defense authorization bill that has bipartisan agreement in both chambers but faces a veto threat from the president. efforts continued on another covid relief package. so far there is no specific bill on the schedule. congress is back monday, and you can watch the house live on c-span, the senate live on c-span 2. ♪ >> you are watching c-span, your government,iew of created by america's cable television companies as a public service and brought to you today by your television >> coming up tonight on c-span duende is next with historians talking about two of the most contentious presidential transitions in history in 1861 between james buchanan and abraham lincoln and in 1933 between herbert hoover and franklin roosevelt. britishds we hear from

prime minister boris johnson addressing his government's response to the coronavirus pandemic. another chance to see the georgia senate debate between incumbent senator kelly leffler and democratic challenger raphael warnock. ♪ >> our country has experienced several fraud presidential transitions but the 1860 transition between james buchanan and abraham lincoln is described by various historians as contentious, tumultuous,

dangerous, and even the worst in history. what made it so? susan: on the face of it is what you have to recognize is this was the most consequential election transition in american history. course, is issue, of that several southern states did not recognize the election of abraham lincoln as a legitimate. it considered him a sectional president for the fact that by and large to support came from non-slave states and no sooner had he been elected that south carolina makes good on its promise to proceed toward seceding from the union on the grounds that the election did not represent its interest. host: let's set the stage for the transition. james buchanan had announced that he would be a one term regulart, but we did a presidential leadership survey and james buchanan always falls at the bottom of the list as the

worst leader in american presidential history. how would you characterize his leadership skills and how we conducted his administration and how he left the country as it moved toward the election? susan: it does seem to be the way historians assess him in large part because the next thing we know is the civil war. little bit like a categorical characterization of him. you are right that his administration came under a lot of criticism. he was fairly sympathetic to the proslavery interest of the south , he championed the dred scott decision, which many americans felt like a complete abdication of leadership editorial of interest that drove the republican party around the abolition of slavery in the west and he earns that number one spot in terms of how he conducts the transition, and that is a way in which he openly rejects

secession, he believes in the union but he consistently says over and over and publicly that he has no power to prevent the southern states from leaving. he sets up this real problem that secession is wrong but i will not do anything about it. host: in your analysis it is ineptitude on his part or an interpretation of his powers as president and sympathy towards the south and wanting to undo what the voters at actually chosen in 1860. susan: that is fair. he does not believe the election is illegitimate. he is frustrated by the republican party and openly blames the party for the crisis. the first public statement he makes after the election is his address to congress after november and the entire country is riveted. he is very costly. he blames abolitionist for this

fact that southern states are seceding and that feels like an abdication of responsibility. it feels like he is making the crisis worse. host: how are we to interpret the fact that his party actually nominated two candidates in 1860? susan: that seals the deal. when democrats meet in charleston, the sweltering heat of the summer the convention falls apart on the issue of slavery. northern democrats and southern democrats cannot see eye to eye. they are sympathetic to slavery in terms of wings of the party that southern democrats are not satisfied that stephen douglas is not proslavery so they walked out of that convention. anyone paying attention to party politics in the summer of 1860 can see the election of abraham lincoln and republicans had gotten a tremendous boost of likelihood. host: what about the republicans this year?

this is only the second time they had advanced a candidate for election. how united where they? susan: it is crucial for our viewers to understand as you just reminded them this is only the second time the republican party add mounted a presidential ticket. we are talking about a party that is five years old going into losing its first effort and into it second. it was not the favorite candidate. he is known as the dark horse and has a strategy that i quite like. he is everyone's second favorite. leaders are presumed leaders are unacceptable to us. you have border states, more conservative republicans who find someone like seward who is anti-slavery unacceptable, but lincoln is the one that can bring all of them together.

you hinted something. ther that election forefront of lincoln's of mind is not just having his cabinet and dealing with the crisis but unifying this new party. host: was the election really only fought on that single issue, the preservation of the union and the future of slavery? susan: it does come down to that. there are other issues in american politics in the 19th century but that is the key. the key elements are not just slavery but slavery in the territories, a referendum on that issue. host: let's look at the results on election day. there were four candidates and at that time only white males had the opportunity to vote in the united states. -- won the election with a clear majority and carried 18 states. what are the things to know behind those numbers? susan: the things my students

find most remarkable is that he was 40% of the popular vote. that is a statistic that deep southern democrats tout as an absolute definitive judgment on the legitimacy of the election. host: did southern voters take part or do they sit it out because they saw it as a sectional election? susan: that is an interesting question. most southern states didn't participate in the typical way and in the deepest southern states, the states considered most depended on slavery, southern democrats, the most wins, sooslavery part you can see condors that have everything to do with slavery but also the pattern of secession that will occur after the election. host: the fact that he only received 40% of the popular vote is interesting to your students.

how about this? the fact if you tally all three candidates together they did not equal lincoln's numbers? why is that also important for him setting the stage to have a mandate? susan: we deal a lot with the data in the 1860 election and they say the problem was there was a four way election, the democrats split. that is just part of the problem. this is a fragmented election, that even as you said the constitutional union, northern and southern democrats banded together lincoln still would have prevailed. the key there is to understand that the electoral strength is moving in a certain direction that has to do with population trends. host: as we are wondering what will happen with the senate majority in the outcome of the 2020 election how did congress fare for abraham lincoln in 1860? susan: the republicans do well. it is very sectional.

strong what i would call mandate. the other thing to consider about congress is that after south carolina it succeeds, ,fter the troubles -- secedes after the troubles that pushes other state -- southern states to leave, you have an election where republicans do well and the rest of secession is compounded by the fact that deep southern pro-secession slavery representatives are leaving for the capital what that makes possible is a republican agenda that might not otherwise have been possible. kindln does not face the of scrutiny and opposition and delay in his cabinet that he might if there was a full democratic strength opposition party and toward the end of victims administration it makes it possible to bring in kansas as a free state and a whole host

of new territories, including colorado. country is simultaneously shrinking and also growing. it is remarkable. host: would you spend a minute talking about the journalism of the time and how they supported the candidates and their causes? it was an age of highly partisan media and the time people only read what their interests were, which has parallels to what we are seeing today in the country. susan: that is a wonderful observation. when using partisan media that you meet literally. most of the party bargains. you have the secession winter lincoln'segnum for inauguration, you see all kinds of tension. what is lincoln saying this week ? why is he not seeing something on x? filtered through your political identity. i cannot stress that enough. it is so resonant with what we are seeing today that from

november to march people saw events through the lens of their own party. we are in an era where inaugurations have in march. did the new inauguration starting march or did they begin their session in january? susan: they do not come back into session until july. it creates an enormous problem. this is before the 20th amendment. we still have presidents inaugurated in march and i want to impress that upon your listeners. period whatwhat a the firstr was from tuesday in november until the first week in march. a seemingly endless period when the country is on a knife edge. when lincoln is inaugurated congress is not in session and will not be back until july. that creates all kinds of

problems because of lincoln as to face some of the first crises around fort sumter. he raises a militia without the permission of congress. and becomes an area in which he is scrutinized because congress is not in session. host: you told us james buchanan made his speech to the nation shortly after the election. did he stay in washington for the rest of the time of the transition and was he vocal during much of that time? susan: he does stay in washington, and scholars have pointed out is all you have to do is go back to pennsylvania. he is one of the oldest presidents at that time. he is there for the crisis, and he is sending mixed messages, on the one side sitting secession is absolutely illegal and on the other so that not doing anything and there are consequences for that. not least of which is in that long interregnum before lincoln some stronger and

federal stance, southern states are taking control of forts and garrisons, federal property. the confederacy, when it does form and go to war, is stronger than it might have otherwise been. buchanan's in action and its consequences. host: why would a sitting president not use federal troops to defend that garrisons? susan: the real question is whether he isn't violating state rights and whether he has the power to do that. she does send the star in the west in early january off the coast of south carolina to reinforce that, but they are fired on by south carolina and they retreat. january is in early responsible for that second wave . you have south carolina at the

christmas declaring itself out of the union, and right after they pulled back from using force if had the rapid secession joining south carolina to form the confederacy. mississippi, florida, georgia, alabama, texas, and louisiana. host: we talked about what james buchanan did. abraham lincoln stayed in his home city of springfield, illinois. how visible was he during this. a bank? period? susan: he takes visitors. well,of well-wishers as but the interesting thing is this is where lincoln is scrutinized. timeld say that for a long civil war scholars really look at this period and thought why did lincoln not do more? why did he not reach out more, placate the south?

ashas come to be described deploying a masterly inactivity. he is careful about what he says, he doesn't speak but not about slavery and what he repeatedly says it is my record stands for itself. manyhe means is that on issues he is open to hearing suggestions. he wants to halt the momentum of secession but there is one issue on which she is inflexible and that is the founding principle of the party that elected him. congress has not just the right but the obligation to forbid slavery from spreading into the territories. host: all eyes were on his cabinet selections during that period of time and he did a lot of interviewing of people in springfield. what was he trying to do with the cabinet he was assembling and how was it viewed by

partisans on both sides of the issue? susan: the republican party is a fragile coalition as you implied earlier. elements, thevery former whigs, a little more tentative about augmenting a quasi-abolitionist position and those folks do not get along together always. the convention in chicago should out those divisions. lincoln is carefully reaching out to certain types of people, including a more conservative republican from missouri as well eward from new york who represents the ardent antislavery ring. it is complicated. hass also a cabinet that gone down in history by scholars as choosing one of the more

unfortunate individuals, simon cameron, who was known for being an open lifter when it came to -- grifter when it comes to corruption and fraud. while he was in springfield did he use any allies to help advance his issues or reach out to the buchanan administration? susan: it is not just in washington but around the country. closellow senator is a colleague, someone who had bested him in the race for senate several years earlier who is now his key emissary. she uses individuals like mble to -- like tru final messages into washington. there is a frantic effort to

inve off secession, to end the crisis and reach some kind of compromise. the other thing i think it fascinating and my students led this is that in this time, december and january, lincoln is also writing to his former colleagues from congress, john .ilmore, alexander stephens these are men he trust and in the case of alexander stephens this is a man who openly criticizes this union. stephens says she was fellow governor this is not the way to get what we want. we are safer in the union then out of the union. in my mind lincoln is reaching out strategically. it does not work out. north carolina and georgia joined the confederacy, but he is putting out feelers to push things in a certain direction. host: another interesting

contrast between the incumbent and the incoming president. perhaps thean was most experienced politician of the era. he held almost every post you can think of it. lincoln, one failed senate campaign and one term in congress. what do you make in terms of the difference and political fields between the two without the experience? susan: i was reflecting on that this morning. haveam lincoln add -- what a tough time today and the experience around. he would not fare very well as a one term congressman who goes back to practicing law in springfield. that is a tough one. lincoln's estimation grows in hindsight. one thing we failed to appreciate was how much criticism lincoln received during the war throughout the war from different games.

obviously hated in many parts of the south but deeply resented by democrats in the north for provoking a war that was unnecessary, if you will, for ignoring overtures to peace. we considerately get a masterful politician. one not juste historians but leadership types, communication scholars, everyone takes from lincoln but they will but much of that is because we know the outcome of the story. host: and setting the stage for his administration lincoln decided to embark on a 13 date train trip from springfield to washington. tell our listeners about that story. it brought out crowds at nearly every stop and he interacted with the public along the way. i how important was that in setting the tone for his presidency? susan: that is a good question because it is a kind of symbolic move. ride fromng train

illinois through what we would call the upper midwest or the atlantic and down into washington. not a lot of consequential features happen along the way. those speeches are scrutinized and because the telegraphs can be printed or reported upon people are paying close attention to where he is, but it ismore symbolic to where he going down on the meaning of the union, on the fact that this country is more than an amalgamation of states. it has a higher purpose. and that is an element of thinking- lincoln's that this country has a purpose. it is more than just a nation as such. also bringing out crowds as lodges if 2000 people in a

much less populated -- 50,000 people in a much less populous country. forget, it was not in philadelphia, but someplace along the way there is a young girl who write him a letter suggesting he might look good with a beard and that is the beginning of that. host: and shows he takes advice. susan: he is open to suggestions. host: at his -- it is well documented on the left side of that trip lincoln survived an assassination plot. who was behind that ended president begin didn't respond and in a that attempt? susan: i have limited knowledge in that area. i do not have any record of it buchanan responding. it was pinkerton agents who brought the information to

lincoln and that there was a heightened risk in baltimore and this is something that is interesting. after the inauguration, the crisis at fort sumter lincoln needs to call up the militia, and the ones who march through baltimore are assaulted. maryland is a state that remains in the union despite the fact that it is a slave state. and a were openly hostile to the union and openly pro-confederate and you see that in the way they treat the union soldiers. there has been a lot of debate on how substantial those threats on lincoln's life were but later behaviors show us it was not a peaceful thing to be marching in a baltimore on the capital. that lincoln indoors all kinds of grief as a coward who slinks into

washington because he is trying to get around assassination attempts. host: let's move to inauguration day. what do we know about president buchanan's outreach to his successor? was he cordial? susan: to my mind it was a cordial handoff. i do not know the details of buchanan's behavior that day. buchanan was frustrated with lincoln, and lincoln has not much interest and not much to gain by responding to those overtures. host: we found a clip in our video archives of an actor reading the last paragraphs of abraham lincoln's first inaugural address. let's listen to the scenes that he closed his inaugural address on in 1861 and have you come back and talk about setting the tone even though we know the consequences of what would happen next. let's listen. [video clip]

we are not enemies but his friends. -- but friends. we must not be enemies. so passion may have strained. it must not break our bonds of affection. mystic chords of memory stretching from every battlefield and patriot grave to every living heart and hard land all over this broad ofl yet swell the courses union when again touched as surely they will be by the better angels of our nature.

, what was he saying there and how was it received? susan: that speech is so rich. it wasld spend weeks on students because there are so many dimensions. the first -- host: the first thing i want to --back to is how deeply the deeply polarized the country had become. for northerners that speech is seen in one way as an overture, and olive branch seeing the ball is in your court southerners. we are not provoking and get by southerners it was seen clearly as an assertion of federal power. that is one thing to keep in mind. the most important thing i think about that speech is that lincoln holds his ground and asserts the primacy of the union. secession -- he says

secession is --. the states cannot opt out of the union. in the union was something larger than the states. it is older than the constitution, the declaration. there is a spirit that animates the union so secession does not make any sense. states do not exist outside of the union. this constitutional ideal for what the nation will be in terms of its organicwhole -- organic whole, link it was committed to that. he is willing to expend a lot of lives in service to that but he makes clear there are many things in which he will compromise. he is even willing to consider a constitutional amendment. but he will not compromise on the extension of slavery into the territories, so the upshot of that speech really is southern secessionists, you are complaining because you lost an

election but nothing else has happened. host: as we know what a month warr on april 12, the civil got underway. as we close here, some perspective about this. we are looking at two difficult residential transitions, consequential as you said in this case because it is almost in the union. are there any specific lessons for what the country is going through today? susan: that what is tough and i want to be modest here that we that we have a radically different world. in terms of the speed of the country. i hope 1860 is not 2020 and i think the kind of divisions at the country was facing in 1860 were ones where ideology wasn't layered on top of geography. it was not to say inevitable but the fishers were

much clearer then i think they are today. the: susan schelten chairs history department. thank you for spending time and giving us perspective on presidential transitions of the past. hour we our next half continue our look at contentious presidential election since -- elections in 1932 when republican herbert hoover lost -- lost in a landslide to franklin delano roosevelt. [video clip] industrial enterprise lies in every side. many years and thousands of families are gone. , a host ofant unemployed citizens face the grim problem of existence and an equally great number toil.

only a foolish optimist can deny the stark realities of the moment. primarily this is because the ruler of the exchange of mankind's goods have failed through their own stubbornness and incompetence. reashway -- you wrote a book about one of those. us about the for state of the country during which this first transition into fdr's presidency took place. eric: during the election year of 1932 the great reached its depth so you have an unemployment approaching if not one in fourng workers without jobs.

many other people were underemployed. you have a situation where cultural commodities have notped so low it was often worth it for farmers to harvest them and send them to market and so farmers were going out of business and that losing their mortgages. you had people going hungry in many parts of the country and food that was not worth it to sell and other parts of the country. it would not be an exaggeration to say the economy at it visibly broken. not only had capitalism commerce reached a situation of crisis. so indeed had democracy. people had begun to lose faith in the government would do what they needed for them to do. that was the atmosphere. host: what was happening internationally? eric: internationally, the situation was much the same.

the great depression was a global event. it inflicted europe badly and germany add cement into depression a bit earlier than many other countries, and in response you saw the rise of the nazi party to power. at fiddler had gained enough -- tler had earned enough votes to make him chancellor. marchal japan was on the abroad and was about to leave the league of nations over an episode into manchuria and the international order was falling apart. host: you said it people were losing faith in the democratic process. what was the situation like on election day? what were the results like? eric: i do not know what voter turnout was on election day. defeatas a resounding for hoover's policies? that is the point of the question. eric: the election of 1932 it

definitely an ideological one where roosevelt promised a new deal and under that heading promised all manner of things. a massive public works programs, support for agriculture, unemployment insurance, so not only a recovery program from the depression but a rebalancing of the economy to make it more equitable and hoover attacks that program as being socialistic. the fumes had recently boiled over in russia and he would propose any such measures if he were reelected and he lost in a landslide. he won big majorities in six of the states. to twitter and insults about candidates being transmitted globally during the campaign. what was that sinner like between the two men in the 1932 election? eric: hoover did not shy away

from explaining she thought rose -- he thought roosevelt was unsuited to be president. because he belonged to the radical left wing of the democratic party. proposed policies were socialistic in nature, they would bankrupt the country, correct the timbers of the constitution, to get the ideas on which the american civilization was founded. sheer was very clear believed roosevelt was unfit to be president. it would run everything that it made america great to that point. himself singled out hoover's administration for aiticism but mostly it was fairly without victory because the fact were against hoover at that point with unemployment so high and prices so low and a sustained economic crisis for

almost the full four years of our administration. host: i would like the audience to hear the two men in their own words. this is herbert hoover in his own words. let's listen to what he had to say. [video clip] >> might fellow citizens from the congressional elections in 1930 down to the present moment the strategy of the democratic implants an effort to in the minds of the deliberate misrepresentation, the falsehood that the republican party is responsible for this worldwide catastrophe. [indiscernible] i agree with that. it they say the men who made

was myself personally. they expressed no gratitude. country much the easier than russia or south america. host: what do you hear there in that pitch to voters? hear things covert generally said -- hoover generally said that american should be thankful. [indiscernible] though it did so on a small scale and most would use the tariff on a small scale to influence the economy. as he said there i have let people off a lot easier then they have been in western europe and russia. he pitched himself as the champion of free market

capitalism and less intervention is government and represented the democrats as being the opposite of that. host: let's move into the transition period. this is the day after winning the election, franklin roosevelt speaking to the american public. [video clip] >> i am glad of this opportunity to extend my deep appreciation to the electorate of this country which gave me yesterday such a great vote of confidence. that had more than mere party significance. it transcended party lines and became a national expression of liberal thought. it means i am sure the message of the people of the nation firmly believe there is great and actual possibility in an so they willery concede and active plan of action. you have expressed approval of

the plan presented to you. host: it would take a month for that plan of action to begin. what happened immediately after the election? how did the states get set for such a difficult four months between them? hoover conceded the election on election day. he had no choice given the nature of the vote and it was clear he had lost the election. conceded the substance of the argument. the new deal as roosevelt had framed it during the campaign and add work toward it represented a fundamental threat to the american way of life and so he devoted himself to preventing roosevelt from enacting it. this was the last time a president would be inaugurated on march 4 so there was a long wait for roosevelt would be able to take the oath of office, and

during that time there would be thelame-duck congress, congress outgoing would continue to meet. roosevelt worked with democratic party leaders and had his age work with leaders to enact measures, most readily a farmer relief bill that closely resembled the act that would be an active when who -- roosevelt came into office. hoover worked to defeat that between the election and inauguration. hoover was opposed on principle two new deal style legislation. he was determined to not cooperate with efforts to enact it so long as he retained the power of the president. he lobbied against it, and threatened to veto it. -- i do not want the congress to do anything. he tried to make sure nothing

would get through the congress. host: the first meeting between the two men happened on november 22. are there any important things to tell about that conversation, what the dynamics were between the two of them? wec: this is a case where only have a few direct sources about what happened during that conversation because there were four people present. that then secretary, roosevelt and one of his aids who roosevelt took a because he was not an economist and businessman, and roosevelt did not want to signal any particular thing about what his cabinet might be or give anything away as far as his relationship to economic policies. we have these remarks and some of the things roosevelt had four hoover's testimony as to what happened there. it seemed hoover tried to use

this meeting as a way to demonstrate she mastery of international diplomacy and tell roosevelt she could not -- he could not carry forward with the new deal, that he had to move plan andith hoover's he tried to get roosevelt to agree with him to establish a program moving forward. host: what was the outcome? eric: roosevelt understood it correctly that it would be disadvantageous for him to go it with hoover on continuing covert's policies because he had promised very different policies so he politely declined. there is a feeling in the hoover's peoples part that was not gracious. host: how was this playing out in the press at the time? eric: people did not know what

to expect from this kind of situation. it is kind of a novelist in american history and world -- for theirhis this to be this long hangover where it has lots of things to do. earlier that year the congress added roast the 20th amendment which would drastically shorten to whereod of time what we have today where the president is inaugurated on january 20. because of the nature of the crisis, which had begun to accelerate late in the summer of 1932 and get worse, i think people hoped that there would be some kind of policy coming out address theod to

depression more aggressively, more in keeping with what roosevelt promised but that would have entailed hoover giving up on his principles. men make any two other attempts to reconcile or work together? eric: there was a lot of back and forth and most of it was not particularly conciliatory to borrow your word. he waslly hoover decided going to publish some of their estate beer exchanges -- snippier exchanges and that spoil things going for, particularly in february because the inauguration was not going to be until march. roosevelt was the object of an assassination attempt in florida. missed by they bullet. a person near him, the mayor of chicago was fatally shot, and

a longwrote roosevelt letter to address the circumstances as they then were. hoover spent a long time drafting this letter. hoover attempted to draft his letter in pencil, so he carefully drafted this letter to roosevelt which congratulated wentor escaping death and on to blame roosevelt for the current state of the economy and went on to state you and you the ongoingaddress depression by renouncing his plans for the new deal. host: is the perpetrator of the assassination attempt important to know in the scheme of how people were responding to the tension in the country? the would-be assassin was

an italian-american. i do not know we could say his motives bordered directly on the situation. mentallyto have been unwell and to have had some hallucinations. was an italian-american, a registered republican. there were people to this day who believe he was not trying to shoot roosevelt, that is intended victim was the mayor of chicago. i read aboutail that nine page letter to fdr is that it actually was transmitted with the misspelled name of roosevelt. is that correct? eric: i think that is an uncharitable thing to say of hoover. if you look at the archival evidence it may have been

written in haste. i am not sure it was misspelled. host: no intent there. say theres going to weren't many petty exchanges between the two men but i am not sure that is one of them. host: this standoff between the two of them continued until inauguration itself. at what was the day before the inauguration like? time the price and been deepened into a panic. even to banks that were sound were going to close their doors and were rushing to withdraw their money from the base. many states add close the banks to prevent this hemorrhaging and there was a widespread call for a federal bank holiday so that there could be an auditing of the books and a determining of which banks were sound in an attempt to stop the panic. the federal reserve itself was on the bank of collapse because

people were taking their paper andy to the federal reserve were withdrawing gold in exchange. there was a massive withdraw from private banks, the federal reserve system and the whole financial system was on the brink of some kind of catastrophe. there was an outcry even among conservative people for the president, so herbert hoover to close in the banks. do that again to that it was in the nature of capitalism that you kept the banks open so the bad ones could go under and this was a regrettable process, and hoover refused repeatedly right through the inauguration to allow the banks to be closed even when the federal reserve assured that he was ordered to do so in the wee hours of the morning of the inauguration. hoover knew by this point roosevelt would close banks immediately upon taking office, that he would take the nation

off the gold standard to prevent that aspect of the panic and to pursue a policy of inflation. hoover knew what roosevelt was going to do and he could have prevented roosevelt by placing his own restrictions. he refused to do this. there was increasing desperation in the nation and hoover himself was increasingly frustrated and upset with the inability to get what he wanted out of the last days of his presidency as he told an aide at the end of business we have reached the end of our strength. host: hoover attended the inauguration. what with the dynamic light between the two men on that day? susan: there are famous -- eric: there are famous illustrations of the two of them of the apparent discomfort.

he was not vividly warm and generally so you do not want to read in too much but he doesn't look miserable to be there in a accompanying roosevelt to the appears ton and he have exited as soon as it was seemly do do so. it roosevelt was very charismatic, somebody very good at a spirit of confidence and share. famously expensive smile and that was on display on inauguration day and roosevelt had a confident speaking voice as we heard in the clip that you played and that was evident in the inaugural address where he banking anding the only thinganic the we have to fear is fear itself. we can move forward with our

civilization if we can get this panic behind us. host: herbert hoover and until 1964. how did he look back on this period of time? eric: hoover never stopped [indiscernible] roosevelt. he a time after 1932, expected to be the republican of -- the nominee of the republican party in 1936. that did not happen. he he did begin to write immediately after the new deal, explained why the new deal ran counter to the principles of american civilization and the way forward for the republican party was to make clear the new deal was antithetical for what republican stood. being an anti-new deal party was going to be the way forward for republicans, and at first he did

not get a lot of traction with fellow republicans. prophetlike an unheard for many years but by the time you got into the 1950's and 1960's and there began to be republicans like barry goldwater and richard nixon who regarded what hoover thought as what the republican party will become. he did not live to the election. he did leave to see is principles enshrined at the core of the republican party. host: if we look at this that one year later the 20th amendment was ratified shortening the inauguration and setting the date at january 20, something the administration urge states to ratify. if we look at this as having parallels with what the country is going through right now where would you see them? things that move a lot

quicker these days and the presidency is a much more powerful institution that what it was then largely as a result of roosevelt's presidency. the current document of the white house can do a lot more in a short time that what herbert hoover could have done in 1932. we are in the middle of a crisis , and it seems like it is the mismanagement of that crisis that led to the defeat of the whicht -- the incumbent is an unusual thing, but we have newng time to go before a policy of managing a pandemic can be implemented by an incoming administration and it looks like the outgoing administration has any intention of making that way for crisis management and quite the opposite, much like herbert hoover, may oppose it on

principle and appear they will continue on their course as vigorously as they have at this point. host: when you look at the impact of the standoff, which was ideological and personality anden, it was emotional personal as well as ideological, when you look back at that period of type in your research what was your conclusion as to how things could have been different if the two had found a way to work together? eric: what we look at the data on recovery from the great depression it begins immediately upon roosevelt taking office. do not thinkorians that is a coincidence. because of roosevelt's expectations, creating a most americans the idea that prices are going to go up, that creates an incentive for -- for people who have money to spend it because it will fall in value. people begin to have jobs to

produce things, which is what turns things around, and you can see production indices rising immediately in march 1933, so that was the thing that spurred the recovery. we can say that could have happened earlier had hoover gone a in some way or another with roosevelt's program, the farm bill or the policy of inflating the currency. any of those things could have spurred that recovery earlier and if that recovery had begun earlier it is a lot more people who would not have lost their jobs or even their lives. question about transitions as we close out. in addition to the 20th amendment pressing, by 1964, the presidential transition act, legislation was passed to begin to pay for this through the federal government, and i am with thisif you look long lens of history about

changes that were necessary to make transitions between presidencies work more smoothly, especially ideological changes or party changes, are there any changes that could be made to our system as it is structured now that would facilitate a change in power and make it work better for our nation? eric: apparently the thing that needs to happen is that these changes are in the heads of eight nonpolitical civil service . we do not quite have in the federal government, at least not at the highest levels. there is a stipulation in that transition act that funds be allocated to the president-elect as soon as the head of the general services administration ascertains who that is, and there is no real stipulation about how that ascertainment needs to be made or whatever the objective criteria were.

clearer andto be less political ways to make those ascertainment's smooth so that the transition is smooth. wrotedr. eric reashway the book on the transition. thank you for giving us some historical context to presidential transitions as the country worked its way through this one. i appreciate your time. eric: thank you very much. ♪ >> all q&a programs are available on our website or as a podcast at c-span.org. ♪ >> joe biden as president-elect of the estate was c-span for live coverage of the election process and transition of power. c-span, your unfiltered view of

politics. ♪ >> from the sunday news programs now what some senators are saying about the prospect for another covid relief package. packet -- package is about $900 billion. do expected to get past this week? >> my prayers will be answered if it does, but we have a few remaining issues. i think we can work them out. i just hope senator mcconnell brings this to the floor as quickly as possible. we have a lot of work to do and a few days to do it. >> any doubt that he will? >> i do not know the answer to that. where expressed interest the effort. i hope he feels that way when he gets a chance to read it in

detail but there are five republican senators working night and day and five democratic senators it well and it is a superhuman effort to get this together in time to help the american people as quickly as possible. 12 million will lose their unemployment insurance the day after christmas. think of businesses trying to decide now whether or not they can continue. think about the vaccination logistics that we serve with money in this bill. we want to make sure this vaccine is on the road and vaccinating people as quickly as possible. these are life and death issues. we have got to address those quickly. indicatednt trump as he would sign a $908 billion package. there is only one $908 billion package out there and that is ours. mcconnell says he has not interested in making a point. it only can pass into law if it is bipartisan in the house and the senate and ours is.

neither of said we will sign your bill. our final language will probably come out earlier this week. it clearats have made that generally they oppose liability protection for businesses that we open during the pandemic. is that nonnegotiable for republicans? >> defined nonnegotiable. there has to be some liability protection. think about it. the cdc and dr. fauci were saying do not wear a mask and then there were saying wear a mask. there has been ambiguity as we have gone through, and think of that small restaurant when people were told not to wear a mask and then people would file a claim. just the discovery it would make them bankrupt. it has to be something we negotiate that is acceptable to both and that is one of the sticking points right now. >> it is not the deal a lot of people think is needed including

the chair of the federal reserve. more likely you are under doing it rather than overdoing it. do you concur with him? relief is an emergency package only to get through the first quarter. every education says that more money is needed. gets us through basically the lifelines people need and that small businesses can survive and not go under. if we don't invest this money now, and chuck, every indication says more is needed. the president-elect joe biden says this is a down payment. he can come in as president. when he does come in as president, his team can put together a different proposal that takes us further down the road for recovery. if we don't do something now, both sides of the aisle, my colleagues have said the investment we make into the citizens of this country in trying to keep this economy from collapsing, what could be

more important than 2 trillion? march is if we do nothing. >> join this week's question time. boris johnson took questions on the pandemic including the announcement of the approval of a vaccine. he confirmed vaccine distribution would again the next week. the u.k. became the first country to approve the pfizer coronavirus vaccine. this is 35 minutes. am proudly o