there for them and the courage to change. we need to demonstrate we are defined more by the way they lived their lives than by the hate for the man who took it from us. if we go together, we will draw inspiration from heroic and selfless acts, france who helps friends, took care of each other, and saved lives. in the face of hate and violence, we will love one another. we will not give in to fear or turn against each other. instead, we will stand united as americans to protect our people and defend our nation and to take action against those who threaten us. god bless the americans we lost

this morning. comfort their families, they got continue to watch over this country that we love. tomorrow on "washington journal," we will devote all three hours getting comments concerning the mass shooting in orlando, florida. we'll take calls, tweets, and facebook reaction beginning at 7:00 a.m. eastern euros c-span. look at the 1976 republican national convention which elected gerald ford as the presidential nominee and set the stage for ronald reagan's own presidential nomination in 1980. this is about an hour. host: we want to welcome craig shirley, who is the author of a number of books, including the untoldevolution:

story that started it all." that campaign was 1976 and we went to begin with talking about rule 16c. before we do though, we want to welcome our viewers on c-span3's "american history tv." coming up in the next hour, a look back courtesy of cbs news, , and the remarkable coverage presidentately led to ford's domination in 1976. -- nomination in 1976. here is a portion. [video clip] >> the republican party is here to nominate a presidential candidate for 1976 and an incumbent president for the first time since 1912 faces a serious challenge from within his own party. that presidential balloting comes tomorrow night. according to the schedule, but the matter could very well be settled out on the floor of this convention in kemper arena tonight. there will be a vote tonight to that both sides that knowledge and will test their strength, which could make or break their candidate here. it will be on a change in the

party rule, 16 c is the number of that new rule proposed by the side to sighed -- enforce president ford to name his vice presidential running mate by tomorrow morning. 12 hours before the presidential balloting is scheduled to begin. that 16 c was a rule ronald reagan had pointed out, schweiker was going to be his vice president. 16c was designed to do what? craig shirley: to force president ford to name his running mate ahead of the ballot for the balloting for the , nomination of president of the united states. host: politically why? craig shirley: 1976, it was fractured, they were outsiders, insiders, and lots of dollar fracture too. and reagan's campaign manager -- reasoned that

anybody would contact denies certain percentage of the delegation of the nominated convention, and hopefully prevent him from winning -- the whole goal was to prevent gerald ford from winning a first ballot nomination. a lot of delegates in states like north carolina and kentucky and others were mandated to vote for gerald ford on the first , and they would be free to vote for whom they wanted to in the second ballot, and there was reason that if they could get ford to name a running mate, it would suppress his support. and he could not get the first ballot nomination. host: why is this important today? you write the following "today, all republicans are reagan republicans, and reagan's definition of maximum freedom is consistent with law and order and has become the basis of the party's philosophy. furthermore, reagan unleashed the most vigorous debates over the role of government in americans'daily lives. since the founding of the

republic. these debates and the ensuing translation of the republican party started with reagan's seemingly quixotic but most important campaign that failed in 1976, presidential campaign." some players back then are involved today. craig shirley: some things never change. host: this guy was part of the trump campaign manager craig shirley: he was part of ford's operation in camp city, so he was advising john kasich and he was involved with reagan and 1976, and stu spencer is still around. he was advising john kasich and was reagan's campaign manager, de facto campaign manager, so a lot of people who were around 40 years ago are still around today. craig shirley: if you look -- host: if you look back though at this convention you have a , sitting republican president and this led to the watergate investigation and the resignation of richard nixon, the first and only appointed vice president who became president, but a real division between the gop, more business

chamber of commerce wing and the more conservative and ideological wing led by ronald reagan. guest: it is interesting that as action as the republican party was, as of august, 1974, when resigned onlyxon , 18% of the american people claimed allegiance to the republican party. of voters under 30 years of age, 11% had allegiance to the republican party. it was operationally dead. there was on the one state that had republican control of both the legislature and the candidate, and that was kansas. there were states in the south that did not have elected republicans in office. republicans in the senate were below 38 senators so they cannot stop legislation. there were states in the south who did not have republicans in office. at 143 in thehink house, so the republican party of august 1974 was for all purposes, a dead

political party. host: what are the moments you account in your book, and it was not scripted. as gerald ford secured the nomination, he called on ronald reagan and nancy reagan to come down. let's watch, courtesy of cbs news. [video clip] ♪ >> i ask ronald reagan to come down and join me. he is gesturing to him reagan is , still signing autographs. he may not even be able to see the president. he is shouting into the microphone. would you come down? bring nancy, said the president. come on down. they have just delivered the alabama senator -- standard to reagan and the arizona standard. two schweitzer.

walking he is downstairs, he ultimately comes to the podium. we will show that. but if such a great, classic moment in american history. craig shirley: it is all drama. that is what reagan was talking about, a lot of drama. it was a singular moment in american politics because he he gives the next and brainiest speech live -- gives an extent aneousest -- extempor speech live on television before republicans that night, and that 17,000 really is what american politics is about -- drama. host: coming up in the next hour, a chance to watch on c-span3's "american history tv, " some of that remarkable coverage that back then did provide gavel to gavel coverage of the proceedings. you mentioned a moment as reagan makes his way down to the podium and delivered his impromptu

remarks. [video clip] >> someone asked me to write a letter for a time capsule that is going to be opened in los angeles 100 years from now on the try centennial. -- tricentennial. it sounded like an easy assignment. they suggested i write something about the problems and issues of the day and i said that to do so, writing down the blue pacific on one site and the santa ines mountains on the other, and i could not help but wonder if it would be that beautiful 100 years from now as it was on that summer day. as i tried to write, let your own minds turn to that task. you are going to write for people 100 years from now who know all about us, we know nothing about them. we do not know what kind of a world they will be living in, and suddenly, i thought to myself, if i write of the problems, they will be domestic -- the domestic problems of which the president spoke it here tonight. the challenges confronting us, the erosion of freedom that has taken place in the democratic

rule in this country, the invasion of private rights that controls and restrictions -- the controls and restrictions on the vitality of the great economy. these are our challenges that we must meet. and then there is the challenge of which he spoke between limited world and of which the great powers have poised and aimed at each other, horrible missiles of distraction, nuclear weapons that can in the matter of minutes to arrive in each other's country and destroy. virtually the civilized world we live in. suddenly it dawned on me, those who would read this letter 100 years from now will know whether those missiles were fired. they will no whether we met our challenge, whether they have the freedoms that we have known up until now will depend on what we do here. host: craig shirley, ronald reagan back in 1976. no teleprompter. craig shirley: no. host: he did not prepare that

speech. craig shirley: no. host: why? what led to this? craig shirley: he wasn't going to give a speech that night. he was high in the skybox. he was overlooking kemper arena and he was not going to give a , speech that night. he was asked by tom brokaw. are you going to speak tonight? he said, no. ford knows he is the nominee of a broken and divided party. he needs to unify the party, and the best way to do it is to bring reagan down to the podium to speak to the crowd and hopefully endorsed him and unify the party, because unified parties tend to win in the fall and divided parties will lose in the fall. think about when republicans are divided in 1976, democrats divided in 1968, soaking you -- he knew he needed to report -- unify the republican party if he had a chance against gerald ford -- i mean jimmy carter , because at this point, jimmy

carter is 30 points ahead in the polls, national polls of 1976. he brings reagan down, but ford had also spoken and given what was arguably the best speech he ever gave, so they want reagan to look a little bit less, his armor to look a little bit less shiny to his followers and make ford look better. they want ford to say some words, they want reagan to endorse ford, but not look too good or do too well, so that is part of the agenda, too, but still, tremendous animosity between the two warring factions, the followers of ronald reagan and followers of gerald ford. host: 1976 the last time we went into convention without knowing who the nominee was going to be. 40 years later, are the lessons -- are there lessons to the republicans and democrats? phone lines are open. (202)-748-8001 line for republicans. (202)-748-8000 for democrats. you can send us a tweet @cspanwj. you were not there, but your

wife was there. craig shirley: yeah, my wife serena was there. reporters group of for gerald ford called presidentials. they were organized by the ford campaign, and whenever he made a public appearance or in crowds, the presidentials would appear and cheer and applaud, you know, encourage the presidents of the united states. so she was there as a presidential in 1976. host: this is a "what if" question, and i know it is hard to answer, but if he had been the nominee, do you think you he would have beat jimmy carter? guest: i have talked with a number of people about this and i think, yes, he would have. first of all, he would have brought in the reagan democrats early, so states like mississippi and ohio, when very narrowly for jimmy carter. , jimmy carterast

carries ohio by 6000 votes. texas is just as close. i think reagan would have swung these to his side. secondly, i doubt reagan would have made a hash out of the presidential debates the way gerald ford did. you remember the second debate nore he mentioned there was soviet domination of poland. where he effectively stopped his rising in the polls catching up to carter and he froze five days to seven days before he apologized and started rising again, but he did not catch jimmy carter in time. i think it is quite possible that reagan would have won. now states like michigan are becausequestion too , they went heavily for ford, and i don't know, but it was a tremendously close election. closer than people realize. if you swung hawaii, which is only like 2000 votes for jimmy carter, and ohio only went by 6000 votes, you would have had a deadlock because there was one

fateful selective that year from washington state who voted for washed gerald ford, and would've been to 60 92 -- been 269 to 269. nobody knows what has happened -- what had happened. host: ted is joining us, democrat, you are on the phone with craig shirley author of how many books now? craig shirley: seven. host: the next coming up next year is about newt gingrich. in to: i am going to go today's politics and the republican party, and i was wondering if he could comment on michael reagan's comments about whether his father would support reagan, i even ronald think he concurs with his brother whether whether reagan would approve of a nominee like trump. host: thank you, ted.

craig shirley: obviously mike and ron knew their father, his thinking. whether or not they could speculate reagan would support trump is another matter. reagan was the party man ended support the nominee of the party even though he disagreed with him. it is interesting to note that 1964 when goldwater was controversial nominee of the republican party, all of them establishment fled barry goldwater. nelson rockefeller mitt romney's , father, he fled. bill scranton, they all fled. bylly to people who stood barry goldwater were richard nixon and ronald reagan and both ended up becoming president of the united states, so there is something to be said for party loyalty. host: a viewer said, how did break and finally beat the gop establishment and create his "big tent" at the same time? craig shirley: first of all, he never coined the term "big

is wellut the point taken that he created a lot of open primaries so that democrats and independents could come and party andrepublican choose the candidate of their choice. reagan would have lost the wisconsin primary arguably to then ambassador george bush because so many reagan democrats turned out to vote for ronald reagan, although interestingly, they were not called reagan democrats until after the 1980 election. they were just simply conservative democrats were or democrats supporting ronald reagan. in a lot of key states, democrats could vote for ronald reagan, so he repositioned the republican party toward the more populist outside party by basically running against the establishment. when he ran in 1976, he held the press conference at the national press club, and he talks about big lobbyists, it was pure

gness. m, anti-big there was populist activity in illinois at the time. he was born in kentucky, grew up in the 1920's, 1930's. in a made, but he did so way that he was not just a beginner. he did also also by talking about -- he did so also by talking about freedom and opportunity and talking to primary voters and the general election voters in a way that republicans had not talked before. host: our guest is craig , focusing back on the 1976 campaign. also carrying this program on c-span3's "american history tv," and there is a chance to watch 4.5 hours of coverage from cbs news of august of 1976. it is fascinating. margaret, chapel hill, tennessee. good morning. caller: good morning.

thanks her c-span. i want to say it kind of -- i kind of disagree with him saying reagan would have beaten mr. carter in those days. i do not believe that the country was ready for another republican. but read "the presidents' club" to find out what really happened in that 1976 debate to find a what happened behind the scenes. it is very interesting. thank you. craig shirley: i have read "the president's club." it was a very good book. it was strictly a speculative question, but i do think it was possible. nobody knows, but it is possible reagan would have brought a different campaign and gerald ford would have. as she points out gerald ford , was tied to watergate and reagan would not have been tied , and watergate would have run a n entirely different campaign. the continuation of the next and administration would not have

been an issue had reagan been the nominee as opposed to gerald ford. host: when you see this tweet from senator mark kirk under reelection in illinois, he said given my military experience donald trump does not have the , temper to command our military or our nuclear arsenal. the reaction? not only the state of the reaction but also the state of the republican party today. craig shirley: i will say it is -- will not say it is disaster, but i really do think it is open to the question of how the party is going to emerge. there is no doubt that a skid exists. there is the populist conservative outsiders, and then there is the big government establishment insiders. it was coined during the bush 43 is,nistration, so there part republicans argued for what i call hide toryism, which would be the government

dictating programs and other initiatives to the people. or follow reagan's path, which is the traditional path, the founders and framers, power flows upward to the people instead of downward, and that is the great debate inside the republican party. where does power reside? does it reside with the elites, does it reside with washington, does it reside with new york, or does it reside diffused among the many american people? the party has not decided which path it will take forward. host: john is next for massachusetts on the line for independents morning. caller: hi, i did not even know what line to come in on because i don't know if i am an independent or a republican or a democrat, but i want to talk about the convention. 1976in i was working in 1976, massachusetts for the republicans and kind of amazing people like hugh hewitt, but he

did not have a very favorable opinion, but he was working on the campaign even back then. and more interesting to me was anci during the speech for robert dole at the convention. he was an up-and-coming rising star at the convention that way. so the interesting timeframe you bring up now with all the things that have gone on in the past with jimmy carter and operation cyclone and yadda, yadda, yadda, and all the rhetoric and all the things that happened with watergate compared to kind of what is going on now, it seems like it is now.

i was wondering what are your comments on that? host: thank you. craig shirley: history does repeat itself sometimes with divisions inside the republican party by the goldwater campaign and the goldwater fight with george romney and nelson rockefeller and others in the are being repeated today. we know what the outcome was for the goldwater campaign, and we know he also laid the foundation for the nomination ronald reagan in 1976 and 1980. the party has in many ways projected reaganism and embraced bushism,, although now it is a hand-to-hand combat over what path is going to follow forward. host: roger green says there is nothing wrong with the gop in the view of the people, only what he calls the dinosaur elite which will not conform. craig shirley: i think it is a fair point. when was the last time a

republican party proposed shrinking government? i am talking about washington politicians, when was the last time they proposed eliminating the department of education, energy, or downsizing in any way, shape or form, of shrinking the power and control of authority of the national government and sending it back to the states and localities where it belongs? therein lies the seeds of the disagreements inside this party today, because people think one thing and the elites think something quite differently. host: let's go to new york city, on the democrats line. caller: good morning. i question the fact that hillary clinton has the temperament -- she questions donald trump's temper -- i question the fact that does hillary have the temperament. she dismembered the entire average -- arab union over

there. she is the one who should be held accountable. we should not reward her with the presidency. you don't just say whoops, i , made a mistake. craig shirley: in mrs. clinton's defense, almost everybody except almost everybody supported going into iraq, also everybody, and that was a natural reaction to 9/11. the democrats also have their divisions, too, and that is part of the fuel for bernie sanders' campaign, anti-iraq war. but hindsight is 2020 and it remains to be seen whether this issue will dog mrs. clinton or not. host: let me put the events into context. first, why did gerald ford decide not to run for a full term and then change his mind? craig shirley: well he, yeah, you did your homework. he wrote a piece after he became vice president, and then shortly after became president after

nixon resigned in 1974. i think he got bad advice. don't forget, the country was in very, very sad shape as of august 1974 because we are still involved in vietnam on the , losing end of vietnam, inflation, interest rates, gas lines, arab oil embargoes, and in every way, shape and form, every measurable way consumer, , people's attitudes, it was not in good shape in august 1974. so he, i think he thought the way to heal the country would be to say that he is not going to run for reelection, therefore, he will govern as a president. he will not be head of the republican party. he will just the head of the country. he immediately creates questions about serving a full four years of his own, why should he be

there for two terms? there were personal insults aimed at ronald reagan that generated from gerald ford's white house. there was the helsinki accords, personal insults aimed at ronald reagan that emanated from gerald ford's white house. all of these things factored into reagan taking on gerald ford beginning in 1975. host: and the selection of nelson rockefeller as vice president, was that the defining moment for ford and reagan? craig shirley: it was a defining moment for conservatives. i interviewed vice president cheney about this, and he said that they picked nelson rockefeller for reason of stature. somebody into bring to the administration, the ford administration, who is seen as having stature in american politics and stature in world affairs. gerald ford was a one-term congressman from michigan who was not seen as a world leader, not even as an american leader, and they wanted to bulk up the

authority, the majesty of the executive office, executive branch, so that is why they brought nelson rockefeller in. it did not help. in fact, it hurts because it fueled the seeds of conservatives breaking forward which led to eventually reagan's challenge of gerald ford. host: we have a few more moments of the cbs coverage, including gerald ford and a conversation with senator bob dole, gerald ford's running mate. he will be 92 in a few weeks. let's go to matt in minnesota on their republican line. good morning. caller: good morning. i have got a question for mr. shirley. i am curious. in minnesota, we had an election with the establishment, norm skipan for governor, and humphrey on the democrat side. we had a wrestler who won the governorship here.

i wondering if you can, as i do, "draw something" rebel's and see how possibly -- draw some parallels and see how possibly electing an outsider as trump, as we might, could be a big mistake, which was, in my opinion, i don't think jesse ventura certainly didn't have the temperament for governor. he did some things ok, but he was mostly kind of a nothing. i'm curious what you think about that. host: thank you. craig shirley: at the end of the american revolution benjamin , rush was one of the founders. he wrote a letter with thomas payne, one of the intellectual fighters. wrote "common sense" and other pamphlets. the revolution goes on. by that, he meant that american politics to succeed is that it must always be in perpetual state of the revolution. there is always question of

authority, you must always question the status quo, and out of the seeds of that became the republican party. the most successful republican politicians and republican presidents have been anti-status quo. was elected with 38% of the vote. teddy roosevelt was anti-status quo. in some ways dwight eisenhower. farewellk about his address really took on the military you never hear of him being part of washington because he came for eight years and he constantly challenged the authority and the running status quo. host: joining in on the conversation.

republicans, democrats is we look back at the 1976 convention. nominationtting the and delivering these remarks. >> two years ago, people's confidence in their highest officials to whom they had overwhelmingly entrusted power has twice been shattered. losing faith in the word of their elected leaders, americans lost some of their own faith in themselves. again, let's look at the record since august, 1974. from the start, my administration has been open, candid, forthright. [applause] while >> i reaffirmed my lifelong

is theion that truth glue that holds government together, not only government but similar to -- civilization itself. [applause] >> i have demanded honesty, decency and personal integrity from everybody in the executive branch of the government. the house and senate have the same duty. [applause] >> the american people will not accept a double standard in the united states congress. crack surely, as you look at that speech, how did he do? guest: he did very well.

it was probably the best speech of his life, certainly the best political speech of his life. he was not known as being a good speech maker and as a matter of fact, one commentator said, ford puts you to sleep in the second paragraph. reagan can get a standing of a shiver my graveyard. he did a very good job. he had a lot of time to prepare and practice. he had aids that helped write the speech. you know he is up against ronald reagan who is arguably the best speech maker in america in 1976. he and jesse jackson were probably the best speech makers. he has to do something about this, and so he gives arguably the best speech he has ever given in his life. city,the arena and kansas missouri and i mention that because our next color is from kansas city. stephen, good morning. is the arena still there? >> yes, it is. my question is, how did the

republicans go from eisenhower through the last george bush to and not strong america having the gop establishment always win but they were never nationalist like trump. guest: good question. parties evolved. they change over time. the issues change in the men and women change in the attitudes of the american people change. republican party has changed since the time of reagan and certainly people forget, jimmy carter in 1976 ran as an outsider, ran against the washington establishment, was going to reorganize government and ran on tax cuts, was pretty good on the issues of national defense. he ran as a populist outsider, contradictoryuch

to where the democratic party had been since franklin roosevelt when they put more faith in the government. after 1976, you have the failures of government in terms of vietnam, inflation and interest rates, the government ortecting president kennedy martin luther king jr., so believe in government is at an all-time low in 1976. parties change because issues change because people change. host: finish the sentence. the relationship between ronald reagan and gerald ford was? >> difficult, complicated. guest: one of his speechwriters wrote that they could barely be in the same room. mrs. ford and mrs. reagan could not stand each other. reagan was very affable and got along with just about everyone. host: why did he ask them to services running mate?

cheney hade was dick gone to ford at camp david several weeks before the convention and they were armed with polling data that said ford's best choice would be ronald reagan in order to unify the party and reach out to conservative democrats in key states like michigan, pennsylvania and texas in mississippi and other marginal states. reagan sincerely did not want to be, and so he sent word, told john sears to tell dick cheney that when i meet with ford, regardless of ford winning the not want tohat i do embarrass the president of the united states by telling him, no, i do not want to be his running mate, so tell him, please do not ask me to be his running mate, so john shares, reagan's campaign manager

delivered the message to dick cheney and so they met in a hotel the night of the ballot when ford won the nomination but he did not ask reagan to be his running mate because of reagan had already said he did not want to be the running mate. host: john sears is still alive today, correct? guest: he is doing well. aboutyour book talks something we miss of the conventions, the silly hat. joininglisten to thad us from north carolina on the republican line. good morning. >> good morning. i have a comment about jesse ventura. i grew up a huge wrestling fan what our founding fathers wanted. he was not a career politician. he had been a navy seal which is less than 1% of what the military becomes. sectorfrom the private

and saw that was wrong and fix it. i also have a comment, in my opinion, i grew up in georgia and carter is the best president we have had. there is not a better president that the houses. he still teaches sunday school in georgia and 90 years old. he is a powerful speaker. people trusted reagan. he was probably the best speaker this country has ever had and my opinion, he did a really good job. that is just my opinion. host: thank you. the last act, the final year, in emergent legacy of ronald reagan, his battle with alzheimer's. guest: he did a lot of good work. i agree with the color, carter has been a suburban president. he has really defined the role of foreign presidents. most like eisenhower went to gettysburg and basically when a president would call and ask them for advice, usually just went back to being private

citizens and giving an occasional speech but not engaging in humanitarian work the way caught her has. he was delightful. host: frank is joining us from melville, new york. good morning. frank, good morning. let's try one more time for frank in new york. let me ask you about this selection of richards liker who was ronald reagan's running mate in 1976. why did that backfire? guest: it did not backfire. actually, it worked brilliantly. host: the conservatives said of her upset. jesse helms was upset. supported him. yes, they were upset but they supported him. it was a risk. reagan had to do something because after three weeks out before the convention, the most

respected chief operation in america was big, massive, beenfunded, both camps had floating numbers. jim baker would hold a press 1157rence saying reagan is and then john sears withhold a dueling press conference and say reagan has 1157. nobody knew what the actual count was. fog were both creating this machine to keep their candidate's chances alive. kansas city is the first time the republicans knew, or they do not know the republican nominee is going to be. first time since 1952 when they do not know. both sides are trying to gain the psychological advantage, so with it. the hack we are going to count everybody ourselves. they start calling delegates

around the country, argue for ford or reagan? are you a decided? in 1976, they had a 55 share. walter cronkite said it, you can bank on it. he was the most trusted man in america. he is going to announce, prepared to announce that your four -- gerald ford has secured enough delegates for a first ballot nomination through the convention. if he does this thing goes on national television and make this announcement, reagan's campaign is dead in the water. sears knows this so he needs to change the storyline and the way to do it was for reagan to do something unprecedented was to choose his running mate ahead of the convention, head of the ballot and he chooses wholiantly richards liker was well respected, moderate to conservative from pennsylvania, who was ironically a four delegate -- ford delegate.

pro-life,servative, the second amendment, national , was already vetted by the media and was married to a wonderful woman, never cut off base, never any scandals associated with them, a navy veteran. believe, first of all it is going to kill the cbs story because it is going to create a cloud of doubt about pennsylvania and new york and other states'delegate counts. that part works brilliantly which is to kill the cbs story. taking this running mate keeps reagan's chances alive until they get to the convention and they try. it was part of a three-part strategy by sears. the third part was to make a

motion on the floor is bob stoops agreed that both tickets have to address the convention and that is the terrified the ford forces. they did not want ron reagan addressing the convention -- ronald reagan addressing the convention. ,hey were terrified that reagan if he spoke to the national convention, as we saw, that people would have said, i do not care what the rules say, i am voting for reagan for the nominee for president of the united states. given a speech, at least one delegate turned to a ford supporter as reagan is giving a speech and she turns to the reagan man and says, we have nominated the wrong man. morning with crack surely. >> thank you for taking my call. i am calling come of this great conversation is developing a

question and i am wondering how these outsiders, or if these outsiders are indispensable if unintentional sort of antiseptic to the flow of power in our government. it really sounds like it, the narrative of the conversation that these people are more than indispensable. guest: they are more than indispensable. , it says "weion the people," it does not say "we ," but its or banking says "we the people." , all theke the framing people and not just the elites, , sometimesintention more pronouncement other times like it is right now, obviously less pronounced during the great depression, during world war ii

because we were far more united as a country than we are today. host: we are going to hear from a former senator bob dole in just a moment. why do gerald ford select him? guest: interestingly enough, the night that reagan and forward matt at the hotel --met at the hotel after ford had secured the ford and its that reagan a list of six candidates to run. knew he was one the short list and he asked an old friend, look, if president ford asks governor reagan about me, would you ask governor reagan to say something nice? sears says, yes, of course i will. he tells this to reagan about dole, say something nice about them. reagan is looking at the list

that ford has handed to him and reagan looks at the list with john conley and others and favorably toward bob dole. he was a conservative, 1976, a war hero, well thought of, they thought he would be a good combative campaigner, take the , that he would help unify the convention. that he was in some ways not a stand-in for reagan but acceptable to conservatives for reagan. host: this past week, we had a conversation with former senator bob dole not only about his own as gerald ford's running mate but also this question, did ronald reagan do enough in 1976 to unite the republican party? let me ask you about that moment when ronald reagan came down and you were standing off to the side of with president ford.

do you think of that point he did enough to unite the republican party in 1976? ,> well, i would have to say probably not. people werereagan reagan people. when he does not get the nomination, i think there are thousands and thousands of republicans, reagan-republicans did notan-democrats who support ford. metmember i was the one who with reagan a couple times, once in new hampshire and i cannot remember the second place. i tried to bring him around and

get him to support, you know, ford full heartedly, if that is a word. he was very good to me. i think you made sort of a tepid endorsement. i am not certain just how he said it anymore, but it was not very long. i think he could have made a veryrence, talking about a close election. this was a very close election. host: was he right about that? guest: probably. put yourself back in 1976, reagan has just lost by the narrowest of margins and he

believes he's has lost because of shenanigans and hanky-panky in some delegations like new york and mississippi and others. he is also the brunt of personal attacks that imitated from gerald ford himself in the ford white house for two years. he has gone through a grueling campaign. he is angry. time, he did not do a lot of campaigning for ford and then he did. even so, do not forget as he said, ford did not actually pick up the phone and call reagan asked for him help -- is held until a month after the kansas city convention. the election was very compressed. the national election was held on november 2 which is the earliest it has been held in 100 years. host: let's go to decatur, georgia. that morning. >> good morning. i was wondering, who did ronald

reagan sent to iran before the election in 1980 to negotiate with them about holding onto the hostages? guest: nobody. the answer is nobody. there has never been incredible evidence. carterpreferring to possibly getting hostages out before the november election. the american people out of gratitude what reelect him in november of 1980. there is far more evidence, the hostages were used for political gains. there is some evidence that jimmy carter, the morning of the wisconsin primary when he thought he may lose to ted kennedy went on national television to announce a major breakthrough that occurred in the hostage negotiation and thereby, he perks up his voters and supporters and wisconsin in

1980 and ends up winning the primary there. david brunner, who passed away several years ago, was a wonderful, wonderful political reporter for many years for the "washington post" wrote several come along detailed stories about how carter had politicized and used and manipulated the hostage crisis to his advantage in 1980, so there is far more evidence coming from many more sources that carter politicized the hostage crisis then reagan did. actually, reagan was almost silent on the hostages throughout 1980. in the summer of 1980, carver attempted the rescue of desert one which failed, reporters caught up with governor reagan and he simply said, this is a day for few words and many prayers. that is premature. host: coming up in 10 minutes, coverage from 1976, cbs news and

about 4.5 hours you can watch it historyn3's "american tv" including a lot of great moments under the direction of walter cronkite. questions to nelson rockefeller. the reporter making a reference to the former governor of new york. >> can you stand up for a moment? just end up. the phone people are here connecting. you have a disconnected phone. >> we have a telephone people and i want to tell you with the greatest efficiency in the most tremendous fee. they are right on the job. >> a good plug for the phone mr. vice president, can you tell us what happened what did you say? >> what did i say? what did you see? >> none of us know.

if you did not get that sign back, he was given a rip it out of him. >> what sign? >> the reagan sign. he handed it to me and i just took it. i thought he was handing it to me. >> and then he went to get the reagan sign back? >> it was a man. >> he came to get that reagan signed back from you? does the smack of 1964 over again? >> a little on the light side. i am trying to get out but i cannot get out. >> the vice president wants to get out of here and he cannot unless we get out of here. a rather agile 68, i think it is. ret service helping him. walter, back to you. in 1976lson rockefeller and just one of those classic moments. guest: the convention seems so

scripted. i foresee it will seem less scripted this time. the first question, that is the vice president of the united states, where is the secret service contingency? that was part of 1976 and what happened was rockefeller tore be sign, " reagan for president." and rockefeller ripped it out of their hands and tore it up in the utah delegate szabo was happening and took the sign away from rockefeller and give it back to the north carolina delegate, so the agitator was nelson rockefeller. host: hector from san diego. good morning. >> thank you very much for taking my call. sh less common for mr. irely led into my comment.

what about the security in cleveland? guest: there was secret service there but that would not even happen today, not in a million years. they would not allow a dick or vice presidential nominee or presidential nominee to go on the floor today, even with all of the pat down's insecurity that goes into producing these conventions. they would never, ever allow a vice president or president to go on the floor to mingle with the delegates except in a most controlled and limited circumstance. allow thoseuld they leisure suits, and look at the hair of 1976. [laughter] good morning from the republican line. >> good morning. my daughter is working the democratic convention as an electrician down there. i remember back when reagan was

about to come into office and i was really young and did not understand a lot of things about politics. what i thought was that they carved a way for the iran contract that was a shoo-in for reagan to become president that was known before he was elected, that that was what he was going to do. by upperat was run albert noris but i do not see a connection. lessons for the republican in 2016 as we look back in 1976, what are they? guest: what the faith in the american people. isresentative government derived from the public and

republic is derived from judeo-christian values which means the republican party should be a moral, anti-corrupt him a anti-insider party, anti-oligarchy. we know that with concentrations of power become corruption in the best way for the republican party to move forward in the country, especially a nation of over 300 million people, the question of practicality, the divers is too big, vast, to be governed by one oligarchy. to best way to govern is send power up to the american people, out to the localities and individuals and let them decide in the future instead of washington deciding on the future. host: as someone who has spent his entire life following republican politics, i want to share with you the passing of former governor, senator george one of the who began his career in cleveland ohio as the mayor

of cleveland in the 79 years old and his legacy. was one of those pioneers of a new style of republicanism in the midwest which came about after the new deal, eisenhower, which was ideological then reagan, more maintenance but he wanted a break from the corruption of the past of politics and brought a lot of reform in ohio and party politics. host: your new book on newt gingrich will come out when? guest: . next spring. host: we appreciate your time. guest: thank you very much. announcer: tomorrow on washington journal, we will devote three hours in your comments concerning the mass shooting of the nightclub in orlando, florida.

we will take your calls, tweets and facebook reactions beginning 7:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. madam secretary, we proudly give 72 of our delegate votes to the next president of the united states. [applause] ♪ ♪ greta: this week, we want to welcome congressman xavier becerra, thank you for being here. we also have christina marcos with "the hill," and erika warner, reporter, and erika will

kick us off. erika: thank you for being with us. hillary clinton wrapped up with a big win in california these past days, but there are a lot of committed sanders supporters across the nation. what does hillary clinton need to do to get those people enthusiastic about their campaign? rep. becerra: more of what she has been doing, reaching out, showing people how she will be the president that will bring real change, meaningful change, deep change, where no longer will we have to wait for a congress that is gridlocked and essentially asleep at the wheel, but we will actually improve options for the affordable care act, we will make sure that our foreign affairs are the things that we want to see our nation be involved in, not things that get us into battles. we want to make sure that as