this would not have been possible without them. jamesial thanks to carville, thank you for your service and thank you for here tonight. [applause] result in thea election. thank you all. >> result in the election. thank you all. coming up in under half an hour at the heritage foundation will be hosting a foundation on the tacticsng of strategies of terrorists organizations, it's certain eastern. president trump traveling to ohio today talking about the infrastructure rebuilding plan. ,e will discuss the blue print

operators.enting we will have a lot on c-span. until the start of the event coming up at noon we will show you a discussion from wall -- washington journal earlier this week. joining us is our mary schapiro, the all caps -- the author of broken. he served as the former chief of staff to representative rockefeller. a little bit more about your background. the kind of things you involve yourself in in the senate. guest: i worked in the senate .or about 12 years i got hooked on it as an intern for republican senator jacob javits is nearly 50 years ago. i was in the majority and

andrity, committee staff personal staff and leadership staff in a swell and work on codes such as the ethics to mentor funding, to foreign intelligence surveillance act. five in thears and majority, next six in the minority. i saw it from both sides. host: what's it like as far as the process and why is that different from the house? talked about we used to call the great senate in my renamed it then i might mansfield senate. the senate has always at its best worked in a bipartisan way. ofause of the general frame that you needed a super majority it was the place where the parties came together to

reconcile diverse interests. walter montel gwen stefani -- describe the senate -- walter mondale described the senator -- the senate as a mediator. a figure to find common ground. that is what has been lost over a long. of time. you have the title is broken. guest: that's the least controversial point you can make because everyone agrees the senate is broken. senators cannot stop talking about how broken it is. they give speeches, write articles and books. the only thing they have not done is fixed it. host: give us specifics. guest: sure. what has happened in recent particularly the last

decade, senate leaders used to work together. it was an obligation to work together, they were a leadership team. after the last 20 years and accelerating over the last 10, senate leaders became tribal leaders. the democratic leader let the democrats, republican leader led the republicans. that is not the way it is supposed to work. the house is a majoritarian institution. leaders sevene obligation to come together and make it work. read a, team failed that test and senator mcconnell's effect on the senate has been profound is not regard. host: i want to invite people to call in.

you can tweet us at c-span wj. senator mcconnell if you define power in terms of the ability to accomplish the object objectives, nobody has been more powerful than senator mcconnell. he has been very effective. that's different than being a senate leader where you are trying to bring people together and accomplish something for the nation. if you go back to 2009 when barack obama was coming into office and we were on the verge of teetering into the second depression, i was a moment when leaders would usually come to get at say, we have to deal with this national economic emergency. that was not what happened. let themcconnell republicans in opposing the economic stimulus that was

vitally necessary to start us back toward some kind of recovering and prevent the depression. when i cite his strategy in doing that, he lays it out in .is own 2016 memo that's not what leaders are supposed to do. that was a moment where you would have seen the president and the leaders in congress come together and work for the country. host: we just saw the passage of this large omnibus bill. cases someertain bipartisanship can be done. in this case, the republicans wanted in norman -- the enormous --rease in spending, to democrats wanted increases in domestic spending. failure,o look at the

or back to 2017 at the repeated effort to repeal the affordable care act without hearings, without mark ups, without amendments, that's a failure of the senate. the senate was not supposed to work in that kind of a way. case, --mcconnell's guest: i have to bring up leader mcconnell because he is a big ce heart of the senate history at this point. he is finishing his 12th year and has made a mark. the question is what kind of a mark. back to the obama years, it was implacable opposition. our system depends on a certain amount of minority club ration and it -- cooperation and it wasn't there. steamroller so that things start passing like the

tax bill with 50 votes or 51 votes rather than the super majority. he has been very defective. the cost -- he has been very effective. itself,te sees host: job in maryland on the republican line. go ahead. caller: good morning. i have to disagree when all the blame at mcconnell's feet when you look at what harry reid did to the senate. he took the filibuster rule is like, he was a disaster for the country because he would not pass any budgets, he stonewalled both the democrats and the obamaicans when president was trying to get things passed. he had been a disaster.

his chickens are now coming home to roost. guest: you are making the point that many republicans do make and i believe senator reid was a successful leader. i think that read/mcconnell team failed the senate starting in 205 -- 2005 and then in 2007. the difference is that senator reid, he was the leader trying of anct the program elected president and then a reelected president. mr. mcconnell only had to oppose, and he did with great effectiveness. if you look back on the way the other minority leaders have functioned, they functioned so as to oppose the president on certain things and work with him on others. i did not see any of that kind of working together that would

have characterized the howard baker or robert dold --dole. host: was there a willingness for chuck schumer? guest: the current minority leader is capable of making bipartisan deals, he has a history of it. it worked effectively in 2013 on a comprehensive immigration bill. the minority leader is dealing with an unusual situation, mainly the donald trump presidency. this has provoked massive resistance from the beginning. it has been a partisan situation. the thing i should say to you startedviewers is i writing the book in the fall of 2016 when i believed that hillary clinton would be president. unless theot govern

senate change. the book was not about donald trump or any particular person although senator mcconnell does in it because he is such a force. the long-term decline of the senate created a situation where people looked at washington and sent, it is not working. i am willing to try an outsider because people in washington are failing us. i put a lot of the senate's failure. host: we heard from chuck schumer in february about the condition of the senate. this is what he had to say. >> we showed that the senate can lead a four and it must again. the house is fractured. the president is the president. that has theate potential to act as a beacon of stable leadership and progress

in a political culture played by gridlock and division. we have a special obligation to this country. the senate and agent of virgil senators and power for the right of the minority are not only respected but chairs, where the rules like bipartisan ship -- bipartisanship. in the senate we know what president washington called us, cooling saucers for the hot tea of politics that can lead the senate through difficult times. if there was ever a time when our politics needed a cooling saucer it is now. that is what our history teaches us. i could not say it any better than senator schumer but i couldn't say it any better than senator mcconnell has at different times.

he made a great speech on january 14 on that same aim. the beginning -- in the same thing. it starts with the special role of the senate. senatory the way schumer described it. and yet he has not worked that way as leader. we have seen things ramped through --rammed through. host: the minority leader mentioned the various rules being changes -- the role of the what are the long-term effects of that on both sides? guest: they have been distracted. the senate is supposed to as senator schumer described as a cooling. . when filibusters were real but when you needed them minority and the majority to come together to get anything

done but the senators understood their obligation to do that. when one person could not hold up the senate indefinitely, that was how the senate used to work. without those restraints it has become a block on the nation impaired our progress rather than being what senator schumer said, which is that beacon of hope and common says that we so need at any time but particularly now. host: focusing now on democrats line. myler: thank you for taking call. you member on immigration day to a --barack obama president. allowed aconnell supreme court appointee to have a hearing.

host: you are remembering some important examples of what happened during the obama presidency. guest: i was kind of surprised as i got into the book. power -- just a much mcconnell could have and one example of that is that in 2015 when he reached what he had said was his lifetime all of the --rgie leader, all of us lifetime goal of being leader, he became a constructive player and the senate worked because the democrats and the republicans were able to work together. that lasted one year and one month and then justice scalia died and we were thrown back into the crisis in the senate, the senator would not allow for the confirmation -- for

consideration for an obama nominated. host: that was over neil gorsuch caller: host: how do you get past those from the individual senators to make those things happen? guest: first it requires leaders to behave the way leaders always have. this was an unprecedented action that was taken. there has never been a case where a leader sent this is the eighth year of the presidency so we are not considering your nomination. that is unprecedented. i am not talking about policy differences. presidentng about a -- unprecedented acts that strike at the heart -- the way you avoid them is you don't take those kinds of hacks. the other is it has no -- all on

the leaders. i felt the other senators for not pushing back more. they are not helpless victims trapped in the institution, they have power. they can assert what they believe, assert the importance of their committees work. currently he says mr. thennell, needs to keep senate in session longer so more nominees can be can firm. -- can be confirmed. that.bout senateevery time the starts to make progress, you can 2015.k to 2013 or when the senate moves ahead because they know what they should do, then they bog down on

nominations executive and judicial. my view is they should have sat down long ago and said this is how we are going to handle these nomination. this will be our process to work for years from now because we don't know who will be president. country,air for the but they have never done that. they just goes from crisis to crisis. host: california on a republican line. hello. just have a quick question and comment. feel. shapiro, how do you for the current status of democratic party being anti-israel and pro-pakistani. pedroment, watch out for -- about your sex life. guest: i don't think the current

senate democrat or republican sign --ti-israel or at pro-pakistani. time, iportant at this didn't start writing the book because of donald trump. the real question is whether the long decline of the senate so weakened it that we cannot provide the leadership and the counterweight that we sorely need right now. the senate has been diminished over a long. totime and now we are closer one man rule that i can remember in my lifetime. frankly, one man rule is is a catastrophic course. there is no doubt that there is a genuine divide between the

parties that is much deeper than it used to be. i take it as a given the fact that political climate is much harder, whether it is the cable news works or the internet, social media, the cost of campaigns. all of those things are relevant here and i don't excuse the senators. they have an obligation to transcend that, to bring people together. they know that they are not doing the job. they talk about it all the time that they ought to do the job. host: new york, independent line, sean. i want to talk about oligarchy for a second. it's a small group of people have control over the institution. , youave multiple senators

cannot serve two masters. -- congress passes the buck when we want to go to war. it's baffling. how the institution works now. guest: i agree with you. over the long period that i views then my book, long decline of the senate. what you see is the senate that does not set up to its responsibility over time and ands its authority sacrifices public confidence and its own self-confidence. after the long decline, it takes a deep dive and becomes a partisan and divided institution. specan see when the senate

-- steps up to its responsibilities and pushes back , so that last year by 98-2 vote they agreed to put sanctions on russia and to tie the president hand so he could not take the sanctions off. pushingyou can see them -- on trade you can see them pushing back on nafta. they know how to do the job. on certain issues they do it. on other issues they stand aside and say it is to listen and the climate is too difficult. book the write in your russia connection into the senate. abouto you think accurately fully and look into some thing -- and look into this thing? the senate islike going to serve the american

people by making sure that the russian investigation is full and fair. by that i mean what centers burr doing on are bipartisan basis. in the house the process broke down completely. i believe the senate would intervene strongly if the president decided to fire special counsel mueller or rob rosenstein. and finally, i believe that if the report of mueller is a harsh report, i believe the judgment of the individual senators will prevent a part of our of how the nation reacts to it. your book takes a current look at the workings of the senate. can't the senate save itself and the country? i ripped -- irish appear has joined us.

mike hamilton -- my comment is about the comment made as far as the justice and that justicented scalia was not put forth -- justice garland was not put forth. at that time, i think that it was very unlikely that anyone figured that president trump and a conservative justice would be put forward. it was more likely that hillary would be the person that would get to choose the justice. i think that mcconnell was

taking a chance. office be person in make changes that would be effective long-term. host: thank you. guest: you make a good point that many people thought hillary was going to lose the election or it nonetheless, president obama in his last year had the right to nominate and expect a consideration of a supreme court justice. no other president has been denied that right. 30 years ago, ronald reagan dominated and -- nominated --hony kennedy in his a year eighth year of presidency to the supreme court.

judge garland would have been a superb addition to the supreme court and he should have been considered. host: the historical aspect and the book you deal with clarence thomas and robert bork. guest: history teaches us a lot. democrats andngs republicans will always debate when do the institution start going down? from my standpoint what history teaches is what the authors of how democracies die called forbearance. .orbearance is important you don't nominate the most extreme conservatives you possibly can. you not only people who can attract and generate broad

support. i think the board's nomination was a mistake and i think howard baker thought it was a mistake. he was the chief of staff them. -- then. not seen asmas was qualified. host: the next supreme court justice sip -- considering what happened with neil gorsuch. whethere don't know justice kennedy or anyone else will be retiring. this is a place where the sun to test the senate to push back. if a number of senators who were republicans ran to the president and said we are only going to confirm a moderate conservative who can get 60 or 70 votes, that

would make a difference. the president would say that he did not need those votes. the senators would say, you need 60 votes because we're not going to give you 50 votes for the wrong nominee. host: it had a lot from chicago. you can see the rest of this program on c-span.org. we have an event with karl walling the college professor discussesnterrogator strategies of terrorist organization. our coverage in just a moment here on c-span.

>> good afternoon and welcome to the heritage foundation.