this will literally stand out as some monolithic edifice at the top of this hill given its size and the fact that it as at the top of the hill. the fact that there was this huge push in cheerleading and city agencies long before it was certified and it led to a changing of the information about the neighborhood. the neighborhood has been terribly amiss characterize as a three and four story which is not. this is the corrected illustration of building heights to show that 25 buildings on the block were incorrectly identified. this block has been identified as some sort of transitional area, some sort of area in flocks which is completely untrue. one of the newest buildings on the block is booker t. and it was built in 1952. there are very few new buildings on this block. almost all of them date from the 1800's and some of them date from the 1920's. so, hand in glove with the bureaucratic and financial momentum behind this project has been a fudging of facts and mischaracterization of the neighborhoods and conclusions which is still makes sense -- which just don't make sense. this action

pioneer park project is trying to make the point that not only the tower, not only this man-built edificee is a symbol of the city but also the green space on which it sits and the hill to which is rests. to understand them, you have to understand the topography of san francisco. early days of the city, the city grows up in what is the financial district on the edge of chinatown. everything they rely on for existence is the golden gate. it's of massive importance to the people what comes in and out of san francisco bay. they can't see it where they are. they get the idea to build a giant wooden structure. the years that it was up here, it gave the name telegraph hill. it survived although the structure is long gone. come to the 1870's and the city has growed up remarkably. it's fueled with money from the nevada silver mines and the gold rush. it's trying to be the paris of the west. now the beach is the suburbs, the we will their people lived on the bottom and the poorest people lived on the top because it was very hard getting to the top of telegraph hill. it was mostly lean-to sharks an

1963 is my twice freedom story because in march of 1963, reverend martin luther king came to this edifice looking for one of those famous mass meetings and had been driving around for two hours and he found this. and it said that dr. king practiced his ending to the famous "i have a dream" speech right here at the second african baptist church here in savannah. .. >> it's about 5 minutes. 55 minutes. >> hi, i'm david cowan, president of the museum of american finance. welcome back to our lunch and learn series. welcome to the university of central oklahoma and professor arnold. thank you for coming. please join us again, everyone, next week on the 26th we're going to continue the lunch and learn series. the director of the roth child archive will be here, melanie. this is an historic banking house, again, a week from this thursday. and then on the 24th, this is tuesday upcoming, we'll be screening the rediscovering alexander hamilton. this is the pbs documentary recently released, and all your questions about the movie can be answered because the producer/director, michael pack, will be i

1963 is my twice freedom story because in march of 1963, reverend martin luther king came to this edifice looking for one of those famous mass meetings and he had been driving around for two hours and he finally found a meeting and it said that dr. king practiced his ending to the famous "i have a dream" speech right here in the second african baptist church right here in savannah. >> for more information on c-span's local content vehicles and the 2011 lcv's tour visit c-span.org/localcontent. >> what are you reading this summer? booktv wants to know. >> hi, i'm jane blair and i'm the author of hesitation kills, a female marine officer's combat experience in iraq and this

he and others fanned federalism back into effect as a constitutional part of the american edifice. what is the prospect we will see any resurgence of the non- delegation doctrine? it seems to have been dead and buried for such a long time. i do not sense any interest in the court to revisit that issue. do you think that the sooner the issue you're talking about the so -- you're talking about this morning might force that? >> we have long and complex views on this. first, i disagree that the non delegation doctrine has original list foundations. if you look at the legislation passed in the first congress, it included five or six delegations that, today, we would think would blank check delegations to the president to do various things. in my view, the non-delegation doctrine is a late-19th century creation by lawyers anxious about the nascent the administrative state. that experiment lasted until the 1930's and then basically collapsed. it shows no signs of revival. the non-delegation doctor leads a ghostly existence with people talking about it all the time, but it does not manage

he and others fanned federalism back into effect as a constitutional part of the american edifice. what is the prospect we will see any resurgence of the non- delegation doctrine? it seems to have been dead and buried for such a long time. i do not sense any interest in the court to revisit that issue. do you think that the sooner the issue you're talking about the so -- you're talking about this morning might force that? >> we have long and complex views on this. first, i disagree that the non delegation doctrine has original list foundations. if you look at the legislation passed in the first congress, it included five or six delegations that, today, we would think would blank check delegations to the president to do various things. in my view, the non-delegation doctrine is a late-19th century creation by lawyers anxious about the nascent the administrative state. that experiment lasted until the 1930's and then basically collapsed. it shows no signs of revival. the non-delegation doctor leads a ghostly existence with people talking about it all the time, but it does not manage

he and others fanned federalism back into effect as a constitutional part of the american edifice. what is the prospect we will see any resurgence of the non- delegation doctrine? it seems to have been dead and buried for such long time. i do not sense any interest in the court to revisit that issue. do you think that the sooner the issue you're talkingbout the so -- you're talking about this morning might force that? >> we have long and complex views on this. first, i disagree that the non delegation doctrine has original list foundations. if you look at the legislation passed in the first congress, it included five or six delegations that, today, we would think would blank check delegations to the president to do various things. in my view, the non-delegation doctrine is a late-19th century creation by lawyers anxious about the nascent the ministrative state. that experiment lasted until the 1930's and then basically collapsed. it shows no signs of revival. the non-delegation doctor leads a ghostly existence with people talking about it all the time, but it does not manage to by