with last week were cleared years ago. >> jen, congressman, pardiss, thank you all. that is all in this evening. good evening, chris. extra smart show this evening, well done. thanks to you at home for staying with us for the next hour. late today, president obama was at the university of hartford in hartford, connecticut. the president delivered a pointed and powerful speech. he was speaking in a room that greeted him with some of the boisterousness of a campaign rally, but it was a room that the president spoke to with some seriousness. and at one point with an edge that bordered almost on angry. >> in the wake of a tragedy, you'd think this would not be a heavy lift. and yet some folks back in washington are already floating the idea that they may use political stunts to prevent votes on any of these reforms. think about that.

they're not just saying they'll vote no on ideas that almost all americans support, they're saying they'll do everything they can to even prevent any votes on these provisions. they're saying your opinion doesn't matter. and that's not right. that is not right. we need a vote. >> we want a vote, we want a vote. we want a vote. we want a vote. we want a vote. we want a vote. >> we need a vote. >> we want a vote. we want a vote. we want a vote. >> now, i've also heard some in the washington press suggest

that what happens to gun violence legislation in congress this week will either be a political victory or defeat for me. connecticut, this is not about me. this is not about politics. this is about doing the right thing for all the families that are here that have been torn apart by gun violence. it's about them, and all the families going forward so we can prevent this from happening again. that's what it's about. it's about the law enforcement officials putting their lives at risk. that's what this is about. this is not about politics. this is not about politics. >> the president today speaking in hartford, connecticut. now, among the people there to see that speech were families of the victims of the newtown

elementary school massacre on december 14th. the president applauded those family members, specifically singled out some of them by name. he talked about them using their grief, using their grief that is of a level that most of us cannot comprehend, but using that grief with love and logic. those were his words, to try to right something that has gone wrong in this country. the president was introduced for his speech today by nicole hockley who lost her son, dylan, at sandy hook. she was one of 11 family members of the victims of sandy hook massacre who met with the president today in connecticut before his speech. but then this is interesting. after the speech, they left connecticut with the president as well. they left with the president on board air force one to travel with him to washington, d.c. this group of family members is traveling with the president on air force one and the white house says they are going to be meeting tomorrow with members of congress. members of congress are back in washington now. the senate back in session as of

today, the house back in session as of tomorrow. members of congress are back in town in part to craft gun legislation and to decide how and if they are going to vote on gun legislation over the next few days. this effort with those family members flying back to washington on air force one with the president, this is part of a full-court press on this issue this week. tomorrow vice president joe biden and attorney general eric holder will be speaking on the issue at the white house together, pushing for gun reform legislation. on wednesday the first lady, michelle obama, is going to be traveling to chicago with plans to address the issue of gun violence there. it is rare for the first lady to give a policy speech like this, especially on a contentious matter that is yet to come up before the congress. so expect a lot of attention to that event with the first lady in chicago on wednesday. while the president was making his remarks in connecticut today, the top republican in the senate, senate republican leader mitch mcconnell wasted for time. he issued this statement saying

that he would join efforts to block a vote on gun legislation in the senate, no matter what's in the legislation. he will join a filibuster effort. mitch mcconnell that means will join 13 other senate republicans who are pledging to block any gun legislation from even coming up for a vote. these are the 14. and these are not senators who are saying they will vote no. they want there to be no vote at all for anybody, not even on issues like universal background checks. they are pledging to filibuster. a group called the coalition to stop gun violence tells us today that they are organizing a filibuster of the filibuster. sort of a counter filibuster. that they plan to set in motion as soon as republicans start blocking a vote on gun legislation. so if republican senators block there from being a vote in the senate, as soon as they start doing that, victims and survivors of gun violence will start standing outside the u.s. capitol reading the names of the more than 3,300 americans who have been lost to gun violence just since newtown.

they will do that at the same time that the republican senators are filibustering the gun legislation. quote, we will go as long as they go. we will go as long as they go. the gun lobby is seen as so legendarily powerful in our politics. they're seen as being so all powerful over this issue in washington that it's become beltway common wisdom that it would be a huge lift for republicans in washington even to vote for a policy that is supported by 90% of americans. a policy supported by most republican voters. a policy supported by most gun owners. a policy supported even by most nra members, but it's still considered to be a huge heavy left because the nra leadership and lobbyists say no to it. the common wisdom says if the leadership and lobbyists say no to it, then it can't happen. that is the common wisdom born of the way the nra has flexed its muscles over the years on gun issues in washington. but this time there is a really big push on the other side of

the issue too and the push on the other side is starting to look powerful. in part it is a push that's demanding that the focus not be just on the politics here, but the focus stay on the problem that the politics refuses to address. and so, yeah, republican senators may be filibustering legislation inside the capitol dome, but outside it will be people talking about the consequences of there being no legislation to address gun violence in our country. the names of victims. the most stunning example of this approach to the issue, this part of the pressure has of course been the newtown families themselves. mothers and fathers and siblings and other relatives of the victims who died. parents who lost their 6 and 7-year-old kids, brothers and siblings who lost siblings and wives and husbands. ever since this tragedy happened, the people who have found themselves at the center of this tragedy have not only been dealing with their grief, they have put themselves out there publicly again and again and again to try to keep the

focus on what happened at newtown. to let it not be forgotten, but also to try to inspire something in us as a country that is more than just an emotional feeling about their loss. but it's also a concrete step toward making sure it doesn't happen again. the newtown families have been willing to bring their grief into the public to try to keep the rest of us to not forget why we're having this debate. they're making real demands in terms of policy, doing it in a rigorously bipartisan way and doing it with all the political capital that they can bring to bear because of their public grief. they are making their demands in a way that is hard to ignore. including physically putting themselves in front of their legislators who are on their way to the floor to vote as they did last week in connecticut. >> several of the caucus members, when they realized that we were people from sandy hook,

the vast majority of them spoke to us and apologized, many of them were crying with us. >> we really appreciate -- >> they weren't being callous. they just didn't know who we were. >> my heart goes out to you. >> we don't want this to ever happen again. >> parents from sandy hook elementary school passing out pictures of their kids who were killed in that massacre as connecticut state legislators went to the floor to vote on gun reform legislation. this is footage from "60 minutes" last night. connecticut did pass that package of gun bills last week and governor dan malloy signed it into law. the families who lost loved ones at sandy hook are a potent part of this process. they are willing to grieve publicly in front of millions of people, including on cbs last night, including on air force one with the president today. they are resolving to turn that grief into action. >> do any of you fear that after only four months the impact of this on the congress is beginning to fade? and the memory of how we felt on

that day is beginning to fade? >> well, people do change, because the country goes in different places. but we're going to bring it right back, so that america can see four months to them, it feels like it just happened a moment ago. >> to you. >> and yet -- and yet it's been years since i've seen my son. okay. so we're just -- we're not going anywhere. we're here. and we're going to be here. >> we don't get to move on. we don't have the benefit of turning the page to another piece of legislation and having another debate and then playing politics the same way we've been doing. we don't have that benefit. we're going to live with this for the rest of our lives. so our legislators need to hear us. >> our legislators need to hear us. parents and family members of those killed at newtown are among those who flew tonight

with the president to washington. they will be making their case directly to members of congress on gun legislation tomorrow to make sure that in fact they are heard. common wisdom in the beltway says that nothing can happen on this issue. these folks are working to destroy that common wisdom. joining us now is jillian soto, a member of the newtown action alliance. she's been on the show with us. her sister, vicki, was a first grade teacher who was killed at sandy hook elementary. jillian was in hartford today for the president's speech. she was among the family members who flew to d.c. with the president and she joins us from washington where she very recently just got off air force one. jillian, thank you so much for being with us tonight. >> thank you for having me.

>> so i know it's hard to hear people talk about this, even though -- still today and the people who you've been doing all this work with. let me ask you what it means to you to have been with the president today, to be traveling with the president today, to be part of this effort that you're in today in washington? >> it was a great feeling to be with him today on air force one and even in hartford today at the university and to have him support such an amazing cause and stand with us and remind everyone we're not going to forget what happened in newtown. we are going to continue to fight for change and demand something finally be done, that no one else has to feel this. so it was a good feeling to have him there but it was still an awful feeling because what it's for to ride on air force one, it's for -- because my sister died and i'm coming to washington to fight for change in her name and the other 25 victims of sandy hook. >> last time that i talked with you and your siblings, we talked about how much a sacrifice really it is for you guys to be willing to be in public while you are grieving so much, but how it is something, a, that you're doing for her and also you said that it was essentially a nice thing, a positive thing to have people on capitol hill, to have people in the country listen to you and feel like they were open to what you were

saying because of what you have been through. does it still feel that way to you? >> at times it does, but i do feel a lot of people have forgotten what happened in connecticut to sandy hook. a lot of people have forgotten all the things that we are going through. and, yes, it's been almost four months but it's still very new to us. it's still something we live with every day and it's a pain that will never go away from us. and it's nice to have people rally with us, but there's so many people that are still against us that we need to reach out to and still demand them to come with us and listen to what we're saying and demand change from them. >> i know that you're planning on meeting with legislators. you've done some of that in the past before, all of you who have been involved with newtown response. what do you look for in those meetings? obviously you talk about your sister, you talk about what you've been through, but what's the best case scenario for you when you sit down and have those meetings? it must be so hard to do it.

>> it's very hard because you open up. you open up about that day, about december 14th and what happened and what these families have gone through, what my family has gone through. we open up about it. all we look for is to have actual people listen, to listen to what we say, and to hear it and to take it into consideration and not just brush us off as people who are just talking and to actually listen and, you know, think about it and think if they were in our situation, if they lost their daughter or their son or their best friend or their wife, how they would feel. that's all we want. we want them to listen and put themselves in our shoes and see what they can do and what they're willing to do if they were in our shoes. >> jillian soto, the sister of vicki soto, a member of the newtown action alliance, i will talk to you about this stuff whenever you want to talk about it. i realize that doing these kind of interviews is part of what is difficult about this, so i'm very thankful to you, jillian. good luck, thanks. >> thank you. the former white house council, bob bauer is here tonight. he is right in the middle of another thing that people said

could never happen in washington but looks like it is in fact happening. we've got lots ahead, all of which defies the common wisdom. please stick with us. [ female announcer ] when a woman wears a pad she can't always move the way she wants. now you can. with stayfree ultra thins. flexible layers move with your body while thermocontrol wicks moisture away. keep moving. stayfree. woman: what do you mean, homeowners insurance doesn't cover floods? [ heart rate increases ] man: a few inches of water caused all this? [ heart rate increases ] woman #2: but i don't even live near the water. what you don't know about flood insurance may shock you -- including the fact that a preferred risk policy

starts as low as $129 a year. for an agent, call the number that appears on your screen.

new radical pretty blatantly unconstitutional anti-abortion laws have generated a lot of headlines from the great states of arkansas and north dakota, but don't leave kansas behind. in kansas the republican legislature just passed an anti-abortion personhood bill late on friday. it declares that life begins at fertilization.

yes, all three states are advancing abortion bans with legislation like this. but kansas goes an extra step. kansas law mandates that doctors have to describe to their patients an unproven scientifically dubious made-up link between abortion and breast cancer. there is no link between abortion and breast cancer, but the state of kansas wrote this script and will now mandate that doctors read this lie to their patients. the bill now goes to sam brownback, the state's republican governor. according to a spokesperson, he is almost certain to sign it even though he hasn't read it yet. governor brownback said he will sign any anti-abortion bill and so far he has kept to his word. so that was friday night in kansas. this was saturday morning. the very next day right after kansas republicans passed their sweeping doctors have to lie to their patients bill, the national republican party tapped kansas republican governor, sam brownback to deliver the republican party's national weekly address.

ta-da, of putting the best foot forward. meanwhile in new mexico, republican governor susannah martinez, a real rising star in her party. she gave probably the best speech of the republican national convention. she's very charismatic. she's supposed to be a different kind of 21st century republican. on friday governor martinez had a seemingly nonpartisan, noncontroversial bill sitting on her bill. a bill designed to make it easier for veterans and their spouses to get jobs. so for military families, new mexico would recognize professional licenses issued in other states. the idea was to cut the red tape for veterans and their spouses to make it easier for them to reintegrate after coming home from deployments. governor martinez vetoed that bill. and then immediately signed a bill that was identical except it singled out only straight soldiers' families as being able to benefit from the provision. so she vetoed the one that included all families and then signed the one that was just for

straight people. same bill but 100% less gay. the republican party says it does not want to be known for this kind of fire and brim stone social conservative activism stuff but in states where republicans are in power like kansas and new mexico and states where they have the governor's mansion and majorities in the legislatures, republicans have never been this aggressive, never been this radical on abortion in particular and on a lot of other social conservative issues. no matter how many retired republicans support gay marriage, the ones still in power are still going out of their way to prevent gay people from having access to the same benefits and rights as straight people, even when you're talking about gay people in the military. they say they do not want to be known for this stuff anymore, but you know what? as long as you're actually doing this stuff, you will be known for this stuff. for example, the great state of pennsylvania is not known nationally as a bastion of social conservatism. republican tom corbett is the governor of pennsylvania. but if his name rings a bell in terms of national news

attention, it may be because last yore about this time governor tom corbett was asked what he thought of a proposed republican bill that would force pennsylvania women seeking an abortion to undergo a medically unnecessary vaginal ultrasound with the ultrasound screen intentionally turned toward them. about that governor corbett offered this advice. >> wouldn't change it as long as it's not obtrusive. >> making them watch, does that go too far in your mind? >> i don't know how you make anybody watch because you just have to close your eyes. but as long as it's on the exterior, not interior. >> just close your eyes. governor tom corbett did not go on to do a whole lot of campaigning with republican presidential ticket last year, even with pennsylvania being an important swing state. he wasn't exactly driven out of the party but he is one of the least popular governors in the

entire country, and he is up for re-election next year. how do you run against that? how do you run against don't worry, you can just shut your eyes? what would a campaign against tom corbett look like? joining us now is somebody who's about to show us. allyson schwartz announced today she is running for governor. now, you are not the only democrat who's likely to try to get into this race but i have to ask you, other than tom corbett's approval ratings being slightly south of toenail fungus, what was the appeal to you getting in? >> i think this is such an important race to pennsylvanians and middle class families. you point out one area. it's just one of the misguided priorities this governor has had for the state. we've seen higher unemployment than the national average. his first action was to cut proposed education funding. that doesn't match and the fact is that we can do a whole lot better.

i watched pennsylvania -- the governor not taking any kind of leadership for the state, spending time on what you just mentioned, inappropriate offensive actions against women and the fact is that we are a great state and we deserve better leadership and we need someone who can be governor who is going to have the priorities of our people and work on those jobs and make sure people have access to higher education, be competitive in this kind of global marketplace that we're in and get things done. you know, really just find those solutions and then find that way to get it done and that's what i've been doing in congress for almost ten years and i want to bring that leadership style to what is a pretty problematic environment in harrisburg. >> is there -- in terms of the problematic environment, is there a distance, and how would you describe the distance, if it's there, between what the stated priorities are of the corbett administration and what they have actually focused on?

what's the distance there between what they said they'd do and what they're doing? >> sometimes republicans say what they're going to do and we don't quite believe them, or at least the voters don't. the republican platform is pretty consistent with some of this pretty sort of extreme right wing kind of agenda. they said they were going to cut government. people don't really think that meant their schools. they didn't really think that would mean their priorities but in fact that is what they're doing. and it's hurt pennsylvania families. you know, i go to scranton and you see 10% unemployment and they're saying we get no help at all from this governor. we're making some great progress in some of our small towns and cities across pennsylvania. we have great biotech and life sciences. we have amazing opportunities in natural gas to do it right and that's what pennsylvanians say to me. let's get our priorities right. let's find someone who has the skills and experience and the know-how and the determination and the energy to fight for us and to get to -- you know, get to harrisburg and find those solutions and find those results and make it happen.

>> if you were elected governor as a democrat and you had still a lot of republicans in the legislature, what are the issues on which you feel like you could move forward even with republicans who are likely to be opposed to you on a partisan basis but might be willing to work on practical matters? >> one advantage i have is i've been a legislator and i know that you need to be respectful of legislators and you need to understand where they're coming from and what their agenda is and find that common ground. every bill that i've introduced in washington has had a republican co-sponsor. that's tough to do. it's taken me a bit of work to make sure that that happens because i know i'm not going to get it done unless there's bipartisan support. my first bill was signed into

law under george bush. this is not easy to do in the environment that i'm in. but in harrisburg, i've served in harrisburg a number of years ago, for 14 years. and what you need to say is, look, we know that you have concerns, you have issues. take the issue of education. it was republicans in the state senate who pushed back on governor corbett and said this is not acceptable. people i represent in urban and rural and suburban pennsylvania want to be able to have their kids go to college without huge debt. we have great universities. it's one of our advantages in pennsylvania. and they pushed back and only cut 20%. but without that pushback, you know, we would have seen a cut of 50%. so i believe that i can talk to people outside of harrisburg, talk to people across pennsylvania and really bring them together too, but work with the legislature to get things done. >> if you were elected governor, you'd be the first female governor that pennsylvania ever had. and while that is an exciting prospect of breaking that glass ceiling for the state, it also raises an electability issue, which is obviously a question about sexism. has pennsylvania ever elected a republican governor before because -- excuse me, a female governor before because the state is too sexist to do so? >> well, i certainly hope not but i certainly think not as well. i have to say, you know, since

i've been having this conversation with lots of people across the state and not just in southeastern pennsylvania where i'm well known and people know how hard i work and how smart i work i hope, but really when i've been in pittsburgh and harrisburg and scranton and in parts in between, they really say maybe i'm offering a different style and i think they're right. that's the way you break up this log jam that we have in politics, to bring someone who really does have my style, which i do things differently. i come with a different perspective. look, i'm running to be the governor, i'll not running to be the first woman governor. i'm running to be a great governor hopefully. and i hear men and women say maybe it's time. >> congresswoman allyson schwartz announcing today that you're in it to oust tom corbett from office. thank you for being here. appreciate your time. >> thank you very much. >> thank you. all right. you might remember way back in 2012 when practically every state up for grabs in the election was doing everything it could to make it harder for people to vote. remember that? that was yesterday.

it turns out it's also tomorrow. hold on, we've got more on that coming up.

today the epa released these photos. these photos of the exxon tar sands oil spill in mayflower, arkansas. we've got a link to these at maddow blog if you want to get a closer look. these are high resolution photos showing the ongoing damage caused by the pipeline spill in arkansas and in some cases showing the means by which they're trying to clean this mess up. and yes, these photos are gross

enough about what is going on down there in arkansas, but if you want to grasp the enormity of just how much of the spill is being handled with paper towels, honestly that's the technology they have got for cleanup, for that you really have to check out the gorilla unauthorized video reportedly shot by people sneaking onto the spill site. it shows the marshy wetlands around the site of the spill and it shows the way exxon is dealing with cleaning up this toxic, heavy tar sands oil out in the wetlands is what it looks like is to put a bunch of paper towels on it. see how that goes. this is the extent of the technology that the oil companies have come up with for how to handle a tar sands oil spill, like the one from this pipeline in arkansas. the keystone tar sands pipeline, remember, would be a pipeline for tar sands oil that would run the complete length of the country, from the canadian border down to the gulf of mexico. but don't worry, if anything goes wrong, they have paper towels ready to wipe it up, or

to just leave the paper towels sitting on the spilled oil. maybe that will work. it's the most profitable company in the most profitable industry in the history of the country, and this is what they have been able to invest in cleanup technology. brawny it isn't. we'll be right back. what if you could shrink your pores just by washing your face? [ female announcer ] neutrogena® pore refining cleanser. alpha-hydroxy and exfoliating beads work to clean and tighten pores so they can look half their size. pores...shrink 'em down to size! [ female announcer ] pore refining cleanser. neutrogena.®

[ female announcer ] pore refining cleanser. as soon as you feelon it, try miralax.

it works differently than other laxatives. it draws water into your colon to unblock your system naturally. don't wait to feel great. miralax. we'll be right back.. happy birthday to the 17th amendment. and you thought it was just monday around here. no, no, on this day 100 years ago shall the 17th amendment crossed the threshold for ratification to become part of the united states constitution. and we thus changed how we elect u.s. senators. before the 17th amendment, you didn't get to vote for your senator, the legislature in your state just picked your senator. the 17th amendment changed that and said actually you get to decide on your senator. you just get to vote on it by direct democracy. along with the amendments guaranteeing freed slaves and women the right to vote and suffrage for everybody starting at age 18, the 17th amendment is one of the changes we made to the constitution to enlarge the reach of democracy and it was

100 years ago today. happy birthday. in tennessee last week, the legislature spent the 100th anniversary of that state ratifying that amendment by debating whether or not to undo it. whether to cut voters out of the nominating process for u.s. senate seats. under this tennessee republican bill, you, the average voter in tennessee, would no longer get to vote in party primaries for senate candidates. instead the legislature would do it. the legislature would just pick each party's nominees for senate and you would only get to vote in the general election. it's kind of a papa knows best thing. it's as far as you can go toward getting around the 17th amendment without actually repealing it. the bill got through a senate committee in tennessee. the vote was 7-1 in favor of it. the republican senate speaker said that the bill's chances looked like at least 50-50 to him. after some national attention, though, and a bit of a freakout caused by that committee vote, tennessee republicans appear now to have taken the bill off the calendar for now. the senate sponsor saying he's just going to wait a while on this. but it's not just some republicans in tennessee who are going there, who think that people should stop electing our senators.

across the state line in georgia, republicans also have a bill calling for voters to lose that particular voting right. the georgia measure has not gone much of anywhere yet but it is still kicking around. and it may seem like a weird idea, but ending democracy for senate elections turns out to be a really popular thing among certain republicans. our own steve ben an has been tracking this as kind of a hobby. the list of people who want to get rid of the 17th amendment includes guys like louis gohmert who's out there with his own state's governor, rick perry. also mitch congressman pete hoekstra, raul labrador, utah senator mike lee. arizona senator jeff flake, all saying we should get rid of voting for senators. we should get rid of the 17th amendment as if what's wrong with democracy is that there's too much of it. too much voting. in this last election, the national story of the functionality of our democracy, the way our election system

works was long lines, right? our long lines for voting were a national scandal. what's wrong with our democracy was how much extreme time and effort people had to put in in order to participate in it. seven-hour lines? in the weeks after that november debacle, the nation demanded to know why our voting system in practice looked like something out of the third world. turns out that kind of thinking was so december. because since january, republicans in the states have kept on keeping on with making voting harder, working diligently wherever they are in control to make voting still harder than it was even in november. 55 bills in 30 states and counting, all to put down more barriers to voter registration and to voting itself. new bills have passed already and been signed into law in virginia and arkansas. just in the weeks since the stay in line election in november. in north carolina republicans are proposing to cut early voting nearly in half and to cut the places for early voting and to require new forms of i.d. you never had to show before in order to vote.

and north carolina republicans want to raise your parents' taxes if you register to vote at your college, which is something the supreme court says you have the right to do. north carolina republicans say, okay, maybe we can't take away that right but at least we'll institute a tax hike to punish college students voting. with one party pushing as hard as ever in the states to make voting yet harder and yet more painful and even more expensive in the case of north carolina, how do we make national progress toward making our elections work better and not worse? turns out i know exactly the guy to ask, and he is here tonight for the interview. he was the top lawyer for president obama's re-election campaign. he was white house counsel for president obama and he is here next for the interview.

so tonight i'm announcing a nonpartisan commission to improve the voting experience in america, and it definitely needs improvement. i'm asking two long-time experts in the field who, by the way, recently served as the top attorneys for my campaign and for governor romney's campaign, to lead it. we can fix this. and we will. the american people demand it and so does our democracy.

>> president obama in his state of the union address this year announcing the kind of thing that sounds good, but you think will be one of those things in the state of the union that never actually happens. turns out it's happening. joining us now for his first interview about the new presidential voting commission is one of the two men tapped by president obama to lead it. the president's top campaign lawyer, former white house counsel, bob bauer. mr. bauer, thank you for being here. >> thank you for having me. >> there have been a million things over the years that i wanted to ask you. tonight i am going to ask you things about voting. were the long lines at the polling places the worst problem of the last election? the problem that is most in need of fixing, or do you know yet? >> the commission will look at that. it will focus very much on the

lines issue to be sure, as the president said in his state of the union address. as reiterated again in the executive order that he executed just recently. so we're going to be focused on that. we're going to be focused on other obstacles to voting. obstacles for the military, for limited english proficiency voters, obstacles for disability voters. but obstacles that represent an election system that isn't functioning the way it does and something needs to be done on a bipartisan basis. >> you are co-chairing this with your counterpart from the mitt romney for president campaign mr. ginsberg. the reason i thought this might not happen is because of the bipartisan part of it. lower turnout equals better republican outcomes in elections so anything that makes it difficult for anything who's not pretty explicitly a republican voter to vote is going to be to their advantage and that i have suspected has been behind some of the republican partisan efforts to just make it harder to vote in general. they think that helps them. if that is the republican

mindset, what is the likelihood of a bipartisan solution. >> as you know, i'm co-chairing the commission with ginsberg, who was governor romney's national counsel. i've known him for a long time. we disagree about virtually everything. we've never been on the same side of most political disputes. we've been on the other side of the table from each other as counsel. but i believe and i think ben would agree with this that there is a space where apart from other contests that are going to have to be fought out in other ways, as they were fought out in the election campaign, there is a space where there are some of these questions that can be resolved on a bipartisan basis. no republican, no democrat, no independent is going to say that it's acceptable for americans to stand in line for six, seven, eight, nine hours to vote or to face other completely

unmanageable restrictions on voting. no republican is going to acknowledge that that's acceptable. i honestly believe that there is room here within the confines of the commission's mandate as set out by the president to address these issues on behalf of the voters and on these particular issues, not on all issues, but on these particular issues we ought to be able to set aside partisan conflict. >> i believed that was true too when i saw florida republicans sort of repent about the long lines for which they were nationally ashamed in this last election. the other state that had very -- one other state that had very, very long lines was virginia. virginia republicans have responded by putting yet further barriers to voting in place since the election. so i hear your optimism there. i do not share it. do you see other areas of policy, election related or not, in which both sides have been able to come together and agree that there ought to be a technocatic solution. designed to be behind the veil of ignorance. is there a model for that sort of policy where it worked? >> i would have to think about that a bit. that's a good question. we are trying to take a technocratic approach. we view these as fundamental questions about administration. how the polling place is

administered, how election officials prepare for elections, resources available to them, techniques, tools they can use to process voters and to accommodate voters with special requirements, which as i said includes the military, limited english proficiency voters, disability, voters that are disabled. seems to me and i think others that looked at this in the election law community agree that there are ways to study it to identify good data, on the basis of that to arrive at good solutions people would agree are strong, sensible management solutions for the benefit of voters that there's no reason to have partisan shouting or disagreement about. i understand your, as you know, i represented the campaign during the obama for america campaign last time and also the time before that and the first election of the president, general counsel to democratic national committee. i yield to no one in my concerns about some of the very issues that you just talked about a few

minutes ago, some of state legislative restrictions, some traveling under the mislabel of id. i think we defined an area that is possible. >> hearing you say that in terms of your background makes me optimistic about your optimism. i am still not there. will you come back and talk about this again? >> absolutely we will. >> bob bauer. former white house counsel, general counsel to obama campaign and dnc. thanks for being here. >> thanks for having me. >> we'll be right back. [ female announcer ] total effects user kim scott still looks amazing. but with kids growing up fast, fighting seven signs of aging gets harder. introducing total effects moisturizer plus serum. for the ninety-two practices, two proms, and one driving test yet to come. she'll need our most concentrated total effects ever. she can't always move the way she wants. now you can. with stayfree ultra thins.

flexible layers move with your body while thermocontrol wicks moisture away. keep moving. stayfree. while thermocontrol wicks moisture away. and need to get my car fixed? progressive makes it easy, because we give you choices. you can pick where to get your car fixed, we can cut you a check, or, at our service center, we take care of everything for you. [ relaxing music playing ] [ chuckles ] -whew, so many choices. -take your time. -the service center. -okay. giving you choices -- now, that's progressive. call or click today.

behold, ronald reagan washington national airport, one of d.c.'s two major airports, used to be called washington national airport, now it is ronald reagan washington national airport. this is the ronald reagan turn turnpike in florida. used to be the florida turnpike, now it is ronald reagan

turnpike. and ronald reagan elementary school in idaho, fundamentalal school in yuma, arizona, home of ronald reagan fundamental patriots. and ronald reagan peace garden in illinois, peace garden, really? ronald reagan minuteman missile site, sports park in california, all of these are the work of the ronald reagan legacy project, created by american conservatives in 1997 with the express goal of creating a statue, park or road named after ronald reagan in all 3,000 counties. if yours doesn't have it, they're not going to rest until that changes in your county. while mr. reagan was in office, he was one of the most divisive political figures. divisiveness is not necessarily a bad thing, it is just true his

supporters liked him a lot, his detractors disliked him a lot. he had a lot of detractors. you wouldn't know that now, but that's in part because the ronald reagan legacy project for a generation has been part of a concerted, conservative effort to make him into a hero, to gloss over what was unpopular about him, how much resistance there was to him in his time. he was almost impeached over iran contra scandal. 14 reagan officials weren't just implicated, they were indicted, including the defense secretary and head of the cia and two national security advisers. and that's just one thing among many. he tripled the deficit to run up an arms race with the soviet union. economic policies led to the biggest gap between the rich and poor in a generation. he couldn't bring himself to say the word aids while tens of thousands of americans were dying from a brand new, terrifying disease. ronald reagan was the war on drugs, arming saddam hussein, invading freaking grenada.

his legacy is beloved among some conservatives but not beloved by everyone. it is one thing to make the case about why your side sees heroism in one of your political figures. it is another to try to make it seem like that perception is unanimous and that opposition to that same politician is just not real. didn't happen. it is just not as much a part of his legacy as his fan club is. since we learned of the death of former prime minister margaret thatcher at the age of 87, the way her death was noted in our country has reflected a bit of the reagan legacy project by proxy. the close relationship between ronald reagan and margaret thatcher in their times in office led her to be treated in american history as an off chute of the reagan presidency. adoring photos like these adorn her obituaries today. in britain which couldn't contain the counties touted by that regular see project, prime minister is viewed with less of

a soft focus. from a guardian newspaper obituary, the iron lady was more admired abroad than at home where even many conservative voters recoiled from her apparent lack of compassion for those whose lives and careers were disrupted by her policies. maybe you would expect that criticism. even the take of the guardian more broadly today, and the overall mainstream reaction in britain today to her death is to remember margaret thatcher as an important and transformational figure in british politics. but her means of transforming that country are still debated today and are not being whitewashed today as something that her country all accepted with delight. this is the riots against her trying to impose a pole tax. earlier, some massive and violent crushes of strikes as she busted british unions. there were riots in liverpool, huge strikes in support of coal

miners whose industries she dismantled as a means of dismantling their union power. her economic policies included big tax cuts for the richest in the country and under her leadership, the rate of poverty and economic inequality rose to rates not seen since the great depression which angered many people. what's most interesting about that legacy and the faulk lands war and hunger strikes, what's interesting about that, you can glean all those from her legacy today from the british press, covering her passing on the day it happened, without the soft focused effect that we reach for so much in our own treatment of focused effect we reach for. we're not doing that in a way seeking to speak ill of the dead gratuitously, they're not being ignorant of the real legacy she had, the real range of impact and feelings she inspired inhe