approach and a plan for how you will turn around the school. this has been proven out in other areas that this works. the state in the school district are working together on this as opposed to putting more money into a formula that you do not know what is going to happen. >> we are talking about the high school dropout rate. if you want to get involved in the conversation, for democrats and republicans, and independence, -- independan ts and we have changed the numbers for today. 202-585-3880. we will keep those numbers up so that people can get involved in the conversation. our first call comes from a bridge to new jersey.

-- bridgeton, new jersey. >> i have two children in high school. the students' needs instead of the teachers' needs. if you see what the teachers go on strike about or what they complain . . they never go on strike because the students are not graduating. that is never one of their issues. we need teachers to be focused on the students' needs and not the teachers' needs. if the teachers unions would get together and focus on what the students want and complain and demand more for the students then something would change. teachers are the ones teaching the students. as long as the students feel that the teachers are more important than the graduation rate, then they never will get a

chance. guest: i am not talking about throwing more money at the problem. as governor, i had to balance the budget. i know what that is about. i am talking about targeting dollars. i do not want to spend one additional dollar to make a dysfunctional system more expensive. expensive. we need to for strategic change. every school should be student- centric. you raise a point that is very critical which is successful high schools are ones where the personal graduation plan for every student recognizes that every size does not fit all. what if this student has a need for literacy skills and this one has a numeracy problem and this one needs more time after school. this one may need more time over the summer. would we believe heavily is targeting to the needed each

student. each school is different. it is important to target the needs of the schools also. host: our next call comes from north carolina on a line for republicans. caller: on the note child left behind situation this was a detriment to our national school system. the reason i say that is i have three sons that graduated before that during the time it was in effect. one was a slow learner. he had a lot of emotional problems. instead of that child being held by the school, that child was taken without my permission into

a room to it the school counselor and was told that he would be better off to quit school and get his ged. the reason he was told this is because by the notion of left behind policy, that policy stated that if the curriculum could not get above a certain learning curve and the children did not score a of a certain percentage on the standardized test that teachers and principals were subject to being changed out or dismissed and replaced with teachers that would be more able to teach these children instead of these children being taught more, there were more encouraged to quit school and get a ged. this child is now 23, married,

has a child, cannot keep a job, cannot get a job, because he does not have a high-school education. host: thank you for your call. guest: she brings a big problem under the current no child left behind. the emphasize -- emphasis was on testing but not on whether or not exaggerated. it is like you are asking children to do a mile run in every 10th of a mile you are assessing them for how well they are doing and when they get to the finish line, you do not care anymore. if you have a job that is not doing well it is to your advantage if you are an administrator to move that child out, because it will not be scored against you if they do not graduate but it will be scored against you if they do not do well on a test.

it is too late for your child, but the education has changed that and adopted a regulation it also illustrates another problem that if the child is in need more support, it should be provided. host: if you want to send an e- mail to our guest the address is [unintelligible] mississippi, independent line. caller: this is an interesting topic.

i think one caller has a good point. i have something similar to her child. she said her child was a slow learner. i was in an emotionally conflict died class in the seventh and eighth grade. i did not like to be told what to do, but i loved learning. matt was my favorite subject. i paid attention to the teachers, but they kind of treated me unfairly. because i was one of the more troubled ones and most difficult to teach, but my point is that there are emotional children with learning disabilities, they should treat them like they are in a regular classroom. i got out of ld and went into

regular classes to prove to teachers that i could do it. i dropped out in eighth grade and started working when i was 15, 16 building houses. i have been doing that for a very long time. i have never had a job with benefits. but my school, baker high school, they gave me the the opportunity because i got expelled and i was a troubled child. they gave me the opportunity to have a work-release program full-time. they gave me my high-school diploma. it is a certificate of education. they basically said do this, do a good job, we will great you on your work and you will get your diploma. i got accepted into college.

can i read to you my acceptance letter? it says congratulations. we are welcoming you for fall semester 2008. this was last year. i cannot afford to go to college. the financial aid has been hard to get in touch with. i applied as a joke, but i got accepted. i am interested in doing this. i am very smart, but i made some very bad decisions. i wish i could have stayed in school and become a book smart instead of a work force. host: we will leave it there. thank you very much for your call. how would a program be like the gpa help someone like this caller get from high school into college? guest: he talked about the need for differentiated approaches.

he was able to continue on and that is something that we need to recognize. not every student is going to get to a diploma in the same way. we need a structure to recognize the need and get them there. he also pointed out the economic impact. why does he want to go to a community college? he understands that it will help them get a better paying job. of the 45 major metropolitan areas, what would be the economic impact to them if they cut their dropout rate by half? 12 cities were found that the wage growth alone -- one class of dropouts would put -- if you turned half of them into graduate would yield about half

a billion dollars a year in additional wage income. it would greatly improve students' like him being able to go on to committee college in college. we wanted it to calculate the gain to the real-estate market. what we see is that you have 8000 more likely home buyers as a result of simply cutting the dropout rate in half. this is important. there is a moral imperative of every child getting a good education. we want to take action in tough times. this is every bit as important as automobile industry bailout, assisting banks, this is an economic issue as well as an equity issue. host: we will see more of the numbers that he is talking about by going to their website. next up is kansas city, missouri

on a line for democrats. caller: the morning. some women were put back to work and kids did not have places to go. some are not addressed in the school system. some end up in drug problems and drop out. if we do not address -- [unintelligible] it was hard for me, but i overcame my difficulties in morning.

they do not teach critical thinking. people do not know how to communicate with each other anymore. it is alarming. when you see test results of the oklahoma, not very many people lillo our first president was, that is a big problem. bridgett not very many people knew who our first president was, that is a very big problem. -- not very many people knew who or first president was -- who our first president was. that is a very big problem. guest: hostyou have to monitor a plan all the way along.

we know that students need direct relationship with an adult on a regular basis in the school building. one guidance counselor for 500 students may not be effective if the council cannot speak to each student regularly. in order to restructure schools, you need the assistance of the federal government'. many will say that every state is in a budget shortfall. we do not have the luxury to wait. sometimes you do your best restructuring in an economic crisis. if we come out of this recession with the same graduation rates and a lack of preparedness, we are 21st in the -- we will not be

participating globally if this continues. continues. we will not be competing as we will not be participating as well globally and will have a direct impact on our economy. that is why we keep coming back to, what you're talking about the 45 billion, it to cut the dropout rate in half, it would mean $45 billion more additional tax revenue coming to the federal treasury, federal cost savings. i can do that for you for about $5 billion per year. this is a problem that affects the individual, yes, but also affects to rest of us. host: someone writes on twitter, public schools have been decimated by free-market ideologue who want to privatize public schools and make them a

business. your response? guest: i'm not sure if you are referring to privatization or charter schools. those are different. we are about the public school system. that is where 90% of school children are. having said that, i think we are willing to recognize there are very strong charter schools out there as well. we have a 7% to free and reduced property rate. the of graduating the majority of them tfrom high school and many are going to college. you can see dedicated teachers and personalization of the education experience, use of data which is helping informed decisions. you see 8 flexibility in recognizing everyone has different needs. you will have students staying

after school getting tutoring or students going to school during the summer. some students do not need more time and others do. whatever you call the school, it is the same elements that are making it successful. the graduation promise at and some other legislation want to help schools implement these elements so that all of our children can move ahead. kip means knowledge is power. it is a non-profit. there are a chain of schools across the country that have had great success host: he is the president of alliance for education and also the author of "raising the grade." our next call comes from oklahoma on the republican line.

caller: hello, my concern is that -- i wanted to take my son out of a neighborhood that was becoming impoverished. what i recognized is that they started heavily busing students from one side of town to the other side of town. that was primarily minority students. when you take a kid out of their neighborhood, they become disenfranchised. i was in an all white school in the '70s. there was nobody like me. there were no teachers like me. now i look at some high-school students, because of busing, they are so huge. there is no personalization or community spirit. there is nothing that drives them to school except for the hour bus ride which means an additional early morning rise.

some communities, the students have to get up at 6:00 a.m. so they can get to school by 8. we need more schools in communities. it more community involvement and give the kids activities closer to home. host: thank you. guest: she makes a lot of good points. some schools tend to be -- have too many opportunities for at risk kids to fall through the cracks because there is nobody looking out for them. that is why so many successful models, they are breaking up the building into three separate schools. there is a community that has developed which is important. we cannot -- but we tried to demonstrate by the economic data, how this affects all of our pocketbooks not just the

students. there may be a high school that is 10 miles away that we never drive by it -- it directly affects us and our community. . the reality is wheel of a direct interest in the quality of every child's education. i have to come back to a statistic that i used in the beginning. when i graduated 40 years ago, this country could afford if one-third of the kids drop out, 50% in the inner city because we did not need them. we had enough kids going on to college. that is not true today. our work force is much more highly skilled, much more demanding. we need every child to participate fully in a global economy to truly be the economic success and maintain our

prosperity. we need to make sure that every school has quality because we need every student coming out of there have a quality education. he's in charleston, south carolina. >> good morning to you all. my question is this. 12 time to eliminate the agree garian-based education -- gregarian-based education system and condensing the hours of schooling during the day? in this particular area you have young children who start kindergarten age at 7:30 and they don't get out until almost 3:00. and that duration of time and the lack after tension span -- of attention span as those children grow up can be a debt meant. they're getting up -- -- up at a point where their brain may just get tired so if we

eliminated the summer break and just had a year-long system like other countries have, do you think in this country it's time to seriously look at that across the board? host: dwayne as two very important questions. one is on sleep. there are school districts that are now making the school day start later, recognizing students aren't functioning as well early in the morning. equally important is about the time. do we eliminate the 180-day schedule? a number of school districts are. we happen to be an industrial nation with one of the least amount of time, days in class. having said that it's not simply about seat time. it's about quality of learning. and so there are some students that will need more time, others that won't. but we need the flexibility. that flexibility, i hope, will come when the congress takes up. that's why it's so critical. several have complained about no child left behind. that's expired. congress needs to take up the

next round of legislation called the elementary and secondary education act to address many of the issues that guest: thank you very much for coming on in speaking to us about this. >> here's a look at the schedule. up next on c-span, "america and the courts" with supreme court justice ruth peter ginzberg talking about her early days as a law clerk. after that, a carry on whether sections of the patriot act should be extended as their expiration date nears. later, a look at the obama administration's proposed changes to the missile defense program. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2009] [captioning performed by

national captioning institute] >> ms. c-span's "america and the courts." next judge ruth bader ginsburg. >> jus tins ginsburg, i'll lied to begin by asking for your reflections about one of the great stories in american legal rule. the young district court judge had invited a ver wendell holmes at this point late in his career out to lunch. they had had lunch and had returned to the capital where the supreme court was at the time. and the learned hands turned to

oliver wendell holmes and said, well, sir, good-bye, do justice. and oliver wendell holmes spun around on him and described in different ways and different situation, turned on him fiercely, eyebrows bristling was one description, and said that as justice holmes said, that is not my job. my job is to play the game acourding to -- according to the rules. so which of the great judges had it right? does a distinct sense of judgment affect how you play the games by the rules. >> i think the story are possibly are possible because the learned hand that i studied played by the rules and did justice. >> i think the learned hand said later that he did it

deliberately to be provocative. he knew he would have that kind of reaction from holmes. >> one of the great privileges was to ride in the back of the car while my judge drove the great learned hand home. and part of the story was that i wouldn't give it anything to -- but these were pretitle 7 days and learned hand did not want a woman as a law clerk. yet in the car he would say anything that came into his head. he said words i had never heard. [laughter] >> and i asked him, why when you are so uninhibited in this

car, would you not consider me as a law clerk? and his answer was -- young lady, i am not looking at you. >> i was in the back and he -- it's as though i wasn't there. >> as pioneering it will gator for gender equality you had to sper suede the supreme court to deliberate this. when is it appropriate to reconsider past decisions and what type of waive ought to be given to them and how the processes overrules some precedent. >> to explain to the audience

what it was and then they would understand why it was not a difficult job urging that the supreme court overrule that case and others in the similar period. the gossett was a mother and daughter. the mother owned a tavern and the daughter was her bar tender. then the state of michigan passed a law that said, a woman cannot serve as a bartender unless her father or husband own the establishment. that was built a law protective of women because unsavory things go on in taverns. what the law didn't say was that women couldn't serve as waitresses in these taverns when they would be closer to

the men who might be a little tipsy. and there was some thought that the bartenders, you named it, it was not so much to protect women, but to protect the bartender's union against the competition of women. in any case, the supreme court upheld that law all in the nation that this was protecting the mother and her business establishment and the daughter out of her job. well, the supreme court never saw gender base classification it didn't like until 1971. and then the supreme court began to see finland was in a

green light all over the country. laws that will protect women, laws that were once thought to be protecting women came to be understood as laws that, not far from putting women on a pedestal, as justice brennan put it, too often put them in a cage, shut them out from opportunities. and the supreme court, you know, is an entirely reactive institution, does not make the controversies that come before it, but it responds to what is put before them. the simple case that the court faced in 1971, when it turned an about face, was the loss of state of idaho -- the laws of the state of idaho that red, "as

between persons equally entitled to a decedent's estate, males must be preferred to females." it's not something that would you think of the u.s. society. so with that changing a poor relationship that we have sandied and reviews. the store unrecognizeably held -- in the 197's a cream court that with knowned by ron. he would grab all the state laws that they discriminated all by that.

>> i don't know if you ever actually call balled some strikes. i can see you being drafted in it. does that metaphor decide you work harder? >> it's harder. apply jeff jevchuss tin -- basketball was his favorite sport. he said, if you're an appellate judge simeds you have to call foul against the home team. >> she said you will be a

roundy dude, but you have to call it as you see it. and not as the home ground. whether is president or the con fliss or the that is certainly true. but there are many cases that we get as you all know, the law is not clear and certain. where we ve a greatly general feign like the equal protection of the laws. and this computer that you luggage in the facts of the case and you get out an answer that you -- it's your three prior judgments. and the judgments can change. well, i if i think of my favorite term is the equal

protection claws, nor should any states deny to any person the equal protection of the laws that became part of the scrution in 1968. in 196768. some people say how can you use the equal protection clause to all you -- she said there should be no arbitrary distinctions between men and women. let's ask the presemmable. i said we the of the united states. in order to form a more perfect you on. who are we the people today? the united states in all of its diversity. iity the genius of this problem

and his governs are well over 200 years in that it is ever becoming more perfect. and we the people have decided to be more incruisive. >> i was going to ask you why the eepings adoms in 1928 to a change. one of my fee rees about the organize snigse of evil prektslaws was that it was designed to grant equal civil rights or system of task or something of tasks. it might not have been the quix -- but surely after the ninth amendment it should have been clear. and just spoke to the freemcoumplet suggested that perhaps it should be -- does

adongs of the 19th evidence attendant day the judge. >> it was a big argument for you. and you tried and it failed. [laughter] >> and it failed. >> there always was, i become commit cal of d unity. they breakfast. they should have equal statute. the answer was the 19th moment gave the women the moan by the only that, it doesn't make any other change. one would think that one of the basic rights as options of sit senship was so impressive that

made, nots employ ever women said let's argue for the boat. let's fast. it was the national's went dough es party we m -- we want an equal rights eengs. they said the 19th empty give tom give us hoop. to truly introduced to they're -- their feet.

it was not gratifying. it was taken off close. >> in particular from tee -- the u.s. constitution is hard tore ahend. tense ernedsprabs suggesting of the fact that article five justs two heart of a hurry ls for constitutional amendment. >> martha who was equal lie said there was never a time that the equal protection law would not give us everything that we're asking for through an equal rights amendment. i am still a partisan of the equal rights amendable not because it wouldn't change the kearkters of the cost. but if you have not find a siv

war, you have this constitution the of an cream movement. i would like for my granddaughters as they >> dreeling this morning their school in chicago i'd like to be able to see that that's a fundamental premise that men and women of equal stature. i any it would be nice if they could see that in our funt mental and not dressed as a jnable interpretation of the eagle protection clothes. >> we have a lot to apologize for it. probably didn't die his -- tie

his belt. they say the hardest because the two parties testified incompatible and no contrary things. one of them must be lying. and one of them injures. those are the type of cases that i find harder to resolve. is there an anas sill, -- is there a necessary case. >> there are many famous faces. but once this man said it ain't over anymore it's it's over. clinics -- critics i met with this morning, that at last time they were at four gayses well

the four line. and the majority wu were building held. the thing of thinking rethinking. attempting to pir suede one's colleagues. and in one, the it awers to him with a sight to right. ended up. i had some really heavy experience. i can't reveal which case. but i often thought to right. and there were only two of us. that decision and my -- we had the opinion of the court for six judges and only three on the other side.

>> to what you attribute that? >> i have been hoping for a repeat, but it has not yet occurred. one of the interesting things about the system, as a young lawyer, i went off to study their procedure system. what they could not understand about our system was, they said, why did you have parties that testified take the oath? that is just requiring them to lie. it in that system, the parties do not take an oath. witnesses do, but the parties do not. >> i think it was late 19th century when criminal defendants were allowed to testify under oath in england and the united states for similar reasons. >> you have talked about what

role foreign sources of law could potentially play in constitutional interpretation, and i wondered if you could say a little bit about that. to what extent is inappropriate for the court to take note of what is happening in all the other constitutional courts that have sprung up since world war ii? been, international law. it's vastly misunderstood by us. we are not bound by any other nation. however now a days we have -- a days,. you know what, i won't say that. s in -- the country got into the business of reviewing

ordinary plaw with the fun fundamental instruction of government. it happened after 441 because in nations came to perceive that particular elected suggest churs could not only be trusted to remain faithful. this society's core values. so they set up. returned foral cal governing. and in the early days of those other ghosts, including canada the h 1 n 2. they all look to because there they all look to because there was tom they all look to us because there was no other player. more and more, they're looking

to each other. one question i get when i go abroad is, we refer to the decisions of the net is state supreme court. you never referred to decisions of our courts. don't you think we have anything to contribute? and it is hard for me to answer that question. [laughter] well, justice kennedy was criticized and lawrence v. texas, consentual sodomy case, because he referred to a decision of the european court of human rights, 1981 decision. it was their decision saying that criminalizing consensual acts that do not hurt anyone is a violation of the european convention of human rights. justices were referring to that. it was very clear that he was not using it as any kind of

bonding authority. it was kind of liked citing one of professors law review articles. [laughter] >> well. [laughter] . >> justice, in the crawfordrdford line of education, those fraces have javier monica. you are joined with discuss tisssclee yeah. and he has based his receive nurebnaste nair person, the manning of a club. in the original constitution touch. and -- and he is arguing in those cases that he is bound to be faithful to that original

penful. it is much criticized by lawyers throughout the quntri. have you joinings with justice cla lie yeah for both reasons. his understanding of the confrontation clause does reflect the original standing or meaning of that close. they're talking about needs that the department has the righting to be confronted with the it. there's not too much room for confrontation between these two wors. so yes, i enjoy the show. enjoy justice khali yeah's manning?

-- sclee yeah's -- sclaly yeah. you know that came out of the proceedings. think hi -- it's a fundamental right in our criminal, justice system. the colleagues have situated very elaborate theories of judicial philosophy or constitution interpretation. and in contrast chief justice roberts and alito have indicated that it is perhaps difficult to construction such an overall approach to judging cases need to be decided, one case at a time. i was wondering if you could say something about the

judicial philosophy that you rely on on approaching cases or whether there are or some overarching themselves that they talk about. >> they talk about rather different things i suppose if i had to pick either -- well, i think i'm an originalist in this sense. i think this constitution -- the longest -- it's the oldest constitution, fourth in the world. it was written at the end of the 18th century. but i think that expectation was that it would govern us through the ages, and i don't

treat the due process clause and the equal protection clause as frozen in time. i think they were meant to govern society as it evolved. in some cases when justice scalia would say, the false amendment has to apply to new circumstances. so it keeps the people the right to be secure in their houses against unreasonable shirt and cesars. police also audience crossing their way into your house. but what happens when it hovers over your roof. never touches your house be is able to measure the heat and --

and that may lead you to be a suspect for growing marijuana. is that a violation under the fourth amendment? even though yows -- your home was never touched. >> could you say a few things about o oral government. about o oral government. could you say a few things memorable on your time on the bench. >> do you have any advice to the appellates? >> i would say apelant advocacy , appellant advocacy, in our

country is quite different than the way it is in most countries. in fact, for example, they will give an -- the lawyer is not interrupted. he gives a speech. in our systems all advocacy is more of a conversation. the conversation between the lawyer and the members of the court. by fall, though, most important part of the appellate process is the written part. i have looked at other judge who is have dealt in this case have said. and then i mace look -- i may

look at someone as president. when the last thing i look at is the lawyer ice brief. we are informed with lawyers pleading. the lawyers will do best if they don't have a pained expression when the justice asks a question that they walk on questions. ziforos. so it's a conversation. anyone who comes in with a prepared crift is going to be sorely disappointed. you can probably have one sentence. >> oral argument ever change

your mind? >> yes, but rarely we don't come on the bench with an empty mind. it shouldn't be a closed mind either. but once you've done all the reading, you have a pretty clear idea about the way you think the case should be decided. sometimes more often than turning you around 1 80 ago -- 80 ago you can read the marriage. it's to address that issue. so you may decide the case on a different graund than the one you should you would turn into.

sometimes there would be an argument that the courts didn't see that the justices aren't the only one talking, but by talking. scalia will complete the answer or even -- [laughter] >> i do the same. the him. -- with him. >> what were the major differences upon being noted to the supreme court from the d.c. circus. i wonder if you could say a little bit about those differences and what we shown. what a difference. and it's really wonderful to be on the supreme court. you go to the court of appeals

from the trout or from this the district court as a matter of life. and the matters could sense their issues. the d.c. servant had in law cases and mrs. -- and in the supreme court we have the luckry of decided what ways wullwe just heard. and there are issues in the d.c. circuit area. and there's the one question that we think makes it. so that's one big difference that we choose the cases, not only the cases, but the issues that we will hear. one has to be a bit more restrained when you have eight colleagues and when you have only two.

>> another rep straint is that the supreme court allow as half hour aside. in most cases they allow less than 15 minutes. but if the bench becomes interested in an issue, the argument dk go on and on. ry rib passed a ah half hour. >> so he finished it sentence. [laughter] but not more more than that. >> i'm wondering whether you have discerned any shift in

your approach to cases over the years you've been on the court and to speak generally that might lead a judge the way she views cases. >> having been a law teacher for 17 years and teaching constitutional law and then 13 years on the c.d. circuit, i can't say that my approach to cases has changed. one colleague, i think justice blackman is the most graphic example of a justice who did change. he doesn't think he did. he believes that the court changed. and he stayed in the same place.

but if you look at his early decisions like the one about the man who was too poor to file bankruptcy. and he said, well, too bad, you can stop smoking. how much you'll save by not buying cigarettings. amped he'd come up with $15,000 and this is the same man that wrote, what was the name of the poor joshua case? [laughter] >> so i think he did change and did some wonderful books. did some wonderful books. it's by linda greenhouse. she tells the story of this man's odyssey. most tragically, how his close friendship with chief justice burger