true and lasting victory. god bless you. god bless the united states army. and god bless america. congratulations. thank you very much. thank you. [applause] [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. 2020] reform,r: with police protests, and coronavirus affecting the country, watch our coverage of the response with briefings from the white house, congress, governors and mayors updating the situation. trailom the campaign 2020 , join the conversation every day on washington journal.

if you miss our live coverage, watch any time demand c-span.org, or listening on the go with the free c-span radio app. 202-748-8001. the conversations, even extending to capitol hill. 's white house correspondent joins us. guest: thank you. host: your thoughts on the nancy pelosi. guest: she is renewing the call on removing a number of the 's in the that honor people who either fought for the confederacy or or otherwise confederacy. the 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 confederateas the president during the war. send thetate gets to statues. speaker pelosi basically wants them to be removed by what is called the "drink committee on the library," -- "joint committee on the library." it wants to remove the statues anyway. what we have heard from thatlicans, 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 over the

years, but speaker pelosi, i believe, would like to see them event is perhaps some of the southern state legislatures will not be inclined to replace them. host: what would be the process? guest: the joint committee will need to figure out whether or going toare actually do much of anything. now, this is separate from the other issue that congress is is adebating, which 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

announcer: c-span stopped in north carolina to sample the community. here is our interview at battery park, where he talked about the jim crow era. really unfolds progressively after the civil dramatically accelerates in the late 19th century in the early 20th century. system that we use the term jim crow to describe is a separation,che racial frequently by the law. initially, it was accomplished

practice, ander late 1890's, bollards were passed to expand the system and enforce the power. for example, the simple pleasure that i am enjoying right now, ofting at the southern tip this part would have been unavailable to meet during the , becauseera african-americans were excluded from the parts of the city. they were not allowed to recreate in them, in particular this location, which was a premier recreational area in the city. the only way african-americans could be in such a place like this is if they were in the employ of white people, and the

classic and most common example of this would have been black women who were nurse mates or ,aretakers for white children who could bring the children to the battery, take them for a walk, so on and so forth. proximity to and having charge of that white child would toe them a legitimate reason be here. people don't fully appreciate what this system is. yes, a system that enforced racial separation, and it was, but the real problem was that the system had a purpose, and the purpose was to impress whites with their superiority and to oppress african-americans with their inferiority, because in the system it was the whites who were completely and totally

in power to determine what the race relations were going to be, opportunities african-americans would have, and so those who lived and worked and lived their lives in aroundtem could look themselves, their city and the way it was designed, and look at the fast disparity in opportunities that were afforded to african-americans and whites, landscapendscape, the over and over said one group of and anotheruperior group of people was inferior, and no one had to say it. taughtd not have to be in formalized lessons in schools , it was part and parcel of everyday life and the environment that people lived in

, and this is the system people would challenge and challenge at an increasingly high level, 1950's andin the mid- into the 1960's, and of course we know that challenges the civil rights era, and some refer to it as the second reconstruction. congressional black caucus chair karen bass discusses legislation to address police violence and profiling in the wake of george floyd's death. live coverage begins monday at 2:30 p.m. eastern on c-span. alex vitale, a sociology professor and the author of the book "the end of policing." thank you for joining us. guest: good morning, pedro. narrator: