i'm margaret smith. i teach in the peace and con flebt resolution programs at american university. i teach on conflicts like northern ireland, rwanda, cypress, bosnia, sri lanka, et cetera, all civil wars where there has been a contested society where groups rely heavily on the collective memory in order to maintain the cohesion of the group for all kind of political reason. of course israel, palestine is another one. and when it comes to trying to address the question of memory in these places, one reality is that history is serving as a way of conducting the conflict by other means. and so until you get a political arrangement that creates a certain amount of stability, it's actually rather hard to shift the narrative or to find any willingness to shift the narrative. but maybe that's only a problem of degree compared to what you've been talking about here. in any case what i'm trying to get out is the question of the relationship between the historiography and the politician. can you change the historiography until the chang the politics? or can it work the other way around? you

supreme court justice sandra day o'connor, who was the recipient of our very own nas margaret chase smith award just a couple years ago at our winter conference. he investigated the impact of technology and the internet on legal education and studied the intersection of video games and moral development. he helped find legal university, provides training for professional development for poverty lawyers across the nation. he holds a ba in social studies. from harvard university, and a juris doctor from harvard law school. we ask him to speak about the committee to us about i-civics, which is a curriculum in many of our states, a number of teachers and others are using this curriculum in their government and civics classes. mr. chapman and i serve as chairs in our own states in local committees that are working closely with our supreme courts and our judicial system and others to advance the use of justice o c'connor's initiative. we're pleased to have mr. ku here and welcome and thank you for your presentation. [ applause ] >> thank you secretary, and what a great opportunity it is to addr

margaret k smith, birch bayh and that's quite a cast of characters and those are names that many older americans remember today. of those names, which names pop out to you, and which have impressed you the most? >> let me say first in full disclosure, the narrative of the book focuses on the last years of the great senate, the late '70s, and then -- but the book is backlit by what happened before. my basic argument is that there was a great senate from the earl '60s through the '70s, so all those people you indicated are part of that. the ones that stand out most prominently in my memory would include hubert humphrey, who was perhaps one of the greatest senators of all time, although i think someone of a tragic figure because of what happened to him in-during the vietnam when he was vice president. but as senator he really invented the modern senator's role to some extent. he communicated the senate to the vast public on issues like nuclear disarmment and civil rights particularly, and he was one of the great senators. >> let me -- two questions. the 60s and the 70s were very profound