one moment. >> perry stein with the washington post. you mentioned that there will be 13,000 armed services in the city on inauguration day. i want to make sure that number is correct and, two how many of them will be armed? >> that number is -- i've got 5,000 supporting on the active duty side. ceremonially. the national guard, approximately will 8,000. so that number is correct. and none of the active duty title ten service members will be armed. >> none of the guardsmen will be armed. >> sir, follow up? >> thank you very much. tom sherwood from nbc 4 in washington. what is the advice the various officers are enlisted people will be given in terms of terrorism and anti-terrorism attacks. knowing that police take first control? this is a secret service national special security event. what is the advice to the officers who are coming in from

out of town to be alert and aware obviously. >> of course during our in processing, before we deputized them, they will be getting a security briefing and intel briefing on what to expect. as i mentioned earlier, we have spoken to the chief of the metropolitan police department, chief of the park police, the chief of the capitol and we are following their lead. we are there in support of them. so if there is a threat or an outburst, they will be the first to respond. but we will be right there with them in case they need our support. >> thank you. >> as far as ceremonial participants go, they're all going to be handed a quick reaction card of steps to follow and those types of things. but any time there is an event like this, there is a very well

thought out retrograde plan where they'll take accountability and get on buses. the same buses we will use to get in and out of the city. and again, the military is not the first responders. so we'll regroup and then, you know, take accountability and establish command and control and go from there. >> thank you, sir. establish control, and go from there. >> thank you, sir. ma'am, up here in front. >> i heard crowd estimates on the other side of approximately 800,000. i'm wondering if that is a generic estimate devised before the inauguration or if you're revising crowd estimate based on, you know, buses being chartered and hotel rooms being booked and, you know, social media. i mean, how good is that number? and, you know, how might it fluctuate in the coming weeks?

maj. gen. schwartz: we are prepared to support whatever crowds come with us. our framework has been established and established in 2008 during president obama's first inauguration where we had crowds upwards of one million folks within the nation's call tall. the framework with the chief establishes has the flexibility to deal with crowds. yes, we are in the receive mode as to what that number would be. but it would not affect our planning processes. >> but so is will 800,000 the working crowd estimate? and, i mean, assuming -- you know, you want a more refined estimate as time goes on. maj. gen. schwartz: yes. and we have heard the number of 800,000 also. but our planning process and the number of support personnel we have provided to the agencies will not change.

an additional strategy we have put in place that i mentioned one of those a little earlier about the route of pennsylvania, but we have contingency forces built into our strategy that we can get a more robust force in any one of the subtask force that general walker mentioned earlier. task force, crowd management, task force security, access. there are several sub task forces. and the way we have designed the force is to have more military police, which are army forces , and security forces from the air, so my formation is made up of heavy number of military police and security forces who understand police work. >> great. thank you very much.

>> the mission analysis is on going. so the 800,000 is a good number to start with, but as general schwartz mentioned in 2009 it was over a million. the important thing to take away is that whatever the number is, the united states military and the national guard can support our district and federal government partners. we have the ability to surge. we have the ability to lift and shift. as general schwartz mentioned, we have 11 task forces. so we can augment those people. we have it broken down our analysis because, as general becker said, we can't control the weather. that we would have maybe an eight-hour shift or ten-hour shift. so what happens?

something goes bad where we need to augment that, eight-hour shift becomes a 12-hour shift. the 12-hour shift back to a 14-hour shift. we're fundamentally service members. so we're used to long hours. we're not talking about an extended operation. can you work 12, 14, 16 hours if you have to? we've all done it. we're ready. >> thank you, sir. ladies and gentlemen, there are just a few more minutes remaining in our question and answer session. we have time for just two more questions. yes, sir? wyatt: thank you. wyatt goolsbee. this question is taken by any of you. my question is about the significance of the trump hotel here in washington, d.c. i noticed on the big map there it is highlighted. is there any other significance in terms of security? is there going to be, to your knowledge, any extra police or secret service? how does that sort of play into it, other than the fact it is located right there along the route? maj. gen. schwartz: we are in support of law enforcement and their plan.

if the metropolitan police department decides that that's a primary target, and they need to have additional security there, we will be in support of their plan. whether it be mpd officers, additional officers, probably so. will there be guardsmen there? maybe. maybe not. but whatever analysis that they have performed, we will be there. it could be traffic control. and understanding where that building is, it's right in the heart of the parade route and everything else. so it will be secured. because of it's location. >> thank you. time for just one more question, sir.

corey: thank you. how were the guard units selected? is there any significance to having such an expansive range of units from all over the country? i briefedschwartz: like i usually do. i briefed like i usually do. several were in leadership positions. but the generals normally get together two or three times a year, and i briefed back in february about this upcoming inauguration. and i saw the leaders of the state guards, and they all volunteered to be here. if d.c. national guard's responsibility for the hosting, housing, and logistic support for those guardsmen.

some of these guardsmen are from other states. this is probably their third or fourth time coming to do an inauguration within the nation's capital. so they're overjoyed. several states don't have a major event. d.c. has one every couple of months. and that's it. so we are well exercised, and the young men and women, just like they volunteered to serve overseas, they volunteered to come and do this again. add, gen. walker: if i may just to give a little granularity to that. so pennsylvania, virginia, maryland -- can you hear me? pennsylvania, virginia, maryland, we will bring a lot of those guardsmen, army and air , because they bring the vehicles with them.

and the vehicles will support task force crowd, task force access. so they'll be coming -- they'll be driving their vehicles. puerto rico, guam, they'll be flying. so a lot of the selection on the bigger organizational units are coming from our neighboring states where they can drive to the location. >> i would like to just highlight one thing on the active duty side. the bulk of the joint task force is stationed here in the national capital. we do have some folks coming from out of town. but as general schwartz pointed out, every time there is a national special security event in the ncr, there have been four in the last 18 months since i've been here, we come together as a joint task force, and we support the u.s. secret service, park police, capital police, and we work hand in hand with our d.c. national guard partners.

so we are very -- this team that puts all this together for the 58th presidential inauguration, we're familiar and have strong relationships and we work together all the time in support of national security events. this is not the first time we've done something like. this. this maybe just a slightly larger scale. maj. gen. schwartz: and there is a theme between what general becker does and what i do because we have one focus and that's to make sure that this inauguration is done in a safe and secure manner. >> great, thank you. ladies and gentlemen, thank you very much for your time. following the press briefing, the national capital region and joint task force district of columbia staff will be able to help with you future needs. they're located here to my right, to your left. we will have some additional subject matter experts available for additional one-on-one interviews if you need to do any follow up or clarification from your interviews earlier. please grab a member of of our public affairs staff to assist you. it was my pleasure to have you today. thank you are attending. please enjoy the rest of your morning. >> maryland representative-elect jamie raskin spoke with c-span for a house freshmen profile interview.

mr. raskin was elected to serve maryland's eighth congressional district. he has also served in the maryland state senate. -elect jamieative raskin, representing maryland's eighth district. a democrat. why did you decide to run? rep.-elect raskin: i have been a state senator in maryland for a decade. we have tried to restore voting rights to former prisoners, ban military style assault weapons, high-capacity magazines to reduce the bloodshed on our streets. the truth is we cannot solve any of those problems at the state level. we need to be fighting in congress. the level of dysfunction in congress got to a point where i said -- i have to go and see if i can help dislodge the paralysis and impasse that has overtaken congress. i had some success in maryland working in a bipartisan way for

real progress in our state. and the general assembly had passed more than 100 of the bills that i introduced, and more than 90% of them had republican support. it was on a bipartisan basis. we need a universal background check for gun buyers. that is something supported by the overwhelming majority of gun owners in the country. it is not a second amendment problem. as a professor of constitutional law, i am happy to talk about the second amendment with colleagues on the other side of the aisle. we can advance common sense, middle way gun safety legislation without impairing anyone's second amendment rights to possess a gun for self-defense purposes or for hunting and recreation. that is one example of an issue where i hope to play a role in pushing things forward and getting beyond the stalemate that has seized congress for so long. >> why do you think, with that background of state politics -- how is that going to make this job easier?

what experience do you think will help you with serving in the house of representatives? rep.-elect raskin: i have only been in my freshman training for a couple of weeks now, but i am starting to think that the real divide is not between democrats democrats and republicans. it is between people who run with a lot of money, never having served in office before, and those who have served in state legislatures. it is at the state and local level that we experience the real opportunities of democracy , and we learn the art of civility and treating people well and even creating friendships across the aisle in order to build the foundation for making progress on the problems that affect the country. and we have so many. the infrastructure is a great example of something that affects everybody whether you live in the countryside and the roads are falling apart or you live in the washington metropolitan region where the metro system is a huge crisis. i used to ride the metro when i was a kid to look around and it

opened new worlds for me and today, it cannot get me to capitol hill on time. i was late for my first set of meetings coming down because the red line is on the same tracks safetrak system. we need to invest in american infrastructure, and we can have a real conversation about that across party lines and geographic lines. it is something that can unify the country. after a really brutal and bruising election it is , something we can make progress on. >> where did you grow up, and what influence did your parents have on who you are? rep.-elect raskin: i think i will be the member of congress, certainly the freshman living closest to congress. i live 20 minutes away in takoma park, maryland. i have lived my whole life in maryland or washington, d.c. i have offered to give tours to my new colleagues or advise them on schools or where to go in rock creek park and so on. my parents have been a profound influence in my life.

my dad worked for president kennedy. he is a political philosopher. he wrote a book on "liberalism: the genius of american ideals." he has been a great progressive thinker and influence on me. when i was a kid, my dad said that everyone has two impulses in life. one is to fly like a bird and another is to stand like a tree. i always thought of myself as a tree person, so i never really moved away from home. i have been to different parts of africa and europe, but really, this is the place that i love. i am very moved that the voters of the eighth congressional district, which is not just montgomery county, sent me here as their representative. it is a great title to have to be able to represent people's needs, interests, and values. my mom was a great writer, a novelist, a journalist. i have a lot of respect for your profession and what the media people do. it was jefferson that

said, "if you would ask me to choose between having a government without a newspaper or a newspaper without a government, i would not hesitate to choose the latter." media keeps people engaged with citizens and lets people know what is going on. for people to know what is going on in government that is an , important role of a representative, to be a channel of information for people back home. >> what did your father do for president kennedy? rep.-elect raskin: he was on the national security council. he left in early opposition to the vietnam war. he created a think tank called the institute for policy studies. he has been a think tank person and a professor at george washington university. >> did president kennedy have an impact on you? rep.-elect raskin: i got from my dad all sorts of jfk memorabilia. i love the kennedy family and the role they have played in american life. and i always thought that bobby kennedy embodied both the

toughness that we need to have in order to make progress but also the gentleness that we need to have in order to understand what the real needs of society are. i have always looked up to bobby kennedy. and i know his daughter, kathleen kennedy townsend. , who was in politics in maryland, and some of its other kids. >> any mentors in this area that you have worked with or anyone you are looking forward to working with on the capitol? rep.-elect raskin: the maryland delegation is a very strong, tightknit delegation that punches way above its weight in congress. we are a relatively small state. we only we only have eight members in the house, but of course nancy pelosi, the democratic leader, was born in baltimore, and her father was the mayor of baltimore. the number two democrat, steny hoyer, who was born and bred and bleeds maryland, and he has been a terrific help to me.

i love the people i am serving with. john sarbanes is one of my friends, anthony brown is a friend of mine, and john delaney has the neighboring district. i know all of these people, and we work strongly together as a cohesive team to bring back the best results for our people and the best programs and services that will uplift the people of maryland. >> what will be the biggest difference for you coming from the state house assembly to the house of representatives? rep.-elect raskin: the maryland senate is a small and intimate body. is 47 members. 33 democrats. and a lot of the action takes place on the floor of the senate.

i had many amendments that were offered that were incorporated into legislation and you can see legislation change there. what i am learning firsthand in my tour through the house is the political science rule that the larger the body, the more hierarchical it is. by the time legislation comes to the floor, there is not that much maneuverability. congress is really in the committee, and so the committees are where all of the action is. you have to be a very diligent and involved committee member. because i am a professor of constitutional law and i have a nerdy disposition about parliamentary procedure, i will like that a lot. >> what committees would you like to serve on? rep.-elect raskin: we just got a speech from nancy pelosi about not having our heart set on a particular committee. i have been on the maryland legislative committee. i have been a law professor for more than a quarter of a century. i think the judiciary committee is a logical place for me to go. there are other committees appealing to me, like the oversight government reform.

another great maryland representative chairs, elijah cummings, and so i am hoping to get on that because it overseas the whole federal government. i have more than 85,000 constituents that work in the federal government in every place from agriculture, to the pentagon, to the treasury department, where my wife works. i want to be a zealous champion for the hard-working people who are doing the work of the public interest by going to work every day and advancing the agenda of the american people. >> representative elect raskin, thank you so much for talking to c-span. rep.-elect raskin: the pleasure was all mine. thank you very much. >> i do think you can learn from failure. president the next wants to aspire to be like somebody, they probably aspire to be like washington or link entry they cannot -- or lincoln. they cannot spark a civil war. so who next, james monroe? i don't know. but they can aspire to not be james for canon -- james

buchanan. >> tonight on "q&a," author robert stross talks about james buchanan in his book "the worst president ever." robert: washington, lincoln, fdr are always at the top. they were decisive men. you cannot go to the top of the and not be decisive. buchanan was a waffler. he always went back and forth. you you are my advisor, tha have to tell me what to do. that is how he was as president. >> tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span's "q&a." offering carter recommendations on the person hired to replace him, retired general james mattis.

this is just over 45 minutes. [applause] sec. carter: thank you. thank you all. good afternoon, and john, thank you for that kind introduction. it is very good to be back here at the reagan forum, and i am pleased to join so many longtime friends of mine and the defense department, among the dedicated and patriotic americans here, including two of my predecessors, former secretary of defense and former vice president dick cheney, former secretary of defense leon panetta, as well as so many dedicated public servants like chairman mac thornberry and the congressional delegation here today, current colleagues like my deputy bob work, the chairman

of joint chiefs of staff, joe donnelly, and i believe joe had to leave a little while ago, and many others who contribute to our defense enterprise, such as lockheed martin ceo, raytheon ceo tom kennedy, all part of the team america. thanks all for your continued support for service members and their families. there is marilyn. hello, marilyn. and for all your own contributions to our national security. each of you knows well that america's defense is so vital that to we whom it is entrusted must ensure its excellence and continuity across the years and across the domains for of foreign conflict, not just in air, sea, land but also in space, cyberspace. from strategic era to strategic era, from presidential administration to presidential administration, across our government and across parties.

ensuring that continuity is important at a time of change of administration. i'm proud of the way the men and women conducted themselves during the last presidential campaign. standing apart from politics, staying focused on the mission. i am committed to overseeing the orderly transfer to the next commander-in-chief. that's something dod takes a lot of pride in and has done for a long time. we are carrying out this year's changeover with the excellence that is expected of us. let me also congratulate general jim mattis for being chosen to take my place. i've worked with jim for many years. he is is a friend, and i hold him in the highest regard. of course the excellence the american people expect of our department is to impart to the continuity and leadership

defense secretaries of both parties have provided over the last seven decades. each one of them has strengthened dod to meet the challenges of their strategic eras and the future challenges as they saw them. with bold action such as unify the our forces at the dawn of a nuclear age, moving to an all volunteer force after the vietnam war. leveraging leap ahead technologies like stealth and precision-guided munitions and battle networks to fortune on unmatched military edge against the soviet bloc. winning the cold war and defining u.s. leadership in the era that followed in waging 21st century counterterrorism and counterinsurgency campaigns. i myself have lived through, witnessed, and served in all but the earliest of those eras.

and the strategic transitions between them, also. contributing to programs involving missile defense and space in nuclear triad during the cold war, overseeing the project to prevent the vast stockpile of soviet nuclear chemical and biological weapons from falling into the wrong hands after the cold war ended. in more recent years, helping develop and field capabilities like the mine resistant protected vehicles for the fights in afghanistan and iraq, among other places. in this strategic transition that we're in right now, we must widen the spectrum of our current and future capabilities to account for this great change -- the great change economic, political, social and technological underway -- and the greater and fiercer competition we face.

i say this because today, dod confronts no fewer than five immediate but also distinct and evolving challenges. we are countering the prospect of russian aggression and coercion, especially in europe, something we haven't had to your worry about for 25 years but now we do. we are also managing historic change in the asia-pacific, the single most consequential region for america's future. we are strengthening our deterrence and defense forces in the face of north korea's continued nuclear and missile provocations. we're checking iranian aggression and malign influence in the gulf and helping defends our friends and allies in the east. we are countering terrorism and accelerating the certain and lasting defeat of isil.

and of course, we're preparing to contend with an uncertain future. ensuring our military is ready for challenges we may not anticipate today. defending our country in this strategic transition requires our military deters the most advanced adversaries while continuing to fight terrorist groups. to be clear, the u.s. military will be ready to fight very differently than we have in iraq and afghanistan, or in the rest of the world in recent memory. we will, as we must be prepared for a high-end enemy, which we call full-spectrum. our budget, plans, training capabilities and actions we must demonstrate the potential that

if they start a war, we will win it. because a force meant to deter conflict can only succeed if it can show that it will dominate conflict. that is the kind of force i have been determined to build my successors. that is why, amid this strategic transition, it has been necessary and will be necessary for dod to change, adapt, innovate, not only to meet today's challenges but also ensure defenses continued excellence well into an uncertain future. i want to speak today about the changes underway to respond to the challenges focusing on the military campaign to accelerate the lasting defeat of isil, our strong and balanced strategy on russia on the rebalance to the vital and dynamic asia-pacific. also to describe the actions we are taking and pioneering innovations underway to ensure dod has the technology, the operational plan, the organization, and the people to continue to defend our country and make a better world for decades to come. let me start in the middle east. the region of great turbulence and confusion but where we are not confused.

we are clear about our pursuit of america's national interest. among them is dealing isil the lasting defeat that it deserves and that it will certainly receive. we have reached a critical counter-isilthe military campaign plan as we meet here today, american forces are engaged in intense effort to isolate and collapse the control in iraq andosul rocca in syria. from bringing the great weight of our entire range of capabilities to bear in the enabling of capable and motivated local forces. the seizure of these two cities is necessary to ensure the destruction of isil's parent tumor in iraq and syria. the primary objective of the military campaign, and put isil and irreversible path to defeat.

reaching this is the result of deliberate actions taken last year. since last year. going back to last summer i consolidated the work for iraq and syria under a single unified command. streamlining our command-and-control for the fight against isil. last october, president obama approved the first in a series of recommendations that i and joe dunford made to accelerate the campaign against isil, introducing every tool of our military to the fight from airpower to special operation forces, to trained advice and assist capabilities to our intelligence and cyber tools. i should tell you that since then, president obama has approved every single recommendation the chairman and i have have taken to him for additional forces and capabilities as we saw additional opportunities to

accelerate the campaign. the overall coalition military campaign plan we devised last year has three objectives. the first is to destroy isil's parent tumor in iraq and syria. the sooner we crush both the fact and the idea of an islamic state based on isil's barbaric ideology, the safer we will be. that is necessary but not sufficient, so the second objective is to combat isil's metastases everywhere they emerge everywhere around the world. in afghanistan, libya and elsewhere. and the third objective is to work with the intelligence, homeland security, and law enforcement partners to help protect our homeland and our people from attack. that's ultimately our most important mission. this strategic approach of our campaign is to leverage all the tools at dod's disposal to enable capable and motivated

local forces to apply pressure to deal isil they lasting a lasting defeat. we recommended this strategic approach because the only way to ensure that once defeated, isil stays defeated, is to enable local forces to seize and hold territory rather than to substitute for them. we have been squeezing isil from all sides and across domains through series of deliberate plays to continue to build momentum. for example, when our special operators conduct raids, free hostages, gather intelligence it leaders, ite isil creates a virtuous cycle cycle a better intelligence generates more targets and more raids, more airstrikes, and more opportunities we can seize to gain even more momentum. as a result since last year, play-by-play, accelerant after accelerant, in town after town, the campaign has delivered

significant results. in iraq, we been helping iraqi security forces and the kurdish peshmerga to systematically dislodge isil from city after city -- ramadi, falluja, kiara, others. our coalition is now doing the same in mosul, having isolated the city, the iraqis, with our help, taking back easter most of them moving west. there is a complex mission will take time to accomplish, but i'm confident that isil's days in mosul are numbered.

in syria, our local partners put an end to isil's expansion and then began to systematically roll it back towards raqqa, an important objective since the so-called capital of the caliphate and the hub for external attack. after helping capable and series -- and motivated local syrian forces defended kobani, we enabled them another forces to retake other talents, denying isil control over those areas and cutting off their primary lines of communication into turkey and iraq. we are now helping our local partners isolate raqqa from which there's only 15 miles away. isolation face continues according to our plan where generating additional local forces necessary to seize and hold raqqa. in addition to taking back territory, our campaign is yielding results and if denying isil the finances, supplies, freedom of movement command-and-control it needs to

survive. we have systematically targeted isil-controlled oil wells, trucks for smuggling the oil, revenue repositories. we deliberately focused on suffering isil controls and syria from the territory of controls in iraq. leaders of the terrorist group can no longer travel between raqqa and mosul without the risk of either being hunted down our expeditionary targeting force or struck from the air. in fact, since we began accelerating the campaign last year, we have killed some of isil's most senior leaders. while these results in iraq and syria are encouraging, we have to stay focused on the continued execution of this plan. the inevitable collapse of the control over mosul and raqqa certainly put isil on a path to lasting defeat. there will be much more to do after that. to make sure that once defeated, isil stays defeated.

we will need to continue to counter foreign fighters trying to escape and isil's attempt to relocate or reinvent itself. to do so, not only the united states but our coalition must endure and remain militarily engaged. in iraq in particular, it will be necessary for the coalition to provide sustained assistance and carry on our work to train, equip, and support and support local police, border guards, and other forces to hold areas cleared of isil. beyond security, there will still be towns to rebuild, services to reestablish, and communities to restore. those are not military matters , but they are part of how after winning the battle, one wins the peace. that's why my principal concern that this juncture is international community stabilization and governance efforts lagging behind the military campaign.

there will also need to be continued political support for an inclusive and multi-sectarian iraq. in a region rife with sectarianism, the threat of isil has brought people together for now against the common and. enemy. that is really true in iraq thanks to the unity and leadership of prime minister a bbadi and cooperation between the iraqi security forces in the kurdish peshmerga in the battle to retake mosul has reached a level that would have been unthinkable a year ago. we are taken steps to help promote and maintain the unity. we know that's the only way to keep isil defeated. as i said earlier, success in in iraq and syria is necessary but it is not sufficient to deal a lasting defeat. that is why were focused on two other critical objectives of our

campaign -- combating isil's metastases around the world and helping protect our homeland. when it comes to combating the metastases, we've taken strong actions in support of capable and motivated local forces in libya and afghanistan and elsewhere. in libya, the u.s. military has provided air support and forced to isolate and collapse their control. as a result, isil is being ejected. in afghanistan, on chairman dunford and my recommendation, the president this year gave expanded authorities to u.s. forces to proactively assist and enable our afghan partners and operations that would have strategic effect. we also the decided to modify our plan in order to retain some 8400 u.s. to retain u.s. troops

there until 2017 rather than 5500, as the earlier plan had called for. we will continue to maintain our financial commitment to the afghan defense and security forces. these robust commitments and authorities on forces and finances will ensure we not only continue supporting the afghan security forces would also sustain our regional counterterrorism platform. operated out of afghanistan. for example, alongside the afghan partners, we recently conducted two large-scale against isil in afghanistan, killing the top leader in the country and significantly degrading its capabilities there. on the campaign's third objective, protecting the homeland, dod is working with intelligence, homeland security and law enforcement partners at home. and supporting them is job and

priority number one for our northern command but also abroad. there, we are conducting operations together intelligence with a particular importance of focus on destroying isis' external spacing operations cadre. as a result, we have not only killed the chief of isil's external operations, we have also taken out more than 130 external plotters. we have gone after al qaeda's branch in syria, we with the fbi work with the fbi to systematically eliminate members of an isil cell outside the united states that was inspiring attacks in our country, and including against our armed forces. we directed the joint special operations command to make that top priority of destroying isil's external operations capabilities. the campaign against isil and its results are another example of the military's continued excellence and america's continued leadership in the middle east and world.

no other nation could have brought to bear the resources we have. assemble the coalition we have built and led the execution of a comprehensive campaign that the united states has done. we did so in pursuit of our nation's interests. which in this case, are aligned with many allies and partners who are also resolved to destroy isil. we did so despite major, simultaneous, and growing military commitments in europe and asia. let me now turn to them. first, i want to discuss europe where the transatlantic community is standing up to russia's provocation and aggression. that is a big change for many of us who worked productively with russia in the post-cold war era. i know i did so in the 1990's when we were working with sometimes common rather than cross purposes.

at the time, russian militaries cooperated to arrest those of military weapons, and when russia agreed to join the peacekeeping force in kosovo. i remember both. today, unfortunately, russia's aggression and provocation appear to be driven by misguided ambitions and misplaced resentment. russia wants to be considered, and understandably so, as the important power that it is. indeed its history is rich and its people can and should be proud. in recent years, some have interpreted that history and to fuel grandiose visions and provocative destabilizing actions abroad. we see that in russia's aggression in ukraine and georgia, its counterproductive role in the ongoing tragedy in syria, its attacks in cyberspace, it's violation of

arms control treaties and other international agreements, and perhaps above all, it's nuclear saber rattling. these actions are not what the world expects of a global state in the 21st century. rather, each threatens to undermine global security and erode the principal international order that has been so good not only to the united states but to russia and the rest of the world. let me be clear, the united states does not seek a cold, let alone hot, war with russia. we do not seek an enemy. but make no mistake -- we will defend her allies, the positive future that affords all of us. we will counter attempts to undermine our collective security. to do so, the united states is following a strong imbalance and balanced strategy. in it, we are addressing

russia's action while pursuing in pursuing bilateral cooperation where u.s. and russian objectives can be aligned. this strategy for deterrence does not simply recycle the playbook used to deter syria during the cold war because that would not match the russian challenge of today. we have not had to prioritize deterrence on the transatlantic eastern flight for over 20 years, and unfortunately, now we do. that is why the united states is strengthening our posture so quicker soagile and that we can respond to threats that russia might pose. our latest defense budget request asked for more money, more than quadruple what we allocated the year before. intended to allow us to, in addition to the two brigades we have stationed in europe, rotate an armored brigade combat team on a persistent basis and

to pre-position brigades equipment and war-fighting gear to be used by american forces flown into europe, among other steps. we are also increasing military exercises with allies and partners to demonstrate resolve and build the resilience while enhancing operability. we are updating and confining our operational plans and trying to overcome areas any as hyper warfare and denial systems. we are investing the technologies most relevant to countering russia. and we are also recapitalizing our nuclear deterrent because nuclear deterrence is not only the bedrock but our security and also critical to sustain inlet denial of russia's nuclear saber rattling. the united states is not alone.

for more than 67 years, nato has been the quintessential example of nations coming together to respond to collective security challenges. as it did during the cold war, nato will be critical for preserving critical defense in the face of new threats. to ensure it does so, we are working with allies to adapt and to confront the new challenges nato faces like russia. so nato, too, has a new playbook. one that prepares to counter cyber threats and hybrid warfare, to better integrate conventional nuclear deterrence , and much more. that's why nato created a joint task force that can deploy task on 48 hours' notice to any crisis on allied territory. it's why nato is deploying forward battalions to us eastern u.s. eastern flanks. the united states will lead a battalion starting next year. it is why nato is providing

support to countries like ukraine and georgia to help strengthen and reform their national defense and institutions and improve their ability to work with nato. everything the united states is doing on its own and with nato will ensure we continue to stand up to russian aggression and that were ready for longer-term competition. but is also necessary to keep the door open to working with russia when and where our interests align. as i said, there's a time in the years after the cold war were where russia cooperated and contributed to the principal order rather than undermining it. i remember that personally and many of you. perhaps someday we'll see that spirit rekindled. next, i want to talk about what we are doing the president obama's rebalance to the asia

pacific. it will ensure that dod continues to help provide the security necessary for that consequential region, which is home to nearly half the global population and nearly half the global economy, to remain a place where everyone can rise and prosper for decades to come. that has been the american policy and practice since the end of world war ii more than 70 years ago. regardless what was going on at home or in other parts of the world, and during democratic and public and in, during times of deficit, war and peace, the united states has remained economically, politically, and militarily engaged. unlike elsewhere in the world, peace and stability has never been managed by the region-wide formal structure like nato and europe. that made sense because of the

asia-pacific's unique history, geography, and politics. instead, the united states has taken a principled and inclusive approach and collaborated with a network of regional allies and partners to enable principles security and uphold important principles, like resolving disputes peacefully, ensuring the countries can make choices free from external coercion and intimidation, and preserving the freedom guaranteed by international law. because we did so, out of the economic world war ii, miracle after economic miracle occurred. think about it. first japan and taiwan, south korea and southeast asia, and

now today, china, india, and others rose and prospered. that progress produced incredible things in the region. populations are growing, education has improved, self-determination has spread, economies have grown more interconnected, and military spending and cooperation are both increasing. amid all this remarkable change and progress, america's interests and objectives in the asia-pacific have endured. we still want peace, stability , and progress there for all -- including ourselves -- because the region has changed how we meet those had to change along with it. today, the department has been operationalizing one after another and rebalancing. we are not only ensuring that we remain the strongest military and primary provider, but we are also connecting our allies and partners in a burgeoning,

principled, and security network to allow all of us to see more , share more, and do more to maintain security in the region. in the first phase, which began five years ago, dod sought to make the regional posture more robust both on our allies, our own parts and partners geographically distributed, politically sustainable. sent tens of spen thousands of personnel to the region, committed to 60% in the asia-pacific, and begin to modernize the posture around guam. the second phase we committed to sending some of our best people and most advanced capabilities. our newest aircraft and service vessels to the asia-pacific we . we also developed new and

innovative strategies and concepts and put them into use in more complex exercises on our and expansive training our own andoth on with allies and partners, none larger than the summer's impact. we have strengthened our bilateral alliances and partnerships. nurtured over decades, tested have nows, and we strengthened these relationships so they better reflect the 21st century security needs. there are so many examples 2.2 in the region, whether it is the long time republican korea or australia, or our new partnerships like those in singapore, vietnam but for time's sake i will focus on the two i'm leaving tomorrow to visit, namely japan and india. the u.s.-japan alliance remains the cornerstone of the pacific

security, and with their new defense guidelines, the alliance u.s.-japan alliance has never been stronger or more capable of contributing to security in the asia-pacific and beyond. likewise, the u.s.-india defense relationship is the closest it has ever been. through our strategic handshake with america reaching west in the rebalance and india reaching east and what prime minister modi calls the policy, our two nations are exercising together by air, land, and sea, and we have the technological handshake trade initiative grasps hands in the campaign. that is helping the country move towards a more diverse development and production

system for developing and procuring weapons. and now in the third phase of the new balance, it will be necessary to cement the progress . we made in the first and second phase -- and more importantly to build upon it. the united states will continue to sharpen the military so we remain the most powerful military in the region by increasing and targeting investments and capabilities suited to the region to ensure that we stay the best. more on that momentarily. we will also continue to make leap ahead technological investments, including some surprising ones that will help us keep the lead in the asia-pacific and elsewhere, and we will further catalyze the growing principled inclusive security network. although it isn't a formal alliance, this burgeoning network is grounded on the principles that i mentioned. it is inclusive sense any nation, no matter its capability

budget or experience and it's can contribute, and it is developing in several ways. -- on mechanisms that previously worked together. for example the blossoming u.s.-japan republic of korea ilateral partnership -- helps us coordinate responses to the nuclear missile provocations. just last month, three countries held their second effort many countries are coming together on their own by establishing the biological and trilateral mechanisms for example indonesia, malaysia, and the philippines are coordinating the trilateral maritime patrols to counter piracy, organized crime , and terror activities in southeast asia.

that is a good thing on its own, but it's also an important step in the developing network. and even more broadly, the asia-pacific regions are developing a network multilateral regional security, from one end of the region to another, as a central example the defense ministers meeting serving as an important forum. that is all for the good of the region and the united states, but it is important to remember the rebalance security network is not aimed at any particular country. the network isn't closed and it excludes no one. its objective is to tell everyone to rise and prosper , although we have disagreements with china, including its destabilizing behavior in the south china sea, and it's

driving many that work with us, we are committed to working with china where possible on the measures to reduce risk and encouraging them to avoid self isolation. all this is happening today, but even as we confront today's challenges of the strategic time of transition, it would also be necessary for the dod to lead well into the future. today is the finest fighting force the world has ever known. there is no other military that capable, more experienced, or more innovative, but that isn't a birthright. we can't take it for granted in the 21st century. we have to earn it again and again. to do so we have to invest and , innovate for the uncertain future that we face, and that is why i am constantly pushing the pentagon to think outside our five-sided box and ensure that our technology, plans,

organizations, and above all our people stay the best for decades to come. the most recent budget proposal that i continue to urge appropriators and congress as soon as possible is designed to make sure they maintain their dominance in every domain we are . we are growing not only the number of ships in the fleet at locality like the new weapons like the tool capable of extending the community lead investing in the global reach and payloads of all kinds and also innovative capabilities and platforms, the joint strike fighter. and some less so like swarming micro drones, the arsenal plane, and others. those are the things we can talk about. meanwhile, we are also prioritizing full spectrum

training and readiness for the ground forces. as i mentioned earlier, we are reversing decades of underinvestment in the nuclear deterrent and re-capitalizing it. we are doing more in cyber and warfare in space to stay on the cutting edge, and in addition to these investments we are pushing the envelope with research development to stay ahead of our competitors and at technology's frontier by putting $72 billion into the r&d for next year. just to give you a little context, that is more than double what apple, intel, and google spent on r&d last year combined.

where are you? that is him right there. those outputs are already producing results. withare interacting companies and 31 states to help us adopt technologies more quickly they can help our war fighters accomplish their missions. need are strong existing defense partners to help us build our defense systems. it will help her own companies define new technologies and new people to bring into them. all that is an investment worth making. we are also innovating

operationally. our core contingency plans are constantly being changed to provide innovation to operational bridges, including ways to overcome threats. we are building in modularity, planning in new ways for overlapping contingencies and injecting agility and flexibility into our work plan. meanwhile, we are making reforms across the dod enterprise, streamlining our headquarters, lowering our health care costs, and more. we are also continuing to toport and seek improvement among other changes, clarify the role of the joint chiefs of staff to help our commanders be and efficient and agile support me and the president, especially in the face of trans

regional and trans functional challenges. there also building on success of our better buying power initiative which has helped to reduce the costs for major acquisition programs very significantly. to improve on this progress, it will be necessary to make changes, liketice streamlining the system itself. we are ensuring dod is a place were thinking boldly and , which is long a strength of the american military, is fostered. one way is with defense innovation. what one of their recommendations and on the creatingation, we are a chief innovation officer to

serve as a spearhead for innovation activities, such as andding software platforms building human networks across the dod. lastly, we are building the to ensurehe future, that amid changes, we continue to attract and retain and develop the most talented people america has to offer for our military. in total, the force of the future initiative span the career of the uniformed service member from recruiting men and women to join to caring for ,etaining and developing them and then helping to successfully transition those who want to move on. includeitiatives reinvigorating, expanding the reach of our reserve corps training program, which marks its hundredth anniversary

this year, making common sense improvements to the talent management and officer promotion, giving components the authority to directly hire civilians on college campuses, and recognizing survey data indicating the importance of family life to retention, after all, our forces are largely a married force. maternity and paternity leave and expanding on based childcare hours. to demonstrate the logic of what we are doing, let me tell you more about one way we are helping build the force of the future. as some of you may know today is the one-year anniversary of my decision to open up all combat positions to women. i made that decision so we can benefit from the talents of every american that can meet our high standards and contribute to our mission. in the 21st century and the all

volunteer force that requires us to draw from the broadest possible pool of people who can meet our stringent standards. that pool must include women because they make up more than 50% of the population. that's mission-critical. i directed that there be no quotas and that's why the number of women in the previously closed specialties may be modest but they will be the best talent , for the job. who don'tor women choose those specialties, the fact that they are open means any woman in uniform will be measured by her contribution to the force no matter what career field she chooses. , all of then actions and decisions i have spelled out today were taken to do exactly what my predecessors did for me, ensure that my

successor and my successor finessors will inherit as a fighting forces i lead today. it's one i've always been determined to uphold. as i mentioned, i depart tomorrow on a two week trip to visit our american personnel serving in the asia-pacific, the middle east, and europe. my wife stephanie and i are looking forward to thankingmy we looking forward to thanking them and their families, wishing them all a happy holiday season from their commander in chief from , the leadership, from their country and i'm sure from all of , you. i would ask all of you during our holiday season to help our fellow americans understand and appreciate what those troops are doing for them. each and every one is ensuring that we continue to meet the

challenges we face, defend our country, and make a better world. not just at the strategic transition, but well into the future. we are able to do so and bring unrivaled strength to the missions because the work, the contributions and the ideas of , people, supporters and leaders like those in this room. we can do so because of the decisions and leadership of the president, defense secretaries, senators and congressmen of both , and moster decades importantly, we can do so because of the service and sacrifice of our people. every soldier, sailor, airmen and marine, and their family. i know there are missions demanding and constantly changing but i couldn't be more , proud of them for what they do everyday and for what they've done for all of us. and i'm sure you feel the same. so god bless them and god bless

the united states of america. [applause] >> i do think you can learn from failure. i think it the next president wants to aspire to be like somebody, they probably want to be washington or lincoln. you can't re-create the country and create the civil war, so what do you do next? you aspire to be james monroe? i don't know. tonight, robert strauss talks about james buchanan's presidency in his latest book, worse president ever.

i think the differentiation of good president, bad president -- the surveys that the historians take, they were decisive men. you can't come to the top of the ladder and not the decisive. polk hated him for being a waffler as secretary of state. that's how he was as president. >> tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span's q&a. >> now a conversation with jd vance. this is one hour. we want to welcome jd vance, the author of "hillbilly elegy: a memoir of a family and culture in crisis."

good sunday morning. thank you for being with us. guest: good morning. host: i want to start with the beginning of the book, "my name is jd vance, and i want to start with a confession. " host: let us begin at that point. why the book? guest: i thought i could add some useful to the conversation of we are having in the country, and why poor kids were able to achieve the american dream. my idea was to not make the book just about a big abstract sociological argument but to make it personally about my life. tosome ways, is a bit absurd write a book about yourself when you're only 31 years old -- i am

32 now, but hopefully i have added something. book, youeading the say your family life was, to say the least, complicated. guest: it definitely was, and that is in some ways what the book is about. my grandparents grew up in pretty tough circumstances in eastern kentucky who immigrated in some ways to ohio where they found better work and better jobs, and of course as i write about it in the book, their life in certainmplicated ways for her even though they achieved some financial stability early in life, that started to fade away later in life. there was a crisis, the breakdown of the family, the crisis that i write about in the book was very much a part of my life and my family for the life. host: both the "washington post" and others writing about the orphan heroin overdose crisis, especially in rural america. guest: that is right. it is astonishing that ohio

leads the nation in overdose deaths. it is not california, texas, it is ohio. ohio, west in virginia, or eastern kentucky, a lot of these areas, it really is in some ways the thing that people talk about and think about. almost no one is untouched by this open your epidemic, whether it is a family member or friend. host: why do you think your book became a "new york times" bestseller? guest: that is a good question. i think part of it is obviously this is a group of people, white working-class americans in the rust belt, ohio, michigan, pennsylvania, and so forth, they deliver the presidency to the donald trump. and because of that, folks were asking a love question about who is this group of people, what do they think, what are they like, and hopefully my book sheds a light on that. i'm hopeful the book became successful because it is compelling, because some of the arguments i make are compelling,

but i know part of it is because it is timely. host: jd vance is an author here on c-span's "washington journal" as we kick off a series with some of the authors we have featured on c-span's "q&a" program and c-span's booktv. "new republic," responding to the book and its impact on the country, writing the following. rise of donald trump, it has been a rosetta stone for blue america to interpret that most mysterious of species -- the economically precarious white voter." your reaction. guest: that is definitely how the media has reacted to the that, of i don't fight course, because i do think it is important for us to try to understand who the voters are that went for donald trump. aam a republican but not republican who voted for donald trump, so i think it is important for all of us who were wholindsided by this guy

came and won the presidency, who are these people, what animates their political choices? maybe if we ask better questions about who these people are, we will have better answers . host: let's talk about middletown, ohio. "today,the following -- downtown middletown, ohio is a little more than a relic of american industrial glory, abandoned shops with broken , where lining downtown central avenue and main street meat. if you need a payday lender or a downtownstore, then middletown is the place to be." since the book has, come a lot of stores have reopened in downtown middletown, so it is recovering from the recession in you see ays during

lot of close down shops if you go through downtown middletown, and that is one of the underappreciated things about the trump election. talk about economic and anxiety, rachel anxiety, what is a lotting the voters, but of businesses are not operating, negative the worry about the place you are living in, and that worry expresses itself. host: as christmas approaches, and you write the following, "i grew up in a world where everyone worried about how they would pay for christmas, and now for theities abound wealthy and privileged to shower their generosity on the community's poor." guest: that is something bizarre about my life, especially around the holidays, because when we grew up, especially when we were kids, we always worried about how we would have a nice christmas, how our parents and grandparents would put nice gifts under the christmas tree. i am a so weird now is

lawyer now come i work as an investor in silicon valley, there are all these programs were people divide christmas gifts for our nation's poor, and i think the programs are really good, but coming where i came from, it is an interesting juxtaposition that you have gone from worrying about how to provide for christmas to thinking about a different way that is a worry itself. host: this captures the essence, i think, of your book. "hillbilly culture at the time, and maybe now, blended a robust sense of honor, devotion to family, and bizarre sexism into a sometimes explosive mix." one of the things i write about is that my grandma, after she moved from eastern kentucky to southern ohio, in some ways found herself in a very difficult position because she ,as a very independent woman but she was expected to live a certain lifestyle that was 1960's womano a

who lived in basically middle-class circumstances. the problem is my grandma has a very acute sense of loyalty, but many of the men in her life, including unfortunately my grandfather, he was not as loyal to her as he should have been cured and i think the loyalty that mamaw expressed, that is what i called my grandma, but the loyalty with sexism was certainly a combustible mixture. host: you devoted the book to your grandparents. how may times was your mom married? guest: she has been married five times. host: how did that affect you growing up? guest: i think it affected me in a way that life was always unstable. you always expected the next year, the next month may bring a new person into your life, it may bring a new home into your life, so our early childhood -- we moved around a fair amount, we do not more than a year, maybe two years in a home at any period in my lifetime, until i

moved in with my grandparents. it was just very unstable and very chaotic. host: how did you go from almost failing out of high school to yell law school? guest: well, my grandma gets a lot of credit for that. when i was in high school, i moved in with my grandma, and i became her sort of war she saidd. -- ward. she said, "look, you are going to shape up," and she was hard on me, my great started to improve, my confidence improved, and i started to make improvements that led to the opportunities i have today. i joined the marine corps, that allowed me to go to school, that gave me more confidence, i went to college, it is sort of built on itself. when you have little successes in life, that as i wrote about in the book, really enable you. host: before you got to that point, what were some of the bad choices? well, i started to get

involved in trucks pretty early, 12 or 13 was the first time -- drugs pretty early, 12 or 13 was the first time i smoked pot. social influences a critical part of growing up well in doing the right thing. but most of all, i just did not have a lot of faith in myself that if i made the right choices, if i did the right thing, then that would ever produce any good outcome. i was pretty hopeless about whether i would be able to control my own destiny, and because of it, i gave up on my cell, even as an adolescent. ,"st: you wrote the following --iction and roque and homes "in a part of the country slammed by the decline of manufacturing, joblessness, addiction and broke homes, churches tenant has fallen off." guest: it is a way that people self identify, so when you call

people and ask them, how they identify, as religious or not, they call themselves evangelical christians, but among lower income communities, the church great has fallen off, so increasingly in these areas of the country, people still go to church, but it is increasingly the middle-class and upper-class people who are going to church services. that has pretty negative consequences. thatnow from the data church attendance actually produces some pretty positive consequences. host: the book, "hillbilly elegy : a memoir of a family and culture in crisis," our guess is jd vance. amy is joining us from georgia. good morning. caller: good morning. recently, npr has put on a serious of the resurgence -- and they have been

interviewing some men that have one suffering from it, and man said if he got better, he would go right back into the coal mine and do that job. i have been listening to you over the are talking about your i don't understand the thinking of people who do not seem to act in their own best interest. what good is a job if that job kills you? what good is voting for someone who does not truly see you but can manipulate you? what is the thinking? how does someone get to the they where consistently will act against their own best interest? host: amy, thank you. guest: the question about why would people still be interested in working a job that is obvious the very dangerous to them -- i think to answer that question, you really have to understand the spiritual, the almost

spiritual impact of coal on some of these communities. if you go to the west virginia state house else i there is a monument to a coal miner. if you talk to people who have to people who have been a coal miner, they talk about coal as something that won world war ii, that powers and energize the american economy, which of course it did back when cole was the main fuel source that america relied on. when people say they are willing even back in the mine, when it is obviously dangerous, people are willing to do something that they feel is dignified, hard work, not just that paid a good wage but make them proud about what they are doing. i don't think we should discount that when we think about how we get the american economy working for a lot of these folks, the role of something dignified, that you are proud of, how much of a factor that is. your story is getting a lot of action and activity on our twitter page.

do you tweet? i do guest: -- guest: i do. mom --nce we saying his momtweet saying, his married five times? he turned out well. another said great personal story. usmc shapedd the him," and another, "good thing grandma did not coddle him." guest: i think she really recognize and was perceptive about what some of us needed, and what i needed was not to be coddled. host: how many brothers and sisters do you have? guest: i have my sister, l indsay. sister,y brother and

corey in chelsea, who are half-sisters on my dad's side. lindsay is my half-sister on my mom's side. i have a fair number of stepsiblings, most of whom i have fallen in contact with because often when your parents divorce, that is the relationships that suffer. host: let's go to marcia in delray beach, florida. caller: marcia weissman, i follow you on twitter, and i really enjoy it. i am concerned because people here are changing the rules for book club. usually, for book club, we read books that are old, and now they are reading books, your book, because it is brand-new and they are paying for it. we had someone in our book club who read your book went to middletown, and she said she cried, and she started crying when she was talking about it.

i lived in a small town in indiana and revisited about 10 years ago, and the downtown that used to be thriving and beautiful was all ordered up, and that was really sad. my question for you after reading your book is -- how do you have such a strong belief in god? guest: well, i think i have a strong belief in god because mamaw and my dad and a lot of other people in my life made sure i had it. for mamaw, christian faith was not abstract, it was very personal, and it motivated her to doing good in life, to taking me and my sister under her wing when she was old and sick when she did not have a lot of money to do so. but the thing about my faith in god, is if mamaw could have faith and could act in the way she acted, i carry that with me for my life.

author jdguest is vance, he is a native of middletown, ohio, served in the marine corps, stationed in iraq, a graduate of ohio state university, went to yale law school. our next call is from texas. caller: good morning. how are you? i am a little bit older than the author. i grew up near where he lived. i have family from middletown. i worked in the steel mill in ohio. i got out due to the crack epidemic. i like in the book where you say, "i really love these people, but i had to get away from them for my own good." i felt the same way. i learned a lot reading your book. best wishes to you. your grandmother is hilarious. [laughter] well, she is definitely hilarious. she had a whole lot of personality.

i am actually not living in cincinnati right now, but i'm moving back in the next few months. thanks for your kind words, and nice talking to you. host: why moving home? guest: i think that those of us who have been fortunate enough to be given the opportunities that i have been given owe it to our communities to go home and do something meaningful. i do not think home has to mean middletown, maybe it means southern ohio, maybe ohio in the broader sense, but, you know, so-callednk of the coastal elites, as folks back home call them, and i think of one of the problems that really animates a lot of the animosity between the coastal elites and middle america, part of it is that folks like me and him going to the coast and never come back home, and i never wanted to do that in my life. now that the book has been successful, i have for its ability to do it. host: when did you first come up with the idea to write the book. ?

guest: i was a third-year law student, and i was encouraged by a professor who herself was a very successful author and her own right, and she said i really here,you have a book idea and when she first said it, i said no, nobody would read this book, but i followed her advice, i started to write it, one thing led to another. thanks to her connections, i had a book deal. host: and the title, "hillbilly elegy," why that? guest: it is sort of a double meaning in some ways. "elegy" is a lament to the dead, but it can also mean a sad song poem.: -- sad "hillbilly" is pejorative innocence, but when used in my family, it is endearing. it is a sort of sad song to these people that i think have been in some ways put down but also have a certain strength to them. host: albert is next from

chicago. good morning. caller: good morning to your guests. i have a question. i heard you mention the term "white working-class voters," and how they voted for mr. trump at the beginning of your segment. i have been hearing that term "white working-class voters" really since the 2008 election. as if there is something different about that class of voters than any other class of voters. i thought working-class voters were all in the same boat. can you explain to me, other than the fact that the term "white," what makes them so different from any other working-class voters? i will take my answer off the air. host: outward, thank you for the call. let me put forward some numbers to further his point. supported voters who donald trump or from small

cities or rural area. 62% said they voted for donald trump. guest: to that point, i think a lot of this has to do with the fact that white working-class is often associated with rural or at least suburban areas where the working classes also associated with the inner-city. my answer to why the white esrking class vot differently from the latino or black working-class is racial politics. i think their interests are similar and should be aligned in our politics, but when you go back to strategic decisions made among the different parties in the 1960's and 1970's, a lot of white voters gravitated toward the republicans, and a lot of of black and latino working-class voters gravitated away from the republicans. another way of putting that point is if you think about donald trump's rhetoric during the campaign, it was appealing, i think, toward the working class of all demographics, but if you are a black or latino

working class american, a lot of them said, "i am not going to vote for a guy who will be down ," "i am not going to vote for a participated in conspiracy," and i think a lot work propelled by that rhetoric, even not a lot of white working-class voters were willing to vote for trump anyway, even though a lot of them did not like that rhetoric, but were willing to look past it. i think it is more about our politics has evolved then it is about any core economic interest or differences between these groups. host: rebecca with these tweets -- it sounds like the marine corps is what saved you and made you know you could do it. guest: that is definitely true. the marine corps was a powerful influence on my life. those who did not serve in the military and do not reshape -- it is set up with leadership promotions, exercises, and so forth, so you are given an opportunity. if you succeed, you are given more opportunity, if you fail,

you're yelled at and then given more opportunities. it will build your skills that in a way that is powerful. corps, donmarine said the marine corps does for the united states is when wars and make marines. i do not think i appreciated the make marines side of it and so i served. "thanks, jd, for helping me complete my christmas list." [laughter] guest: great. caller: good morning. unfortunately, so far, mr. trump has done nothing to help these guys. problem is he comes down south and go to areas where the sv textile and stuff like that, all of those towns are just about wiped out. the problem is that the service industry has become so strong in this country, from cnbc, 12% of its economy is in manufacturing. most of that is in service.

and one of born these towns, you really have no way of getting away from it. cnbc also reported that 10% of the population owned 80% of all the stocks out there. 2% of the population owned 60% of everything. add into this automation. add into this what appears to be then taking jobs away. it is so sad, they're not going to be able to bring a lot of these jobs back, no matter what they say. the situation is this -- you go to china, you buy for a penny, you come back to america and sell it for a dollar. that is not going to change. it is all smoke and mirrors. i feel sorry for some of these people that are here because there is no hope for them, and it is not going to come back. host: jim, thank you. you make a really important point about automation and driving some of the job losses. we have had disruption in the past in the american economy,

and the choice has always been to scale up in terms of the next level of jobs that we do. myig part of the problem, in view, is not that these jobs are going overseas. a big part of the problem is that our education system is really failing to train people for the next generation of technological jobs. that is not a problem that you can fix or easily, but it is a very important problem to fix. i am hopeful that the trump administration, once they take our, will focus on the education component, because like you said, jim, there is no way that all of these jobs are going to come back. host: our series with different authors will be featured on c-span2, and we kick it off with jd vance, the author of "hillbilly elegy." connie from new jersey, you are next. good morning. caller:. good morning. i have some questions about all of this. first of all, i want to know

what christian means. evangelicals are christians. catholics are christians. the word latin, i am proud that life and people are not white. the marine corps, on and on. if you are such a person, and talented, in europe -- not south american, latin, is hispanic, in some countries, they are latin, and they are caucasian. so that is lassen -- means what -- what?t is latin, means guest: my understanding of a christian is anybody who thinks crisis the son of god, and i

would certainly include catholics and evangelicals and other protestants in that category. that is my answer to that question. and the second question, i did not quite get, so i apologize. host: the difference between what we may view here in the u.s. and other parts of the world in terms of christianity and religion. guest: that is definitely true, and i think there is a history in the united states of sort of anti-catholic bias in the united states, but i do not think that is a big problem in the united states. what i grew up in was a heavily processing, evangelical christian area, but there cap looks, too, and i did not feel like they were especially discriminated against. host: let's go to james. caller: i just have one question. i grew up around a lot of friends that got really bad with myself, drugs and alcohol,

at a young age. like i said, i went down the same road. i grew up in prisons all my life, juvenile homes, and donald trump speaks about building a wall, and everybody attacks him because, you know, they want to call him racist or anything like that. well, you know, he speaks about, you know, stopping the drug flow in this country. and i've had a lot of friends since middle school all the way up that went down with drugs. how come no one is applauding him about stopping the drugs in this country, and they just want to attack him about bad things, you know, just to try to keep him down? host: thank you, james. caller: yeah, well, this is a really important point. a lot of folks, when they hear the rhetoric about building the wall, like you said, it's a reflexively racist reaction to immigration. but a lot of folks i know, and james, you clearly would agree with him, think that the biggest advantage to building a wall is actually that you might prevent the flow of drugs across the southern border. i have a couple of responses to that. one, it definitely seems to me that it's important and

valuable that trump is talking about the drug problem. he's one of the few politicians to really make it a hallmark of his campaign. i think it's not surprising that he won a specially heavily in areas where this drug problem has really taken hold. the second thing, i do worry that building a wall is actually not the best answer to the drug problem. maybe it prevents the flow of some of the narcotics coming to the country, but my real worry is that so long as there's a demand for this stuff, people are going to find a way to bring it in, so we have to attack the drug problem, not just on the supply coming in, but also on the demand of folks who are addicted to this stuff. host: of course, the decision to use drugs, decisions that individuals make. i ask you that, because you say in the book you say we need to look ourselves in the mile an hour sandror admit that our conduct harms our children. public policy can help, but there is no government that can fix these problems for us. guest: yeah, and i think that's one of the most misunderstood lines in the book. i appreciate you talking about it. i mean, it's important to say

that public policy can't help. i do think there's a role for public policy to improve some of these problems. but when we look at the broad swath of sociological and economic issues, i don't think that we would be honest with ourselves if we said the government can fix all of these problems. can it fix, truly solve the opioid crisis? i think the answer is probably not t. can probably help it, but this addiction crisis is always going to be with us. and so there is an element of tough love in my book. i'm trying to speak not just to folks who might read the book, but folks in my own hometown, folks who grew up in areas that are like the one i grew up in to say, look, we've got to do better day-to-day in our own lives, too. host: lisa from minneapolis, good morning, with j.d. vance. caller: i haven't read your book yet, but i'm looking forward to it. i grew up in a mixed class family, though part of the family just keeps losing more and more ground, the other are doing very well. but one of my main concerns, i

grew up in texas, first 30 years of my life. been in minnesota the last 30. and the whole discussion, this white working-class people are predominantly racist, as if middle class and upper middle class white people are not. i'm want going to say there isn't racism in my family. there is. i've been devoted to doing anti-racism work in my life. i would love for you to take on racism and the white working class from your vantage point. thank you again for this book. i so lock forward to reading it. guest: well, thank you. i have a couple of responses to that. the first is that, if you look at what's really motivating some of these volingse, i think the evidence is very thin that most of them are motivated by race. there's definitely an element of racism in the white working class, but i really don't see any good evidence that that's what really drove people to

donald trump. my sense is that the concerns over not just the state of the economy, but the state of the society, the opioid crisis, the family breakdown, and so forth, is really what motivated a lot of support for donald trump. and to your second point, this is a really important point. i think a lot of the discussion around the white working class and what motivated support for donald trump ignores the fact that there are racists at all classes of society and that prejudice in the united states, in this incredibly diverse society that we've been gifted, is something that requires a sort of constant vigilance and a constant thinking about. and when we sort of say, well, look at all the donald trump supporters, they're all rays, i think it gives us an excuse to ignore the fact that there are prejudices at all levels of society we should be worried about. host: from the book, you say, we tend to overstate and understate, to glorify the good and ignore the bad in ourselves, this is why the folks in appalachia reacted strongly to an honest look at some of its most impoverished

people. it's why i spent the first 18 years of my life pretending world was a problem -- that everything in the world was a problem except me. guest: yeah, there's definitely an element where it's hardest to speak truthfully about yourself, right? it's easier to look at other people's problems, to look at other people's issues and say, look, those people are messed up in some way. they suffer from serious moral problem or they're pathological in one way or another. but one of the things i'm trying to do with the book is encourage to us really look in the mirror, to recognize that there are really great things about our families, our communities, our broader culture, but we also do have some really serious problems we've got to face up to. host: some of these stories in the book, think about it for a moment, your favorite story, the one you'd like to share most often. let's go to john, joining us from new york with j.d. vance. good morning. caller: good morning, gentlemen. mr. vance, you're talking about white working class voters, racial motivations and everything else. essentially my question to you

is, how are white working class voters being helped in what is going on currently with the state legislature in north carolina? host: with what specific issue are you talking about? caller: my issue is what's going on, you're talking about white working class voters. how are they being helped by what is going on with what is going on with the state legislature in north carolina? host: are you talking about the transgender bathroom issue or other topics? caller: no, i'm talking about what they're currently doing, all these bills they passed in their special session, and the exiting governor is signing into law. host: ok. caller: his ability to govern. how is that helping out the working class -- the white working class voters in that respective state? host: the new incoming governor

next year. guest: sure, and my sense, and i'm not especially well read on this topic, so forgive me if i'm speaking out of turn, my sense is what the folks in the republican legislature in north carolina are doing, it's ill advised simply because sometimes -- or very often in our politics, we find ourselves with the shoe on the other foot, you know, whether it's in national politics with some of these executive orders that will be unwound by the trump administration, or whether it's passing laws that you may want a democrat to follow, but you don't necessarily want the republican that comes after him to follow. i think we'd be much better in our politics if we actually appreciated the fact that the shoe will always be on the other foot and to govern our institutions respectively. as far as as it affects the white working class, my sense is that it will have little effect one way or the other on the white working class. we'll, of course, see. host: from new orleans, joe is next. good morning. caller: good morning.

i have two questions, but first i want some clarification. is this the young man that wrote the book about how people in his community had no respect for professionals, but looked up to individuals who were rich? guest: no, that's not my book. caller: ok, well, anyway, two questionsive. -- two questions i have. really am curious as to why lower economic republicans vote against their self interests. and my second question is, why is there a need for them to feel that they are better than anyone else, better than blacks, better than latinos? i'm really curious about that. and do you think that this is the modern doctrine, where white folks convince poor people to fight against each

other instead of fighting for their own economic interests? host: thank you for the call. guest: thank you. so the question about why do white folks need to feel that they're better than other groups, i think it's really important to note that i don't think most white folks do have that need to feel they're better than others. obviously some people do, and we should fight that impulse and sort of say, look, you don't need to think like that, you don't need to feel that way to recognize that it's self-destructive is really important and something that i hope that we continue to do in our political discourse. the question about why a lot of lower income americans vote against their economic interests is a really difficult one, and i think that we should be cautious to necessarily say that they are voting against their economic interests. one of the things that -- you think about the way that the left and the right maybe has talked about working class issues for the past 10 years. so go back to the 2012

campaign, what was the president really offering working class voters, maybe some additional social welfare programs, maybe further implementation of obamacare, what was mitt romney offering these working-class voters? maybe, you know, additional tax and regulation cuts that were supposed to sort of trickle down and stimulate economic growth. for a lot of folks, both sides of that conversation don't necessarily offer a whole lot for them. they don't necessarily want lower taxes and lower regulations, even though they think those things are good. they don't necessarily want additional handouts, even though they think those things might be good. what they really want is stable, dignified work. and so if you think about not just the obama administration, but the bush administration before it, there have been really significant problems with providing all americans, or at least most americans, with stable, well paying work, and so i'd really fight against the idea that folks are voting against their economic interests. what i think they're doing is trying to find a candidate.

they're sort of swinging from republican to democratic and back to republicans, trying to find candidates who will serve those interests and they keep on being disappointed. host: the symbolism of your book cover, a dirt road in appalachia with what looks like a dilapidated barn and the remnants of an american flag. guest: yeah. guest: yeah, that's right. when we chose that coffer, i really wanted that american flag to be on the barn, because i thought it reflected something important about the way that this is in american story and this is a very american way to think about upper mobility and opportunity and the fact that a lot of americans are struggling right now. host: we welcome our radio audience. our guest is j.d. vance, the author of the "new york times'" number one bestseller, "hillbilly elegy." julia joining us from your neck of the woods, zanesville, ohio. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. i will say, mr. vance, i have not read your book, but i found

this topic interesting. being from -- well, i wasn't born in southeast ohio, but i've been here for 30 years. a single d a boy as mom who went into the marines, found himself and is doing well. however, when i was raising him, one of my chief concerns is the fact that, in ohio, the suicide rate for males between 15 and 25 is astronomical compared to the rest of the nation. another concern that i have as a female is the mention you had of the disloyalty of the male to the female. in southern ohio along athens county, all along this, there's like six counties, there's not one rain crisis center. so my concern is basically, how do you address these issues when you actually look at the facts that toledo is a major

hub for human trafficking? these things are just left unaddressed when males don't have the security of a future. host: julia, we'll give him a chance to respond. what do you do currently in zanesville? why are you stayed there this ong? caller: i'm a paralegal by trade. and the reason i married someone and moved here. and the reason i stayed here was for my children. i got a government job, highly republican here. it's the major party. i've got a government job so i could be available to my children. i put them in a private school so i could overlook them, to keep them from the drugs, because it's so astronomical. the county that i live in, the town, a decade ago, was known as the cocaine capital of the country. so even though it's been, you know, on 70, it's just a major

transit. so if you can just speak to these issues. and also, something that i found interesting is that obama released a lot of money to deal with the drug epidemic, and it doesn't -- even though we're, you know, 25% of our county is on food stamps, everyone wants to say we do it all on our own bootstraps, and they're christians and hard working and believe in the american flag. so if you could just kind of speak to the white male, i would appreciate that. thank you. host: thank you for adding your voice, julia, to the conversation. j.d. vance? guest: yes, thank you. and the suicide problem in this community, and not just the direct suicide problem, but, of course, so many of these young men are killing themselves through drugs, is a really significant problem, not just in ohio, but in this broader sort of appalachian and midwestern region. it's a very significant issue, and, unfortunately, not something that has an easy solution. i think that we're now starting to talk about it and think

about it, which is good progress. and you mentioned human trafficking, which is another very significant issue that folks don't realize is a serious problem in ohio. i've actually been really -- you know, i've seen that the governor kasich and the ohio legislature have actually been doing quite a bit to try to address the human trafficking issue, and i hope that they come to some solid solution. host: and this is from another viewer saying i grew up in a steel town in ohio. as long as people knew that the mill was there, the kids just felt that was their destiny. guest: yeah, that's absolutely right. d you still see some of that or at least i saw some of that growing up in my hometown, even though it was very clear that the steel jobs weren't necessarily going to keep on coming. they weren't always going to be there. a lot of us just assumed when we graduated from high school, we sort of had that job waiter for us. it's really unfortunate because it doesn't force a lot of kids to think about their other options, and there has object other options, because so many

of these mills aren't able to provide the high quality, high wage work they used to. host: let's go to ron from tennessee. good morning. caller: good morning. i really like what he just said on television. i was born and raised in merion, ohio, and i worked at merion power shovel. i actually helped work on the crawler that carries the shuttle out to the launch pad. we were bought out and it was moved to mexico. and my question is to him, when you lose all your industry, what else are they to do? the people? host: thanks for the call. guest: yeah, that's such an important -- that's such an important question. and, unfortunately, there has to be a combination of answers. so when these jobs leave, one hopefully folks are coming in and creating new jobs, and if

they're not, i think that we have to think about ways to encourage them to do so. two, a lot of those who lost their jobs unfortunately may have to go somewhere else temporarily, or at least go back to school and sort of scale up and figure out how they're going to get jobs that do exist, and, of course, some folks are just going to struggle. i mean, i'm sure the caller has seen it, i've certainly seen it in my own life -- there isn't an easy answer when these jobs go overseas. i think the way that we have to think about it is to get as many people as possible in newer and better jobs and to try to take care of the folks who just can't adjust. host: you have a lot of fans on twitter. this one says the discussion on c-span's "washington journal" with j.d. vance is phenomenal. great and important topic. keep those tweets coming. mark, fort lauderdale, florida, did you want to respond? go ahead, mark. caller: hello, good morning, and thank you for c-span as usual. i grew up in cincinnati, ohio.

my father was born and raised in middletown. all his cousins were, too. he came from a family of eastern european jewish immigrants that ended up in middletown. they all raised their families there. none of them ever looked at this steel mills and factories being a future, they all ended up getting college educated and mostly migrated down to incinnati. but the main thing i wanted to follow up with, there was a lady that called back -- that called a few calls back, her premise was that the white working class people had to feel superior to others and that by playing to that, that may well have been how trump got elected or how hate groups ton wield influence. and the author disagreed with that.

while i like most of what your author has to say, i think he was wrong there. in fact, it goes back to even the civil rights legislation of the 1960e's, when people asked president johnson why he was having so much trouble with people accepting the civil rights movement, even though it might well help them, their own economic interests, he has a very famous quote to say, if you could convince the lowest white man that he's better than the best colored man, he won't notice you picking his pocket. he will even give you money to keep him down. i paraphrase there slightly. but i think that applies today, and it applies to a lot of trump's followers and a lot of the working class whites in ohio, i hate to say. host: mark, i'm going jump in. we'll get a response. thank you for your call. guest: thank you, mark. i'll continue to push back against this, because while i definitely agree that we have to respect and recognize the

fact that there are racists out there and that there is driving at least some of the animosity and some of the really divisive rhetoric that we see in our country today, i think it's a mistake to sort of oversimplify and to say that just because these folks are feeling that they're going to get passed by minorities, that's why they're voting for donald trump. at the end of the day, there are probably any single person probably has 40 or 50 reasons all jumbled up together for why they're voting for barack obama or donald trump or hillary clinton. i think if we ignore the real complexity that informs and motivated their choices, we're going to ignore the things that we can deal with. you know, one thing we obviously have to deal with is the fact that there are and continue to be racists in the united states. but another thing that we have to deal with is the opioid crisis. another thing we have to deal with is the family breakdown in these communts. another thing we have to deal with is the fact that wages have stagnated for the bottom half of the country for a very long time. and i think that while we need

to focus and understand the racism in the south there, if we focus exclusively on that, or even primarily on that, i think we're miss ago lot else that's going on. host: the subtitle of the book, "a memoir of a zpeam a couple newer crisis," as we continue our conversation, our remaining minutes with j.d. vance. he is joining us from mountainberg, arkansas. good morning. caller: yes, good morning, sir. guest: good morning. caller: good morning, young fella. not you, sir, but the boy. i hope you feel good right now. but i'm 60 years old, and i broke my back twice, and my wrist is broke, and, you know, you don't feel as good when you get older as you do right now. i preach the gospel for year -- i don't know, 5 1/2 years or something, but i was a marine, sir. i loved the marine corps, and i love you.

but i'm just trying to tell you, when you're young, you feel real stout and everything. but when you get older, you can't do nothing, and that gets sad. but i love you, son, and good luck to you. guest: well, thank you, sir, i really appreciate that, and hope you feel better. good bless you. host: our next call is from valparaiso, florida. tim, good morning. caller: hi, i enjoyed the book. in the book, you mentioned the demons of the life we left behind continue to chase us. what are some of the life skills that you had to develop through the years to be even today still defeat those demons? thanks a lot. guest: sure, well, thank you for that. the life skill that i think is most important and that i had in mind when i was writing that particular line is the life skill to disagree without rain corps, to be able to have an argument or disagree with somebody, but not turn it into yelling or fighting or

screaming match. that's really how i learned in my household, in my home, in my community to deal with conflict. and, of course, when i thought of the american dream when i was a kid, i didn't think of going to a nice law school or having a nice job, i thought of having a successful family, having a nice marriage. and to do that, unfortunately, you have to learn how to agree and disagree without rancor, and that's the life skill that i had to cultivate and i ton cultivate today, and i think it's ant important lesson to try to do the same. host: this tweet from a viewer, the book is not justed occasional, you will fall in love with j.d. vance and his mama. guest: well, i appreciate that. and one of the reasons that i did write the book is because i felt this is mawmaw who is this incrediblely powerful and funny figure that i didn't want people to not know. i wanted people to get to know her, and i thought that they would like her if they did. obviously they have. so i appreciate that. host: diane from iowa.

good morning. caller: good morning. thank you very much. i love your program. thank you, mr. vance. i've not read your book, but i will. i think that something is getting overlooked here. and i think that we just overlook the republicans who voted the hard working americans have always been so giving and so understanding, and because they have good, solid jobs, they can afford to give. so we don't have the jobs anymore, and now people want to be able to give, but we find that we're giving to lost causes. so much for welfare and all the programs. and we just can't give anymore, and i don't think that -- it's not racism or class or whatever, but we just can't do that financially anymore. so i think you're missing a whole boat of the financial issues that are playinging the

working class of america. we just can't do this anymore. guest: yeah, thank you for that, and i appreciate that. one of the things i write about in the book that i do think is really important is the way that the economy, the way that manufacturing has declined in these areas, and so i do think the jobs crisis, the wage yice in these areas is a really important part of what's motivating some of the other problems that i write about in the book. you mentioned a point that i think is very interesting, which is that, you know, it's sort of difficult to feel especially giving towards other people when you feel strapped yourself. i think it's much easier to be magnanimous and to be charitable when you yourself feel financially secure. i think that's an important lesson to think about how our political conversation unfolds when so many people feel like they're falling behind. host: from ohio, chris, you're next. good morning. caller: good morning. i was thinking that the declines in unions and union

membership in the private sector has contributed greatly to the economic disparity for the middle class. i was wondering what your thoughts were. guest: sure, yeah, so i'm one of these people who definitely worries about the decline of unions, and there's some really economic studies that suggest that people who are in unions, even controlling for income and wages and so forth, actually are more likely to start a family and more likely to stay married, more likely to raise their kids successfully. so the decline of unions is something that worries me. i will say that the evidence that i've seen suggests that the problem sort of goes in the other way, that the unions have declined because a lot of these jobs have been automated. so, really, the big problem here is it goes back to automation and technological change that we really have to deal with. host: our last call is from kentucky. andy, we have a meant or two left. quick question. caller: ok, yes. ok, i feel like why the democrats like lost and

everything, and i want to get your opinion, because i feel like the democrats is like values and everything, because they used to be conservative. and i feel like if we would get back to being conservative, then we can start winning again. and then also, like the lady with the unions, i'm for the unions. in fact, i ran for city commission, and i did you not make it the first time out. i got 1,050 votes. i'm still going to try again later. to me, i feel like we need union jobs again. we need to be pushing for the unions. and i know kentucky went all republican, and i know they want to try to push for this right to work, and this right to work, while it's good, it's going to be hurting the unions more than -- and so we need to try to stop that right to work, because it's not good for us. host: thank you, andy. guest: yeah, thank you. it's a really interesting point about the decline of democrats and some of these local political environments. there's this really fascinating piece i suggest you read in the

"new york times," and the author actually suggests a big problem democrats have declined in these areas is because democrats don't even live in these areas anymore. they don't relate to the people on the ground. they don't really share a lot of their concerns. and so i think, you know, frankly, you can make the same argument about republicans and some of these coastal enclaves, where there are very few elected republicans. but it gets back to an issue i write about in the book that really concerns me, is that whether it's about class or religion or race or political ideology, we don't spend a whole lot of time with people who are different from us, and i think that should change, and i hope it does. host: and finally, i didn't forget, your number one story. guest: my number one story, so i forget -- i forgot you asked me, but i'll throw this out, and it's, you know, my grandma, when she found out that i was involved with a kid who was doing drugs and that i was smoking pot, mamaw told me if i didn't stop hanging out with that kid, she would run him over with her car and no one would ever