thank you. [applause] to be theatch book summer every saturday did club p.m. eastern, settle in and watch several hours of your favorite authors. next saturday we feature your times best-selling author david marinus, the author of a dozen books including, once in a great city, a detroit city, baruch barack obama. featurerday, the 27, we given mccullough. binge watch book tv all summer on c-span2. niels lesniewski the white house and congress chief

correspondent joins us. tell us about the efforts coming from speaker pelosi. guest: speaker nancy pelosi is renewing the call on removing a number of the statue's in the in the collection that honor people who either fought for the confederacy or otherwise involved with the confederacy. the most notable name on the list of people actually honored in the capitol with a statue from the collection of statues where each state gets to send, would probably be jefferson davis, who was the confederate president during the war. and so each state gets to send , the statues. speaker pelosi basically wants them to be removed by what is called the "joint committee on the library."

it is a standing committee that is the leadership of the rules and administration committee in the senate and the house administration committee in the house and it wants to remove those statues anyway. what we have heard from republicans, at least, is that is kevin mccarthy and mitch mcconnell, i believe have said that do you need the states to make this decision. and they are welcome to send other statues. we have seen the statues in the collection change. but speaker pelosi, i believe, would like to see them gone, perhaps even if some of the southern state legislatures will not be inclined to replace them. so now that she has sent the letter, what is the process? guest: now the joint committee , will need to figure out whether or not they are actually going to do much of anything.

now, this is separate from the other issue that congress is also debating, which is a role for congress itself, the question of naming of military bases which you mention in the open. is a role for congress itself, the question of naming of military bases which you mention in the open. these are both issues that would require a president and the pentagon to consent to. but the manner of the -- the matter of the statute is interesting because congress itself could make the decision, that they have generally been ready deferential to the states. host: we saw the senate armed services committee take up consideration on that front. tell us what happened. guest: so the armed services committee met behind closed doors in its markup of the annual defense authorization this week.

what we learned on wednesday was but an amendment had been offered by elizabeth warren, the democratic senator from massachusetts, who everyone knows very well after her presidential campaign. senator warren offered an amendment that would basically give a three-year timeline to the pentagon to remove the names of confederates from frankly everything, not just the military bases like fort hunt, fort bragg, fort benning and the like, but also places where there may be ships, there may be militaryn installations but may be named for confederate figures, basically all of that needs to go away. want to basically have a jefferson davis highway running through a military base either. put that into the defense authorization.

that will be in the bill as it goes to the floor. hofe, chairman of the armed services committee, said even though it was adopted not going vote, he is along with it. it will not take an affirmative senate.the because it is in the bill coming out in the committee, more than likely, if senators want to not make the military have to remove the names of confederate generals and the like, they will have to have a vote on the which floor to do that, is not necessarily a vote that a lot of senators want to take. host: for those items attached to the defense of the white house on that? guest: so, even before i knew

that the amendment had been offered, i happened to be one of the rotating reporters in the white house press briefing on wednesday afternoon. and the press secretary said the president would not sign any legislation, any legislation that changes the names of military bases that crikey on her confederate generals, arguing that it may have been the last place that people left the united states before going and dying in the war. general david petraeus had an opinion piece a few days ago. believeave spoken up, i robert gates is now speaking up, the former defense secretary. is the white house argument that he will not sign anything even if it is in the defense authorization. so we are looking at the

possibility, as far-fetched as it may have been on wednesday morning, of a standoff that leads to a veto of the defense authorization which always includes a pay increase for a host always includes of provisions that the pentagon named over items that are for confederate figures. host: neil covers the white house and also congress, serving as the chief correspondent of the rollcall on those fronts, here to walk us through >> c-span made a stop in charleston, south carolina two beach of the history and a life of the community. here's our interview with the college of charleston history professor at battery park where he talked about the jim crow era charleston. reallyjim crow era

moreds more and progressively after that civil war, and dramatically accelerates in the late 19th century and the opening years of the 20th century. system that we use a short ham term -- shorthand term jim crow to describe, is a system of .acial separation frequently established and codified by the law. separationthe racial was accomplished through custom, customary practice. by the late 1880's and 1890's in the opening years of the 20th century, laws were passed to expand the system and enforce the system, the power of civil authority. for example the simple pleasure that i'm enjoying now, sitting

at the southern tip of the city of charleston in battery park, what have been unavailable to me , as a black charlestonian, during the jim crow era. because african-americans were excluded from the parks of the city. they were not allowed to recreate in them. and especially not in this location, which was really a premier location, a premier recreational area and the city. the only way african-americans could legitimately be in such a place as this, would be if they were in the employ of white people. commonlyassic and most -- most common example of this would have been black women who were nurse mates or caretakers for white children could bring the children here to the battery and take them for a walk, and so on. the proximity to, and having the

charge of the white child, would give them a legitimate reason to be here. people really do not fully appreciate what the system is -- what it did. we call it a system of enforced racial separation, and it was. but the real curse of the problem -- the real crux of the problem was the system had a purpose. the purpose was really to with theirte superiority and to impress african-americans with their inferiority, because in the systems it was the white who are completely and totally empowered , to determine what the etiquette of race relations was going to be. what air and opportunities african-americans would have. who lived and worked and lived their lives in the system, could look around themselves. they could look at their city

and the way it was divided. and they could look at the vast disparity in opportunities that were afforded to african-americans and whites. at the landscape, the landscape sent a signal over and over, that one class of people, one group of people, was superior, and another group of people was in fear. -- in fairy are. -- inferior. it.no one had to say this did not have to be taught in schools and he did not have to learn it in books. it was part and parcel of everyday life and the environment people lived in. this is the system people would challenge and challenge at an increasingly high-level, beginning in the mid-1950's and into the 1960's. and we know that challenge as that civil rights era. and some people also refer to it as the second reconstruction.

>> congressional black caucus chair california representative karen bass discussed legislation to address police violence and racial profiling in the wake of the death of george floyd. live coverage begins monday at 2:30 p.m. eastern on c-span. our first guest of the morning is alex vitale, a sociology professor and the author of the book "the end of policing." thank you for joining us. good morning. good morning, pedro. narrator: could you give the audience of what your view of what the police should be in current society? guest: i think it is not so much about what the police should be, it is what we should be doing instead of policing in as many situations as possible. the problem is we have come to over rely on police to solve every social problem under the sun. it