. >> sir thomas clarence. >> has your assessment included looking into the morales of the agency and put into place initiatives to actually improve mo the morale? >> it's what i do, yes. >> actress holly robinson peete. >> they're showing just how amazing kids with autism are. and love coming through the "sesame street" friends makes it acceptable in sesame str"sesame magic. >> bureaucracy is when you care more about the rules than you care about the goals. that is killing us as a nation. so we are working very hard to get the inappropriate things out of the way. >> representative bruce poluquin at the consumer protection bureau's semi-annual report. >> you guarantee that neither you or anybody at the cpfb have used commercial devices, text, e-mail, cell phones and fully complied with the record, yes oe at cspan.org, on our web page and by sifting through the video library. >>> values of the founding fathers starts now by gordon wood who looks at the founding fathers and the shaping of their values. this is from the society of the four arts in palm beach, florida. >> i am so energize

do on capitol hill but there's nothing like the level of vitriol in the board hearings in the thomas clarence hearings when george h.w. bush was president. >> bill: but those men were much more conservative than judge gorsuch is. >> i don't think you can say that about clarence thomas. add the fact he was head of the eeoc. that was a political hit job of the first order and it was all -- >> bill: do you think do you think the hatred of ronald reagan was at the same level of donald trump? >> i don't. that's why i don't think it's a bad hatred of the president. i think it has to do with the democrats deciding and there's no doubt it decided is the hearings they decided 200 years of tradition which was you should generally approve a judge that is somehow educated, intelligence, experienced -- scalia was approved 98-2. to the difference ideologically between scalia was nothing. they decided however, the court they had to have the court liberalism is a minority about 20%. if you want to continue to dominate the way liberals had you weren't going to do it through the congress or presidency where th

thomas clarence ring a bell? after this. they have this claim satisfaction guarantee. really?xperience is fast, fair, and hassle-free or they get their, like, money back. saraaah!!! come to prom with me!! no. -hey mr. parker. claim satisfaction guarantee, only from allstate. it's good to be in good hands. why pause a spontaneous moment? cialis for daily use treats ed and the urinary symptoms of bph. tell your doctor about your medicines, and ask if your heart is healthy enough for sex. do not take cialis if you take nitrates for chest pain, or adempas® for pulmonary hypertension, as this may cause an unsafe drop in blood pressure. do not drink alcohol in excess. to avoid long-term injury, get medical help right away for an erection lasting more than four hours. if you have a sudden decrease or loss of hearing or vision, or an allergic reaction, stop taking cialis and get medical help right away. ask your doctor about cialis. >> neil: all right. might not be 60, but it will be more votes than clarence thomas got when he was voted for his position. it's looking like neil gorsuch

that was juan williams on clarence thomas. he's been conveniently transformed into a monster about whom it is fair to say anything, for whom it is fair to do anything, williams said. by the time bill clinton won the presidency, bork had become a verb -- a verb. and high-tech lynching was on the lips of the nation. wounds were fresh and deep when this democratic president had the chance to name two justices of his tone the -- of his own to the court. now, mr. president, republicans could have responded in kind to these nominees, but that's not what happened. when president clinton nominated ruth bader ginsburg the senate confirmed her 96-3. when president clinton nominated stephen breyer, the senate confirmed him 87-9. i, like the vast majority of republicans, voted for both of them. we did so in full knowledge of the considerable ideological differences between these nominees and ourselves. ginsberg in particular had expressed notably extreme views. even advocating for the abolition of mother's day. a nominee for the supreme c

. >> after her famous testimony against justice clarence thomas, 25 years ago, anita hill offers an important message in san francisco. >>> also gulping down a specific type of soda could do more than harm your body. it may also impact your brain. >>> and a river rescue in sonoma county. a man with no life jacket is very lucky to be alive. >>> i'm abc7 news meteorologist sandhya patel. big changes ahead as we appro >>> two women who changed the public conversation on workplace bias and harassment spoke out in san francisco tonight. leslie brinkley was there to hear what ellen powell and anita hill had to say. >> you're not going to take excuses like, well, you know, that's just what men do. >> in 1991, anita hill galvanized the country as she accused supreme court nominee clarence thomas of sexual harassment. he got the nomination in the end but she unleashed a wave of women running for office. she told a packed audience in san francisco's haze valley what she thought about fox news taking commentator bill o'reilly off the air because of accusations. >> now they're paying him millions of doll

we will start now with clarence thomas who joined the court in 1991. he talked about how a new member gets their sea legs and adjusting to the new job. >> welcome a new associate justice. how long does it take them you talk about walking into congress the first time. when he watched new justices come important you arrived how long does it take before they get it? >> i don't know. i think we all learn at different paces but when i came to the court i asked that same question because it was very important to me to figure out when what i get my sea legs. the common number was five years. and justice white would often say takes about that long to go around the full horror of all the cases, that the kind of cases that we get. that was their number. and that may be about right. that doesn't mean you can't do your work or it just means things are still new for the first five years. you know, you may not have had as many original jurisdiction cases involving water rights or boundaries. you may not of had a lot of admiralty cases. so you get all of that. it was

. >> after her famous testimony against justice clarence thomas, 25 years ago, anita hill offers an important message in san francisco. >>> also gulping down a specific type of soda could do more than harm your body. it may also impact your brain. >>> and a river rescue in sonoma county. a man with no life jacket is very lucky to be alive. >>> i'm abc7 news meteorologist sandhya patel. big changes ahead as we approach tech: when your windshield needs to be fixed... trust safelite autoglass. for these parents, driving around was the only way to get their baby to sleep. so when their windshield got cracked... customer: we can't drive this car. tech: ...they wanted it fixed right. so they scheduled with safelite. our exclusive trueseal technology means a strong, reliable bond, every time. at safelite, we stand behind our work. bye, bye. because the ones you love, sit behind it. (parents whisper jingle) safelite repair, safelite replace. >>> two women who changed the public conversation on workplace bias and harassment spoke out in san francisco tonight. leslie brinkley was there to hear what ell

. >> after her famous testimony against justice clarence thomas, 25 years ago, anita hill offers an importantessage in san francisco. >>> also gulping down a specific type of soda could do more than harm your body. it may also impact your brain. >>> and a river rescue in sonoma county. a man with no life jacket is very lucky to be alive. >>> i'm abc7 news meteorologist sandhya patel. big changes ahead as we >>> two women who changed the public conversation on workplace bias and harassment spoke out in san francisco tonight. leslie brinkley was there to hear what ellen powell and anita hill had to say. >> you're not going to take excuses like, well, you know, that's just what men do. >> in 1991, anita hill galvanized the country as she accused supreme court nominee clarence thomas of sexual harassment. he got the nomination in the end but she unleashed a wave of women running for office. she told a packed audience in san francisco's haze valley what she thought about fox news taking commentator bill o'reilly off the air because of accusations. >> now they're paying him millions of dollars to e

back then, it was clarence thomas. right now it could be kneel gorsuch. lee carter on the implications of this. you would think listening back and forth, lee, the recriminations on both sides, the nuclear option and the filibuster option and the nuclear reaction, it was -- the whole capitol was going to blow up. what does this mean? >> so it's really complicated. basically it means other at gridlock and they can't agree on anything. this is why donald trump is the president of the united states. people got fed up. they're sick and tired of republicans and democrats not working together. they're sick of nothing happening. so right now basically the democrats are saying, we're going to put a filibuster, we're going to say we're not going to vote on this and it's not okay. the republicans are going to go back and say, we're going to invoke a nuclear option. basically what they're saying, they're unwilling to compromise or work together. the biggest problem, there's no real reason that the democrats shouldn't cooperate except for the fact that they're operati

sam alito and clarence thomas. >> actually, thomas is the only one because when the filibuster came up with alito, there was 72 votes to go forward. so there's just one, just about every nominee gets 60 votes. because in the past, presidents have actually consulted the other side before picking someone. in this case, donald trump consulted the heritage foundation. the federalist society, hard right groups with extreme special interests oriented views and it didn't leave much chance for compromise. >> heidi hidecamp, one of the democrats, came out in favor of gorsuch and in favor of cloture. she didn't like the way that garland was treated but she ended her statement by saying two wrongs don't make a right. why not give neil gorsuch an up or down vote? >> let me make a proposal to maybe break this problem that we have, okay? it looks like gorsuch will not reach the 60 vote margin. so instead of changing the rules, which is up to mitch mcconnell in the republican majority, why doesn't president trump, democrats and republicans in the senate sit down and try to come up with a mainstream n

in 1991, clarence thomas was confirmed on a 52-48 about. and in 2006, samuel alito was confirmed on a 58-42 vote. in fact, when president obama was in the white house, republicans did not filibuster nominee. in fact, this body confirmed sonia sotomayor in 2009 by a vote of 68-31.y confirmed justice kagan by a roll call vote of 63-37 in 2010. we did not filibuster. let me remind folks. cloture is in place to stop debate, not to stop a vote. cloture was put in place to speed the senate up, to end debate and move to a vote, not to stop a vote. it was never intended to be a stall tactic or something to obstruct this body. this bears repeating. cloture was put in place to speed up the process, to prevens obstruction. this chamber has never had a partisan filibuster to a supreme court nominee. let me say that again. this chamber has never had a partisan filibuster to a supreme court nominee. and so here we are today with no other option but to invoke the so-called nuclear option to put an emily qualified individual on the united states supreme co

never been a traditional of filibustering judges and as many have pointed out, even people like clarence thomas were confirmed with 52 votes. any one senator would have been able to require 60 votes to close off debate to get to that vote. so you see my point. but i think it's really important for people to realize that what the democrats are proposing isn't for the first time in american history to have a partisan filibuster of supreme court justice. you'll recall not even in 2013 were they willing to suggest that that was appropriate. they carved out the supreme court all together. but it really is up to them in how we should proceed, but one way or the other we will confirm judge gorsuch and perhaps end up just returning us to the status quo before the george w. bush administration when the senate had had 200 year plus traditional of not filibustering judges. >> let me just add that if you look at the arguments that are being made by the democrats on gorsuch most of them are arguing that somehow he's not in the mainstream and if you look at the 2,700 cases that have come out of the tenth cir

bush nominated justice souter and clarence thomas to the supreme court. either just a face to filibustes even though 48th in the voted against the thomas nomination. they did require a cloture vote when a group of democrat senators attended to block a vote on the confirmation of justice alito's nomination. es 72 and back to invoke cloture,e, or preserving the bipartisan u.s. of filibusters against supreme court nominee is. among those who reject bid the alito filibuster in 2006 with the two democrat senators from my state, senator robert c. byrd and senator jay rockefeller. 72 senators voted to invoketing cloture on justice alito's nomination, but only 58 ended up voting for the final confirmation. the senate has a very clear history of rejecting the use of the filibuster proof court nominations. there's no justification for aoh filibuster on the gorsuch - nomination. neil gorsuch is a mainstream judge with the highest possible rating from the american bar association. he was confirmed by the senate without an action in the year 2006. his service on the 1

. >> the look at clarence thomas and what happened. [inaudible] >> i don't think so because you could say the same thing. >> most people don't know. [inaudible] >> i think justice thomas answers your question. if he is as controversial as he was he's much more controversial than judge gorsuch is, he got there without a filibuster, so why would the issue be brought about. >> are you concerned about animosity. >> i think senator durbin set a tone hoping that we can get things done and he referred to the criminal justice reform bill that we are working together on. so far this year, he and i are meeting together with people close to the president on the very subject. we are going to do what it takes to get it back to the senate. i think it will be back to the senate in regard to legislation, but i think it will take somebody like senator schumer, that started this whole slippery slope in 2001 to drill a new well that's not going to be poisoned. there will be both republicans and democrats to help him. >> there will be more than 100 vacanc

the most conspicuous example of that was the clarence thomas nomination. he was confirmed for the supreme court 52-48. for your listeners to know, all it takes to get a filibuster in the senate is for any one of a hundred senators to have 60 votes. the most controversial supreme court nomination in history. not a single one said you had to get 60 votes. even though i very much dislike the way the senate democrats did this 2013, in effect, it was for the practice, the practice of the custom of the senate down to 2000. >> chris: the government runs out of money on april 20th, which means we could have another government shutdown on the 29th, which just coincidentally would beat donald trump's 99 day in office. how confident are you that you and congress can avoid the government's shutdown? >> senator mcconnell: i'm very confident. the two appropriations committee are working on the bill on a bipartisan basis. we will be talking to senate democrats, they will be relevant to this process. it will require 60 votes. i'm confident senate democrats are not going t

i don't expect a clarence thomas like silence from gorsuch at all.ng to bet three arguments today. he'll at least ask some questions on his first day. >> fascinating historic day. thanks for sharing. appreciate it. >> what do alyssa mal milano, samuel l. jackson and newt gingrich have in common? they're connected to the most closely watched election in the country, the georgia race that could tell you everything about the health of the presidency. >>> and bracing for bunnies. live pictures from the south lawn of the white house, the new first family's first white house easter egg roll, no shaq, no beyonce but we are promised surprises. the president and first lady speak live, coming up. y2bg6y y10my at lincoln, we're all about making things simpler for you. like, imagine having your vehicle serviced... from the comfort of your own home. introducing complimentary lincoln pickup and delivery servicing. because the most important luxury of all... is time. pickup and delivery servicing on the entire family of lincoln luxury vehicles including a complimen

confirmed by the senate on april 24th and was sworn in on april 20 fooichlk by associate justice clarence thomas. >>> well, good afternoon everyone i'm glad the rain stopped for a short period of time. it's been a big day for me having been sworn in as the seskt agriculture this morning. i'm grod to work. we've been up here since january, a lot of decisions at usda and i'm anxious to go to work. we had a wonderful meeting with the president where he demonstrated an intricate knowledge of the issues of agriculture having do with trade, labor, regulatory reform as well as infrastructure. these people from all across the united states are legitimate agriculturalists and they help communicate to the president the needs of american agriculture in a very sincere way and he was very sincere as his response regarding hosting them here today and signing an executive order regarding agriculture and rural prosperity. he's charged us with inner agency cooperation that will enable us to work cross agencies in this task force to report back to him in no less than 180 days all the barriers to rural prosperity

clarence thomas was confirmed 52-48 the most controversial supreme court nominee in history. and not a single senator said he has to get 60 votes. >> you're somebody, though, that was very concerned when this rule was changed by harry reid for judges below supreme court. if you regret what harry reid did, why continue down this slippery slope? >> well, i think breaking the rules of the senate, to change the rules of the senate which is what was done in 2013 was terrible for the senate. but when we came to the majority a year and a half later we discussed this. about whether or not to restore the old -- the old system. and we decided not to do it because the custom, even though it was always possible to filibuster judges, the custom down to 2000 was not to do it. the senate restrained itself and and gave the supreme court nominee an up or down vote, down to 2000. so this recent invention of this level of controversy we decided was best left alone by just leaving us where we were -- >> so you now believe harry reid make the right decision? >> no, i don't think he should have br

a lot of fiction that goes on and i'm not aware of the clarence thomas one. thought he did not tell the truth. i thought that others did. robert bourque lost in committee, but we said he should be allowed to have a vote on the senate floor. he would have been confirmed with the republicans that voted for him. a large number voted against him. at the same time when the republican president was trying to get himo withdraw his name. >> an important addendum there. thanks for teeing up the conversation. there was nothing wrong with that. >> take care. >> still ahead on mtp daily, understanding this word. unmasking and what it really mean and whether it should matter. stay tuned. you don't let anything keep you sidelined. that's why you drink ensure. with 9 grams of protein and 26 vitamins and minerals. for the strength and energy to get back to doing... ...what you love. ensure. always be you. and you're about in to hit 'send all' on some embarrassing gas. hey, you bought gas-x®! unlike antacids, gas-x ® relieves pressure and bloating fast. huh, crisis averted. b

the level of vitriol that there were in the bork hearings when reagan was president or in the clarence thomas hearings when george h.w. bush was president. >> bill: those men were much more conservative than judge gorsuch is. >> in don't think you can say that about clarence thomas. the time, he was head of the eeoc. there was nothing outrageously conservative about him. that was a political hit job of the first order, and it was -- >> bill: do you think, and i know you don't i'm going to ask anyway. the hatred against ronald reagan was at the same level of donald trump? >> i don't. that's why i don't think this is about hatred of the president. i think this has to do with the fact that democrats decided, and it began, no doubt it began with the board hearing. they decided twoyears of tradition, which was you should generally approve a judge who is somehow educated, intelligent. experience. judge scalia was approved. the difference between judgeca scalia, bork, practically nothing. they decided that they had to have the court because liberalism is not a majority opinion. it's a minority. if y

she was speaking against her boss, clarence thomas, a supreme court nominee.g up, baidu wants to be behind the wheel of your autonomous vehicle. we will speak with baidu president on the plans for driverless car technology. this is bloomberg. ♪ >> it is 11:29 a.m. in hong kong , let's get a check of the first word headlines. saudi arabia says several oil producers have reached an initial agreement to extend the chronically high inventory on prices. three months of limited production have seen opec and its independent allies failed to cut stock prices. minister did recognize that the countries in favor of an extension. is an agreement, but we have not yet told all producers we may be forced to extend the measures to reach our goals. >> the trump administration is overhaulr the biggest ofthe tax code at the end the year. steve mnuchin says reforms of go ahead even if a second attempt to repeal the health care act fails. he says the priorities are to simplify personal taxes, create middle-class tax cuts, and make is this taxes competitive. governments have toughe

oddly enough will pick up more votes than clarence thomas did back in the el 1990s. that was one occasion, a supreme court justice did not get a minimum 60 votes or voice acclamation. it was commonplace during the eisenhower years and jf kennedy years and for a while, early lbj years, nominee approved by voice acclamation. inadvertent allly unanimous on -- virtually on both sides of the aisle. that was the environment then. different now. 25 or 26 didn't have to go through that. clarence thomas is the one standout who was dragged through a bitter, bitter partisan battle but ultimately approved as supreme court justice. we're keeping track of this. the reason why the markets are up, has a lot to do with this because it would be deemed through all the sausage making a w, a big win for donald trump. he has not had legislative victory, despite executive orders, executive memoranda, whatever you want to call them, very business at all that, not a win or legislative achievement he could take home. this would certainly be that. the markets are buoyed by that how inevitable

clarence thomas, one of most controversial nominees in this last century. came out of the committee with a divided committee. after the vote failed, the committee then voted to send his nomination to the floor without a recommendation. he then passed on a floor vote of 52-48. there was never a request for a cloture vote. no one filibustered him, not one person. if clarence thomas would have had a filibuster threat facing him, he wouldn't be on the court today. he's been an excellent jurist on the supreme court. but he came out during a time when there weren't these idle threats. it's even interesting that robert bourque who is currently not on the court, his vote failed 42-58. but that was a failed final vote, robert bork did not face a filibuster threat. he was brought to a final up-or-down vote. i can go on and on to walk through the judges and justices and how they've gone through the process, but there's been a simple procedure. is this person qualified? the american bar association, multiple entities, huge bipartisan support around the country. no ques

clarence thomas who was confirmed by a narrower margin, but we all know there were more complicated things on with that. >> what was clarence thomas's margin? >> 52-48. that had to do with the scandal around the elected sexual harassment of anita hill. with gorsuch, this was politicked. you have on the one hand, republicans saying this is somebody who is a mainstream jurist. he is very much in the mold of justi justice scalia who he was he's going to be replacing. democrats saying guy is far right, and the seat was stolen from garland. the it's not that there were real issues on gorsuch himself. it comes down to the fact that republicans basically sold everything out to get a republican elected last year so they could have this seat. >> see? i think that's the real issue, and i raised it on this show, and other of my work about gorsuch's vote around supporting big business, dealing with a specific case of a driver that was fired, but i had some problems and questions around his legal history, but the real problem for a lot of us is this is the senate just openly defying a sitting president

a clerk under clarence thomas, i'm not taking sidesr,nd worse.rs it looks like this week we will see a part of the senate changeg more into doesn't take a bipartisanotes, a simple majority canonnell was rt in his point. this is a 200 yearer changed.g a sunday during lent t in the way he characterizes thi this. there has never been a parsa sut nominee. when my former during all of the controversy surrounding clarence confirmed, the boatti on the supreme court, much to the consternation of the left. this is ridiculous at this point. >> chris: republicans were filibustering lower court judges in the bush administration -- not the bush administration, and the clinton administration. this has gone back and forth. >> the supreme court nomination process has never gotten to this point there was a threaten of a partisan filibuster. mcconnell, he knows the stuff inside and out to completely write the way he characterizes it. i understand that democrats don't want neil gorsuch to be on the court, i got that. he's going to be on the court. this in the end h

or if he's in the mold of somebody like clarence thomas or justice scalia who he is replacing. that will be interesting. he will get an opportunity, really, off the bat with some of these court cases that are before the supreme court already to really, i think, curry favor with some folks in the far right sort of evangelical communities that were a little nervous about some of his answers around roe v. wade from those really long confirmation hearings. >> very long. 20 plus hours of confirmation hearings. i want to get to what people think of his style in just one second, as you were alluding to. but, jeffrey, i think we both could have heard wrong. but after the swearing in it did seem that president trump leaned in and said go get them. in the theme of going and getting 'em, what is the week like for neil gorsuch? lay it out. >> he has been given briefs to read, even though he hasn't been a justice yet. he will have to sit in the justice' conference where they decide which conference they're going to take and there is a weirdness about these events. justice john paul stevens

he referred back to the clarence thomas case.teresting when you think about his confirmation. nobody tried to filibuster him. even as controversial and as drawn out and so many twists and turns and critics of his, many of them proven to be completely false after the fact, but by the time that justice thomas got to an actual vote, nobody tried to filibuster him. judge gorsuch got the highest rating you can get from the american bar association unanimously. that's not a conservative group. he had people celebrating him left, right and middle. people all over the political spectrum saying regardless what you think about politics, he's fair. he adheres to the texts. so even with the backdrop, the democrats decided to filibuster him. something that they didn't even do for justice thomas. >> neil: you're right about that. shannon, we know he's scary smart as are you. thank you very much. everything on monday. that will be a big deal. meantime, you've seen and heard about mad dog mattis. he was key in recommending the course of action w

clarence thomas is not serving that capacity. don't believe this nominee would have that type of capacity could where we are now as a nation and where we are going to, we are going to have to have somebody who has compassion for the people and a repenting spirit the whole justice of it i believe in a christlike manner like dr. king in thurgood marshall try to do. dr. king was talking about a community of chaos. -- weare at a point we go are headed for chaos because community is a being dissolved and being taken over i corporate interest. -- taken over by corporate interest. i am hoping for a change so that we can have that change. we are going to have to stand up and boycott and divest so they can hear the people's voice. that is where we can go from here as a people. that would give us a thurgood type marshall individual and maybe clarence thomas can wake up and do the things he has been called to do to represent the people. host: let's go to lawrence in georgia. good morning. caller: yes, i voted for donald trump and i feel lik

that was juan williams on clarence thomas. he's been conveniently transformed into a monster about whom it is fair to say anything, for whom it is fair to do anything, williams said. by the time bill clinton won the presidency, bork had become a verb -- a verb. and high-tech lynching was on the lips of the nation. wounds were fresh and deep when this democratic president had the chance to name two justices of his tone the -- of his own to the court. now, mr. president, republicans could have responded in kind to these nominees, but that's not what happened. when president clinton nominated ruth bader ginsburg the senate confirmed her 96-3. when president clinton nominated stephen breyer, the senate confirmed him 87-9. i, like the vast majority of republicans, voted for both of them. we did so in full knowledge of the considerable ideological differences between these nominees and ourselves. ginsberg in particular had expressed notably extreme views. even advocating for the abolition of mother's day. a nominee for the supreme c

gorsuch, the nominee, is somewhere to the right, even if justice clarence -- even as justice clarence thomas. this case is not an outlier. in fact annal sills of his decision -- annal siz of his decision showed he ruled against students in eight out of ten idea cases. there was also a consistent pattern in judge gorsuch's record on discrimination and retaliation involving employers. bloomberg b.n.a. analyzed judge gorsuch's record and found that he ruled for employers ought out of 12 times. for example, he ruled against the sex discrimination claim brought by a u.p.s. salesman. ruled against a disability discrimination claim brought by a college professor. ruled against an age discrimination claim brought by two maintenance workers and a claim brought by an african american grocery store employee who was called a monkey by his supervisor. ruled against a gender and disability discrimination claim brought by a female county accountant with multiple sclerosis. ruled against a discrimination claim by a transgender woman seeking to use the restroom of her gender identity. the case of grace wank

where we are now is we are back as late as 2000 and the best test of that would have been the clarence thomas nomination in 1991. nobody would argue that was most controversial supreme court nomination ever. you all know all it takes to get safety votes in the senate is one senator out of 100 to say i want you to get 60 votes. nobody did. that's a pretty strongly held custom. that's the way the senate operated until 2000. this notion that this somehow bleeds over into the legislative filibuster is untrue. i'm opposed to it and senator collins is circulating a letter to senator schumer and myself and members who support the legislative filibuster. i would be the beneficiary and my party would be the beneficiary of changing that. i'm opposed to changing it and i think that's what fundamentally changes the senate. republicans have always felt that way. from ancient history, 1994, big republican sweep, took the house for the first time in 40 years and got the senate back, tom harkin who used to be here was always in favor of turning the senate into the house. on day one, he proposed a rules chang

but the reaction 26 years ago was much different when anita hill accused supreme court nominee clarence thomas of harassment. >> of his own sexual prowess. >> reporter: last october, hill told cbs news that the focus of the issue has to change. >> starting, really, how are we going to measure punishment from the point of view of the person who has been harmed? >> companies are going to be held to account. >> reporter: fatima goss graves, incoming president at the national women's law center, says that may be happening. >> so we are at, really, a tipping point of public attention, public awareness, and transparency on the oorve harassment. >> reporter: according to a cbs news poll conducted last september, 78% of women and 71% of men believe sexual harassment exists in the workplace. but just 37% of victims report it to a supervisor. >> most women never report harassment at all because they fear retaliation, because they believe that they won't be believed, because they think they'll be discounted. and that has been true for a long time. >> fox news. >> reporter: graves says while the ouster of

. >> reporter: it's why anita hill publicly testified against supreme court nominee clarence thomas.n 1991 the 35-year-old law professor sat before an all male senate judiciary committee and recounted how he allegedly harassed her. thomas landed a spot on the court. >> it was a very reluctant decision. >> reporter: fast forward to modern day silicon valley. ellen powell spokeful her decision to sue one of the world's most powerful venture capital firms for discrimination. >> when it was about me, i thought i'll work harder and do better and take this feedback and i will adjust, but when i saw that it was clearly happening to other women in the firm and there was this harassment element to it, i felt like somebody had to be held accountable. >> reporter: in the end she lost her court battle. both women said they wedge through periods of blaming themselves -- went through periods of blaming themselves. >> understand that you are not the problem, that there may be things that can be fixed, but in some situations like yours you're not going to be able to fix it internally. >> reporter: s

i am admirer of clarence thomas and other black conservatives law and civil-rights i understood how bad the movement had become anything thomas is a great guy on those issues the very wise man unknown to 99% of today's youth to have a stranglehold on the university. >> caller: it is wonderful to listen to you. i was born 1950 force schools were integrated it was inspiring because my african classmates were into the civil-rights movement as a positive culture so to contrast that to the culture now which is so negative and destructive it is incredible senate this will rights movement was destroyed by those to race hustlers who would line their own pockets by attacking white people basically. is a terrible thing what it has done but to tell them that the system is rigged against you and then that is denying them an incredible opportunity that this country affords. and as a talented comedian. it is a great country a. in the censorship issue is huge. my book is 10 weeks on the new york times best-seller list. by the l.a. times and "washington post" and have the new york review for the indust