next, q&a. after that, prime minister theresa may taking questions from the house of commons. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2018] announcer: this week on "q&a," politico magazine contributing editor joshua zeitz discusses his book, "building the great society." brian: joshua zeitz, your new book, "building the great society." inside lyndon johnson's white house. before he ask you questions, i want to show you on this network in 2014, talking about a previous book about two of lincoln's staff members. [begin video clip] >> they undertook a mission to

create a definitive and and during historical reputation for their leader. the combination of their efforts was a 10-volume biography which was see her allies between 1886 magazinein the century which was america's leading mass circulation magazine. that constituted one of the singularly successful exercises in historical revisionism in all of american history. [end video clip] joshua: who was that young guy? [laughter] book.: yes, i wrote a

secretaries of lincoln. was a catchcretary" all for chief of staff, political director, the white house staff was miniscule in those days. they knew him from the springfield days. they were very young men and they lived in worked in the white house. they were party to everything we know about lincoln during the civil war years. they became his biographers, or his first biographers. writing that book intrigued me because it became clear there is this component of residential history, which is the history of the men and women who staffed these administration's, which is so critical, not only in terms of such visions they make while they are in the white house, but the access with historical retrospection and place in context the events they witnessed. brian: what did you think of the history they wrote? the 10 volumes? joshua: the 10 volumes don't pass muster given the secondary literature we have on the civil war. they played a vital role in placing slavery at the

center of the conflict of the civil war, which today seems intuitive. they were writing this decades after lincoln had been assassinated, when the country was going through a romantic reunion. it became popular and prevalent for most historians and political commentators to view the war as having been over states rights or other constitutional issues, but not slavery. they did something critically important. they put the context over slavery's expansion at the center of the narrative. not only about the war but about lincoln's career. in that way they created the standard historical account that everybody would argue against afterwards. but i think also, when we are talking about presidents, they are the one to created a prototype that lasted until this day, the way we think of lincoln of having been a master of a fractious cabinet, a first among

equals in washington, a master politician, the head of a team of rivals. perfectly against and with each other in order to achieve his ends. that was their interpretation. that lasted pretty long. brian: how old were those two men when they were staffed for abraham lincoln? joshua: hey was in his 20's. mid- they had his 20's. no prior experience. they grew up in illinois. i don't think hay had ever been to washington, d.c. there were a lot of people who wanted that job, probably had a better claim to it, who are jealous of them. they realized they were a shot of water when they came to the scene. but that is a common story over the decades.

brian: in your bibliography, i count at least nine books written by staff of lending -- lyndon johnson. what did you think of their history? to quote a lot from those books. how do you follow up to make sure they were telling the truth? joshua: you treat a memoir, whether it is a staff memoir or a journalist, with a critical eye. the stories they tell can be very helpful to consult if they have been corroborated by other sources. bite, and even if you suspect some of these stories are apocryphal or self-serving, because oftentimes they are, they certainly help to provide insight between the staff and the president he or she worked for. so i think like any other primary source, you have to look at it critically. i did try to bear in mind some advice they had written back and forth to each other. they had written back and forth while they were working on it for decades. they consciously decided not to

use all of the oral history nicolai took of people around lincoln from his springfield days to the white house. they decided not to re-interview people. they rely you as much as they could on contemporary documentation. they found as people get older, their memories went, and/or they had a particular grudge in their interview. johnson is an interesting case in point. there is a rich trove of oral histories taken in the late 60's all the way through the late 80's. i did use them. i did not follow nicolay and hay to the letter. i did use the ones when people were being candid because they had security in knowing these would not be released for another quarter-century. they did not necessarily have to position things just so.

at all times, if i could corroborate the facts and the sentiment by consulting contemporary sources, memos they wrote to each other in the moment, i would always privilege that is because they were clearly not written with an eye toward history. brian: did you interview anybody who worked for lyndon b. johnson? joshua: i did not. there are only two senior staff members who are still alive. that is bill moyers, who went on to have a storied career in journalism and television. the other went on to become secretary of health and welfare for president carter and had a successful law practice in new york. i reached out and never heard back. knew that ilifano was writing a book. he was pleased to hear it, but i id not interview him for stop but i did not interview him.

-- he was pleased to hear it, but i did not interview him. i have poured through tens of thousands of their early contemporary memos in the early 1960's. i looked through scores of newspapers. i was able to consult oral histories. brian: here is a photo that includes moyers and watson. who are the people standing with lyndon johnson? joshua: most people know who bill moyers is. moyers was a young minister, grew up in texas, a lot of the guys who worked for johnson were from texas. from very modest upbringings. he ended up, he did not take a pulpit. he was a brilliant student and was a very sincere and ernest theologian. he ended up working for johnson and johnson's media business, a television station that lady bird on. he worked his way up as an intern. jack was just a friend. he was the youngest advertising

and pr guy from texas who johnson knew. he ended up marrying one of johnson's secretaries. was a real character. he was advancing a leg of the and lbj andn 1963 invited him him from houston to dow list. he ended up being 10 cars back in the motorcade monday president was assassinated. johnson put him on air force one immediately. if you look at the iconic photos of the swearing-in, you will see him in the back of the airliner. he and did up staying in becoming a very close eight. brian: who of all the people you wrote about entry due the most. >> mcpherson. he was younger lawyer.

also a texan. he was one of the few to go to the university of texas at austin. he was a young lawyer who wrote a letter to lbj. senator. somehow that sort of spun into him coming into washington one johnson was majority leader. he actually got out from under johnson's farm. guy to was a pretty hard work for. theson brought him into white house in 1965 as chief counsel. he ended up serving a whole number of functions. most of johnson's guys were utility players and could move back and forth through different functions. he enjoyed his work and was committed to it but i think it would've been no tragedy to him if he had to leave the white house. he was not the sort of person to

move or propeller from positions. yet a calm demeanor. the rest of the staff looked at him as an honest broker. this: here you write about in your book. this was a contentious person. arthur's lesson jerk who was historian -- arthur -- he was historian for john f. kennedy. he is now d.c.'s. he was here and it year 2000. rate this down. [again video clip] thinkyou were here, i most of the legislative program that was lyndon johnson's, would've gone to completion and the great society and had its origins in kennedy's new

frontier. you would've been able to do that. i think it would've been a very different country. joshua: arthur/ginger was content to us of jfk in the -- arthur schlesinger was contentious of jfk. he was never willing to credit johnson. he had been all of the good assigned -- he had been assigned to all of the good of jfk and all of the worst of lbj. in 1968, when valenti was already out of the white house, he was at a dinner party and she was injured or was basically -- schlesinger was basically trashing the war policy. moyers was still in the white house.

schlesinger says, what are you talking about? nobody from the kennedy-johnson administration very seriously doubted the way it was going in vietnam. johnson's administration was heavily populated by kennedy holders. schlesinger was the kennedy family's court historian, was never able to record johnson's place in history, which is not to minimize what a difficult man johnson was. brian: we have talked about lyndon johnson a lot on this network. how did you go about writing a book that was different than others, not duplicating? joshua: i can't wait for the next volume of his book.

they are foundational. he is a biographer, and although i deal with elite actors, i don't view this as a biography, per se. it's really a history of political ideas, history of the way government administrated certain programs. it is a book about johnson, but it is not really a book about johnson. it is really a book about his staff. i wanted to take the focus off the story, which is, lyndon as the great master legislator, and look at exactly how an administration within the space of four and half years built all these programs. after they pass congress and he signed them into law, how did they build medicare and medicaid from the ground up in one year? how did they create programs like head start? who stands, and nutritional -- food stamps and nutritional programs for children, while desegregating the country and dissembling about the war in vietnam.

so, it is really about the administration, the staff. the way they disassembled the great society and the reassembled it. you can read the next volume. i think there will be insight about johnson the man and perhaps johnson the president. hopefully this book will help people place the great society itself in greater context. brian: is richard goodwin still alive? joshua: yes, he had a number of roles under john kennedy. best remembered as a young congressional staff attorney during the 1960 tv television game show scandal hearings.

he came into the johnson administration as a speechwriter. he is known for having coined the term "the great society." he wrote most of the text that survived that johnson delivered at the university of michigan when he launched the great society. good one was one of those who work with the president, but then he broke with him over vietnam. the hapless residential candidate, mccarthy, new hampshire and early january of 1968 was with good one in new hampshire. brian: this is about litton johnson. you we've this kind of thing throughout the book. let's watch.

[begin video clip] >> he was in the presidential bedroom. he said, derek i'm here. i looked around. the voice was coming from the bathroom. i walked into the bathroom and there, seated on the toilet, was the president of the united states. [laughter] trans1 time he had george monday and there. george bundy stood with his back to the president and walked out of the room afterwards with his back to him. johnson later remarked, you wonder how a man like that ever got so far in the world. ]end video clip o'brien: how much of this did you find? joshua: enough to make you believe it was probably a common happenstance.

johnson expected 24-7 division from his staff. bill moyers had and also her for a good year during his tenure there. yet special direct telephone lines installed in bathrooms of his home so he can get a hold of them anytime. they had axes to the presidential cars, fleet of cars. which sounds like a great perk, but the president would call to turnedand get the car around. there's probably a good could somewhere where he tells the story when he first got the assignment to the great society speech. bill moyers asked him to come to the white house. the two of them went to the swimming pool which is where the now. room is johnson was swimming in the poll is what he did for his afternoon swim. that is where he assigned him the task of writing the great

society speech. they had to essentially get naked and swim the pool. this is just what you had to do if you work for lyndon johnson. if you could tolerate it, you did. and she could not, you did not work for lyndon johnson. page 142 u tell the number of sayings. this is drawn. i'll try not to read too many it these words. you say, lbj said -- what that woman needs is you. take her out. give her a good dinner and a f--. what is that? johnsonmatt is lyndon trying to make his aides uncomfortable. to realize who was in charge. he engaged in these brush theatrics in order to put people

against the wall. to make them feel uneasy and uncomfortable. i think it is fair to say that lyndon johnson's personal behavior and conduct would even push limits today. brian: here's more. harry has been taking out this reporter and screwing her. i realize about his wife and children. talking about harry mcpherson. was at true? joshua: no. johnson told mcpherson this particular reporter woman had been writing critically of the administration. i want you to take her out. mcpherson rolled his eyes and ignore this and hoped the president would drop it. a few weeks later, the president is saying mcpherson is doing it. just to put mcpherson and a difficult situation. what is interesting about mcpherson as he refused to let to him.

brian: this is about congresswoman edith green. califano to have him a take her out, give for a couple of bloody mary's, and spend the afternoon in bed with her. then she will support neg-d building once. if you wants to help his president, that is what he will do instead of writing memos every night. pure johnson.s he is telling califano, tell the guy and your staff that is what he will do if he wants to be helpful. that particular story came directly from califano, who remembered it. this is oral history that was done years earlier which suggests to me was probably reliable. even if the dialogue, you have to take it directionally. nobody can remember that conversation verbatim two or

three years later. at this is purely ended johnson. you'll find stories like that this pervades volumes about johnson when he was younger guy. this is simply the way he operated. he likes to assert his dominance in a room. he didn't in ways that were crude. it is not hard to understand why schlesingere arthur found it completely unappealing. brian: jackie mentioned earlier. -- jack you mentioned earlier. joshua: he became the appointment secretary. he was the gatekeeper. he decided not only who did and did not see the president, he decided what the president saw in terms of staff memoranda. and staff work. that was critical. johnson kept what he called a two-day day. he would get up very early, put in six or seven hours.

the first swim, take and now, and go back to the oval office until about 8:00. then he would spend hours reading through stacks of memoranda. those were probably policy memos that word detailed, granular. you would read through of them until 1:00 or 2:00 in the morning. he would put instructions and their through four staff members. valentiwould see jack in the morning. he would go through the memos, which he had curated. valenti read it and decided whether he got in there. the next morning he would pick up the memos and dispersed the instructions. valenti later estimated johnson was reading 300 words a week -- in300,000 words a week policy papers which meant the lengths he was reading more. he was incredibly important. he was also a speech writer. he was a utility player like all

of them. that was a critical role. he was really broad and open minded for a texan who had never really worked. he went to harvard and whatnot for his mba. he was a man of the world but he did not know washington. this was the mid-1960's when a lot of ideas were fomenting. he was seen as an oddball. staff members and folks in the cabin agencies put stuff in the night reading. me if i was wrong but i believe he left the white house and went to work for the motion pictures association of america. i think it was the first lobbyist in this town to make $1 million a year. joshua: i heard that story but i do not know if it is true. had an interview with him back in 1990. it was a profile. we don't let anybody colorless from theseything out

interviews. he called me after the interview and ask very strongly that he wanted us to cut something out. doaid, we're not going to it. that was the question asking him who are the five best texans he and politics. later he called and said, you have to changes. i could tell he was really upset. i ask you this because i want to show you what happened. i ask you this to see how much it describes what jack valenti was like. here is the end of the interview and then what happened after that. [video clip] >> i thank the good lord every day for letting me do this. lot ofbeen one hell of a fun. >> thank you. >> jack fomenting contacted c-span right after this interview. he felt very strongly he needed additional time or remarks you feel to make. here are his comments. >> would brian asked me about

eminent political figures in texas, of course the two most influential in that state whose whole arena though is the national arena would be james baker of houston, the secretary of state, of course the scene to their senator from texas, lloyd bentsen of houston. both of these men are singularly powerful. i think the future is cheerful for both of them. as you know, lloyd bentsen was the vice presidential candidate in 1988. all observers, both democrats and republicans believed he found himself with great skill, knowledge, and grace. i think you will be hearing more about him in the future. clip]ideo what does that say about jacqueline t? joshua: he clearly realized five minutes after the interview that

the chief lobbyist for a major industry he had just potentially test off to people with great importance. baker was secretary of state at the time, right? it is funny, that is not to jacqueline valenti that comes through in contemporary sources from the mid-60's. he was very new to washington. he was thereby complete accident. he had an incredible native intelligence, he very quickly figured this town out, came to understand it, and came to know everyone. there was a certain humility about him, which you had to demonstrate if you were working for lyndon johnson. there was a sense of the beginning of his tenure that he was aware there were plenty of people asking who jack valenti was and why he was working for the president of the united states in his senior role.

i think he later developed that kind of the swagger after a decade or two when washington. that it is sort of a more fun jack valenti who comes through in these earlier sources. you writet year did about lincoln? joshua: around 2012 or 2013. brian: where do you live? joshua: hoboken. brian: when did you start on this book? joshua: i began six months after "lincoln's boys." poking around. i think i began more serious work about a year later. i had two little girls around the house. joshua: i became fascinated by the dynamic between staff and their presidents. i thought about doing this or doing one on the new dealers.

it became, the young men who roosevelt brought to washington in the 1930's, to me it became clear that there was a missing piece of the story about lyndon johnson and the great society that needed telling. there has been a lot of writing and films about johnson recently. also, to rehash and entertaining fashion the same stories. the accomplishment of having to build these programs and make them last half a century. to do it in a space of just a few years, it is remarkable achievement. i don't think his staff got credit for it. in the facey did it of much more stalwart opposition ,n those cases it nevertheless to think the answer much trouble building one critical program on the johnson administration stood up dozens. brian: let's go back to the

photographs of two people we did not talk about. you can see next to jack horace busby and next to him watson. witha: i will start watson. he was sort of a loner on the staff essentially. very conservative. lyricalss executive and operative and texas. jackson brought him into replace valenti as the secretary. they were on the same page. watson was there for this and cap of johnson's tenure. very conservative, very tough. he was the guy who said no. he was not involved deeply and policy. he was not in his heart kind of a deep society. he kind of touched the other >> or a new frontier liberal, so kind of touched the other

staff members sometimes a bit rough. your me inject this from page 22 where you talk about horace busby. i'm going to read it >> the most successful politicians have some little their office who sits back in the corner, he doesn't ave to have any personality, doesn't have to know how to dress, usually they don't have tied right a button off their shirt. their e stains on fingers, no coat, all of that but they will sit back in the corner, they don't meet any of that come into the office.

buzz -- busby, he was joc -- he left his staff and then came back on the staff he eft the staff again, could only kind of subordinate his personality to johnson for a or two at a time but they came back e, they into the white house since 1964, and then again left right around 1966, and then was back in the fold in 1968, not formally on staff. kind of a contentious but of warm ind relationship, that was busby's role. along did he got get with? bill moyer and

ichard goodwin to some extent, mcpherson, to accommodate the faction and be nominally part of it. n the other side there were people like busby, to some fuentes, watson, they didn't share the same politics, watson was much more they were, butan there was a great tension between the two factors and in an billar between busby moyer's. here's some video by bill moyer 1990.ng in >> as i look back in those years and the time i spent briefly 1954 an 1960, in every respect except one, he lways had a better eye for the horizon than anyone else around except on vietnam. a gap, a blank, an

i haven't figured yet. in the book he wouldn't talk to you. about 't written much those years. >> no. he has occasionally, it's been a sit for some did interviews when there was a two biography a few years ago. there were transcriptsta he wouldn't say he refused to speak with me, i didn't ask to speak with them. them reached out to let now i was writing it. he's an enigma. historiessit for oral with the lbj library. he had been for a time johnson's closest aide. called him like, you know, john said he was like a realized and people that moyer's was the de factor 1964 of-staff from late onward, and he was the press

ecretary and he was always at johnson's side and beck and call but they had this mysterious foulout in 1966 and 1967. they didn't speak to each other moyer left the white house. extensively it was about vietnam. in the book it gets into it a bit. it was in some part because moyer was developing his own persona and reputation and had established out a at least with reporters, as being more doubtful of the administration's vietnam policy than other people in the white house and the it.sident took poorly to ou write this narrative --

mean, i believe him on that i think moyer did come reservations s about the policy by the end of 1966. he was ame time, jobs before other he left. by no means did he leave in protest. think he an the president had just come to the end of the road on the relationship. very at that point was much in bobby kennedy's camp. i think that conversation reflects a desire to cast moyer

white good angel in the house who ultimately had to because he was cast aside. think people have delved more but the ideaietnam he left in protest because of vietnam is one that was a lot of the y kennedy partisans. personal view on this, you spent a lot of time with these people. ho do you think you would not have liked working with? >> who would i not have liked working with. found i would have pleasant.tson to bun >> george, i had great for.ration >> hold on, i've got some video. done in 1996. he's no longer with us.

to hen it comes organization, lyndon johnson was quite chaotic. you never knew who with you things and quite often you had to step in because no and somebody had to do something. a long time aide. he was press secretary for a while before he got moved out my years became press -- despised spited moyer, when you talk about him to put a big asterisk next to all of. personal ax to grind. he once said he was a very knowledgeable guy, i'm making up a bit but if you asked him about the weather he would give you the history of the eather for 10 minutes and then tell you what the weather s. he seemed like he was a bit insufferable to work with and i found himr colleagues

so as well. > did you listen to any of the oval office conversations? >> they have difficult to listen to make heads of tails out of them. most of them have been transcribed. incredibly useful, they give you the transcript of what's being said at all times. lyndon johnson was a political understood different contexts and different conversations, he had to say deploy t things and if you just guage, take a conversation between him and his aides and a third party history of at's the what just happened, you better go back and listen to the other conversations because he could be speaking about a particular of legislation with a labor leader in a march than he did 10xt minutes later, than with a of a major airline and then 15 minutes later with a

legislator. i found his conversations with staff members to be the most there was g, because no need to provide anything but truth as to what he wanted. pleasant awn not very to george? >> that's right. as with all of his staff he them.torture reedy had health issues, struggled with weight and johnson would be merciless with him, and stadium, pay for his hospitalization when he needed to go on a weight-loss buy him a new car after having humiliated him in bunch of staff members. he was a great up with for giving out expensive gifts. complicated guy to work with and reedy soured on johnson. been close for 20 years, but in the 1970s he critical of johnson and his writings and later in oral histories and interviews he to d go out of his way cknowledge t-- finer points

about johnson and i think he his thoughts on rights unsellable. jacobson, who you quote in here as saying some very strong some of the staff in the white house. was he and why did you use his oral history? >> he wasn't a factor too much book. jacobson was a political and business operative. actually born in new jersey but texas.w up in he was a texan. brought him the last year and a half to the white house, where, again he was a utility player. at him too much. useful he was mostly from my mind in providing a lens to examine some of the who were instrumental in building great society programs. he distant think very highly

califano's supporters in the white house would cknowledge that he was an empire builder. he had literally built a policy on the basic floor of the west wing where he demand deared secretaries and young aides and and, he was a powerhouse jacobson didn't highly of him and he didn't particularly like moyer. insider who f an didn't have a great affinity for most of these actors and was his because of relationship with johnson but of that great society project. >> you grew up where? a little town in central new jersey. >> what did your parents do? >> my dad was a political my mom a social worker. but he covered trenton, new jersey statehouse so i remember a kid in the late 1970s and 1980s, living and breathing politics in the same way crew orace busby and this

grew up living and breathing at thestate politics but age of four i could probably thanmore state legislators i can today. >> where did you go cleaning? >> outside of philadelphia. studying -- >> studied history, minored in and did a ph.d. in brown university, studied with patterson, one of the greats of american history. work also a privilege to with gordon wood, a great historian of early america. >> he was just here a couple of ago. >> he's got a new book. >> lyndon johnson left the 1969.ent in january were you alive? >> no, i was born in 1974. i as someone who was alive want to ask you this question because you never saw him in person. know d you try to get to aides?d these >> inscrutible.-

the aids i found easier to access. lthough i used their contemporary memos to and from each other to write the policy pieces of the book. histories, even if you take with it grain of salt, i found the oral histories helpful because people e transcripts of just talking. you could understand their style, the way they framed things, their sense of humor. these transcripts with a go on for hundreds, sometimes thousands of pages. almost hear the voice of the person or sometimes you voice if you wanted to listen to the tape. know them a little bit better but what's fascinating if read contemporary newspaper there wasyou can tell

a lot of sort of presentation of who they were. really were doesn't come through in contemporary coverage. >> did you read every one of books?ine books?ch nine >> of staff? >> johnson staff, absolutely. >> which of those books were your opinion, and which weren't? so iedy's was pretty tough took them less. >> a lot of them i would scrutinize. entertaining but i think -- the jack -- of the me in the guy you showed that clip, he was posturing for history at that point. califano, a bit of the same but he gives you a much nicer kind of look at some of development in that period. the one that i found the best is

mcpherson, which has become somewhat of a classic for people washington, d.c. to work in the white house. mcpherson strikes you as what said he ontemporaries was, he could take johnson for good and bad and not need -- we can do know if this but we have to do it fast because we haven't got much time. fter the white house, what did dio?n watson >> califano -- bill moyer,edbout sorenson, we haven't mentioned. > i don't know a great deal about his career after he left the white house. >> how long did he stay around? a not very long, just for couple of weeks, maybe a couple of months.

he was just grief-stricken by resident kennedy's assassination. >> got to read this because you took this quote from graham who "washington post." >> who called johnson and said, of your stuff in here, he insisted, days later, the publisher of the "washington post" advised to show sorenson a little love. "marvelous" but also very hurt, and i know the mood he was in and i don't forgive him for that but we all have to just in that ow he feels he's a man who instead of rying, did this really naughty trick of being cantankerous and hurt. doing telling johnson this? >> this is in the days right after the assassination. barely come into the office at that point but he first to write johnson's speech before congress. the won where he famously calls for civil rights act, but i mean, to give you a sense of how hurt he was, he had who line in there, i,

cannot, you know, fill -- i who -- fill his in shoes cannot sit in his seat and obviously they struck that line speech. he just, he fought unnecessarily johnson and valiante and with the man who helped to write that speech. basically imparted a complete noninterest in working at the white house. wanted him there but it was very clear it wasn't going to work out. book you vend of your line> that's probably the best of the book. hey watched me write this book for a few years but they were also avidly interested in

politics. and are big clinton supporters. extremely sad when she lost stood for what she but also because there were excited to see a woman run for the presidency. talked to them about it and they know you lose once that doesn't mean you lose the time. >> define your own politics. >> i'm left of center. at a democrat, a liberal one that but i kind of like this era ecause the parties weren't as ideologically polarized at that point, and there were a number f just tremendous moderate and even liberal republicans who worked with the johnson administration, to get these programs passed. the same token there were a lot of southern democrats today essentially classify them as deeply conservative retrogresssive. you, on page 314, you say --iv. > you, on page 314, you say --

>> great society, list is enormous. act, immigration, economic activity, civil rights, medicare, medicaid. lot more, we're now $20 trillion in debt. great framers of the society, they did this in the context of a post war economy booming. growth seemed to be boundless so they assumed you didn't need to pie up more. you simply needed to grow the pie and provide people with the needed to help themselves and get their fair share. many years later, putting the aside, many years later, inequality is growing, real since the stagnated 1970s, manufacturing and related halttries have ground to a and are receding. ewer people have access to

employer-based healthcare or defined benefits pensions. my admiration for the great society, the great society itself, is it enough of a 21st century economy, one which is, in many bleak than the economy that we had when johnson was in the white house. to ow much can you assign lyndon johnson and everybody that followed him saying we will and somebody else will have to pay for it later? >> some of these programs, i realized.k they medicaid is a great example. medicaid was supposed to be a kind of program to capture to help those who simply weren't be able to help them. poor children, people who had workplace.of the people who were very sick and uninsurable. in was a small population 1965. it's become larger, it's become larger because many employers no their employees with healthcare and they pay them so little that they

qualify, more children are growing up, 31% now in and e parent households, when wages stagnate you need two wage earners to keep above the line.ty more children in poverty than we had then. blame, han assign structure of today's economy these y created many of ballooning costs. it was never perceive that we would have the kind of do today. that we >> did we pay for the vietnam war at the time? >> did we pay for it at the time? no. the johnson administration, they effectively had to borrow the oney because they couldn't ask for a tax increase. >> have we paid for the iraq war? hock so i eply in don't think we've paid for anything. >> did we pay for the afghanistan war? >> absolutely not. will be paying for it. >> in 2017, inequality, whether income, by household wealth or retirement security has achieved levels unseen since s.e 1920 if many conservatives regard the great society as an exercise in

liberalism on the left there is growing consensus that the new political economy more, not less, state intervention. where is the money going to come from? >> that's a good question, where is the money going to come from? hillary clinton's campaign briefly toyed with the idea of universal guaranteed family income but they couldn't make the economics on it work. question is, i think, your question is a good one and politically i guess the question is, are we oing to actually create an economy in which you don't have this kind of inequality because to ou don't there is going be a demand for some sort of redistribution where as in the rejected the distribution of wealth in the form of minimum family income and the like. see liberals today calling for it. >> go back, and this is in your book, the first year of food staffers, 500,000 on food stamps. today it about 45 million. you think they ever thought it

would be 45 million people? they never thought it would be but if you ask somebody like paul ryan, he'll say, these way out of control. they created a culture of entitlement, generations of again dependency, they never nticipated a world in which workers who were being paid good union wages with defined pensions and healthcare while their kids and grandkids are now working the equivalent jobs which pay wage with no healthcare, with no pensions, and yet, the cost of everything from to food has gone up, and so, you know, is it the grew out of whack or is it the economy that left all of these people behind and perversely left them under the means tested line, you know to qualify? lean toward the latter interpretation. --you have a ph.d. >> you say -- >> not fake knew.

>> what do you do on a full time asis to take care of your family? >> i left academia a couple of years ago and now i'm lucky that in politics rked for a number of years and now i work in corporate communications company but i'm lucky that i'm also, i sort of for ine as a columnist politico, i write with a number column people, write a called history department, for -- wegazine, where we get rye to basically take really good academic history and a broader for audience, a general audience and it's been one of the magazine's successful columns. >> why did you leave academia? a you know, it's become pretty brutal profession. i think a lot of folks i know -- it was bad when i was getting grad school. universities are moving from tenured and tenured track adjuncts. to teaching loads are quadrupling. are niversities themselves under financial strain. and i think i realize on some

level that this was probably not term viable, but more to the point, i wanted to go work enjoy writingd, i about it an reading about it. >> i didn't mean to cut you off for?ho did you work >> i worked for a number of bob -- and jon correspond and some campaigns. >> the future writing, what's your next book? >> i'm still working that out. want to surprise and shock my editor but i am thinking of looking at a couple of king stories, weaving them together to look at the decline of unions, particularly in coal and steel. everybody is fascinated by some of these states and these that have the country been left behind and i want to look at how different nstitutions like unions and government sort of let them down in many ways, probably taking it through the s present. >> only have 30 seconds, but now

back on john hey nicolay and john hay. >> they spent their lives trying to explain it and yet they were never able to adequately convey there.t was like to be >> our guest has been joshua zeitz, "building the great society. johnson white on house." you very much for joining us. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp 2018]

[captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] > q&a programs are also available at c-span podcast. >> if you enjoyed this week's q&a interview here are some other programs you might like. caroli, lady ty bird. and frank , menkiewicz. these at any time c-span..org.ary at

>> discussing the week ahead in congress and in the white house. analyst mark sullivan talks bout implementing the new tax law, be sure to watch washington each sunday, our special series "1968 america in back to that ook turbulent time in 196 including the vietnam war and the presidential election. >> cast the lone vote in opposition and his descent legacy ly eclipsed the of the majority opinion. explore this case and the high

with daniel -- ean of howard university's law attorney. an monday.ve on for background on each case while you work order your copy f the landmark cases companion ook, it's available for $8.95 plus shipping and handling. on our website to the national constitution center's interactive constitution. >> wednesday, british prime minister theresa may answered a ange of questions on brexit negotiations during her weekly question time with members in the house of commons. border discussed the dispute between northern ireland and the republic of ireland and once theade agreements uk leaves the e.u. for both