of incidental leadership, with our survey advisors, giving insight on the newest rankings. we will talk with historians douglas brinkley, ed noah green medford, richard norton smith, and amity shloss, chair of the calvin coolidge presidential foundation. watch the conversation tonight beginning at 9:00 p.m. eastern, and before the program, go to c-span.org/presidentssurvey2021 to see the full results of the survey. ♪ >> c-span's "washington journal ," every day, we take your calls live on the air on the news of the day, and we discussed policy issues that impact you. coming up tuesday morning, we will look at the future of the workplace after the covid-19 pandemic ends with the forbes foundation's's sarita gupta.

watch c-span's "washington journal" live at 7:00 eastern tuesday morning, and be sure to join the discussion with your phone calls, facebook comments, >> now it is president biden's fourth of july remarks from the white house. he talks about the greatness of americans and thinks the u.s. military for their service. he goes on to say the country has lived through some of its darkest years but a brighter future is ahead. this is about 15 minutes. >> ladies and gentlemen, the

united states. -- the president of the united states. ♪ president biden: today we celebrate america. our freedom, our liberty, our independence. the fourth of july is a sacred day in our country. a day of history, hope, remembrance and resolve. of promise and possibilities. before me stands -- the greatest and goodness of our nation.

monuments to life and liberty. there is a towering memorial to george washington, a general who led our revolution. the president who set our nation on its course. there is a memorial to thomas jefferson, whose words about liberty and equality literally change the world. and across from the jefferson memorial, there stands martin luther king jr.'s, toward the promised land where equality is not only an -- but a reality. [applause] they remind us of the -- history has given us in our own time.

each year, the fourth of july is a special celebration. we are emerging from a year of isolation, pain and heartbreaking loss. think back to where the nation was a year ago. think back to where you were a year ago. think about how far we have come. [applause] [indiscernible] raising american flags. -- cheering together again. grandparents hugging their grandchildren again.

businesses are open and hiring again. we are seeing record job creation and economic growth. the best in four decades, and i might add, the best in the world. [applause] today, all across this nation, we can say with confidence america is coming back together. [applause] 245 years ago, we declared our independence from a distant king. today, we are closer than ever to declaring our independence from a deadly virus. that's not to say the battle against covid-19 is over. we've got a lot more work today. but just as our declaration in 1776 was not -- was a call to

action, not a reason for complacency or a claim of victory, it was a call to action. that same is true today. back then, we had the power of an idea on our side. today, we have the power of science. [applause] thanks to our heroic vaccine efforts, we have gained the upper hand against this virus. we can live our lives, our kids can go back to school. our economy is roaring back. don't get me wrong, covid-19 has not been vanquished. we all know power for variance -- powerful variants have emerged like the delta variant. but the best defense against these variants is to get vaccinated. my fellow americans, it is the most patriotic thing you can do. so please, if you have not gone vaccinated, do it now.

for yourself, for your loved ones, for your communities, and for your country. that is how we are going to stay ahead of these variants and protect the hard-won progress we have made, because we never again want to be where we were a year ago today. today, while the virus hasn't been vanquished, we know this -- it no longer controls our lives, in no longer paralyzes our nation. it is within our power to make sure it never does again. for that, we can think the scientists and researchers, the educators, and all the other frontline and essential workers, like many of you here today. [applause] who became the light to see is through the darkness. i hope you know that you, the american people, have been part

of one of the most remarkable achievements in american history. but in this moment of joy, we know that this day falls hard on all those who have lost a loved one. as i told you before, each day i carry a card in my pocket with a schedule on it. on the back of that schedule on that card, i have the number of americans who lost their lives to covid. as of tonight, that number is 603,018 who lost their lives. they are husbands and wives, mothers and fathers, sons and daughters, mothers and sisters, grandparents, friends, neighbors, coworkers. we also remember all those who lost this year, that we and

families lost to other causes of death and cruel twists of fate. they too left behind loved ones unable to grieve or mourn or find closure. each of them meant the world to someone they left behind. those of you have been through this, know that to heal you have to remember. we commit to always remember them. that's what will do. i've long said america is unique. unlike every other nation on earth, we were founded on an idea. we hold these truths to be self-evident that all people are created equal, endowed by their creator with certain on -- certain unalienable rights, among them life, liberty and the

pursuit of happiness. and while we have never fully lived up to those words, we have never given up on them. they continue to animate us and remind us that at our best, we as americans believe. we americans believe in honesty and decency and treating everyone with dignity and respect, giving everyone a fair shot, demonizing no one, giving hate no safe harbor, and leaving no one behind. we lead by the power of our example, not the example of our power. we are part of something so much bigger than ourselves. we stand as the beacon to the world. it is a code, a uniquely american code. it is who we are. all of the servicemembers and families here tonight, today, all of you serving around the

world, it is the greatest honor to serve as your commander in chief. [applause] jill and i and our entire family, thank you for your service and sacrifice. like so many military families, thinking of your loved ones who served, we think of our son beau today. you're all part of a long chain of patriots who pledged their lives and their sacred honor in defense of this nation and democracy around the world. for freedom and fair play, for peace and security and opportunity. for the cause of justice, for the soul of america itself. but the defense of all that we love doesn't fall on your shoulders alone. it falls on every one of us,

every american. each day we are reminded there's nothing guaranteed about our democracy, nothing guaranteed about our way of life. we have to fight for it, defend it, earn it. folks, it's up to all of us to protect the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. the right to equal justice under the law. the right to vote and have that vote counted. [applause] the right to breathe clean air, drink clean water, and know our children and grandchildren will be safe on this planet for generations to come. [applause] the right to rise in the world as far as your god-given talent can take you, unlimited by barriers of privilege or power. one of the great gifts of the spirit of independence -- think

about this -- one of the great gifts is our capacity to see ourselves whole and see ourselves honestly. what we have gotten right and what we have gone wrong. it's a measure of the greatness of america, and we are a great nation. we don't seek to bury the wrongs. we face it. we work to make it right. you know, history tells us that when we stand together, when we unite in common cause, when we see ourselves not as republicans or democrats but as americans, there is simply no limit to what we can achieve. none. [applause] today we see the results of unity and purpose. the unity and purpose forged in our nation, for together we are

beating the virus. together we are breathing life into our economy. together we will rescue our people from division and despair. but together we must do it. over the past year, we have lived through some of our darkest days. now i truly believe we're about to see our brightest future. [applause] this is a special nation, a great nation, and there is a timeless truth about america. the most powerful idea in the history of the world, in the hearts of the people of this country. it beats in all our hearts. no matter your race or ethnicity. no matter your gender identity or sexual orientation. [applause] no matter your disability, no matter your faith.

it beats in the hearts of rich and poor alike. it unites america. whether your ancestors were native to this land or brought here forcibly and enslaved. whether you were immigrants from generations back like my family who came from ireland, or you are coming here today looking to build a better life for your family, like our fellow americans i just swore in, in the white house two days ago. [applause] the american creed. we use that phrase, the american creed. because we're all equal, created equal. it was written a long time ago. but the genius is that every generation of americans has expanded it wider and wider to include those who were excluded before. that's why it's never gathered dust in our history books, it's still alive today.

alive in our hearts, alive in the work of our hands. alive not only in the history we read but in the history we are making. my fellow americans, now we are the guardians of that very idea of america. it is up to us to save it, to preserve it, to build on it. and i know we will. on this sacred day, i look out to those monuments on our national mall, and beyond them into the hearts of our people across the land, and i know this -- it has never ever been a good bet to bet against america, never. [applause] we just have to remember who we are. we are the united states of america. and there is nothing, nothing we can't do if we do it together. [applause] folks, happy fourth of july , america. god bless you all.

and may god protect our troops. [applause] thank you, thank you, thank you. [applause] ♪ ♪ >> tonight, a conversation about c-span's 2021 historian survey of presidential leadership with

our survey advisors giving insight on the newest ranking. we will speak with professors of history and others. watch the conversation tonight beginning at 9:00 p.m. eastern, and before the program, go to c-span.org to see the full results of the 2021 survey. if you view posting on our facebook page. democrats for liberty is the handle this person goes by saying will of a favorite in mind, president obama endured racism with grace and class. another saying --

juan off facebook saying when it comes to favorite president his is a choice between former president trump and andrew jackson because they both kept it real. east brunswick, new jersey starting us off. democrats line. your favorite president and why. guest: -- caller: thank you c-span and thank you sir. i'm thinking with passion now. and from east brunswick, new jersey. my favorite president is abraham lincoln buried i'm an american of the jewish faith and i'm connected to abraham lincoln because if he did not abolish slavery we would be a sad state of affairs. a book came out years ago. lincoln was very close to the jewish community in springfield, illinois and he is connected to a man who many americans do not know. he is connected to julius rosenwald, the cofounder of --

who was born in 1862. in real life, abraham lincoln affected many people. my family in 1921. host: you said he affected many people pretty still continues to rank high on our rankings. aside from what you list it, why do you think he continues to enjoy such popularity? caller: because this country is changing. this country like south africa is changing from majority white rule to minority white rule. host: we will go to joe in new mexico. republican line. your favorite president and why. good morning. caller: franklin roosevelt and lyndon johnson. host: ok, there is two. tell us why a little bit of each prude why do they rank as favorites caller:.

franklin -- each. why do they rank as favorites? caller: franklin roosevelt because of social security and lyndon johnson because of medicare. host: is that their greatest achievement in office or there are others you may highlight? caller: that was their greatest achievement. host: ok. show listing two favorites. he told us why. so you can put that into the mix if you want. you can let us know again if you want to call and tell us why. there are lines divided by party. perhaps you want to post on social media some of your thoughts at facebook.com/c-span. you can always text us at 202-748-8003. if you want you can also post on our twitter feed, @cspanwj.

a lot of you calling in when you call and let us know what your favorite is you can also reference the survey we just released if you wish. you can find all those results as a result. if you go to the website, you have a section at the website to tell us what you are looking for. you can see how you compare to how these historians ranked it. one of the people talking yesterday, one of our advisor team for the survey talked about presidents in the survey and then getting added to the survey. [video clip] >> i have suggested a 20 year rule where we probably should not assess presence performance going back 20 years. if you go back to the beginning

of the survey, every president since then unintentionally, but nevertheless in part because the climate in which we are operating, they have in polarizing figures. in spite of their best efforts, divisive figures. richard nixon said it would take 50 years before anybody could write about him objectively. i don't think we need to wait 50 years, but i do think there is something special about presidents who not only occupy a continuing element of polarization on both sides. i think that skewers the natural process. dwight eisenhower, when i -- when ike left office, he came in

below chester arthur at 22nd in 1966, his papers began to be open to the eisenhower library and all of a sudden people began to see he was a much more sophisticated public you'll -- political manipulator. that process generally tends to applied presidents. host: richard norton smith and three others serving as advisors to the survey we released just last week. those results at our website. you can also find if you want to see a list of the historians that participated, 141 of varying political viewpoints.

you can find out who those historians are that ultimately compiled the rankings we are telling you about. all of that available at our website. gregory shelton on twitter says lincoln and kennedy because they were both poetic. robert from our twitter feed saying ronald reagan when it comes to the presidents previous of who was his favorite. steve dunkin says lincoln probably but the first five in a row, fdr, teddy, lyndon, the last one seemed to be the worst. you can use it as a compare and contrast as far as your favor presidents are concerned. mike in oregon, republican line. go ahead. caller: i have a mix. one of my favorite ones is actually a democrat.

that would be harry truman. for a republican i would say ronald reagan. host: ok. tell us how you arrived at that. caller: basically harry truman was basically an honest man who was basically stuck in a position because he would get into trouble, they put them in vice president to get rid of him. and then he assumed the office. ronald reagan, he basically came at it and basically change the way we look at government. and those were very influential presidents that did very good things.

host: when it comes to the category of crisis leadership, historians were asked to grade upon, it was harry truman fifth on that list. before him, abraham lincoln, george washington, franklin roosevelt and theodore roosevelt , ronald reagan coming in at ninth when it comes to the category of crisis leadership. if variety of categories. that being one of them. democrats line, north carolina. on this observed independence day. caller: good morning. i grew up in segregated raleigh, north carolina in the 1950's.

a female catholic and working-class, but i was very fortunate to attend a cathedral school, i was taught civics in the importance of participating in our democracy. i was very interested in politics, i had the fortunate experience of meeting jfk when he was campaigning. he further inspired me and i became a dedicated volunteer, but i want to get to the point which is my favorite president. i thank you for the opportunity to say it's barack obama. i refer to him as my brilliant beautiful president. there's no category in which he failed as far as i'm concerned. even though i always say the 2012 election days the greatest

day of my life because he was reelected and he proved no matter what the opposition threw at him, and they threw everything. mitch mcconnell saying in 2008 my job is to make sure that barack obama is a one term president instead of saying i will work with our new president. i'm just so proud of him. i'm proud to be an american. i'm just proud of his accomplishments and i'm so grateful he spoke out in his words of wisdom during the most recent campaign. i thank you so much for this opportunity. host: under the category when asked how they managed to do the job advancing a vision and being able to set an agenda, barack obama, the former president

coming in at 12 this time around on our survey. the top of that list, abraham lincoln. followed by george washington, franklin roosevelt, theodore roosevelt. ronald reagan rounding at the top five when it comes to advancing a vision paid st. paul, minnesota, independent line. caller: good morning. i'm going to toss in a new category. most underappreciated, but best prepared. no president is really prepared, but i look at bush 41 as having the credentials that matched perhaps no one else but george washington to step into that position and i think it's leadership was very good in a number of different categories.

i do recall the speeches he did on c-span afterwards or something he wrote later puzzled by so much rhetoric, nonsense rhetoric and he wanted to be judged based on his actions more so than his words because a lot of people didn't think he was a great orator, but in fact his relationship both domestically and internationally really prepared him to perform well in the office. host: i was can ask you, former president bush served in a lot of different roles before becoming president. which do you think help pare him the best? caller: probably, he was very successful in the gulf war, his relationships with international

leaders, that would be vice president, i think he was u.n. ambassador rice and ambassador -- his international footprint was magnificent. host: giving us former president george w. bush as his favorite. david is next, from new york, republican line. caller: i'm going to base my choice on a visit to mount vernon a couple years ago. i had no idea the scope of that complex. george washington was born into circumstances at the moment when slavery was in. from all the evidence they were all well treated because under

those circumstances there were all kinds of industries going on there. everybody seemed to be training a skill. had he freed his slaves at that moment, where would they have gone? what would they have done? he was caught in a tough spot. that's the part i liked about washington. he gave back power, he fought the revolutionary war, he wanted for us. so he helped elevate it in my estimation. not only is the president, but as a businessman, as a humanitarian, and overall great president for all the attributes i mentioned. host: did your trip to mount vernon solidify those things?

caller: i had no -- it was impressive to see. he was born into the circumstances 200 something years ago and he did a pretty good job given that set of circumstances. here we are moving forward. the original sin of slavery and slowly being eroded away. for me, that was an eye-opener. he was a great president. he was a pretty good businessman. host: let's hear from kay in utah, republican line. caller: good morning. my favorite president is president trump. always has been, always will be. i'm 80 years old and i really loved and respected the man since day one. caller: in your mind, what set

him apart from the other presidents? caller: he was such a go-getter and always america first. if he was in office it wouldn't be going on what's going on at the border right now. which is heartbreaking. host: ok. listing president trump is her favorite. when it came to the individual categories of our c-span survey, when it came to the power of public persuasion, that's when the former president ranked highest at 43.9% when it comes to those scores. shortly after that was the topic of economic management at 42.7%. as you can see the list of other categories when it comes to former president trump, the idea of vision and setting an agenda, low scores for the category of moral authority at 18.7%. all of that available if you want to see what these historians thought about these

individual categories particularly as it related to president trump. you heard them talking but the debut rankings, one of our advisors particularly talked about president trump's debut ranking on the survey. here are some of the comments from yesterday. >> it gets harder to do the closer we get to the president so you have to ask yourself worthy historians as objective as they try to be answering whether they would vote for trump next time or where they really ranking him. i say that in good conscious. it's very hard to rank recent people. look at the recent jump up of president george w. bush, that's one of the factors. you look and see bush 43 went up , you kind of have to change lenses real fast when someone moves from being a live figure

two being "history" and i think that play a role with president trump. i think he deserves a higher ranking personally for economics and i think history bear me out on that. let's just look the other things. you see jackson going down, president trump is more like andrew jackson, more they cowboy and cowboys did not do well in american opinions in this pole. host: overall there were four advisors that guided the historians who participated in the survey. you heard one of the advisors talk about the role president trump has in the survey, you can see more of her interview and the three others who participated yesterday at our website. also twitter, when it comes to favorite presidents and why, keeps it down to fdr and then adding the new deal because of

that ranking. adam says grant saying he smashed the first version of the clan and pushed reconstruction. a radical experiment of democracy that ended too soon. deborah from twitter saying i admire many things about him, washington for the first peaceful transfer of power prayed in my life i admire jimmy carter. former president obama for the affordable care act and wearing the presidency with intelligence he -- intelligence and humor. you can pick your favorite president and also tell us why that person is your favorite on the phone lines, 202-748-8000 free democrats -- for democrats, 202-748-8001 for republicans and independents, 202-748-8002. democrats line, you are next. caller: good morning.

my favorite president is fdr. he got the united states out of the great depression in his new deal policies and his social security basically set up social security for older folks when they retired, to have some type of income. my second favorite president is bill clinton. he also set up some basic structure and he was also one of the presidents who got us out of the surplus of money just like fdr did. host: let's hear from robert. robert joins us from alabama. independent line.

caller: president jimmy carter was a real human being. if he was still president there wouldn't all -- there wouldn't be all of this weaponry. barack obama, one of the best presidents that's ever been. in the end was made by condition and a great man and it's a great human being. this country will you better because he was chosen as our president. host: elaine is up next in connecticut. republican line, good morning. caller: donald trump, he got things done, he could make deals and he was for the people he loved america. since biden got in, everything's

gone sky high, he is a disaster. they are like living on $45,000 a year, he is a complete disaster. and the water is horrible -- border is horrible and he hasn't been down there. trump at least he keeps on going down there, he's been down there twice. host: what was his greatest achievement while in office? caller: while in office i think doing things for the people and making deals and no wars. when obama and biden were in we had wars. we didn't with trump. trump knew what he was doing and he was ripped down from day one by the democrats and all the people were thoroughly jealous of him. we were in south glastonbury and we love trump.

host: his debut ranking for the survey which we put out every time a president leaves office, individual categories as far as historians, 41st overall, when it comes to rankings of presidents that were released last week as part of the survey. you can find out about those individual categories at c-span.org. with reference to president biden there is a feature in the new york times today taking a look at the oval office and some of the art that exists in the oval office and highlighting some of those pieces of art and the significance to each of the presidents. can't go deeply into everything, but when it comes to the oval office, looking at it towards the desk, it shows a couple of things. the avenue in the rain, it depicts fifth avenue and during

a rain at straight in the u.s. flag at the time. there is a bust of abraham lincoln right below it. right behind the desk, a bust of cesar chavez. to the presidents left, benjamin franklin, a portrait of him and also a bust of harry truman. there is more art and some comparisons to previous presidents as far as the artwork that existed in the oval office during their presidencies. the new york times is the place to find the pictures and everything else you can find it at their website. we spent our first half-hour you telling us about your favorite presidents and why. if you want to text us this morning you can do so at 202-748-8003. if you want to post on our many social media fronts, facebook.com/c-span and @cspanwj

is how you post on her 20 feet -- twitter feed. on instagram you can also use @cspanwj. in tennessee, democrats line, we will hear from james about favorite presidents and why. caller: top pick would be harry truman, of the reason for that being up until 1952, it was the best time i ever saw in my life. second pick would probably be john kennedy but he did not get to live too long. the third pick would probably be bill clinton probably there. joe biden who could be a very great president but he's knocking to be at all because it looks as if things are

completely locked up, this joe manchin thing and stuff like that, this country, people better be looking ahead at what's happening because this is going to be worse than a communist country because mr. trump is already locked it up and he's just as good as the devil wants him. host: before you leave, back to bill clinton. he also -- he hung up. the thoughts of that viewer. let's go to kurt in ohio. good morning. caller: good morning and happy fourth of july. the reason i called truman was my favorite president. host: tell us why. caller: growing up, my grandfather was in world war ii and he was on his way over to japan to go fight in a mainland

battle and on the way over there , he was on the boat and that's when they received word that harry truman had dropped the bomb. so instead of fighting japan for a year, my grandfather built japan for a year. and until he died in 2003, we always heard harry truman personally saved my life. so that led me to research more about harry truman, i took a special kinship to harry truman because of his visual impairments and what he accomplished. 25 years ago i was one of your competition winners. host: in 1996 you won that contest. caller: i got one of the $500 delegate prizes. so the c-span school bus came to my high school and did a

vignette and it's in the c-span library. host: we are showing a still from that interview now on our network. when people hear about the studentcam contest which asks them to purchase a bait in a video using c-span resources about topics we assign. what was the topic and what did you focus on? caller: how c-span programming would affect my first presidential vote. so i wrote an essay and what i was good to get out was towards the end of that interview, you guys had my health/anatomy teacher who also happened to be the wrestling coach at the high school and he talked about how how harry truman was my favorite president and everything. so he was talking about how in

-- you have to be shown how to do something. he got a lot of air time talking about harry truman. host: not only telling us about his president, but his experience as a former studentcam winner. thank you and congratulations even now from your achievements back in 1996, we really appreciate it. caller: thank you. host: students, if your interested in finding out about this contest we do, you can go to the website and go to the section there and it will tell you all about it. more on the rankings the historians were asked to talk about former president's was this idea of relations with congress and how they did. to show you a little bit of that perspective, if you go from back in 89 2021, you can see some of

the rankings and how various presidents did. george w. bush going from starting when it comes to ranking at 20 coming into 17. bill clinton starting at his debut ranking of 36 rising to 23. about visibilities you have good relations with congress. george h.w. bush was the first one. george w. bush started at 36 and rose all the way to 21 when it comes to talking with congress in dealing with them. former president obama at 39, of that rising to 32 in our most recent survey. president trump with a ranking of 42, debuting at the rankings out in the future. that number could change. one of the historians at -- had advised people who participated, talked about the idea of how former president's had to deal with congress in order to achieve their goal. here is what she had to say.

>> it's a difficult category because we are kind of making the president responsible for how congress responds to what that particular president is attempting to accomplish. for instance, in the case of obama, because he had so much trouble with the republican party, especially, he sort of is held accountable for that come as opposed to congress. of course in this survey, we have no way of saying that it is -- that the responsibility of congress, to try to work with the president. whenever possible. so what we are seeing, i think come in terms of those who are making gains, and under -- is an understanding of that comes that a president may have done the best he could to try to compromise, to try to work with congress, and congress was just very resistant. and so i'm hoping that as the --

i'm assuming it is happening, that as the participants in the survey are looking through these categories, they are understanding that presidents may be doing the best they can come especially in that particular category. but they are never going to be able to get a very high score if you have a congress or part of congress that has determined that no matter what that president is attempting to put forth to the american people, that they are simply not going to participate in that. so there is such political tribalism in the country today, and there has been for a long time, you're going to see those kinds of issues. [end video clip] host: one of our advisors of the survey we just released, talking about the categories that survey with all four of those advisors. you can go to our website and

see what they talked about for two hours, not only when it came to the results of the survey, the process of the survey, as the categories came in, what we have shown you this morning. we cannot show you the whole to our conversation, but it is available if you want to watch. from our fees this morning, tim from west virginia, when it comes to presence, his favorite is jefferson. a learned, loudmouth, militant atheist, much like me. from dallas, her favorite president is donald trump. works for america first, not china first. sandy from dallas, he or she perhaps. barack obama and bill clinton, this is from our twitter feed, they both had to clean up an economic mess, and that is some of the results from twitter. texas, at 202-748-8002.

roger, independent line. good morning, hello. caller: good morning. i think andrew jackson was a strong president, and trump was. we don't need a president in office who has to be led around by the jaw. thank you. host: from kelly in alexandria, virginia, hello. caller: hi. i think bush number 2 got it easy because bill clinton balanced the budget. so bush 2 got to go in there easy. host: that it's kelly from alexandria, virginia, giving her thoughts on the president, on economic issues, economic management. one of those categories from the historian survey. coming in at number one is

abraham lincoln, top of the list, then george washington following that with franklin roosevelt, theodore roosevelt, william clinton, the most modern president on that list, coming in at number five. then rounding up the others, eisenhower, president truman at number nine, john adams at number 10. when it come to the topic of how each of those presence dealt with issues of economics and how historians thought they should be ranked. diane, st. paul minnesota, democrats line. caller: good morning, how are you. host: i'm well, how about yourself? caller: i'm great. my favorite president has to be linton -- has to be lyndon johnson. on top of everything, due to what he did with the civil rights act and programs that he

was able to give to congress. nobody else had ever done that. it wouldn't have happened if it hadn't been from lyndon johnson. who came from the south, from texas. but he did the right thing. taking a place here in america. segregation and jim crow, having simpson all rights, which we had never had. anything with those other presidents before him. and he did. that is why he is my favorite president. host: that is our viewer diane. lyndon johnson coming in at 24 for this ranking on the category of oral authority. lyndon johnson coming in on that category. -- of moral authority. lyndon johnson coming in on that category. when it comes to moral

authority, ideas from historians. again, abraham lincoln topping that list, as he tops many others on our survey. george washington and franklin roosevelt and white arrows in our -- dwight eisenhower following suit. theodore roosevelt coming in and were five, president obama at number six, president jimmy carter coming in at number seven on the topic of moral authority. john adams at number eight, harry truman at 9, john quincy adams coming in at number 10. that is just the moral authority ranking. a lot of different rankings that you can look at and see how the various presidents compared and contrasted with each other. from new kensington, pennsylvania, republican line. michael, hello. your next. caller: good morning, pedro. hope you had a nice fourth. i particularly like calvin coolidge. i read a book about calvin coolidge and learned a great deal about a president that has

not been heralded very much at all, and had a great economic policy. and he was, as she mentioned, he was a president that approached crises by allowing the states to work their crises out. rather there getting into every single -- rather than getting into every single area for them when they had massive floods and all kind of things going on in this country. he lit the states has it out. he ended up being a very popular president. -- he let the states has it out. he ended up being a very popular president. host: not long ago we had emily slate on the program, talking about her issues. if you type your name into the box of our website at c-span.org, you can find that journal program interview, particularly as she talked about coolidge, if you're interested in doing that for yourself. see, i love c-span.

host: let's go to new port richey, florida. hello. caller: how are you doing? i would say my phrase writ -- my favorite president i have seen has to be president trump. outstanding job growth come inflation at the lowest level. job growth across the board. host: ok. economic issues a key factor for andrew come as he talks about president trump. one of the things talked about among many people now being vaccinated and the like, the topic of vacations, a feature in "the washington post," this morning, how the various presidents treated the topic, focusing on the current one, saying that president biden will be spending independence day at an event with workers and

military families. he and first lady jill biden have made it out to their rehobeth beach retreat just once. adding that vacations change. when you become the commander in chief. both are never out of touch her out of reach. according to jeffrey angle, they cannot unplug like you and i unplugged. or about that if you want to learn about vacation habits of the president of the united states. you can find out at the washington post. roger, let's hear from him in abilene, kansas, democrats line. caller: yes, my favorite president has to be dwight eisenhower. he put the country back to work, and his idea with the interstate highway connected the whole united states and brought us together.

then he put together a plan also to pay for it and keep it paid for with his fuel tax. which people don't realize that my oldest son was lucky enough to be on a subcommittee for transportation, and she told me one time that it is always full of money because of the way he put this all together. 1 host: when did you come to realize eisenhower as your favorite? caller: well, as i grew up, i was a very young boy and i remember waving to do dwight d. eisenhower in a small community as he came by in a car, and he stood up and waved to us. i remember that. i was in the first grade. you kind of just follow what he did, the way he put the country to work, the process of putting

that interstate together -- anybody could buy a truck then and haul gravel, and could make an honest living. he put a lot of people back to work. there were so many jobs that came from that. and the idea of putting that fuel tax on, it still works very well today. to help pay for it and continue paying for it was a very good way, too. host: ok. go ahead and finish, yeah. caller: that's all i have to say. thank you. host: roger in kansas, dwight d eisenhower. when it comes to administrative skills, president eisenhower coming in fourth in this year's survey. enjoying the fifth-place position in 2009, and then into thousand the first year this was

released, he came in at number six. before that, it is becoming familiar, abraham lincoln topping that list. george washington, franklin roosevelt followed after president eisenhower followed by thomas jefferson, lyndon johnson, harry truman, james polk, james monroe. daniel schoonover -- apologies if i'm miss pronouncing your name -- he said ronald reagan. he knew how to talk, he was a leader, people respected him. these are from facebook says grant is up there, of course lincoln, fdr, carter, and obama. no perfect people but they did their best and put the country first. from gina batterson -- from gina patterson, it will be biden. provided he puts some student loan reform in place. and then grant, who had the sexiest beard. our greatest president who

gathered around him, the men who could have challenged him come is abraham lincoln. no to facebook.com/c-span. -- go to facebook.com/c-span. daniel, republican, texas, hi. caller: hello. trump was the best president we had because we had the best economy in the world twice. and the thing is, they tried to impeach him before he was even elected because they didn't want to drain the swamp. thank you. host: ok, daniel from texas. about former president trump. from kevin, point of rock maryland, democrats line. you are up. hello. caller: good morning. i wanted to chime in and say my favorite president was thomas jefferson. he was i think widely known as the smartest president we have had. one of the most quotable presidents we have had.

i just wanted to chime in as james k polk, one of the most underrated presence, with the song they might be giants. host: why do you think he was underrated? caller: his accomplishments, some of his acquisitions in the west. host: kevin and point of rocks, maryland, highlighting the work of james pulled. one of our advisors, doug brinkley -- james polk. one of our advisors, doug brinkley, a characteristic of individual leadership characteristics. here's what he had to say. >> i would go with crisis leadership, and in that regard abraham lincoln is just utterly remarkable, the way that he pulled our country together when we were divided after fort sumter. imagine being president of the united states, and lincoln wasn't even on the ballot in seven southern states, now he is

in washington, and the battle of bull run, which the confederates won the first battle, where dulles airport is today. maryland, it was beyond a crisis. it was the other unraveling of america. in the end, 600,000 americans died, hundreds of thousands wounded and maimed from the war. it was our crucible, and lincoln pulled the country together. he pulled us through it, give us foundational texts, his first and second inaugural. the gettysburg address, the emancipation proclamation. frank lindy roosevelt, greeting industrial mobilization.

that world war ii was not going to be won on an island in the pacific or in a battlefield in europe, that that was going to take place in newark, detroit. the shipyards of san diego and seattle, meaning that homefront, organizing with the war, pulling the country together, we are all in it. presidential crisis management world war ii was astounding. i put lincoln and fdr in that particular category of crisis management, very high and important on our categories that we look at. host: a couple of other people. texting us this morning. i don't know if this person -- i think this was karen welch from new york. when it comes to the topic of favorite presidents, woodrow. he took steps for government to serve and protect americans, tax

the rich. wilmore one, too bad, he was an apologist for slavery. ford was not given enough credit. he deported vietnamese refugees and was last president to sit in front of a congressional committee full-time enjoyed it jordan -- jody from our twitter feed, says i still like ike. let's hear from jake and sherwin, oregon, republican line. hello. caller: is this a line where you see your favorite president? host: yes, sir. caller: my favorite president is donald trump. i feel like it comes with the topic of no president is going to be perfect. everyone has their faults. it is the way god made us. he protected our freedoms. he protected our country. he got rid of isis, and, you

know, in the end, he made it easier for us to express our religious beliefs, and he put aside american politics and put forward jesus politics. that is why i supported him. i feel like the news media, they give him too hard of a time. it was very wrong. host: dorothy from cleveland, ohio, democrats line. good morning. caller: good morning. i would have to start with abraham lincoln, because he believed in people. and i even liked kennedy. he started the era of the civil rights era, which johnson signed into law. then barack obama. we were in a depression, he put less out of it. he had moral authority.

he left growth for the next president to have a good economic -- a good economy going forward. a lot of people are praising trump for the economy, but it started with barack obama. thank you. host: that story when it comes to the category of the various presidents and how they did -- in the category of pursuing equal justice for all, abraham lincoln coming in first, followed by lyndon johnson. president barack obama coming in third, followed by harry truman, jimmy carter, ulysses grant, john kennedy, franklin roosevelt, john quincy adams. from massachusetts, this is richard, democrats line. hello. caller: hello, this is richard. listening to douglas brinkley,

you got the list of the president that i dave meyer. i think washington -- that i admire. i think washington, abraham lincoln, fdr. washington for obvious reasons -- his courage, his leadership, the ragtag militia movement that the army had, the eastern seaboard against this british superpower, what he accomplished is staggering. it's beyond anything imaginable, what he accomplished with what he had. the founding father of our country without question. lincoln is another, the right man at the right moment for the right reasons. and for social justice, equality , stability for the nation, and what it brought to take that great stance.

he's a great politician. you guys know all that stuff. next, fdr pulled us out of the depression. i always admired his political skills, and just like douglas brinkley says, just being -- to listen to him today on c-span, you guys put on some good stuff on the network, by the way. host: richard, let me tell you, doug brinkley and those other advisors that we had featured on our program yesterday for two hours to talk about the survey and their perspective, we are going to rebroadcast that interview tonight, 9:00, you can catch it on c-span. the advisors, the presidential historian survey. if you're interested to hear what he and other historians had to say come you can tune in tonight at 9:00. caller: you know what? it's a critical moment in our history right now, and looking

back on these wonderful men who lead our country, we are fortunate to have these moment at the -- these men at the right moment at the right time. host: let's go to patrick, pump each gardens -- palm beach gardens, florida. caller: i'm going to throw a dark horse at you. i like john quincy adams. john quincy adams was probably the most intelligent and cultured president that we ever had. this is a young man who went with his father, john adams, to russia, to meet the russian ambassador i think at age 17 or 16, travel all over europe as a young man in the ports of france, etc., etc. also he was a president who faced some tough, difficult transitions in america's early

years. the beautiful thing about john quincy adams, i read a biography years ago -- i don't remember who did it -- the beautiful thing about it is that after he was defeated by jackson, he went back to serve in the house of representatives, which i think was a wonderful thing and is a wonderful thing, and served the rest of his life in the house. so i like john quincy adams. host: when did you realize that you like john quincy adams, and what do you think lead to that? when was this first a thing for you when you realize that? caller: when i read his biography. it is an encouragement to everyone, read the biographies of the presidents and you will discover all kinds of wonderful things, and some not so wonderful things about presidents. but when i read the bever fee of john quincy adams, i was very impressed that they biography --

when i read the biography of john quincy adams, i was very impressed. i think he is a dark horse that most modern people barely know the name. it is somebody to check out. host: patrick there, john quincy adams, his president. when it comes to the first survey, president adams came ranked 19th with a total score of 564. in our recent survey, in 22 anyone, he is ranked 17th overall. his total score come 603. brian, lafayette, louisiana, republican line. caller: hey, thank you and god bless you guys. i want to say thomas jefferson, for his intellect. my second would be teddy roosevelt for his pizzazz. thank you guys. love you guys.

keep going. host: richard norton smith, presidential biographer, and amity shlaes. watch the conversation tonight beginning at 9:00 p.m. eastern, and before, go to c-span.org/presidentsurvery2021 to see the results of the survey. us from the washington examiner, jim antle. he served as their politics editor. thank you for joining us on this observed independence day holiday. thanks again.

guest: tank for having me. host: the president talking yesterday particularly when it comes to issues of covid, talking about unity and some of our darkest days. how would you agree the administration as far as their efforts on covid and other things? guest: obviously present biden is presiding over a period where we are having a high level of vaccinations, so we are reopening under button. clearly that is a positive development. i think the voters largely have a favorable view of how he has managed the pandemic. a very large factor in how he became president in the first place. so i think that is very much a positive. clearly -- excuse me -- clearly what is going to matter a lot in terms of how he is evaluated going forward is how the economy goes. so there is an economic

reopening happening. that is going to cause a lot of growth. a lot of people to go back to work. what we are going to have to see how the economy absorbs all of the new government spending that has taken place, and so we are going to see -- we are in the midst of some inflation. we are going to have to see how -- whether that subsides or whether that becomes a new feature of the economy. clearly if we see some inflation continuing to persist, and we see jobs reports that are good certainly, but not quite what economists expect, that those are going to be things to look out for. but at the moment, i think most voters are pretty happy with the way the vaccine is rolling out, and the fact that we are getting somewhat back to normal. host: when it comes to jobs, we saw that jobs report last week, is that a good marker for this

administration? guest: it is certainly better than the last two jobs reports. it is still below what would have been expected based on the fact that we are reopening. and we are still about 9 million jobs short of what we were pre-pandemic. but, you know, obviously with any new jobs better, i think what will happen with additional unemployment benefits phase out in september, does that incite a lot of more workers to go back to the labor force? we have not -- that has not really been something that has performed up to expectations, but clearly, given that we are in the midst of the reopening, things are better than they have been over the past year. host: one of the lines taking a look at the biden administration politically, the new york times highlights that the job approval

has been in the mid-50's for most of the year, particular when it comes to his handling of the virus. also highlighting the fact that his numbers are weaker on topics like crime and immigration. and overall, what is the republican strategy now for the current biden administration continuing -- considering what you highlighted? guest: i think you have to look at the fact that democratic majorities in the congress are pretty small. so in 1994 republicans picked up 52 seats in the house. in 2010, the first midterm election for barack obama, republicans gain 63 seats in the house. they don't need to do anything quite like that to retake both houses of congress. they can add fairly minor gains, a gain of six or seven seats in the house, a net gain of one in the senate would give them a majority. i think republicans are going to focus on the level of spending,

overheating the economy -- is that causing some inflation? are the jobs reports below what we would expect? which so far they have been. obviously immigration and crime are very big issues. people are very concerned about homicides we are seeing in a lot of major cities. and the situation at the border is an area where president biden has some of the lowest job approval ratings based on the public polling that we have seen. people are not very happy with how he has handled that. so those are really big opportunity areas for republicans, and they are focusing on these issues. these are the types of things that also get the sorts of voters that turn out in midterm elections to come to the polls. i think you are going to hear more and more about that. i think those are the things that president biden needs to be careful about. host: jim antle, our guest with

the washington examiner. for democrats, 202-748-8000. republicans, 202-748-8001. independents 202-748-8002 202-748-8002,. you wrote a recent column talking about negotiating skills in the senate. how are you seeing them play out now? can you talk about that, but relate it to what discussions are going on with the infrastructure packet? guest: president biden is a man who served 36 years in the senate. a big argument for his candidacy would be that he would be able to reach across the aisle, he would be able to negotiate, he would be able to come to some legislative solutions. some infrastructure is a test -- so infrastructure is a test of that. the bipartisan talks centered in the white house did not go very well, but ultimately a group of

centrist democrats and centrist republicans in the senate continued talking, and they came up with a framework, and the white house has come out in support of that framework. so you have a situation where there is potentially a infrastructure bill that could get more than 60 votes in the senate, which would be enough to clear a filibuster, which would mean that it would be able to pass. but you also add the fact that president biden is in support of a reconciliation. a bill that would pass only with democratic votes, that would not be subject to a filibuster in the senate, that would maybe re-add some of the liberal policy priorities that are stripped from the bipartisan bill. so does one bill end up tanking the other? that is really the big question. they want to pass both bills. they would like to get as big an

infrastructure package through a combination of these two bills as they can. but trying to do the reconciliation bill, does that abandon bipartisan talks? or are those in the house unwilling to vote for a bipartisan bill, pending whether they can get the reconciliation bill through both houses of congress. you have the fact that you have liberals in the house they have committed to saying both bills or none, and then you have kyrsten sinema and joe manchin, two centrist democrats in the senate, who will have a lot to say about whether a reconciliation bill passes. so there is a framework in place , but there is still a lot that has to come together for these things to pass. host: have the cards been

revealed, which is most satisfying to him? guest: the only thing that republicans will be willing to support, and somep republicans are not even willingt to support that. op it is a trillion dollar bill. we have seen the administration proposed spending packages that are $2 trillion each. we could get up to $6 trillion to $10 trillion in new spending. if all of their legislative plans are adopted. but certainly there is some republican support for the bipartisan infrastructure framework, and there is no republican support for what they are trying to do for reconciliation, which is why they are trying to do it through reconciliation, though they won't need republican support. but if that is a spending bill, that is it -- that is a spending bill that contains a lot more money than the bipartisan bill. host: questions for him on facebook. you can post on facebook

.com/c-span. our twitter feed also. one of the things before the break, this idea of a subcommittee -- a select committee to advance the investigation on january 6. how does that advance things going forward? guest: i think there was always going to be an investigation of the events of january 6. clearly the justice department is investigated people who were in the riot that are -- people who were involved in the right, there will be prosecution. there are members of congress who see some big questions that are not yet resolved. i think one issue will be, does this simply relitigate the final days of the trump administration, or can we agree to which this was a planned event, and what role federal

investigators who were trying to figure out when all of the characters organizing this were up to come over -- were up to, what they played. to what degree was this simply an event where you had some protests that spiraled out of control? to what degree was this an organized attempt to disrupt the certification of the electoral college results? we still don't know the answer to those questions. hopefully that is what the select committee will come up with. it was an attempt to have a different type of committee, one that would have been i think somewhat less partisan. house republicans did not support that. senate republicans blocked it through the filibuster. so we are going to have this investigation a little bit more under house speaker nancy

pelosi's terms then we might otherwise have had -- and then might have otherwise have had it. we will have to see what they come up with. host: eight chosen by nancy pelosi, five yet to be determined by the house committee. talk about lynn cheney. why is she put in place but -- liz cheney. why is she put in place by the democrats? guest: i think liz cheney has become the primary republican voice who is critical in terms of president trump in terms of how he handled the election, his continued casting of doubt on the election results, accusations of voter fraud, things of that nature. she was among the 10 house republicans who voted to impeach then president trump on the basis of inciting the january 6 riot. and then she ultimately lost her

position in the house republican leadership. she was the chairwoman of the house republican conference, the third ranking republican in the house. the perception existed that she was more focused on criticizing trump that she was on promoting the house republican position ahead of the midterm election. so she survived one vote. the second vote removed her from that position. she was replaced by elise stefanik, a republican from new york. so in terms of making the committee appear bipartisan but also finding a person who is broadly in agreement with the democratic position that president trump cited, the events of january 6, that there needs to be some accountability for that. i think liz cheney very much fits into that role and reinforces that message, but

does it in a way that she is clearly somebody who has been involved in republican politics for quite some time. not a big fan of president trump, but as somebody who i think it is pretty hard to write off as a partisan democrat. host: the lines. they all start with a 202 area code. 202-748-8000 for democrats, 202-748-8001 for republicans, and 202-748-8002 for independents. what has raised the debate other than -- is the not wholly unjustified perception that each party is weaponizing election integrity or voting rights for their own partisan gain. happens to be sickly lined up with what most experts believe would help them win a competitive election. my mistake, this goes back to the debate that has been going on about voting rights,

particular with the efforts of passed legislation to change those voting rights in the house and senate. guest: democrats in the house and senate want to do an overall review of how elections are conducted in this country, a much larger federal role in those elections. republicans do not want to do that and have thus far been able to block it in the senate but have at the state level in passing a number of bills that are intended to tighten voter id , getting rid of third parties being able to collect and deliver mail in and absentee ballots. we saw a law of that nature in arizona passed by republican-controlled legislature, upheld by the supreme court this week. so these are very controversial issues. republicans are trying to make sure that the rules for voting

are stricter. democrats are trying to make sure that as many people are able to vote as possible. there are some tensions, of course, between ballot access and ballot security. but as i mentioned in that piece, one of the reasons why the debate is as heated as it is is that in each case, the parties i think perceive themselves to be getting some kind of advantage by having the legal regime surrounding voting that they prefer. republicans believe that if you tighten up some of the protocols that we saw in the 2020 election, that they would win more races, possibly given that the presidential race really came down to fewer than 45,000 votes, remaining battleground states. from an electoral college perspective. the democrats believe that the

greater the turnout, the greater their chances of winning. clearly they are pretty happy that joe biden has 81 million votes. that might not have happened in the situation where you did not have the degree of mail-in voting that we saw during covid and last year's election. so this is going to remain, i think, a pretty heated topic going forward. redistricting is going to play a pretty big role in the shape of the electoral map. next year's midterm election. so there is really a lot that will come down to what are the rules surrounding voting in the competitive states? host: jim antle our guest. democrats like, you are on with jim antle comedy politics after -- politics editor of "the washington examiner." caller: you are welcome for the question i have, with respect to

the select committee and the appointment of the members -- assuming that mccarthy does not designate any republicans for that select committee, and assuming further that speaker pelosi wishes to up an equal number of republicans, how is she to do it and liz cheney? guest: well, the statute creating the committee says that she is going to seek the input of the minority leader, kevin mccarthy, in terms of what republicans and up on the committee, but it doesn't require her to only allow those appointees. the likelihood would be if kevin mccarthy wants to appoint people to the committee that she would not allow that to go forward. but if she does have some -- but

she does have shown -- but she does have some options if mccarthy does not put anyone on the committee. she has already put liz cheney on the committee. they could proceed on that basis. they could also install other members along with housework and's who did not vote against certifying the electoral college vote. that will be one of the bigger controversies going forward, is kevin mccarthy, if he does decide to appoint members, if he appoints members who represent the majority position among the house republican conference, which was to vote against certifying at least some of the electoral college results, does nancy pelosi regard as illegitimate that they are on that committee and on that basis , try to block some of those appointments? that is something that i think we have to take a look at. we don't really know what leader mccarthy is going to do yet, but

i think, you know, putting liz cheney on the committee was a shot across the bow, and we will have to see what his approach will be to the committee makeup. host: to the larger issues of the actions of january 6 -- this is janet from florida off twitter, saying -- similar thoughts from randy in michigan, texting us -- so what is the pay like since the sixth, and what happens now? guest: former president trump is still a major player in the republican party, and rank and file republican voters are still very supportive of him, and they tend to agree with his take on the election, that the election was in some way flawed or worse than that. there has not been much sign, at

least in the public polling, that that is changing. but, you know, he is not in office anymore. there is an opportunity for other republican elected officials to step forward and take a leadership role in the party. depending on what president trump decides to do in 2024, we could end up seeing some very big changes. so, you know, i think when you talk about a lot of these things, people do take a partisan position. certainly you have a large number of democrats, at least in some polling, who suggest that russia altered the vote totals in 2016. that was something for which there is no evidence, but a lot of people believed. there does tend to be questions where there is a lot of partisan polarization.

people do take a position that their party is expected to take. so how much that actually matters for republicans going forward i think is something we are going to have to watch. but president trump, unlike other recent former presidents, is not going away. he is still on the front pages of newspapers on fairly regular basis. i think the select committee investigation will keep those headlines going. certainly the trump organization were keep a lot of those headlines going. but he is going to keep them going himself by taking on a pretty active campaign like role doing rallies all of the country and things like that. so this is really somewhat uncharted territory. . it has been quite a long time since we have had a former president who has remained an active political figure in this way.

>> let's hear from frank, republican line, jupiter, florida. go ahead. caller: how are you doing this morning? the commander in chief, joe biden, needs to get a test done to see if his marbles are all there. i don't think they are. what is your opinion on this? i don't even think he is capable of being president. thank you. guest: it is -- we are in somewhat unprecedented territory here in president biden's. he is older than any previous president. ronald reagan was the previous oldest to serve. he left office about a month before his 78th birthday. president biden took office after his 78th birthday. if he were to run for reelection, he would be over 80

years old seeking a second term. we have really never had that happen before. president trump was also over 70, an older man by historical standards, for the presidency, but he has raised a lot of questions. i think president biden has performed in big moments when that has been expected of him, so his major speeches i think of gone well as debate performances in the general election. they certainly went well. his speech at the joint session of congress went well enough. but there is a sense that maybe he is not quite as that's not quite firing on the same number of cylinders as when he was vice president. this is a man who has been in the public eye for decades, so the public is familiar with him, and they know his speech patterns and what he is like. so there is going to be some

scrutiny of him in this position at this age, older than any previous president. host: from new jersey, republican line. this is jerry. go ahead. caller: i saw nancy pelosi saying it was an armed insurrection. i was just wondering, how many guns were confiscated during that? and i know that -- i know there are 1400 hrs of tapes of this. so why won't the democratic party just show us the tapes? i know that there are several hundred still under arrest, but nothing is insurrection. they are all just for trespassing and those kinds of things. so how many guns did they confiscate come and how many people were still arrested from

january 6? and do they really have 14,000 hours of tapes and video? i want to get to the bottom of this, too. host: thanks, caller. guest: i imagine that the tapes are going to be a big thing that the committee is going to look at. certainly i think where you are going to get to the bottom of a number of things will be that there are people who are arrested in the system and who are going to be prosecuted. as the caller mentioned, a number are being charged for things like trespassing and destruction of public property and things of that nature. it may be where we get our fullest picture is in terms of what do all the prosecutions look like? what are people convicted of doing? what kind of crimes do they ultimately yield -- what kind of

crimes ultimately yield to convictions and prosecutable offenses? the select committee is designed , or at least in theory is designed, to look at the big picture. and what was the purpose of this? this, was this a protest that got out of control, was this somewhat more of a planned event that had a specific aim of disrupting the certification of the electoral college certifications. obviously to some degree it was designed to disrupt that but was it really something that was going to prevent that from happening or did we just have a bunch of people protesting who spilled into the capital and it just went out of control after that. host: of the criticisms republicans had leading up to this was that there were already investigations leading up on several fronts. what do you think about that as

a republican used to keep this committee from being formed? >> i think if people had greater confidence in the idea that congressional investigators are honest brokers, that would have an a tougher argument to make. democrats did not have faith in the benghazi hearings, republicans did not have faith in the investigations of the trump administration. there is a perception that this is going to largely be used as a way of beating up on congressional republicans, if there wasn't the case there would have been more bipartisan report for the committee. at the same time there are clearly a lot of people who would like to know more information about what happened on january 6. obviously a lot of it can be sussed out what happens to the

people who get prosecuted. there are certainly big picture questions that those prosecutors aren't well-designed to answer that in theory if we could have confidence in the select committee that the committee might be able to answer. certainly a lot of republicans think they are simply weaponizing this politically and that they want to continue relitigating 2020 because the midterm elections in 2024 don't look as good for them. host: this is jesse on the democrats line. caller: good morning. i'm calling because i barely caught it pieces of the comments, i heard a false equivalency between the

democratic position around the involvement of russia in 2016 election. that definitely proved that there was involvement. was it proof that they actually changed any votes or anything, that wasn't approved. even putin admitted to it in a press conference that yes of course they did. so equating that to the completely false and negated allegations around the issues -- really truly allegations that are issues with the elections in 2020 is really not something that should be bypassed in the conversation. thank you. guest: right, but what you are saying was never proven. there is no evidence that any votes were changed, which is

what i said. i never denied that russia made some attempts to sway public opinion in the 2016 election which i don't think very many people dispute. some people do, but i don't think very many dispute that. the conspiracy theory, the unverified thing that many partisans believe is that there were votes that were altered and there is simply no evidence for that. host: one of the criticisms when it comes to this committee is the lack of a timeline or at least a definite and. what are republicans concerned about? >> if there is no timeline, you can continue to drag things out through various elections. you can make things campaign issues. certainly i think in a lot of these investigations having some kind of date certain at which things and creates a certain

amount of discipline to the investigation and prevents a mission creep from happening for the committee. i think democrats would argue that this should take as long as it needs for them to get to the bottom of what happened. so i think the republican would be the -- concerned would simply be that it becomes a fishing exposition -- expedition. democrats are going to argue that you need to put in the time and the resources that it will take to actually come up the answers as to what happened to january 6. host: one of the criticisms was the impact it could have on the elections. host: is it actually a fact-finding operation or is it something that's designed to keep the events of january 6 in

the public eye, under a set of circumstances politically in the midterm elections that otherwise would not be as favorable to the democrats. i think a lot of democrats feel continued to discuss january 6 is favorable grand -- ground for them. litigating things that have gone on since january 6 is less favorable. it's a republican concerned that this is something to help democrats in the coming elections. democrats argue that getting to the bottom of this should be a nonpartisan scenario. host: republican line from indiana, connie. you are next. caller: one lady asked the question and it didn't get answered.

i want to know how many guns were found in the insurrection at the capitol building. >> i don't know the answer to that. some of that is going to come out as a result of the prosecutions of people who were arrested for participating. in the riot. that is an example of the types of questions that a select committee should be able to pursue. in terms of who gets prosecuted obviously you're only going to come up with the facts relevant to the case by which they might be convicted in terms of big picture, a number of guns, who was organizing the event. what they were trying to do, to what degree was this simply a protest that got out of control versus a coordinated attempt to prevent the certification of the electoral college results. those of the type of things that

a committee looking at the big picture should be focused on trying to get to the bottom of. a number of the protesters who were arrested were not armed and no one was shot, but the number of weapons that people possess in the capital, i don't know that we have heard final number on that. hopefully between the committee and the prosecutions we will get an answer to that question. host: you decided to take on the topic of critical race theory. he wrote, they are correct to note that racism has been tragic with consequences we continue to live with today, but treating patriotism as if they are in contention with each other as the provocative 1619 project -- is something we will regret it can you elaborate? >> sure.

i think that treating pride in the country, patriotism, national pride and a belief in racial equality as if they are goals that are in tension with each other is something that we are going to live to regret if we do that. you don't have anything that unifies all of us if we don't believe we are living in one country. i think that a belief that our founding principles were inherently racist rather than the product this that began our country were in tension with those principles and that we over time began to live more in accord with our founding principles, i think that is a much better argument and basis for us all living together peacefully in one country and for us to argue that the countries founding itself was a

racist act. we are going to really have to find a way for us all to live together and come together as one country and if we reject any notion that there is any basis to do that, i think it's going to cause more hatred, more social division and it's not going to solve the problems we need solved for us all to go forward as americans. host: the national education association is setting aside money to push back against this idea of critical race theory or at least that it's too complicated to teach to k-12 students. is it true that it's being taught on the k-12 level? >> certainly some things that are influenced by critical race theory starting to be taught in public school curriculum. you could debate whether it is specifically critical race theory.

i think obviously it's important to teach the role racism has played in american society, but what is specific to critical race theory is the idea that people are oppressors and victims based on their racial identity, based on their skin color and i think that this certainly problematic and something that should not be in public school curricula. but certainly that should not preclude us from having an honest discussion about the role that slavery, segregation, efforts to disrupt black businesses, lynching. many of the tragic and terrible things that have in a part of our history we do need to discuss those things, but we don't necessarily need to have an ideological or marxist framework for how we discuss them. host: republican line.

caller: good morning. could you comment on bidens plan to have multiple dwellings in the suburbs and those who don't abide by this will be punished by losing funds? isn't that just an attempt to -- the suburbs so there will be more democratic voters in the same fashion as illegal immigrants will become democrats leading to a one-party democratic state? thank you. >> is interesting that joe biden likely owes his presidency to the fact that he made a number of inroads among suburban voters and certainly democrats retook the house in 2018 based on gains among suburban voters but there's a lot of concern that some of the housing policies and

other policies that the administration is pursuing and the clinton and obama administrations considered some of these policies might lead to the end of the suburbs in terms of multi-dwelling houses, making it harder in terms of zoning and regulations for you to have single-family homes. democrats argue that this is beneficial to affordable housing. republicans are going to argue that it's going to be disrupt to the whole idea of why people moved out to the suburbs in the first place. and i think it's going to become a major campaign issue at a time when democrats are making some of their biggest gains among suburban voters. host: your piece today takes a

look at the supreme court and the debate whether the expanding of such a court -- talk about what you are writing about today. >> after last week's supreme court decisions where you saw pair of six to three rulings, one striking down a california nonprofit donor disclosure law and another upholding a republican passed law in arizona regulating the voting process, the fact that the conservative majority was unified on this question and voted along conservative lines has made a lot of progressives talk again about expanding the supreme court and there's a possibility that stephen breyer, a liberal justice may retire. but democrats would like to after president trump had got

three nominees to the supreme court confirmed would like an opportunity to reshape the court a little bit. being able to expand the number of justices is one opportunity to do that. i think the math for that in the senate at least is pretty daunting. i think it would be fairly hard to do. it is certainly something that liberal activists are talking about. it is something they might make a serious push to do. host: jim antal serves as the editor of politics. >> we will talk with historians douglas brinkley, professor of history at west university and professor of history at howard university.

richard norton smith, presidential biographer in amity , chair of the presidential foundation. watch the conversation tonight beginning at 9:00 p.m. eastern. and before the program go to c-span.org/president survey 2021 see the full results of the 2021 survey. host: judd legum joins us. he is the author of a publication called popular information. thank you for joining us. can you explain what your publication does and what kind of things that focuses on? >> it's a completely independent publication. no advertising. reader supported. and we really look deeply at sources of power whether that's corporations, politicians, the media and we try to dig a little deeper, look at the money behind it and compare that and how the money is being spent to what

people are saying publicly. really trying in any way we can figure out to hold power to account. host: was it things lacking in other journalism efforts on these type of topics? >> there is other great work being done in accountability journalism, but i didn't think there was room for more. there needs to be more scrutiny that we are living in a time where there is more and more power concentrated in fewer and fewer people and their need to be really robust efforts to hold those people to account. so i think there needed to be more of it. i do think the need for it is greater than ever. host: but a longform approach is what you take to these topics. >> that's right. i don't try to cover the whole

ground. i tried to dig deeply into a topic and i will cover one topic one day. sometimes i will cover it over weeks and months. host: we just showed viewers one of the latest stories published. it was about corporate support of the lgbt community during pride month. what prompted you to write about this issue? >> i have covered it for a support for pride month, which i think generally is viewed positively and i certainly don't have any of section two it. this was just an effort to look behind the rainbow colored logos and those other things you see and look at how these corporations are spending their money. that's an approach i take to a lot of different stories. i thought it was particularly relevant here because the

corporations were so aggressive in promoting pro lgbtq messaging. host: he found out what as you investigated this further? >> 20 corporations were very outspoken on lgbtq rights who had donated millions of dollars to anti-gave politicians and we defined that i looking at the politicians that were rated zero by the human rights campaign which is the most prominent lgbtq rights organization in the united states. we also looked at something that was little more current to 2021 which was a series of anti-trans bills that were introduced across a variety of states and looked at corporate

contributions to those as well. host: can you elaborate with some examples? >> cvs health not only turned their logo into a rainbow but signed onto a statement saying that along with other companies, they opposed these anti-trans bills that were advancing in the states. they were proud to oppose them, they stood in solidarity with the lgbtq community. we found that in several states, they had donated to the sponsors of those exact bills. just to give you an example, in north carolina they had donated to senator ralph highs, who sponsored what was called by the advocate the most draconian bill introduced in 2021 and not only did they donate to him, but his

views on these issues were well known because he was also behind the notorious bathroom bill in north carolina that prompted a lot of controversy a few years ago. so the piece was really about comparing the rhetoric from a company like cvs which is trying to publicly promote the image that they are very supportive of lgbtq rights and in some ways they are, but looking at their political donations and showing how that really doesn't match up and in addition to those state-level contributions, we found over $200,000 in contributions to federal elected officials who received a zero from the human rights campaign. host: judd legum, the author of popular information. if you want to ask him questions, you can call the

line. democrats (202) 748-8000. republicans (202) 748-8001. independents (202) 748-8002. you can also text us and post to our social media. was there any direct line drawn between the donation and the legislator support for these anti-gay bills? >> no, because that's not how political donations work. that's part of the issue. i don't believe they are donating to them because they want to support their work on lgbtq issues. they may sit on a committee for a company like cvs health that impacts their bottom line. what it shows is that they are prioritizing these bottom-line concerns above their stated corporate values.

so that's really what it's illustrating. i suppose there are some cases where they are secretly trying to advance these anti-lgbtq bills, but mostly it's that they are prioritizing other issues. host: i noticed quite a theme the kind of responses you got from the companies. >> that's generally what they say. they don't agree with everything these politicians do, they don't agree with all their positions and they give to people on both sides of the aisle. this is a standard thing that companies have been saying for many years. but i think there's a couple of constituencies that are starting to reject this approach. i think people want -- that's why companies are turning their logos into rainbows. they want the companies they patronize to reflect their values but also the employees

want to work at a place that they can feel proud of. so those constituencies i think are becoming more skeptical of that kind of approach. on many issues it is still the approach that these companies need. host: can you talk about the stances of january 6? >> that is something we have been covering on an ongoing basis. we contacted over 140 companies. we asked them if they were going to continue to donate to members of congress who objected to the certification of the electoral college, essentially a vote to overturn the election results. initially we got three companies that said that they would not.

continue to do so. and that created a small ball affect -- snowball effect. companies said they would stop donations to all members of congress or to the publicans who objected. since then we have been continuing to track where the corporate dollars are going and seeing what corporations are biting those pledges and what corporations are returning to business as usual. host: talk about how many people are involved in this. >> it's myself and i have a very talented research assistant. we are looking at primary source information. whether that's the federal election commission data that comes out on a regular basis we

are going to get a whole new dump of it on july 15 so it's coming up very shortly or the state level data or any other kind of primary source information that can form the basis of these reports. then we work from there and build out sourcing. and we started reporting on what companies were saying, some of the companies were getting back to us. other companies were making their announcements internally. once people realized we were tracking this very closely, they sent out a memo that let us know. so that's the approach. host: viewer says what you've brought out so far is excellent reasons why we need to pass the for the people act adding that

it will take the bs out of campaigning and election's money. can you elaborate on that? host -- guest: one of the things the for the people act would bring is more transparency. a lot of the money that gets spent on politics isn't public. if you donate directly to a politician that's public. if you donate to a nonprofit group that might be very involved in politics is not a political campaign, you don't find out about it. so bills like that could create more transparency and could lead to more accountability. it want and money in politics, but i do think these efforts to bring to the for what's going on, to not allow it to operate in the shower -- shadows can

make positive changes because it forces people to at least explain or take responsibility for what they are doing. host: one of the forthcoming topics is related to voting. talk about what you are most interested in looking at, but it comes to that story? how do you plan to follow up on that? guest: the whole process went through and at the last minute, they walked out and broke the forum and the bill sailed. it is coming back this week. we have done some really deep research into the corporate money. the biggest corporate donor over $5,000 to the sponsors of the voting legislation.

you have had corporations who have come out and said that they are opposed to this legislation. what else are corporations willing to do? it is easy to say you are opposed to the legislation, but if you keep supporting the politicians that are behind the legislation, those words can be kind of hollow. you have had a number of corporations sign onto letters, posing all efforts to restrict voting across the country, but you have not had them do what they did after january 6, suspending contributions to people, which would have a bigger impact than just the principle of saying that they are opposed. host: let me take you to the

supreme court. upholding last week, arizona's voting restrictions -- talk about the impact of this decision. guest: it could be extremely important. what they said is that they would be looking for a very specific determination of discriminatory intent. there would have to be a very large negative impact on minority communities for the law to be overturned. this was something that was being read into the law, that there really is no minimal impact that would supposedly be

ok under the voting rights act. it makes the federal action -- it makes it even more consequential because the likelihood is that whatever passes out of texas would get upheld by the supreme court. each case is different. it is certainly not indicating that the supreme court is in a posture where they will easily overturn voting laws, even voting laws that will have a negative impact on other minority groups. host: our first call for you comes from joe in new jersey. no ahead. caller: in light of what you

said about corporate funding, what is your opinion of public funding for the people that are running and what about the length of time compared to the way it used to be? host: -- guest: it would have to be set up the right way. some candidates used to take advantage, but it is not robust enough. it did not always used to be that way.

you have to invest money in it. you can bring up to layer people really had the money that they needed to run a congressional race. it could help. as far as the length, they go on way too long. i'm not sure what you could do, legally, about it because people have the right to express themselves politically. they are allowed to, but i think that is a big part of it because it makes these things so expensive. even the money to run for a seat in congress. that increases the power of the people who have the money. this is not an issue that is really a partisan issue on one

side or the other. people want to see politicians that they support. do not necessarily want to see the ones sucking up to powerful forces. it is an authority problem to tackle. caller: i wanted to ask if the voting law would include taxpayer funding for candidates. guest: the federal voting law? caller: correct. guest: i believe it has a public financing aspect to it. all these schemes are optional. you have a candidate who announced for senate in ohio.

he has a super pac with $10 million funded so what i am raising a question of is, are you going to have a scheme able to compete against that level of funding? generally, they do not. there is a long pass to get voting legislation through the congress. host: corporations are people and money creates speech. this is the result of the misuse of these decisions. guest: i do not know exactly what they are driving at. i think that is right. that is really where we are, as far as these kinds of

restrictions. as long as corporations are allowed to spend effectively unlimited funds, that is where i think transparency is so important. they do not say that corporations are allowed to spend unlimited secret money. one of the things that i have written about that could be extremely important, absent a decision is you could have the securities and exchange commission requiring public companies to disclose all of their political spending, all of their political spending for advocacy organizations, for trade associations and other groups that play such an

important role in our politics. that is what i am focused on because absent a major constitutional amendment, transparency is our best chance to restore some accountability to the system. host: how much transparent do they offer when people like yourself make determinations? guest: we can see the federal election commission has all of the campaign committees, which include the candidates themselves, but also these packs that are operating as well. the irs has disclosure for another entity, but when you start getting into other groups that you will see advertisements on tv -- they will be almost

indistinguishable and that information is not really disclosed. that is where i would like to see more disclosure. caller: good morning. in 1929, the u.s. congress capped. they do not reapportioned the house anymore when our population grows, like they used to. we went from 200,000 people per district to 740,000. each year, as the population grows, the district grows. how come the house has not been on tap, so we could actually run against long-term serving

representatives who have served for too long, based on money alone? guest: it is an interesting idea . not one that i have given a ton of sought to, but that is the issue. the other issue is that people's attention is so diffused now. there might have been one major newspaper that everybody read or maybe a couple local television networks where you could reach a large swath of people. now, in order to reach your potential constituency, there are so many different avenues. all of these things need to be combined, and it is quite expensive, especially if you are in a highly competitive race. host: this is robbie from los

angeles saying, thank you for your dogged reporting. for which social issues do you think the biggest gap exists for public understanding? guest: a lot of the gaps exist because of the inability to track the money that goes to trade associations. voting rights is a big one because corporations have come out and you may have seen open letters that have been published in the new york times and other publications saying that they are supportive of voting rights, but many corporations are contributing hundreds of thousands of dollars, if not millions of dollars, which is opposing federal legislation

that could protect against these laws were essentially these efforts to restrict voting. on the one hand, you have very public communications being undertaken on behalf of these corporations, expressing support for voting rights, but on the other hand, it is being funneled to trade associations blocking federal legislation that could actually stop the kind of legislation that these companies oppose. there is certainly a number of others. host: he was the founder of think progress. what prompted you? what was involved in you making the decision to go for it on

your own? guest: it had grown to about 35 people and i realized i was spending most of my time managing people, helping people with their work, but i woke up one day and i really missed digging into the data and the research myself. i wanted to create something where i could do the work and i wanted to create something completely unencumbered by any outside influence. no parent organization. something that existed independently, so it could be done in the most aggressive way possible. host: what do you think of these paid for newsletters? do you think there is a growth factor as far as an avenue of journalism? guest: you are not going to

replace the new york times by reading popular information. i cannot cover every single story. it is not a replacement, but there is a lot of ways, especially if you have a deep interest, to dive deeper and get something that you might not be able to get from traditional sources, but i am bullish on the ability of these independent newsletters and publications to provide additional value to readers. host: karen is next. caller: good morning. i just want to ask, since the court decided that corporations were people, when i have to file my taxes, i have to tell them how much and where it came from.

i thought of another question. you were saying about the different places and influence. how do you get paid if you do not work for somebody else? guest: that is a good question. i will take that last one first. my newsletter has been available since march 2020, for free. you can go and sign up. but i have a paid option for people who support the work we are doing. that is how i get paid. as far as citizens united, the way that corporations pay taxes, i think that this is a huge issue. when you have income, you pay your taxes. the government knows how much you are being paid and it gets withheld from your paycheck. when you have these incredibly

complex structures, where you can move money offshore and have an affiliate in ireland or in the bahamas, you have a lot more options. that is fundamentally unfair, and i think there are some things being proposed as part of this infrastructure deal. it would try to create a baseline, talk of a minimum tax for corporations that might be able to change that to bring much-needed simplicity, but right now you are right. normal people who make income pay their taxes and wealthy people do not always pay taxes. that is something that a lot of people feel they need to change.

host: one truth and three lies about this. what prompted you to write this? guest: it is almost number one issue in certain places. it is an academic area of study that i was exposed to years ago. as it resolved, i know that much of what is talked about has absolutely nothing to do with critical race theory. that is not to say that there are not things that go on. i'm sure there are some lessons being taught that are inappropriate or unwise, but the idea that taking a critical look at our history and the role of racism in our history, encouraging students to understand it -- i think it is

quite important. i wanted to set this record straight about what critical race theory is. the next step of the, i am working on a project where i will try. a lot of the sources are opaque, trying to unravel some of the money that is driving this push to inject the issue into our politics. host: when you talk money, what sources are you talking about? guest: a lot of them have to do with nonprofit groups. there are bills being introduced on the state level by politicians that have different sources of campaign financing as well. it is coming from a lot of different angles.

i will not promise any particular, but it is in the works, and it is something that i think should be valuable to understand. critical race theory has been around since the 80's. it is the biggest issue in the country and it does not happen by accident. host: hello. go ahead, please. caller: good morning. i just wanted to comment on child protective services in our country and i wanted to state that i want justice. i want the democrats to know that we as mothers, we have been -- some of us have been

victimized. i just want politicians to understand that and to bring it to the forefront that we need reformation. it violates as and it puts us into positions, financially that we cannot afford. i just want justice because i want my child to be in my life. my mom is still very much trying to be a part of her life. host: as far as the examinations that you do, do you focus on the joe biden administration at all? guest: we have taken a look at a number of issues with the joe

biden administration. we have looked at his nominees for the dip -- defense department, potential conflicts of interest with major defense contractors. that was something that we took a close look at. any number of issues, wherever it comes up, but most of the work this year has been focused on a lot of corporate accountability because that is where we felt there was the most room to operate, so we were not duplicating things that were done well in other places. host: two things to show you off of our twitter feed. rick says, thank you for bringing companies to the front.

also, this viewer from florida says many companies act sympathetically to the community. why is this ignored? guest: i think that is a valid point. it comes up in a lot of different issues. certainly operating in china with the human rights record in that country raises a lot of questions on a number of fronts, so i do think that what the listener is getting at, that this is a very complicated issue to untangle and to really align not only public statements, not only political donations, but the way in which you spend your money and operates -- it is

difficult and complicated, but it is something that people are looking for. host: we talked about the texas voting restrictions you will be covering. what are the topics you plan on pursuing? guest: as i mentioned before, we are going to get the next major look at how corporations have been spending their money. 2021 is an off year and the campaigns only having to report quarterly. it was reported april 15 and we only got a small look because there were only two months after the january attack where corporations had an opportunity

to donate. that will be something that we are looking at in great detail. there will be a lot of data to look through. we will continue to look at critical race theory and how it is impacting politics. that is where a lot of action is happening on voting rights, uncritical waste theory and a host of issues. washington is bottlenecked. pandemic relief bill that was passed earlier this year, but since then, there has not been a lot of major legislation passed, but that is not the case on the state level. that is where a lot of our focus will be. host: one of the things you will be talking about is the cpac convention. guest: that is right.

i think that how the more extreme figures, how they get their money, what they are saying and how they are influencing politics is one of the critical issues. we see that happening in texas as well. alan has been a figure. she is now going to challenge the sitting governor, greg added , in the primary. that has in impact because not only could he win, but it influences how greg added handles himself as governor. that might be how he vetoed funding for the entire legislature and is essentially

saying he will not approve it until they pass the restrictions. a lot of what goes on at an event like this could reverberate out and a bunch of different ways. host: republican line, go ahead. caller: thank you for taking my call. i want to ask if your guest supports term limits. guest: i will tell you the answer. i do not think it is particularly important what i support. people who read the kind of work that i do have all sorts of decisions. a term limit is a blunt instrument. i would like to see a campaign system that gives everyone a fair chance. if there is someone on a substantive level who can

convince their constituents that they are the best person to represent their district, i think that they should have that opportunity, but i do not think they should block out opponents to make them nonentities. i certainly understand the arguments for term limits. i understand that it is something that comes up, and it would get us more of a rotation through, but for me, i would take a different approach through. host: how you find that on the web, what is the next time that you will be publishing? guest: i will be publishing tomorrow morning at 6:30 in the morning. tomorrow will take a look at an issue called committee to committee transfers. you have companies that have said that they will not donate

to these 147 republicans. if you look at the data, they have not, but what we have done is we have traced how they have donated to political committees who then, in turn, they donated to republicans, so it is a kind of follow the money >> the secret service was founded after the death of abraham lincoln but it was not until the assassination of kennedy began to get the attention of american people. in the prologue of a new book, covered started on hooker gate,

a scandal in which agents rot prostitutes to their hotel rooms while making -- agents brought prostitutes to their hotel rooms. we talk with the author about her in-depth look in her new book subtitled the rise and fall of the secret server -- secret service. >> this note -- book notes plus, listen at c-span. or wherever you get your podcasts. >> now it is the remarks by president biden for the fourth of july where he talks about the greatness of americans and thanks the u.s. military for their service. he goes on to say the country has lived through some of its darkest years but a brighter future is ahead. this is about 15 minutes. ♪ [cheering] >> ladies and gentlemen, the

president of the united states. [cheers, shouting] [applause] ♪ [hail to the chief] [cheering] [applause] ♪ pres. biden: good evening. today we celebrate america! [applause] our freedom, our liberty, our independence. the fourth of july, a sacred day in our country. today, history and hope,

remembrance and resolving promise and possibilities. before me stands monuments to the greatest and the goodness of our nation. monuments of life and liberty. there is a towering memorial to george washington, the general who led our revolution, the president who set our nation on a course. there is a memorial to thomas jefferson, whose words about liberty and equality literally changed the world. across the title basin -- tidal basin of the jefferson memorial, there stands dr. martin the king junior. toward the promised land where equality is not only an aspiration, but a reality. [cheers]

they helped define who we are and guide what we do, and remind us of the work given to us in our own time. this year, the fourth of july is a special celebration. we are emerging from the darkness of years, the year of pandemics and isolation, a year of pain, fear, and heartbreaking loss. just think back to where this nation was one year ago. think back to where you were, one year ago. and thing about how far we have come, finally -- [applause] streets lined with people waiting american flags. and in arenas, fans back in their seats cheering together again.

and families pressing hands to windows two grandchildren hugging grand children again. we are back seeing one another again. businesses are opening and hiring again. we are seeing record job creation and record economic growth. the best and for decades -- the best we have seen in four decades and, i may add, the best in the world. [applause] today, all across this nation, we may say with confidence, america is coming back together. [applause] 245 years ago, we declared our dependence from a distant king. today, closer than ever to declaring our independence from a deadly virus. that is not to say the battle against covid-19 is over. we have a lot more work to do.

but just as our declaration in 1776 was a call to action, not a reason for complacency. it was a call to action and the same is true today. back then we have the power of an idea on our side. today, there is the power of science. [applause] thanks to our heroic vaccine efforts, we have gained the upper hand against this virus. we can live our lives. our kids can go back to school. our economy is roaring back. don't get me wrong, covid-19 has not been vanquished. we all know powerful variants have emerged, like the delta variant. but the best defense against these variants is to get vaccinated. [applause]

[cheering] my fellow americans, it is the most patriotic thing you can do. so please, if you have not gotten vaccinated, do it. do it now. for yourselves, for your loved ones, for your communities, and for your country. we need to protect the hard-won progress that we have made. we never again want to be where we were one year ago today. [applause] so, today, the virus has not been vanquished, we know this. it no longer controls our lives. it no longer paralyzes our nation. it is within our power to make sure it never does again. so, for that, we can think scientists and researchers, educators, and all of the frontline and essential workers, like many of you here today.

[applause] you became the light to cs through the darkness. -- you became the light to see us through the darkness. i hope you know that you, the american people, have been part of one of the most remarkable achievements in american history. in this moment of joy, we know that this day falls hard on all of those who have lost loved ones. each day i carry a card in my pocket with my schedule on it. on the back of that schedule, on that card, i have a number of americans who lost their lives to carbon, the precise number -- to covid, the precise number. as of tonight, that number is 603,018 people who have lost their lives. their husbands and wives, mothers and fathers, sons and daughters, brothers and sisters,

family members, friends, neighbors, coworkers. we also remember all of those we lost this year, that families lost two other causes of death. in cruel twist of fate, they, too, left behind loved ones, unable to grieve or mourn or find closure. and those who went through all of this know that to heal, we have to remember. we have to remember them. and we will. we will commit to always remembering them. that is what we will do. i have long said, america is unique. unlike every other nation on earth, we were founded based on an idea. we hold these truths to be

self-evident, that all people are created equal, and by their creator with certain unalienable rights, among them, life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. and while we have never fully lived up to those words, we have never given up on them. they continue to animate us. and they remind us, when, at our best, we as americans believe. as americans, we believe in honesty and decency. and treating everyone with dignity and respect. giving everyone a fair shot. demonizing no one. giving hate no safe harbor. and we leave no one behind. we lead by the power of our example. not the example of our power. we are part of something so much bigger than ourselves. we stand as a beacon to the world. it is a code, it is a code

uniquely american. it is who we are. for all the servicemembers and their families who are here, all of you serving around the world, it is the greatest honor to serve as your commander and chief -- commander-in-chief. [applause] [cheering] jill and i, and our entire family thank you for your service and sacrifice. like so many military families, thinking of loved ones who served, we think of our son today. you are all part of the longchain of patriots who pledged their lives and sacred honor in defense of this nation. and around the world, for freedom and fair play. for peace and security and opportunity. for the cause of justice. for the soul of america itself.

the defense of all that we love does not fall on your shoulders alone. it falls on all of us, everyone of us, every american. each day we are reminded, there is nothing guaranteed about our democracy. nothing guaranteed about our way of life. we have to fight for it, to defendant, to earn it -- to defend it, to earn it. folks, it is up to all of us to protect the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. the right to equal justice under the law. the right to vote and have that vote counted. [applause] [cheering] the right to breathe clean air, drink clean water, and know that our children and grandchildren will be safe on this planet for generations to come. [applause]

the right to rise in the world as far as your god-given talent can take you unlimited by barriers of privilege or power. great gift of the spirit of independence, think of it. one of the great gifts is our capacity to see ourselves whole, and to see ourselves with promise, honestly. what we have got right and what we have gotten wrong. it is a measure of america. and we are a great nation. we do not seek to bury the wrongs, we face it, we work to make it right. now, history tells us, when we stand together, when we unite in common cause, when we see ourselves not as republicans or democrats, but as americans, then there is simply no limit to what we can achieve. [applause]

none, and today, we see the results of the unity of purpose. the unity of purpose forging in our nation. together, we are beating the virus. together, we are breathing life into our economy. together, we will rescue our people from division and despair. but together, we must do it. over the past year, we have lived through some of our darkest days. now, i truly believe, and i give my word as a biden, i truly believe we are about to see our brightest future. [applause] this is a special nation, a great nation. and there is a timeless truth about america. the most powerful idea in the history of the world. in the hearts of the people of this country, it beats in all of

our hearts, no matter your race or ethnicity, no matter your gender identity or sexual orientation, no matter your disability, no matter your faith, it beats in the hearts of rich and poor alike, americans. whether ancestors were native to this land or brought here forcibly enslaved, whether you are immigrants of generations back like my family, or your coming here today, looking to build a better life for your family, like our fellow americans i just swear in in the white house two days ago. [applause] [cheering] the american creed, we use that phrase, the american creed, we are all equal. it was written a long time ago. but the genius as, that every

generation of americans, has expanded and wider and wider, to include those who were excluded before. that is why it has never gathered dust in our history books. it is still alive today. alive in our hearts, alive in the work of our hands. alive in the history we read and in the history we are making. my fellow americans, now, we are the guardians of that very ideal of america. it is up to us to save it, to preserve it, to build on it. and i know that we will. on this sacred day i looked out to those monuments on the national mall, and into the hearts of our people across the land and i know this. it has never ever been a good bet to bet against america. remember who we are. we are the united states of america.

and there's nothing, nothing we cannot do if we do it together. [applause] happy fourth of july, america! [cheering] and may god protect our troops. thank you. [applause] [cheering] ♪