participating in our open form. we will do this until about 10:00 this morning. we want to take some time to tell you about our survey that has just come up. since the year 2000 each time there has been a change in administration have asked historians to participate. this morning we are releasing the results of our fourth historian survey. here to tell us more about it is project coordinator rachel katz. thank you for joining us. guest: good morning. host: let's start with, what exactly is this survey of presidential leadership? guest: our survey started from a

series we did in 1999, where we did an in-depth program on each of the presidents and their lives and administrations. and had a lot of great reviews. we wanted to have a capper to that program. we decided to come up with this historian survey, where we reached out to professional observers of the presidency throughout the country and asked them to rate presidents in 10 different leadership characteristics. those 10 leadership characteristics are public persuasion, crisis leadership, economic management, moral authority, international relations, administrative skills, relations with congress, vision and setting an agenda, pursued equal justice for all, and performance within the context of the time. then we have a ranking of all of the presidents within each of those 10 characteristics, and also in overall ranking.

i think it is important to note this is not a scientific survey. while the characteristics have remained the same over the years, the participants have changed. host: tell us about how often c-span conducts the survey. guest: we conduct the survey each time there has been a change in administration. our first one was in 2000, and we did one again in 2009, 2017, and this is our fourth survey. each time we have had increased participation from the historians, both in terms of sheer number and diverse viewpoints. she we had 142 different historians and observers of the presidency participate. host: what is the goal of the survey? why do we conducted? guest: we understand it takes time once a president has left office to get a full assessment of the presidency, but we do conduct the survey soon after an administration so we have a benchmark, a window into what

historians are thinking soon after an administration ends. as we continue to conduct the surveys we can see what change happens. we understand there is a high interest in presidential history. this is a way to start a conversation, get people talking about it, get them thinking about what makes for a good president, about those individual leadership characteristics, and think about the presidents you like, that you think did a good job and see how you would rank them in those specific characteristics. it is to start a conversation. host: where did the former president, donald trump, rank in this survey? guest: this is donald trump's first time in the survey and historians ranked him at number 41 overall. you can see where he ranks in all of the 10 different leadership characteristics here. his highest one is coming in public persuasion and economic management. host: if that is the case for donald trump, what about other recent presidents?

guest: the presidents that have made their debut soon after their administrations were president clinton, and in his first year he came in at number 21. he has moved up to number 19 here in the fourth survey. then george bush in 2009 he came in at number 36. he has moved up seven points, 10 number 29 this year. president obama has come into the top 10 for the first time, finding right at number 10. that is up two spots from his debut. nec donald trump, again, coming in at 41. host: this survey has a lot of content. if people want more, where can i go? guest: we have a website. it is c-span.org/presidentssurvey2021.

there they will be able to select each president. you can also look at each of the individual characteristics and see how the rankings came out with those. you will see a list of the 100 42 historians who participated. all of the resort -- all of the results are anonymous, we are sharing who participated. we have a gallery of insights. more graphics, similar to the two we just showed you. host: again, you can find it on the site, and rachel katz served as the project coordinator. thank you for your time. guest: thanks, pedro. we also have four of our survey advisors coming onto the journal sunday morning. they are going to be live for two hours sunday morning on the fourth of july. they are going to go more in depth into the survey and results, and taking fewer calls

[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. 2021]

>> he told another historian, i'd rather win a pulitzer prize than be president. so because he had this strong desire for literary fame, even though he didn't really want to do literary work, he got himself the prize. and in new york city, in washington, d.c., people have been gossiping. did kennedy really write that book? i wonder how much money they're getting out of those royalty checks? but then the pulitzer changed the equation and i think it made it a moral question and an ethical question. readers realized this too. when i was at the kennedy presidential library, i looked at the letters that kennedy was receiving in 1957. and librarians were sending him letters, school teachers were sending him letters saying, did you really write this book? they were responding to that interview. you wouldn't have accepted that prize if you didn't write the book, would you? that's not the right thing to do. >> sunday night at 8:00 eastern on c-span's q&a. you could also listen to q&a as a podcast wherever you get your podcasts.

>> the u.s. supreme court ruled 6-3 upholing two arizona voting laws prohibiting ballots submitted at incorrect precincts and third party collection of ballots often referred to as bament harvesting by critics. justice samuel alito offered the court's majority opinion, stating the laws do not violate the federal voting rights act. justice kagendy sented, saying the majority changed the law's meaning. we'll show you the oral arguments in the case from last march. >> all persons having business before the honorable the supreme court of the united states are admonishing to give their attention, the court is now sitting. god save the united states and thisor