tv Key Capitol Hill Hearings CSPAN November 22, 2013 4:00pm-6:01pm EST
host: one of a number of ceremonies at arlington national cemetery. the only surviving member of the immediate kennedy family, jean kennedy smith, the younger sister of president john f. kennedy who served as u.s. a visitor to ireland during the clinton administration, among those on hand for the tribute in the posting of flowers and the regiment, the military regiment. the posting of the colors and the wreath at the tomb of president john f. kennedy. richard reeves, "the kennedy years," joining us from new york. guest: one of my thoughts about all this that we forget really but hits us, the president of the united states is not only
the head of government, he is also the head of state. the equivalent of the british prime minister and the queen. the president is the physical embodiment of the american people, so he had a position above party and most of us respond to that, that he speaks for the nation. that is brought home to us because, as we were talking about television, he was in our living room. we thought in some way that we knew this man, which brings us back to the death in the family reaction of millions of people. host: we will watch the scene from arlington cemetery and hear from andy joining us from marlborough, massachusetts.
caller: good morning. i was born on march 21, 1960, so at the time i would have been a little over three and a half years old. i always remember, my first congress in memory that i ever had was being in the kitchen of our third-floor apartment and my mother crying. i remember asking her, you know, what was wrong, why was she crying, and she came out and said that it bad man or someone had shot the president. to this day i would give a million dollars to remember the questions i am sure i probably asked her as any three and a half-year-old would. she was a strong woman and really did not cry that often, but i remember to this day her crying and that really affected her like i guess they did the rest of the nation. every time i hear of the
assassination, i always think that that was the first thing that i really remember happening in my life, my mother, how hard she took it that day. that is all i have to say. thank you. host: thank you for the call. i want to go back to one of the iconic photographs, november 22, the open air motorcade with the president and first lady. in front of them, nellie connally and the governor of texas john connally who has since passed away. he became a friend of president nixon, himself running for president but losing for that bit. back in 1991, he reflected on what it was like to be in the motorcade and being hit i the sniper lee harvey oswald. [video clip] >> we were in the motorcade going through the main part of town. the crowds were extremely enthusiastic, excited, exuberant, and just after we
turned off of main street, someone turned around and said to the president, mr. president, you cannot say dallas does not love you now. he said, no, i cannot. we turned onto elm street to go under the overpass, and i heard this sound that i thought was a rifle shot. i turned to look over my right shoulder because that is where the sound came from to see if i could see anything. i did not. i was in the process of turning to look over my left shoulder when i felt an impact, as if someone hit me with a closed fist in the middle of my back. it knocked me over, and i saw that i was covered with blood. frankly, i thought i had been fatally hit.
my wife pulled me down in her lap. she was in the jump seat on my left. i was in the jumpseat he directly in front of the president. she pulled me down into her lap. at about that time, i heard another shot, about that loud, a snack. my eyes were open. i was conscious. i saw the interior of this presidential limousine covered with blood and brain tissue. and i knew that the president had been fatally hit. host: july 1991, the comments of former texas governor john connally. this week and on american history tv, we will be focusing on the kennedy assassination 50 years later. today on the c-span networks, two reflections you can watch here on c-span and also on c- span radio. 12:30 eastern time at the moment in which president kennedy was assassinated, live coverage from dealey plaza in dallas, texas. historian david mccullough will read jfk's speeches. and the u.s. naval academy's men's glee club performing. from the jfk presidential library museum in boston,
starting at 2:30 because singer and songwriter james taylor among those performing. and the massachusetts governor speaking and commemorating the life and legacy of president kennedy. back to your phone calls. a call from west palm beach, florida. and richard reeves is joining us from new york. good morning. caller: good morning. host: turn your volume down on your tv set, please. caller: ok, good morning. i actually was in philadelphia when the president was shot, and i was going to be returning to palm. in any case, i was a republican. days later, i got a call from mrs. rose kennedy.
she asked me through an appointment agency to become her personal secretary, and i did and i stay there for two and a half years. in hyannisport, we had jackie kennedy and many of the visitors. i have not published anything about it, but i have written extensively about these wonderful people. host: what have you written? what are your memories of rose kennedy and jacqueline kennedy? caller: rose kennedy, i would say her religion, no question about it. her best friend was god, and she was very careful in turning to him. there were difficult times. that, of course, was because of her time with the nuns. jacqueline kennedy was the
kindest woman i ever met. she thought of other people. she was very aware of what was going on. and she did not react immediately. i think she weighed the circumstances, and she also rock comfort in her writing courses. -- riding horses. rose kennedy turned to god, and jackie kennedy had faith, too, but she found great comfort in god's land. host: what years did you work for the kennedy family? caller: december 1963 through july 1966. host: the immediate aftermath of the assassination.
i want you to stay on the line. i want to see if richard reeves would like to ask you a question. caller: i would very much like to be in touch with him. guest: first of all, when you said cynthia from west palm beach, i have a daughter, one of my daughters is a teacher in royal palms. her name is cynthia. so i thought, my god -- caller: my god. guest: i must tell you, i am stunned. you are registered with an employee agency and rose kennedy called the agency? caller: called them, gave a false name. they checked my credentials and she said i want her to start tomorrow. i was up in new york and cannot get on an airplane flight.
she said call the secret service or fbi, say she is my secretary and put her on a flight. he just laughed and said i think a better check this out. you call back in good 20 minutes and said you are on a flight. and that was my introduction to power. host: cynthia, i have one other follow-up. you were with her just a month after the assassination. what do you remember about what was going on inside the family, how they were dealing with the grieving process and the suddenness of the assassination of her son? caller: the family did not come over to the big house. a lot of them did not stay there in palm beach. primarily because of the ambassador's illness, out of respect for that. the grieving that mrs. kennedy did was a very personal grieving.
she had her religion, and i would like to talk to mr. reeves or his daughter and see what we can do. guest: do you know how the president's father joseph kennedy was given the news or was not? host: i do not, but he was given the news. i believe a family member who was in charge of his medical treatment spoke to him about it. but i do not think he was told immediately. i believe it was the next day and teddy was up there and the family had come around. and it was very hard to know what his mental capacity was.
i was there when president kennedy -- i am sorry, president johnson visited the ambassador. and that is a unique story. host: well, share it with us, cynthia. guest: for people who do not know, the president's father had been disabled by a stroke. i guess he cannot speak except a few words. as you say, it was hard to understand how much of his mental faculties were working. caller: exactly right. if you would ask your daughter to call me, i can leave my phone number afterwards. guest: i am going to see her tomorrow. host: i will have you stay on the line and we will get your phone number. president johnson met with the kennedy family, including president kennedy' father. you were there.
caller: i am not going to tell you on the air, but it was a unique experience. host: cynthia from west palm beach, florida. stay on the line and we will get your phone number to pass on to richard reeves. we appreciate your recollection from 50 years ago. anyway, this book with the letters in november 1963. it was in january 1964 that former first lady jackie kennedy thanked the public for their support. [video clip] >> i wanted to take this opportunity to express my appreciation for the hundreds of thousands of messages, nearly 800,000, which my children and i have received over the past few weeks. [inaudible] these tributes are something i shall never forget.
i need them. all of you who have written to me know how much the world loves him and he returned that love in full measure. it is my greatest wish that all of these letters be acknowledged. they will be, but it will take a long time to do so. i know you will understand. each and every message is to be treasured, not only for my children but to the future generations to know how much our country and people of the nation loves him. the letters will be left in his memory along the river in boston, massachusetts. host: from 1964 to this friday morning, november 22, 2013. the kennedy gravesite at arlington national cemetery, the eternal flame.
a photographer captured the moment. family members, including jean kennedy smith on hand, the younger sister of president kennedy, to pay tribute to our 36th president. headlines from around the country focusing on what happened in dallas. this is from the detroit free press. 50 years after the kennedy assassination, a day i will never forget. the tallahassee democrat, shocked, sadness my car and disbelief is the headline. that photograph moments before lee harvey oswald fired the shots in dallas, texas. from the orange county register, the day jfk was shot. this from the richmond times dispatch, enduring mystique, jfk 50 years later. from the atlanta or no constitution, jfk, that awful day in dallas. larry is joining us from maryland. good morning to you. caller: good morning. i was about 10 years old when i received the information at school, just devastating.
since that time, it has haunted me immensely over the years. so much information has come out. and i am quoting here, reading something that says perhaps there was one assassin. but he did not act alone. dallas was the ideal location for such a crime. a friend of the kennedys speaking on behalf of robert and jacqueline kennedy used a back channel to give this information to a soviet leader. i am haunted by the house assassination committee back in 1976 coming up with kennedy was likely assassinated as a result of a conspiracy. senator hart -- he said that american journalism has failed to follow up on this story. what is your reaction when you hear that in lieu of the fact that, as was mentioned by mr.
reeves, kennedy was trying to do a seachange and policy of looking at what had typically been folds of the cold war in light of his june 10 american university speech? host: thank you for the call. richard reeves? guest: i do not believe any of it. as i mentioned before, the culture of assassination, the zeitgeist was abetted by john kennedy and his brother robert because of their of session with castro and the fact that we had plot after plot to try to kill the man. but it was our man who was killed. i have spent a lot of time on the site.
i do not doubt that -- excuse me. oswald was a very strange fellow. he was a member of fair play for cuba. and other organizations. whereas the danger in dallas, a very right wing city at the time, and it may be that the events, the kennedy's attempts to eliminate castro did motivate oswald, but i do not think there was any conspiracy. as we know, oswald wanted to kill general edwin walker who was a right wing icon in the country at the time. he has been forgotten, thankfully. but i do think he acted alone. so many of these theories --
there is the grassy knoll theory, and if you listen to the, there was a battalion of people hidden on the grassy knoll. the grassy know is like a big suburban lawn, a very small setting. i think the conspiracy theories and whatnot of our young prince being shut down and dying young really inclined a lot of people to think this cannot have been an individual action of hate and passion and evil. it is hard to accept. as this gentleman said, he is haunted by it. well, a lot of americans were haunted by it and have continued to try to find a reason, a conspiracy, a group who did
this. the mafia did this. cubans did this. communists did this. i think it is a natural reaction, and i do not think those things happened. host: back to this headline from the baltimore sun -- november 23, 1953. texan who lived in russia charged in assassination. it was said that lee harvey oswald made no statement, admitted nothing, and signed nothing. and this photograph from monday morning of the "new york times" with jack ruby shooting and killing lee harvey oswald two days after he allegedly killed john f. kennedy. light rain is falling here in washington, d.c., this friday morning. the scene at arlington cemetery as the crowds continued together and pay tribute to president kennedy.
we have a call from massachusetts. good morning. caller: i have a question about the kennedy's trip to france. after the second world war, england gave independence to india. [indiscernible] africa, algiers, hands of vietnam. kennedy sent troops there when the french were defeated. i often wonder what happened on his trip there with jackie to france. thank you. host: richard reeves? guest: obviously, the visit, what i think is most important, in 1954, then senator kennedy went to vietnam and the president of south vietnam was a catholic and had lived in the
united states in new jersey and had been supported by the kennedy family. and when young senator kennedy, 1954, there was a rooftop bar at the caravelle hotel, the tallest building in saigon, he was having a drink or coffee with a young american diplomat named edward gallion who became the dean of the tufts school of diplomacy. as they were talking, night fell, and there were flashes across the river and explosions. kennedy said, what is that? and gallion said that is the vietcong.
kennedy said, what is going to happen? and he was told that they are going to drive the french out, they are going to come in and beat us, too. so it was not that kennedy did not know france's role. i mean, we were against the french in terms of colonialism at that time. johnson is blamed for vietnam, but we had 1500 men there when kennedy became president. when he left, it was 17,000.
part of it was that democratic presidents, including barack obama, are under regular attack from conservatives about being weak militarily, not strengthening the military of the country. and kennedy wanted to avoid that. but i do not know if anything happened between he and the president during that trip, but kennedy knew just as much as the french new about what was once french indochina in which we wanted the french out. but then to prove how tough we were, we went in there, and as colin powell years later said in another context, we broke it. we broke vietnam. jack kennedy, president kennedy, twice signed off on two plots in vietnam. once in august of 1963 and then again on november 1 of 1963 when we told the general in saigon that we would not interfere if they tried to overthrow, which
they did immediately and killed him immediately. and all of this is forgotten in history largely because kennedy was dead weeks later. as the years went on, the war became more unpopular. some journalists would say kennedy intended to get out. maybe he did. but it is a hell of a lot easier to get in then get out of situations like that, as we have learned over the years in other countries. one final thing about it, there was a book called "the ugly american" which was about vietnam. it was fictionally-told and it was a book saying america should
straighten us out and this is how we should do it. kennedy gave that book to every member of the senate and every member of the house when he was still a senator. so he was not without knowledge of that part of the world, and he made a huge mistake which most people blame on johnson. ironically, johnson gets all the credit for civil rights when it was kennedy who risked his political career first. richard reeves is a longtime reporter joining us from new york we have a few more minutes in our conversation. the headline from the hometown newspaper of president kennedy, "the boston globe." a reprint of a photograph in 1963 at harvard.
in this headline -- "the news hit, a rogue wave -- sudden, unthinkable, savage." word spread in an instant by walter cronkite and then the city froze in place, to watch and mourn, for what seemed to be an endless 72-hour day. our next call is from montana. caller: i was in high school at the time. the halls were packed. but it was like a wave, a bus coming down the hall. i didn't even know what i was. i passed two rooms going away to homeroom -- we were going to leave school. teachers crying and sobbing. then i got scared. what the heck is going on? i turned to my homeroom and it was dead silent and i was watching my teacher crying. could not even stand up. so terrible, the news.
then finally and stood up and said our president has been murdered. and then -- oh, boy. you know, the responsibility for were back then -- i do not think anybody have the responsibility. i heard president entity had a provision that would shatter the cia into one thousand pieces and put the responsibility for wars under the joint chiefs of staff. i think this was very key to what was going on, because he had said something like that -- not our responsibility to go in and help the vietnamese out. like in america, you have to earn your own freedom, you know? i found myself in vietnam, the tet offensive just a couple of years later, because of what -- it was like, all of these leaders were getting slain after that. all of our countries leaders. like we were children of a slain father figure.
at the same time, they have the warren commission down there trying to stomp this all out, and i guess -- he was in it, one of kennedy's big enemies. they went down and saw jack ruby and he asked for asylum in washington, d.c., and they said we cannot take you up there -- nobody can protect you in jail. i thought, what a ridiculous thing. and then a ruby said if you don't protect me, i will be dead and nobody will ever know what i know about a new form of government coming into takeover. host: we will stop at that point. richard reeves? guest: well, people were numb and hit by this. they thought about a lot of things. this series of events was extraordinary.
and for those of us of age, including the caller, one of the things that came out of technology is our history is becoming more and more visual. one of the things that projected john kennedy in the american psyche. his father was president of rko, the movie studio. so that all these films, technicolor, which was not that common when john kennedy -- it did not exist for most people when john kennedy was a child. there was this film and video and tape record of his life almost from childhood because they were a rich family, and they built around the children. so that is why, i think, one of the reasons that we are also personally involved in this in a way we are not always with political events. again, it was the end of our
innocence. that we were somehow protected from all the bad things going on in the world host: port jefferson new york. caller: just a testimony and reference of where we were when the president was assassinated. my husband was based at strategic air command at the time. i recall being with my little one around lunchtime and i heard this from over the radio and immediately went next-door, and we were just so upset. and we couldn't believe this was happening. and then my husband was called to an alert. they were at the base at the time. and they were on high alert with
strategic air command. i enjoyed the testimony of the gentleman before me. that is the only comments i do have. one thing i would like to add, though, i recall. it seems to me about six months before the assassination that kennedy was coming from a trip to california -- not at the airbase but the national airport. and we lived right near there. he did stop, and they had a big platform about 12 feet high. and i went there to see him. i really recall what a handsome man he was. but anyway, what surprised me at the time -- and i even recall saying this to my husband -- that the security at the time. if it was there, i didn't know what that you could park your car and just walk right up the field to the tarmac. you didn't even have to enter and be checked out. it is just amazing, the hundreds of people who would, in part just like i did.
but that certainly has changed, thank. -- thank god. host: even pennsylvania avenue that had been closed after the bombings in oklahoma city, but that did not happen until the mid-1990's. another piece of sound, from lady bird johnson who we have been focusing on in her first lady series and in her diary explaining what happened the moment after the shots were fired, courtesy of the jfk library in boston. [video clip] >> accelerated terrifically fast. faster and faster. and then suddenly they put on the brakes so hard that i wondered if they were going to make it. the wheel left around the corner. we pulled up to a building. i looked up and saw it said hospital.
only then did i believe that this might be what it was. kept on saying in an exciting voice -- have they shot the president? i said something like, no, it can't be. as we ground to a halt, we were still the third car. secret service men, had to pull, lead, guide, and hustle us out. looked back over my shoulder and saw a bundle of pink, like a blossom, lying in the backseat, i think it was mrs. kennedy lying over the president's body.
host: the first-hand account from lady bird johnson in her audio diary. and this headline from "usa today." "the stars still visible around dallas." richard reeves? guest: and they are. the one thing we have not touched on here was the event was so traumatic in itself, but also there was, without knowing, i think one of the reasons so many people believe in conspiracy theories was that all we knew when it happened that this was the beginning of world war iii. there was a real reason -- for the people who don't like the warren commission -- the single assassin theory. for all we know sitting in new
jersey or new york or wherever we were, this was beginning of war and maybe the beginning of the end. that was the other thing -- we never faced anything like that. the united states had not been invaded or at war since the war of 1812 where things happen on our soil. so, yeah, the posttraumatic stress was almost national. it was probably inevitable. the personal shock, the living room, the member of your family. but also the potential of nuclear war. host: richard reeves, i want to conclude on two points. first, the role jackie kennedy played in the days that followed. what was it? guest: brilliant. i mean, she was obviously fantastic. she had her kind of imagining of
and creation of camelot, it has a lot to do with the legend. and this legend is not going to go away. you have to remember, john kennedy was and is forever young. ironically, if he had served two terms -- which i think you would have -- and then lived to a good old age, i mean, he would be being interviewed as an old man on "the today show" or something but he was never an old man. he was young. and his youth was taken away, and so was ours. host: finally, the next and final stop on that trip was austin, texas, a two-day trip that included fort worth and houston. the morning began and ft. worth and then the event in dallas. but this is a what if question
had he lived, what could we have expected in the 1964 campaign? guest: he would have won in 1964. i mean, he was obviously popular. he had an approval rating -- i have forgotten exactly what it was, but the high 70's or 80's. he loved politics. this man loves politics. he re-created the way we pick our president. he was self-selected. so was carter and now obama. others -- reagan. and so that he --and when he talked about it -- excuse me -- he thought his opponent would either be very goldwater, the senator of arizona, or governor nelson rockefeller of new york. in private what he said was, he is not going to be that tough. goldwater was too dumb to be president and rockefeller
doesn't have the guts to go for. it was not a bad observation. he would have been a good political reporter. host: richard reeves, the general editor of the book "the kennedy years." he is joining us from new york. appreciate your time and perspective on this 50th anniversary of his assassination. guest: thank you, steve. you are doing a wonderful job. you know, hopefully the anniversary will help bring us together at the same time in washington where we are splitting farther apart. we were united then, and it with a different country, and we lost a lot of that -- a lot because of the assassination, too. host: richard reeves, thank you. visitors continue to stop by the gravesite of john f. kennedy in arlington national cemetery.
the eternal flame, a live picture here, on the 50th anniversary of the kennedy assassination. a wreath of flowers placed the other day by president obama and former president bill clinton will stop >> today, the , november 22, 1963. we will bring you the nbc news coverage. you will see some of the reporting of man on that day. that is tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern. important distinction jfk, 50 years after dallas. newsreels after the assassination. interviews with the doctors who treated jfk and a former life magazine editor on purchasing ruderights to be -- the zap film. next up, back to this morning's
washington journal at a conversation about the preparations for the state funeral of jack kennedy on november 25, 1963. >> thank you for being with us. the answer as to the timing is that he finally had the votes to pull it off. he picked up to key supporters. they and feinstein was persuaded that the situation was not going to be any better will stop ago. next,ms of what happens
it is a classic case of the first role of legislative politics. if you have the votes, call the vote. he did and he did. in terms of what happened next, there's a lot of fear among republicans. the democrats will be prepared to do this rules change on legislation sooner or later. the notion that the absence of a filibuster on all nominees, except the supreme court, seems difficult for republicans to fathom. republicans were clearly annoyed by this. they were furious. they essentially decided to put a stop to any further debate on the defense authorization bill. the recess has now begun. this is a bill that has passed 52 years in a row. it seems to cast doubt on
whether that record will be maintained. republicans were clearly going to show that they were not going to back away from the filibuster legislation. host: i will come back to that point. clearly, where you stand depends on where you sit. it was a different situation in 8 years ago when the democrats were in the minority. you had a different harry reid saying he was opposed to changing senate rules. are all hands dirty? guest: absolutely. you also have mitch mcconnell reading from the opposite script. each of them has read from one another's script before. many of the viewers will remember the spring of 2005. the senate got within a few hours of bill frist and mitch mcconnell making the same move that harry reid made yesterday.
and it was only at the last hour that a so-called gang of 14 agreed that they would oppose the filibuster like this. they would oppose all filibusters of judges, except in extraordinary circumstances. that deal sped along judicial confirmations through the rest of the bush administration and into the obama administration until about two years ago. host: and this will involve 1100 cabinet or sub cabinet level positions. i want to go back to this chart from the new york times. let's get some historical perspective. you can see a handful of senate filibusters. there is a steady increase or in the reagan and bush
administrations. it reached 90 during the clinton administration. now, it is in excess of 120. can you respond to these numbers? guest: those numbers are true. what they amount to, the democrats like to point out -- if you add up all of the filibusters that were mounted against the nominees of previous presidents, they essentially equal the amount that have been used against president obama's nominees. to them, that is the crispest number that they can come up with. saying that it is time. there is no turning back. what is important to note is that the democrats have said this will come back to bite them.
it is a certainty that the republicans will run the senate again. at some point, partisan control will change. senator reid has been a big advocate of this. they say that yes, we are ready for that. we understand that turnabout will be fair play. they're willing to live with that. that is today's script. maybe they will change their mind. that is their stated point of view. they're willing to run the risk that when they are in the minority, they will lose their ability to stop a republican president from filling out his executive branch the way he or she sees fit. host: stay with us. we want to talk about what it means for legislative agendas in the year ahead. most notably, with gun control.
let me just share a couple of headlines. this is from the washington times. this is the 50th anniversary of the assassination of john f. kennedy. next that headline, the democrats go nuclear. carl is joining us from west virginia. republican line. caller: good morning. i thought it was a dangerous move when republicans were talking about doing this. i am still of that opinion. instead of having three equal branches of government, now the executive branch will be dominant. this was a power move, pure and simple. obama knows that if he packs the dc circuit, he can rule by executive order. he can bypass congress on just about everything. one thing that i do not understand is how he can change
the law of this affordable care act. the law was passed by congress. now he can tap what he wants out of it. he can keep what he wants. i do not understand. this form of government is being turned upside down. it is getting to be dangerous. one more thing. it used to be a real smear when someone called you a racist. some of these african-americans are really watering that term down. to the point where it has no meaning. i was happy when we elected an african-american for president. my lord, let's not call this racist. thank you. host: bill king has this -- if voters want to conserve the justices, we would have elected romney. republicans do not get that.
janet yellen -- she was facing a senate panel. now her nomination is going to the full senate. her leadership as an almost done deal. we want to bring your attention to this op-ed in the wall street journal. her greatest challenge. they write that the senate approved her nomination to lead the federal reserve -- her confirmation is virtually assured. what is less certain is what she intends to do with quantitative easing. now entering its 34th month. they say that she has maintained qe, but does she have an exit strategy? the fed needs one. the stakes could not be higher. every month it goes on, the exit strategy grows more difficult and more dangerous. our next call is paul from
akron, ohio. independent line. caller: it is interesting -- we had at one point in time a democratic republic. now we have mob rule. i do not believe what these people are talking about. it is going to come back to bite the democrats. i do not see that happening. we do not have the courts packs. what they will do is take it to the courts. when the republicans take over, of course the democrats will find -- the courts will find in the democrats favor. it will not hurt the democrats. host: ok. derek from tampa, florida. caller: hello. i want to say that, what the democrats did was not breaking
the law. the constitution gives the senate and the house power. they set their own rules. why can't people understand that? democrats have the power. they set their own precendents. they can change them at any time. also, this idea that obama is an illegitimate president. i am from florida. how could they get -- he won the election, overwhelmingly. he is the american people's president. i do not believe that everyone is racist against obama. the spirit in washington is so foul, that no matter which democrat is in office, republicans have decided that they will tear them down. i do not believe that they are racist. i do not push the notion that
all. i do not believe this is all about race. it is so foul that they're going to make an example out of obama. host: and molly from california. good morning. caller: good morning. this remark that you made -- first of all, we keep hearing the republicans are stopping things. they sent 30 bills, job bills, to the senate. harry reid would not allow them to come to a vote. both parties have a dirty hand. why don't you say what president obama said about this being done what a horrible thing. they ring true. if you want your own doctor, you can keep your doctor. this is all getting attention off of obamacare. they are so blind and so arrogant. this is going to get much worse.
we're going to lose 100 million policies. this is why he put off -- everything is hiding it. we're talking about this now. it is to get the heat off of that arrogant president in the white house. these judges, we know they have a plan -- the whole reason they have done this is because he wants to fill up his courts. republicans are not obstructionist. god bless them. we are all watching. when he said about this very act it is vile. both sides are dirty. now, harry reid is doing it. everyone is puzzling up. republicans did not do it. host: thank you for the call.
other news organizations have used -- these are all in the c- span video library. we showed you what senator obama and senators reid and mcconnell have said in the past. you can check that out on your own at c-span.org. our last call is from new york. independent line. good morning. caller: good morning. first, i think that this is a necessary action. i do think it will come back to haunt the democrats. the other caller -- the republicans involve us in a war, but that is ok. host: thank you for the call. we want to take you to the senate floor and more from yesterday's discussion. the man behind it -- some are now calling it the reid rule. [video clip] >> to the average american, this is common sense.
this is not about democrat first republicans. it is about making washington work regardless of who is in the white house. to remain relevant, the senate must evolve to meet the challenges of the modern era. i have no doubt that my republican colleagues argue the fault is ours. no one's hands are entirely clean on this issue. today, the important distinction is not between democrats and republicans. it is between those who are willing to help break the gridlock in washington and those who defend the status quo. is the senate working now? can anyone say the senate is working now? i do not think so. today, democrats and independents are saying enough is enough.
host: from the senate floor yesterday, senator harry reid. let's rejoin david hawkings. we know what it means for judicial nominees outside of the supreme court. what about legislation? guest: in theory, in the role that was changed yesterday -- it was upheld by that vote, it only applies to nominations except for the supreme court. in theory, and as we have seen in practice, filibusters are preserved. the republicans did mount a filibuster. we think that when they come back from their thanksgiving break in early december, they will relax that and the bill will lurch ahead. we are not sure. we think that there is absolutely the belief among some
republicans -- people that i have talked to, that the only way to punish the democrats for their move yesterday is to intensify their willingness to filibuster almost all legislation. the democrats saw that coming. they have ultimately concluded strategically that there is not much legislation coming down the pike between now and the midterm election that they absolutely, positively have to get through. they're willing to take that risk. host: the house is in a pro forma session. let's get a look at the calendar going through december. guest: the house is in pro forma. they come back december 2. the senate comes back the following monday or tuesday, the
ninth. they get back on that defense bill. there's precious little legislation i can think of that the house is trying to do between now and the end of the year. except come up with some kind of solution on spending. as you know, there are negotiations going on -- budget conference with paul ryan. they are not getting very far. the working expectation is that it is best between now and the middle of december, which is their deadline -- the best thing they could come up with would be a number or overall discretionary spending. it seems that the odds are against them.
meanwhile, boehner is trying to figure out if he can win enough votes in the house for a continuing resolution. before the holidays. the continuing resolution we are under now lasts until january the continuing resolution we are under now lasts until january 15. speaker boehner would just as soon have congress update that with a spending bill that last until the end of the year so that members could go home for the holidays. there is no sign that he has found the magic number. a number that republicans will vote for. a legislation that would affirm the sequester. spending is supposed to drop by $20 billion in january. he would like his republicans to vote for just enacting that and getting behind it.
they are not willing to do so. members of the appropriations committee think that is in them practically low number. host: david hawking's joining us. the piece you wrote >> we will get to that in a moment. we will get to that in just a moment. i want to share with you the headlines 50 years ago tomorrow. this from "the baltimore sun" -- "kennedy murdered by a sniper. johnson sworn in as 36th president." from independence, missouri -- president harry truman issued this statement. this is from "the baltimore
sun," printed 50 years ago. 50 years ago on monday, this headline from "the new york times." we look at the casket inside the u.s. capitol. former first lady is jackie kennedy is at the casket. this is how the story unfolded on nbc news. the breaking developments in the afternoon of november 22, 1963. [video clip] >> white house press secretary has just announced that president kennedy died at approximately 1:00 central standard time -- that is 35 minutes ago -- after being shot by an unknown assailant during a motorcade drive through downtown dallas.
host: frank mcgee with that news. some initial phone problems, but you could hear the reporter on the scene at the time. this is from a special edition of "usa today" -- "50 years later, tragedy, memories, and hope live on." during the coverage, the nbc bureau had this to say about how washington was reacting to the news. [video clip] >> this is the flag at half mast outside of our studios here in washington. we assume that the flag at the white house is at half mast in the same way and that all over this capital city of the united states, wherever the american flag flies, it has been lowered to half mast to -- as a sign of respect to the president of the united states.
we have very little news. the reaction in washington -- it happened suddenly. there has been very little opportunity for real reaction. senator mansfield has made no statement. speaker mccormick is now in the position related to lyndon johnson -- he has made no statement. nor has the senate minority leader. nor has the senate whip. senator humphrey was informed by his aide at lunch. his voice cracked several times. he seems completely numb. he was unable to make a response and said he would be back to his office. i am told by an aide of senator ted kennedy, who is en route to
dallas with his brother, that when senator kennedy was informed of this he said not a word. he laid down the gavel where he was presiding over the senate, quietly stepped down, and proceeded to leave the chamber. the senate went into immediate adjournment. host: courtesy of nbc news. the flags today are also at half staff. the proclamation was issued by president obama to pay tribute to john f. kennedy, 50 years after his assassination. the live scene from arlington national cemetery and the gravesite. david hawkings -- 50 years ago fell on a friday. the senate was in session. ironically, the 31-year-old senator from massachusetts, ted
kennedy, was presiding at that moment. guest: that is right. as many of your viewers know, being the presiding officer is more of a chore than a position of power. the power in the senate resides with the two floor leaders. being in the chair is pretty ceremonial. i it almost always is assigned to a freshman. he was one of 10 freshmen in that class. he was the youngest of the bunch at 31 years old. he drew the short straw and was presiding at the lunch hour. the senate was debating, as was typical, there was no roll call vote that day. they started preliminary debate on legislation the following week. there was some preliminary debate going on. this was 20 minutes after the shots were fired.
a messenger came in and informed senator kennedy as the -- i had never seen that before. that was a moving bit of footage. it happened just like that. he slipped out of the room. a general hubbub ensued. a guy named winston proudy from vermont was giving a speech about library construction. senator wayne morse said, "would the senator yield for an emergency?" that got everyone's attention. they went into a quorum call. there is nothing else when there is general hubbub. that was when the word filtered through. what is fascinating to me is that, in this day of social media, it really did take a long time for the capitol to get word. host: let me ask you about what happened after that. a lot of preparation was needed to come together rather quickly
for the return of the body of president kennedy. and also for his burial on monday. a very hectic four days, but one that was filled with pomp and pageantry. guest: sort of amazing for me to watch this footage and then to have been reminded how the president was a man in his mid- 40's -- he had no request for his funeral. there was no preparation made for his funeral. where today, where you -- presidents and potential for presidents have files on hand. the whole thing has to be done time ofly, and at a extreme grief and shock. had a keeny, who sense of history and aesthetics, let it be known early on she
many like the funeral in ways to simulate that of president lincoln. in the time it took for the a- day to get back from dallas and out to bethesda naval hospital for the autopsy, various curators at the white house sprang into action, went to the library of congress in the middle of the net night, and hold out records how the white house had been decorated. when the body arrived on saturday morning, the east room had been made to look similar to body arrived in 1865, and then over the weekend, military district of washington was able to put together a full state funeral with the largest tumble off -- number of world leaders to come to one funeral in the world in several decades, an amazing amount of planning that happened on the fly, and the fact that it looked so crisp
and well planned, an amazing thing. david hawking's, a look at how washington and the capital novembero the news on 22, 19 63. thank you for being here with c- span. next, the federal reserve monetary policy, as ben bernanke prepares to end his term. then immigration policy, what should be done about illegal immigrants. then francis rooney looks at the catholic church and its role in global policy. "washington journal" saturday and every day at 7:00 eastern. the eternal flame at arlington is the center of the three-acre john f. kennedy gravesite, and
throughout the day people have been paying their respects on the 50th anniversary of the assassination of john f. kennedy. a lot of our coverage available today at our website. also, a reminder, what happened that afternoon, that is at 8:00, and this weekend, interviews with secret service agents, newsreels from just after the assassination, doctors from parkland memorial hospital who treated jfk, and a former life magazine editor on the process of purchasing the rights to the sapruder film. i thought it was fun to have
a little view of history of a time in america that was not instructional, first inform worst about that was a little more anecdotal and actually a little bit more archaeological, meeting random. you take a look at them and see bunches of weird photos and then the captions explained them. i had a vision of high school students flipping through them and loving history. sapan with the big picture, sunday night at 8:00. scott walker spoke with reporters and a christian science monitor breakfast this morning and he talked about gridlock in washington, his reelection bid, and a potential presidential run in 2016.
[captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] >> ok, here we go. thanks for coming. i am dave cook. welcome to one of our gatherings. our guest is scott walker. this is his second visit with us. , livedborn in colorado for a while in iowa him and then moved to wisconsin when he was and he attended marquette
-- before, left for graduating to do marketing for the american red cross. his first elective experience was in a wisconsin state assembly where he served from 1993 until 2002, at which point he was elected until no -- elected as milwaukee county executive. he was noted as returning part of his paycheck to the county. he was elected governor in 2010. in june 2 cap is 12, -- in june 2012 he became the first u.s. governor to keep his seat in a recall lection. he has written about that iferience in his new book " they paid me more, i would've held it up for you." copies are out your seat. thus ended the biographical portion of the program. now onto the details. we are on the record here.
please, no live blogging or tweeting or other means of filing while the breakfast is underway. there is no embargo when a session ends, except that our friends at c-span, and get a seat right here. "time" magazine. there is no embargo until c- span has agreed not to air video until one hour. if you would like to ask a question, do the traditional thing and send me a nonthreatening signal, and i will do my best to call on one and all. 10: 15ernor has a appointment. he will not be able to linger for the popular bloody mary portion of the program at 10:00. we will move to questions around the table. ask again for coming. >> thanks. thanks for having me matt. i believe most of the time to the questions, but the simplest
and to begin with is people asked why did you write a book, and it was civil. evil in my state and around the country asked to learn more. they knew about the protests. they read about it, they sawed in pictures, on tv, and most people i knew asked about it asked about the recall, but the other recalls for the state senators. people said what war happened? what was the full story? we write about this in the book. the what, how, but most importantly the why. they did people do not know why we did what we did and why those reforms are working even better today, and that is the focal point of this book. if people out before, are looking for typical political book where you learn about my life, growing up, where you learn how became a an equal sketch, you will not learn in that book. you have to go to my biography.
wisconsinbook about and the only thing that strays from my tenure as governor and reforms that we did was a little bit where i talk about my prior experience as a county executive for eight years largely because that puts in context where reforms came from. they did not come from some other group, some group of supporters, but they came vividly as you can read in an entire chapter from my experience as a county executive, and frustration because years ago long before i was governor, when democrats were in charge of everything in our state, they reduced aid to local governments. the difference was they did not give people like me any tools to deal with that. so i another local officials were faced with tough choices. we try to make reasonable choices to avoid layoffs at the time, and unfortunately in the county plus case, the public employee union leaders essentially said no.
and so that was one of the most difficult things i went through and it was something that certainly a key part of why i wanted to make sure that if any changes like that were made when i was governor that they were done in a way that gave local governments, schools, counties, it disabilities the tools they needed to effectively manage those changes. that is what we did. our reforms would have saved more money that was reduced from eight from the state and local governments. and more importantly, the reforms have worked. yesterday we announced unemployment rate in wisconsin is down to 6.5. when i was running two years ago it was nine point two percent. when i came into office we had a $3.6 billion budget deficit. we just finished the year shy of a $700 million surplus. we have lowered taxes. this is the third year in a row property taxes have gone down. we have a rainy day fund five
times bigger than my predecessor's. our bond rating is strong. we have been a below -- we have been able to make investments in education, higher education, worker training, because we made tough decisions over the last two years. and this book not just tells the story, it tells the details of how the people and the experiences, what i and my family went through, what the legislature went through, and many of the stories that up until now were not fully told. that is a little bit of an overview view. will go to myself, and others to start. i want -- one of the refrigerator book says if we can do it in wisconsin we can do anywhere. even in our nation us capitol. a great slogan. i want you to talk about how realistic you think it is. at aei uses employee pay is a big part of the budget and budget problem, so making employees contributed more on
health care and pensions has had a big impact. at the federal level, big cost drivers are entitlements, and care, and kate, social security, and the secret is that americans want more in benefits of all kinds and they're willing to pay for. a positivef solutions do you talk about being in the answer? are there really big solutions that come from your experience at the state level for these much different kind of problems? >> they are different at the local, state, and federal level, but what we did was mad about austerity. if it was austerity, we just cut eggs across the board. meant that things that you value would be cut just as much. what we did was initiating reform, not just about pension and health care contributions. those were part of it, but the biggest reforms in the state or most of our school districts had by their health insurance from
just one company. by pulling back on collective bargaining, district could bid out their health insurance. that means many districts saved money just by connecting that one change. other changes go beyond just fiscal savings. at the federal level, there are different sorts of issues. in our case, it was more than half of our budget is a tool of corporate -- is eight to local governments. these were things that record reforms of the serious. the same thing holds true at the national level in other states. those are areas where you have to annex reforms. reforms do not necessarily happen to current beneficiaries, but the future ones, we made the changes to current beneficiaries and ultimately not only pay off balancing the budget, but you make an argument there are schools that governments are better today than they were in the past. --let me ask you one other
your co-author said yesterday at in that you're very moderate temperament, but immoderate in policy. you have argued in the book that winning the center does not require moving to the center. how do you think you will fare if you decide to make a national run with, for example, positions of right to life positions which are a good deal more stringent than the 2/3 of the public, according to pew, who oppose overturning roe v wade? you see you having problems when these positions become better known? >> i'm not focusing on the national level. i am focused on being governor, and i have worked pretty hard to be governor not once, but twice. i'm going to have to do it again next year, and that is for my focus is. if you look as a parallel, not only the sconces, but other
governors across the country, after the election last year, there are 30 states with republican governors, enmity of them are in places like wisconsin, iowa, and she, ohio, nevada,ania, to mexico, although states are states that have repetitive governments, that they were battleground states covered by obama. i can get almost 30 of those states have republican governors that are not only republicans, but more conservative than our on a's nominee was spectrum of issues, thistle, economic, social. the difference is as governors, we focus on the things that matter most to people, and is our economic and fiscal issues. it does not need -- i am pro- life, but most republican governors are pro-life. i do not apologize for that, but i've not focus on it, obsessed with it. of late in my state and perhaps throughout the country, democrats have been seem to be obsessed with those issues in
large part because voters in our states focus on economic and fiscal issues, the leadership romy have seen come f republican governors more than our opponents. >> this is a political version of what was talked about. contractslike to their abilities with getting done with partisan conflict in washington. the vast majority of governors, chris christie excepted, enjoy one-party role in their state where their party controls both the legislature and the governor's mansion. i am wondering how that experience is transferable to an environment in washington were not only we have divided government, but in an area where the differences between parties are acutely intransitive. if you could talk about that. i am part of the reason not being clip that i nor 2016 but focus on 2014, not just
because i'm up for election, but because i think for any republicans in anybody who cares about his country, we should not be looking at 2014 because what we learned in wisconsin and in other states in the midwest learned in the 2010 election if you want to get reform done, positive reform done, you need a team to help you do that. in our case of everything switched from democrat control to republican control in 2010, in wisconsin. it is similar to my neighboring states. for me, other governors other leaders, that empowered us to make these reforms that would have been more difficult if those changes had not been intact, so the argument, the point made is that is why we need to focus in the 2014 --ctions to make the kidneys to make the case to help senate candidates win in enough states that republicans and regain the majority of the senate, and then in the future, make a convincing
case to the public that give this party a chance to show what we can do, to show that we have been effective in the states in reforming states in terms of their coming and fiscal issues, give us a chance to do it in washington. >> are you saying 2016 is [indiscernible] it is always a challenge. you mentioned chris doing it, , and chris is an example with the pension reform he did. who would have thought where democrats control both chambers you would get significant reform done, but that took republicans in the legislature and the governor working with a handful of democrats, including leaders in the senate and the general assembly. i think it is preferable. historically, that was the you have talked about is that somehow republicans -- the americans want divided
government. they have seen the last few years that that is not a good thing. that of sufficient checks and balances, what they have got is a lot of gridlock. it is significant make the case, as we did in wisconsin -- we made the case, said the people in our state going into that 20 10 election overwhelmingly felt like we had an economic and fiscal crisis. when i ran iran like i was conducting a john -- when iran job like i was conducting a interview. i will ask all candidates, we all spoke about the same thing, about it so much and so consistently, if you asked me had a form what is my mother's maiden name, i would say f it fitch, and every fitch supports this. a week after the election, we got together in the capital with all the new members of the
legislature in both chambers and i said it is put up or shut up time. her paper put that as a headline, and the reason i said that is voters changed everything in terms of party control in wisconsin that you're, like they did in other midwestern states. if we come back and we are little different than the people who are in power before, if we are little less bad than they were before, and we have every right to be thrown out two years from now. it is put up or shut up time. we need to show we were elected for a purpose, and there's no doubt in wisconsin and other states in her neighborhood that is what we did. >> thanks. yournor, you actually gave -- your party gained seats in the senate and assembly last november. this is not unlike governor nolls, a republican when he was elected in 1966, and another in
1974. why have you not considered extending the collective bargaining to police and firefighters, and you ruled out monitor breakfast, the right to work. why with a mandate that you got have you not pursue a more aggressive agenda? lls, inhe history on noo our case we have pushed an aggressive agenda. we did not push it in those categories. that pushed aggressive entitlement reform. if people look at what we have done in the last year in his constant, some of the most aggressive entitlement reform in the country, unlike almost every state in america. adult are in able-bodied in her say, you can i get to do
it unless you are working or unless you're unrolled and one of my employment training programs. as avery other state waiver from the federal government for that requirement read do not because we want to make it easier for people to get work, the harder to get government assistance, so we're doing it. give them that with education reform, and i talked is about, we have made improvements to improve public schools like my sons went to come and we expanded school choice. we broadened the opportunities for charter schools, work shall schools, for home schools. we have taken on aggressive reform. saying ia chapter out did that, too, pointing out that when you look at other republican governors, they talk about things that we have done, we talk about that and a list of everything from voter id to a whole series of other initiatives that we have done, and most people know us because of the 100,000 protesters in our state on that particular issue. there are plenty of other reforms we have done that are
working to improve our state of wisconsin. at the university a flex option, the first public school, public institution in the country to do books online for free and to offer a flex option where people can use traditional in class credit, laboratory credit, online credit as well as tests for competency to get a college student, particularly in high-need areas. they're pretty aggressive reforms that we're done, and it is just not the ones you mentioned so far. >> [indiscernible] 42016 and i believe you are good friends, paul ryan and yourself. out of the three who do you think would make the press that's the best present and why? >> i said when i was asked on one of the sunday shows who i thought the ideal candidate was, not from wisconsin general, and i said, one ideal candidate
would be a current or former governor, because governors have executive experience, but there is a sense across america that people want an outsider. i think paul ryan is one of the exceptions to that rule. for everyone who has worked with him, republican and aircraft, many -- and democrats alike, it is hard not to be impressed with reform, isy toward looking at issues beyond a traditional punishment ith ability, but w harder, executive since. i advocated him to be on the ticket last time because he has those skills and characteristics . but for me in general, i have said a governor makes a lot of sense. it is his starting weinert is have deferred, other than this president, the last one we ate i did was john f. kennedy a member of congress, and it was 40 years before the that. it is rare that we elect a member of congress.
there is reason for it, but as i mentioned before, it is interesting to speculate, my interest is on 2014, not just because my election, but because it does not matter as much in 2016 if there is not a likelihood that that new president will have a party in charge in both chambers that can help him or her get the job done. >> governor, thanks for the but. so why were republican ever nurse in nearby states, john kasich in ohio, rick snyder in his him, why were they wrong to take this medicaid expansion money? >> you'll never hear me say that any of them around because every state is different. i will tell you why i did it and why i made the choice. why i did not make the alternative. every state is different. in our case, we were present of the false choice between yes, you take it, and potentially put your taxpayers at risk about which i was reminded reporters in my state last week yet again
why i thought from my point of view that was an easy decision, because why would you take medicaid expansion, so you want me to depend on a federal government who cannot get a website up and going to extend payments for the amount of money that they were going to get, when today, in my most recent budget that i sighed and went to effect july 1, had to put over 600 million dollars more state money into medicaid, which over 40% of that is because the federal government has backed away from previous amendments, without an expansion. that is where my concern cannot, that i think the federal government is not going to be able to fulfill that commitment. in the law itself, they have backing,ay from 100% and i think it will slip away in the future. we look at other states that just no and missed out the potential opportunities to help their people. in that -- in our state, we
picked a third option, because of the supreme court decision, i was able to use that where advantage so we transitioned everybody living about poverty in our state, all the childless adults covered under medicaid now, our transitioned into the marketplace which for some will include federal exchanges. everyone having in poverty, for the first time in the state's history, will be covered. we raise the age of eligibility to 200%, but he did not have enough money in it, so was cap, so there are people in the past two years who have been living in poverty on a waiting list for medicaid. i eliminated that list. everyone living in poverty will be covered. everyone living above it will be transitioned into the marketplace. i will have 224th thousand fewer people to ensure. i will have a net reduction of people on medicaid. for the first time in our history, everybody in the poverty is covered. i will not expose my taxpayers to the potential large cost
because of the federal government hacking away from that commitment. >> [indiscernible] did it. tell you why i every state is different, because of this. i can assure that there were fewer people uninsured, more people having access who were living in poverty, because i think for all the hype out there about expanding medicaid, i do not know why that is a good thing. in 1994,n was born there were 10% of the people in my state on medicaid. today it is 25%. nationally, it is higher. having more people dependent on the government among weather for medicaid, food stamps, unemployment compensation, i do not think that is the measure of success in government. i think it better alternative is to say how the people who we help longer be dependent on government, because having a safety net for people living in poverty is not enough. we have to have assistance to place that helps lift people out of poverty. that is a fundamental difference. next is neil munroe.
but your record, you said our immigration problems could be fixed if we had a test will legal embrace in the united states. every democrat it candidate who is voted for the senate will has voted for a legal immigration system that will bring a legal immigrant for every teenage entered the country. it brings in a guestworker for everybody between 11 and 21. could you describe that level of embrace? opposed to ink as do not get caught up in bills and legislation proposed here because it is not what i was elected to do. i was elected to govern a state. it is simple. if you want to come into america today legally, it is very difficult from my point of view and the people i talk to, very difficult to do so in a timely basis. we've got people, i do not
care whether from mexico or ireland were around the world, if we want people to meet here and want to work hard, if that dream, we should embrace as people like people embraced by answer sisters from ireland and germany and my wife is from sicily and my brothers, in-laws for mexico, a generation ago. everyone who followed and legal path, and we should be funny way to make that easier to do in the united states and more timely, because the biggest problem is not just access, it is the time it takes to come into this country. >> [indiscernible] >> i would open the door to make sure that people can legally come into this country and i want -- people want to live the american dream are the kind of people this country was based on. are a nation of immigration but also a nation of laws, and that is where the frustration comes with. so often in the city people look at the symptoms, not the larger problem. the symptom is the issue with whatever the number of magic is
of people currently in the country without legal status. the larger problem is there is not an effective way to front and at the front door to make it possible with people who legitimately, legally, corporately want to come into america to live the dream, and that make sense to make that easier. >> governor, what is your position on same-sex marriage, and has your view on that issue or others involving gay men and lesbians changed as it has for a lot of americans in office? and one follow-up on this issue, is this an issue on which the republicans picked take a stand? should republicans take the stand of for traditional marriage? >> in 2006, i voted for it at a time to define marriage as legally between one man and woman, and there has not been debate about that mistake. there is some another other states in other places, but in our state, in the 2010 election
when iran, i asked a question about that, my answer was s imple. for it to change it would take two consecutive sessions of the legislature and involve the people. we have had nondiscrimination laws in place that work well and effectively on other issues. i do not see a reason to change either of those two. and whatr view -- about the issue about the republican party? this talk and discussion the last presidential election i think on this and a few other issues was because idere was a larger avoid -- vo on fiscal and economic issues. if you do not have a plan that is articulated to the people, about what you're going to do to improve people's economy, you need to articulate a plan about what you're going to do to balance the budget, take care the debt, that is morally
responsible to our children and grandchildren, and others issues like this right to a higher level of importance. ed void has not been filled. is aat void weapons voted result in our state and i did not spend my focused on it because that is not what people elected me to talk about or focus on. >> thank you for being here. [indiscernible] the conventional wisdom used to be that divided government created a space for liberation, but now has created gridlike. yesterday democrats weakened the filibuster. i'm curious about your sprint and wisconsin, what you ache of the filibuster debate in washington. >> ire member and a lot of conservatives that were frustrated during the bush presidency times when war was not done. it is always interesting when there are debates like this that
videos of opposing party members, from the past and make for interesting discussions out there. thatnk in general executives, be it a governor, be it a county executive, or a president, if he or she wants to put people into run portions of their administration among my belief is efforts should begin as long as people are competent and ethical and difference should be given to the chief executive in terms of the appointments they make to executive positions. where i understand why there is a larger concern about judicial appointments is those are much more lasting and they are concerned with is present or president bush, depending on it doesnd so i think borat a larger level of scrutiny because at the federal bench you're talking about i found appointments. those have an impact far beyond an election cycle or term. -- tos make sense that
have a higher standard and do not know that up as frustrating as it is to people either -- in either spectrum when they have candidates in office. that is the difference in terms of difference. governor, thanks for joining us. wisconsin was one of the states that has the voter id laws. [indiscernible] i do not know -- i will give you a list of stores of the past. i do not have a number. casesre is a handful of at a substantial because of my vote or anyone else's is jeopardized by the lack of integrity of the process, i can guarantee one vote counts for one person, that is a legitimate issue. >> i asked because in a number of places and on the federal find peoplets to who are voting front only have been very few --
>> when this came up there was talk about few if any overtime. yet seen the district attorney in milwaukee, a democrat, prosecutors, along with state prosecutors, others. of're not talking about tens thousands. you had a significant enough number that it was not done by hawkins, but was done by democrats. to me in our state the law i signed into we effect provides case they issued id card in 'sdition to the driver license free upon request. there's no deterrent to people who some claim would not have otherwise access to photo identification. >> democrats have made the argument that voter id laws were signed that were designed to make harder for certain groups to vote -- elderly, minorities especially, who do not have drivers licenses.
>> i think that is an insulting argument to those groups of people that you mentioned. that somehow they any more than anybody else out there would not have access to the things that are essential to survive in today's society. >> robert. >> governor -- [indiscernible] >> the first thing you got to do is fix the front door. i do not have a perfect plan. i am elected to be governor. if i was running for something else, i would lay out a plan. i do not know what the magic number is because i hear that number, but people who are here legally, how do we know how many there are or not? it could be far fewer or more.
i do not know what the magic number is. to me, i know the plans being discussed right now in washington are far and significant problem we have about legal immigration network in this country. is common fort people in your position running for office to talk about political polarization as a bad thing and the need for everyone to get along and lower the temperature, but the experience in wisconsin has been record banished apathy about state government. i wonder, having gone to this experience, is polarization a good thing or a bad thing? >> i think getting people focus -- i mean, for a second, your premise, but the important point you said is accurate. did, what i would
argue we did, went to talk about in the book, as we pushed aggressive reforms by dramatically taking on the status quo. and i hear time and time again from voters before i was elected, across the spectrum, just republicans or conservatives, who say i am sick and tired of politicians who said way thing when elected and then conclude he down when they get into office. to set aside the issue, and i would assume if you talk to other voters out there, do not apartment,sert like and when you talk to voters across my state, and i would imagine across america, voters say they want people who will not make these are mrs., will make all promises, and will make people who will stand up and have the courage to fall through on those. did not wilt under political pressure, did do what ultimately they said they were going to do and make those commitments. me, i think the polarization came in large part
because not because of what we did but as much as the reaction, when the national units came in. about astory in a book teacher in central wisconsin, and to the midst of this i would go to schools in my state and read to kids and then go meet for an hour or so in the teachers lounge with teachers, and she said today, second and third question, why do you hate teachers so much? i said, with all due respect, ma'am, if you know to youtube tonight and type in my name, there's probably even a video clip of me buying a hamburger in a state this week. everything i do is on you to. and one is always -- there's money out there that gets whatever i am doing or saying. he be hard-pressed to find any videotape of me where you can find me saying anything but praise for teachers and other public service and our state great i said you do not have to agree with me, but no full well the people who are making you feel like you're under attack
are not people like me and are not even lawmakers. leadership,nion because they need to mobilize you. that is where i think -- it is what in the end, the oddity of oddities, one of the most surprising things people find in this book is at the time of my recall election, one of the exit polls showed that one out of every six voters in my state who were voting for me were also intending to vote for brock obama. my numbers consistent last year have shown that more than one out of every 10 voters in the state shows up on the list for me in support and also for barack obama. politically, that makes no sense whatsoever. exceptically, right, that our bases, are both of our parties, partisan opposition, of the opposing party, but the people in the middle, for those folks that are the persuadable, undecidable, whatever you want to call them voters, ironically,
number ofificant them supported me in the president, they felt they were for something. it may not be consistent ideologically, but it was something where they said but their opponents did not fill the void, they made the election about i'm not scott walker, i hate scott walker, in some ways the republican nominee was the same. center, whatf the they wanted was candidates that ran their way on issues, he wanted people who wanted to lead. >> thanks for being here, governor. so you and other governors who have conservative views of lawmakers in washington, like bobby jindal, who say that others should be branding the party more than republicans here. you're making an argument earlier that you need or whoever is the next president needs the
chance to have the party to make it stamp on washington. tot is your advice republicans in congress republicans running for congress, what should a be doing in washington to improve the brand in order to take over the senate? >> not only what they are doing now, but going out as they are running next are for the senate, in particular, they need to be focused on what i still think are the two key issues nationally like they were in my state when i first ran, and we still have a in large part an economic or outright crisis, some very serious economic concerns in our country. not for the coming as a whole, but there too many people, and some are recovering in people, but too many who are not coming through on that recovery. one of the things i mentioned about reagan's acceptance speech that mean we'll -- that many people forget about. it was aspirational. if you are living in despair, we
want to give you hope, but not necessarily hope based on the government. he want to have her recovery and we do not want to leave anyone behind. that has got to be the message that republicans need to do more to embrace across-the-board, but in these senate elections, and it means we cannot be to that extent viewed as the party of no, which in the state where we are successful, that is exactly what has happened. they're optimistic, speaking in terms of relevance, showing that we can act in terms of conviction. the national level, obamacare, other things, if we go to the people and say we sense that republicans running for office go to voters in their districts and their states and across this country and say, here is there a big plan, here is our alternative, market-driven alternative that will improve your life, make your life better, this is our alternative to obamacare, they go to the public and say, here is what we think we need to do to stability,, lower the tax
burden, whatever it might be, those are very impelling issues out there, and i think that feeling in america is that at least i hear from people talking about washington is not just focused on republicans, but a staunch everybody here, is they think people in washington just fight for the sake of fighting. i think voters did not mind fighters as long as they think people are writing for them, fighting for the hard-working taxpayers. >> you know that anybody in the senate in the republican side has put forward that would be a dramatic what you're talking about? >> you hear bits and pieces of it. i would like to see a more aggressive -- and it does not have to be done today, but going into next year, a more aggressive focus on a market- driven alternative to obamacare, because were a lot of americans, they're frustrated not just with the website, but with the program itself, and they are hungry to find out what an alternative would be. my state -- the kaiser family
foundation did this overview, it was in "the washington post" last saturday, talked about the coverage gap. interestingly, it mentions in that report what the single coverage gap in other states who did not take medicaid expansion, i'm the only state who does not have that cap, and why, because we have a competitive market for health care in a state, and that is the overwhelming charge, people over 90% of our folks are covered, and with limited numbers who do not, and as i mentioned we have an aggressive program helping people living a party. our bigger challenge in was -- in wisconsin was not access, but the cost to small business owners, to new startups, small businesses, to a company that starts out with 5, 10 employees who gets eaten alive, if they do not have a big enough number of employees to handle the risk pool that is required to get
affordable health care options as an employer for your employees trade obamacare in our state does not do anything for us. if you're buying off the single market, individual market, it makes it more difficult cost wise. those are the things that need to be talked about. >> nexgt, sean. >> governor, the skin up review, but i would like to get chance. why specifically does -- is right to work a bad idea for the state? you have essentially right to work for the public. why not private as well? >> it is not. i supported it in the legislature. i have said in the past that there was so much attention, so much focus last time that what i heard from my employers, the biggest thing in the state was things needed to cool down in the state, things need to get focused in the state, and while they appreciated it, from a
larger context, they said, we need things to get back on track . people like what happened, but the resin a certain amount of employers who were frozen during the protests, during the recalls, first wave for second wave, they wanted stability of knowing what was coming next. -- beyond that, a very small percentage in our state of private sector union- based employers to begin with, and so as you mentioned, the vast majority of people who would be affected by right work in the state anyway are already covered because in our state the servants have the right to choose. it has been successful for them. >> it seems like twice you have injected that the last presidential election there were problems, there was a lack of focus on the physical and economic issues. economicscal and
prisons. there's often a focus on social issues. is that in your view a -- that carries over into the general election, from keeping the party focused on selling its message on fiscal and economic issues come a that comes up in the primaries? >> is a byproduct of the system in the past, and one of the best things that i think right previously is changing that process, not solely directed at the issues you mentioned, but just in general. beenhought the rnc has talking about moving the convention up to june, shrinking the number of debates about having a more focused attention on the primary caucus process. i handed number of other people who were solicited for ideas last year, those will were things we highlighted that were be useful. about it isdebates unmanageable. and what happens is and you know
this, following this, not so social issues,on but any issue, because the candidates running then, as i imagine would be for any candidates in the future, very similar on economic and fiscal issues. what happens with that many debates is you find very narrow issues that defined by newt to france's -- that the fine -- that define i newt -- minute differences. social issues should not be haved out, because they some of that handful of issues where there is a minute difference. it makes sense to have the bread and butter of what the party is about at the forefront and it does not mean you can ever ask question is about other issues, but that process russian is one that should, of all the things aboutc has been talking doing, is one of the most significant features. governor, a social issues
question. and you were saying it is not a major element that people think it is the voters on the question of same-sex marriage, do you include abortion as one of those asues that maybe is not relevant or high profile as it seems to be in the debate? i have a few other follow-ups on that. you think that some of the most conservative lawmakers need to their views on those issues in order to win national elections or statewide elections? >> no. i talked about that in the book as well. >> what do you think about the fact that a third or so of abortion clinics in texas are now closed at least until january? >> i cannot comment on that because that is not what i am familiar with. but the larger issue on social i am not say
moderator positions, because again, i talk at the end of the book about how i think persuadable, moderate, middle- of-the-road, whatever you want to call voters in that what i found in my state and in , people votedce for both me and barack obama are obviously not people who do not necessarily to be perfectly aligned. what did i want more than anything who have bold ideas that are aggressively putting those out. in the state, oprah's boat, fundamental -- on principle, fundamental issues, to come out and say to win elections, i need to change my -- you will lose votes. they want to respect.