tv Road to the White House Rewind CSPAN January 24, 2016 10:00am-10:46am EST
illinois congressman john anderson, and tennessee senator howard baker. taped by students it is the first time they have been aired in national television. we we on to win the new hampshire primary on his way to securing the gop presidential nomination. he then defeated incumbent resident jimmy carter and the presidential election to win the presidency. this is just under 15 minutes. clark's welcome to election 1980. many americans feel they are not receiving strong, effective leadership today. how would you define leadership? ronald it is not as easy as it sounds. there have been great leaders
throughout the world to have been able to get followers behind them and evil men who have led them in wrong courses. we usually think of leadership however and those who take, who lead the people in the right directions. i think one of the main essentials for leadership is communication. we find that if we look back on men, presidents in the united overseas, men like winston churchill, we find so often we remember them years later and they are known better in history for things they said rather than for the actual deeds they might have performed. i think it is the case of being people communicate to a and persuade those people of the direction they want to go. good leadership, of course, means having a belief in basic principles, moral principles, in
things that are worthwhile. and for the good of the people you're trying to lead. persuading those people of the course they must follow in order to achieve those. help clarify your perspective and the one of. who would you consider the three most effective leaders in history and why? ronald reagan: in all of history? well, one had to be moses. the next out to be jesus of nazareth. i don't know whether i could come up with the third to mention in connection with those two. if you take the story of moses and his leadership, the children of israel. seen the story of a 33-year-old man who didn't own , had no to speak of
extensive formal education in the way that we think of today, simply became a preacher. probably never travel in a circle more than 100 miles across, was in an ordained minister, didn't have a pulpit, and yet, in three years, established principles that have had more effect for 2000 years on mankind and then all of the rulers and all of the teachers and all of the admirals and scholars who ever lived. except those two, i don't know whether i can come up with a third. more were talking modern-day leaders and so forth, we would get into the area of men like churchill, washington, lincoln. .es, fdr
whether we agree with what he did now, what he did to persuade the people in the country in a time of great distress and depression, to support him in the programs that he was taking forward. he was a great war leader. i would like to do now is take this idea of leadership and have you apply it to your role as a leader when you were governor. what kinds of decisions did you make in the past which indicate your effectiveness as a leader? ronald reagan: i came into the governorship quite a strange time in california. our campuses were scenes of rioting in the roaring 60's. we were talking long, hot summers in our cities because of the racial violence. economically, the state of california was in the same condition as the federal government is today. it was spending far more than it
was taking in each day. it was on the verge of bankruptcy. it had a bureaucracy that i grown 75% over the preceding eight years. ofwere the welfare capital the world with a welfare note that was increasing at an average of 40,000 people a month. threatening further bankruptcy of the state. governor, i found the constitution for habit it does at the national level. one of these the -- first things i had to do was the thing i had been campaigning against. i came in at the middle of the fiscal year facing already a $200 million deficit. spending more than a million and a half a day then it was taking in, i had to ask the people of california for a tax increase
simply because of the constitutional question involved , what we were up against in the state. in some accountants, some of the most perspective -- respected accountant firms. they were no expense to the state. they gave a reading on what the state's financial condition was. i took them before the people on television and said that these people here wouldn't think there was any politics involved having succeeded a governor of the other party and then asked for a tax program, but promised to the people at the time that i did that i had always thought taxes were too high and as soon as possible i would return this money to the people. i set out to halt the growth of .he bureaucracy a term that was used was commonly about me was cut, squeeze, and trim.
we did halt that growth. eight years later, we have virtually the same sized government we have only started. eight years later, we had the first aaa rating for california's bonds that we had had in 31 years. we had saved $2 billion on welfare for the taxpayers but in eight ort time 10 years, we were able to increase the grants to the truly ofdy and over that period time, i kept my word about returning the money to the people. not much more than a year after the tax increase, we started returning surpluses to the people any form of tax rebates. at the end of eight years, had given back to the people in tax rebates and tax credits $5.7 billion. vetoed $16 billion in spending measures that have been
introduced in the legislature which was a democratic legislature and i was a republican governor. i never had one of those vetoes overridden. also, i think we gained control of the campuses and restored .hem to education there was great violence and murder done on our campuses, but we didn't give into the mob and the violence disappeared in the legitimate students who wanted an education could do so. if i could may speculate moving to the future, we have our own crises today. beinga is constantly confronted with a crisis
situation. constant rateth a currents of inflation and recession and rising fuel prices . rise in unemployment. of coarse, we have the ever present energy crisis. is accounting the problems he would be faced on a daily basis if you were elected president, what would you do about these problems, and please be specific? ronald reagan: i believe most of those things government is responsible for. government has cause recession so they can make it fall away. government calls the energy product -- crisis so they can make it go away. you asked me to be specific? i believe that we have had an interventionist philosophy at work in this country for the last four decades or more. intervening in what should be the free marketplace, intervening in the lives of the people, exerting controls -- i have described as sometimes, and this may seem oversimplistic,
government exists to protect us from each other. government, for the last 40 years have been trying to protect us from ourselves. we can't have the kind of caretaker. we can't afford it. to tell us what is good for us in our daily living and the control of our destiny and so forth. i would think that one of the first things is you must regain fiscal responsibility and government. that means reducing the size and --ronomy and so government and extravagance of government and that means, strangely enough in my view, a reduction of the percentage of the people's earnings that the government is taking from the individual by way of an across the board cut in tax rates. when i say cut taxes, everyone automatically thinks that means cut revenue. that doesn't. if history has anything to tell us in this country, if we cut the tax rates, lower the rates to the people, the resultant
broadening of the base of the economy and the prosperity that results results in everyone, including government, getting more revenue. in other words, we bake a bigger pie. government has reduced the productivity of the american investor machine here it even of the individual. it has reduced it with too many taxes on the individual. taxes on businesses that make it difficult for them to invest. we have the highest percentage of outmoded industrial plant and equipment of many of industrial nations. our rate of per man hour increase in productivity is lower than that of our competitors. if we can restore that incentive to both business and individual, and i believe it is done through a reduction in the tax rates as i say, we will have gone a long way toward ending inflation.
if we would bring government back to spending within its means. government funds much of that deficit spending by turning out increasingess money, the quantity of money available while not comparably having an increase in the goods or services that are available for purchase. you havele think that to choose between inflation and recession. the only way you can and inflation is with a recession. i don't believe that at all. california's proposition 13 proved that. everyone said when we made that and the people in california rebelled against property taxes that were making it impossible for people to stay in their own homes, it has been 15 or 16 months now. there are 100,000 fewer public employees in california. the private sector in these 15 months has increased 532,000 new jobs created.
personal earnings are up 14%, retail sales are up 14%. last year, the state ended with a $3 billion surplus. that it isieve government intervening, government getting in the way and by the same token with regard to energy, we had the cheapest, most abundant energy and fuel in the united states of any nation, any part of the world, all the way from the first oil well drilled in untillvania in 1859 up 1971 one, again, the government intervened with price controls, restrictions, controls on the marketing, virtually nationalizing the energy industry, particularly in the field of petroleum. , we have had years the increasing prices and increasing scarcity of fuel. it must be evident that if in
nine years of government interventionism you had the shortage and high price and almost 120 years of no government intervention, we had plenty, we had better look at government instead of the energy industry as responsible for our problem today. thank you for being with us on election 1980. george h.w. bush: thank you. >> road to the white house rewind continues with an interview with republican residential candidate george h.w. bush from the 1980 campaign taped by salem high school students in new hampshire. it played in cable access and parts of new hampshire and massachusetts. this is the first time it has aired on national television. george bush would finish second in the 1980 new hampshire primary behind eventual gop nominee ronald reagan who would go on to defeat incumbent president jimmy carter in the general election. this is about 10 minutes. leadership is a quality
vehement -- american people had been demanding from the president. many americans feel like we have not seen strong leadership your how would you define leadership? george h.w. bush: i think leadership is having a conviction, a conviction of the direction you want your country to go, a conviction that can offer a hope of freedom for countries around the world and your own people. it is also a concept of having people follow, looking over your shoulder, and people being with you. to me respect, it connotes strength, and it connotes principle. >> further clarify your definition, who would you select as the three most effective leaders in history and why would you select these people? george h.w. bush: history has been pretty tough. i would say in relatively recent history, abraham lincoln.
abraham lincoln set a direction for the country. tot direction, contrary modern perceptions of lincoln's presidency, was holding the union together. it didn't matter how he did it, it was the survival of the union. he set his sights on that. he did it. in the process, he demonstrated a great compassion for people. clearly, i would put a man like general eisenhower as a strong leader. it was the focus and the matrix was the war itself. he was a great hero, he was a quiet man in a sense. not given to flamboyant or macho , but he generated confidence in the people he led. as president, i am predicting an eisenhower revival. 2% inflation, respect abroad. this man had leadership qualities. he was a decent individual. character has to be a part of leadership. eisenhower had character.
if i went for a third, i would probably take winston churchill. churchill during the early days of the most troubled days for the brits, world war ii, he had a different style. he had a marvelous way with english-language. best in aenerate the people under siege. there are three different types. three, i think, amazing individuals. those qualities that you mention there, what decisions have you made in the past which reflect effectiveness in leadership? george h.w. bush: i have had tough leadership jobs. two that are the most painting the
republican party during the last days of the nixon presidency, the last two years of nixon's presidency. as history would show, this is the first time that the interest of the party did not always coincide with the interest of an incumbent president. that was one. i think another difficult job, maybe the most difficult, was leading the central intelligence agency at a moment when it was very fashionable to jump all over it, tear it down, take a handful of abuses from the past and use those to show there was a certain immorality to intelligence. both of them were challenging leadership assignments. i hope i did them with the integrity of the institution i serve intact when i finished the job. tough assessment to assess one's own leadership. i believe i did that. i believe i had the respect of people with whom i agreed and disagreed.
thepe that the last one, cia job, i elevated the moral of the people. i did not try to elevate myself into the public limelight. in either of these jobs. people say how come you have lacked a name identification? i think it is a style. i judge it -- can you lead with respect? can you call push your objective and then have respect of people? not always like you, not always lead -- agree with you, but respect. i think i did that in most to assignments. >> let's move into the future. today, america is confronted with a crisis situation. americans are faced with the cost of incurrence of inflation recession, and unemployment price, rise of oil prices, rise of food prices. -- and unemployment problem, and an energy crisis. these are the kinds of problems
he would face on a daily basis if you're elected president. how would you handle these problems and please be specific. george h.w. bush: it is interesting, mr. blumenthal a while back made a very candid assessment. blumenthal having been treasury secretary under president carter. he pointed out that no matter how well the intensive than -- intention, the president lacked the will to make the tough decisions necessary to break the back of inflation. let me say i don't think the period in the 80's on inflation and recession will be easy. i think it will be tough for any candidate for president or anything else to say there is a quick and easy fix out there that is wrong. to chart a course, in my course emphasizinguld be the fundamentals of economics. we have gotten away from that area we have gone to the keyns ian, spend your way into prosperity economics, i would change it.
within a fundamental framework of conservative economics, i would restrict the growth of federal spending. i would compel a congress to do that. if they didn't, i would veto legislation. hold the growth rate to around 6.8%. i would find ways, and this isn't easy but it is at least specific, to cut through the excesses of regulation. some of it right i would get rid of many of the regulators leaning on the farthest side of radiation. the cost to our country in regular nation's estimated at $102 billion a year. you need to find a balance between those who would rape and pillage the environment and wantonly spreading around poison from waste and those who would go so far that you cut off all growth and offer only hopelessness to the poor in this country. we have to find a balance on regulation. a third thing i would you
specifically is to have a tax cut. not the popular one. not the one out there that says we are going to have a recession, let's cut taxes for everyone and stimulate demand. i wouldn't do it that way. i would have every facet of that tax cut aimed at increasing investment. economists, a by supply-side tax cut. it would be things like to a family that founded extraordinarily difficult to save for a down payment on a house. those savings accounts are going to be tax-free on the interest. stimulate investment to a businessman who has a truck and wants to buy three more. , or topid depreciation others, tax credits for certain kinds of equipment. or to a business that would locate where the unemployed are. if you put your business there and offer hope to people by having a drop in -- a job in the private sector, not the public sector.
those specifics would result in a balanced budget in the year 1982. i have checked them with some of the best non-keynesian economists in this country. let me tell you this. you ask about leadership. the only way we are going to get there is to have leadership that can convince the congress that we have to try these fundamentals. if they won't try, then you have to veto. it is tough out there. everyone wants to do what is popular. i think leadership means making the tough decisions, charting a course, not refusing to expose yourself to ideas, but charting a course and staying with her. taking the heat that will come from not always been popular out there. >> george bush, thank you for being with us on election 80. >> wrote to the white house rewinds continues with an interview with republican commerce and john anderson from the 1980 presidential campaign. taped by salem high school students in new hampshire, it played on cable access and parts
of new hampshire and massachusetts. this is the first time it has aired on national television. john anderson finished fourth in the 1980 new hampshire primary. he withdrew from the gop race two months later and ran as an independent candidate in the general election where he received 6.6% of the vote and finished third. ronald reagan defeated jimmy carter to win the presidency. this is about 10 minutes. >> congressman john anderson, welcome to election 80. john anderson: thank you very much, paul. probably aware, leadership is a quality the american people have demanded from my president. many people feel like we are not yet with the strong and effective leadership necessary for today's issues. how would you define leadership? john anderson: we don't have a napoleonic tradition in this country. i don't believe the american people want a leader in the
sense of someone by edict and command will tell them what to respect.ry single to me, leadership means the ability to inspire the kind of confidence in the american people to inspire and the american people, a feeling that you, the leader, have the kind of competence to deal with national and international questions that they can put some reliance on your judgment. even more importantly, inspire in you, the average person, the average american, the willingness to be a part of the job that has to be done to rebuild and re-create a stronger and better america. me, is the essence of leadership. the ability to inspire confidence and re-involve the american people and the very important process of trying to get a handle on inflation, of trying to create the kind of image around the world that america is still a strong, powerful, entry country. >> to help further clarify for
us, can you pick out the three most effective leaders in history and why you selected these three liters -- leaders? john anderson: you hit me right between the eyes without. i suppose it would take a lot of a lot of reflection. obviously, i think first in the history of our own country, i think of people like general washington who took the record band of men at a time when one great historian said in a black year of the revolution, there were literally less than 500 people in the colonies who were willing to pledge their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor for the cause of the republic. andook that little remnant made into a force capable of defeating the better financed, better equipped, better trained british expeditionary force. clearly he was a leader. he was not only a leader in a military sense, but he was a man who had the kind of magnificent,
-- concept of freedom that enabled him to serve as the first president of this republic. next, i think of lincoln who served during the most difficult period in our history next to the revolutionary era and was able, despite all of the divisiveness of that civil war, to win the war and espouse the kind of principles of charity and humanity that enabled us to clean up the wounds after the war and remain a united country. lincoln, in my mind, because of his noble expression, is absolutely unlimited power of expression served as a great leader. century,hirdly, in our frank and eleanor roosevelt was a great leader. he was not a member of my party, but i can admire the ability he had to fulfill that requisite of leadership of which i spoke a moment ago, the ability to inspire confidence in a weary
nation that had almost lost faith in itself. he came along and said that we have nothing to fear but. self and went on to recommend in a germanic way a series of policies that enabled us to overcome some of the effects of the depression. as i look at our country, and you can go to european and world history and pick out other great leaders, but those are three great american leaders that i would admire. like to come back to part of that in a minute, if i may. the relationship of the qualities that you mentioned about washington, lincoln, and have you decisions made in the past that would best reflect your reflect -- effectiveness as a leader that example files those kinds of qualities? john anderson: i have to be a little self-serving at this point but you have invited that so i won't be too embarrassed. i cast the deciding vote in the congress 11 years ago on a civil rights bill that would guarantee equal housing opportunities to
the people of this country, regardless of race, color, or creed. it is an often in the body of 435 men that you have the privilege of casting the deciding vote. this happened to be a vote on a committee, but it brought the bill out that was otherwise fated to die in committee. as a result, he became the law of the land and if you days afterward, lyndon johnson shook my hand as they went through the receiving line in the white house and congratulated me for what i had done. it was a difficult vote. many in my party opposed it. they could not accommodate the idea that we ought to have a federal statute that would guarantee equal opportunity in the house and field. all of the years i have been in congress, i am proudest of that vote because it demonstrated on my part, i think, the ability to see an issue that was a transcendent importance and capitalize on the opportunity of that moment to make it more than just an idea, but to translate it into the
reality of an open house in law in our country. it has given me much satisfaction. i think many others, hope, faith, courage that this country ultimately will become a country of equal -- opportunity for all people regardless of race, color, or creed. >> that was a critical time and a critical issue that you dealt with there. today, in america, we are still facing critical problems. we are constantly faced with the recurrence of inflation, recession going on simultaneously. rising food prices, rising fuel costs, rising employment -- unemployment, and the energy crisis. these are the kinds of problems you would be dealing with on a daily bread -- basis if elected as president of the united states. what do you intend to do about these problems and please be specific? john anderson: on the inflation problem, we have to adopt a more sacrificial attitude as far as
the federal role is concerned. we can't continue to pour out money in an ever flowing stream to solve everybody's problem . we have to use the resources of the private sector rather than the public sector to solve these problems. i would strictly by statute limit the growth of government so that it did not exceed the growth that takes place in our economy. rules ofven change the the house and senate to provide that you have to have at least a 60% of vote to approve of an appropriations bill that would spend money beyond the money that we fixed earlier in the budget year on the spending ceiling. on energy, we need more conservation and i have been inspired by what the people in new england have done on their own without government help to conserve energy. i have been in homes where, for example, a mentally not long ago that an oil bill had been reduced from nine or $50 a year to $80 a year because he had and done a wood stove
things that have enabled him to save on fuel. in addition to that, the government has a responsibility in the energy crisis to me to a fuel assistance program, particularly those of moderate and low income. through the community services administration, a grant program that would help people need the impact of these higher energy problems. going back to the general proposition that you asked about, i think we have to depend more on ourselves, find new resourceful, innovative ways to use the genius of our democratic, capitalistic system to solve our problems and depend less on bureaucracy that over the years has tended to encroach not only honor incomes and soak up our tax dollars, but even restrict some of the freedom
that we once enjoyed. congressman anderson, thank you for being with us in election 1980. >> road to the white house rewinds continues with howard baker of tennessee. the final interview in our look at the 1980 presidential campaign. this was taped by salem's high school students in new hampshire and played on cable access in parts of new hampshire and massachusetts. this is the first time it has aired on national elevation. howard baker finished third in hampshireew republican primary behind ronald reagan and george h.w. bush. he withdrew from the race a week later. mr. reagan would go on to win the nomination and defeat incumbent president jimmy carter in the general election. this is about 10 minutes. >> welcome to election 1980. leadership is a quality that american people have demanded from the president. have noticans feel we
received strong, effective leadership from our president. how would you define leadership? i expectker: leadership is a different quantity or quality to define in any case, but a presidential setting, the most difficulty or let me give you examples of strong leaders and i will give you a more direct answer. franklin roosevelt, in my judgment, was a very strong political leader. he could stay purposes and identify problems and did an extraordinary job of inspiring the country through his fireside chance and the congress by persuasion to follow on. he quickly connected most of the new deal legislation in the 1930's. that was strong leadership and social emergency. teddy roosevelt was a strong leader, a strong president. his speak softly and carry a big stick theorem is the most prominent legacy that he gave us, but roosevelt was strong in the international sense,
primarily. he brought the united states into the forefront as a world power. interesting to note that although he was a tough, sometimes blustery man, that he led the country into a period of relative peace and stability. lincoln, of course, was a strong leader. by sheer force of personality and determination, he preserved the union when all of the odds must've been against it. that was a strong leadership. eisenhower, in my judgment, was annexed ordinarily strong personality and strong -- was an extraordinarily strong personality and president. sometimes, it takes strength, to understand things are going pretty well and that you don't have to change them for the sake of change. is ach case, there different quality of leadership in the examples i have chosen. the one common denominator is that the presidency is a strong institution. the constitution adopted in philadelphia required its first
registration, as they said, the president, to be a strong president. i would try to be a strong president. that is leadership. that thebelieve presidency is too strong or two imperial. i believe man had -- man has abused the presidency, but i believe the institution has to be used as a form to suggest rob -- solutions to the problems of the country and leading nation in the direction it needs to go. >> to help us clarify your views on this, in dealing with strong leadership and effective leadership, what kinds of decisions have you made in your that wouldator indicate to us that you have effective leadership? , iard baker: to begin with am proud to be the first republican ever elected to senate from tennessee. believe me, that is no smal l chore. there aren't that many republicans in my state. i had to try to lead the political apparatus in my state
and appeal for broad-based support. that, theon after ability to get elected to republican leader, the minority leader of the senate has been a special privilege for me. s, beforef those period i became republican leader and since i have become republican minority leader, there have been a range of issues on which i felt the need to try to assert leadership. senate in the the 1960's, the civil rights issues were still hot and topical. being a southern republican, it was sometimes difficult for me politically to take the lead in civil rights legislation such as the voters right extension act, the fair housing act, and others. leadership.hat as i was swimming against the current, so to speak. i was a fragile political commodity. the first republican ever to come from tennessee. number ofter on a
other issues, particularly environmental legislation, i was the senior republican on the environment and public works subcommittee on the air and water pollution subcommittee. i can recall gray conflicts over the clean air act of 1970 and the clean air in the mental 1970. -- amendments of 1970. i took a leadership role in convincing congress that the sorts of legislations were necessary. the panama canal, i still have scars and bruises over my head and shoulders over that, but i was convinced we needed a new treaty. treatydidn't have a new in panama, you would end up with a new cuba and panama. an unpopular political decision, but it was a leadership role that i tried to play in convincing republicans that they should go along with the ratification. my opposition to the strategic arms limitation treaty is not based on my opposition to
disarmament, which i support, but rather that this treaty is not a good enough treaty and not ahe senate -- it is popular view. especially with the press of this country. i think that as responsibility leadership. these things occurred to me as i answer your question of some examples as a leadership role that i have tried to assert. let me give you one final one. after i was elected republican leader of the senate, three of the firste things i did was to ask the republican senators to try to onee on issue statements, the major issues before the country. to see if we could get together. i urgedted committees, and counseled with republicans of different persuasions, and we came up with a series of positions that were important to the country and were almost unanimously adopted. theridged the gap between
very conservative senators such as jesse helms from north carolina or orrin hatch from and, jack from new york mike from maryland. we brought them together in statements such as our position energy, thedefense, economy, and so forth. i think of that is leadership as an example of leadership. >> dealing with that kind -- question, the past and present leadership abilities on your past -- part, with the next question, i would like to move into the future. as we all know, america today is confronted by serious crises situations that americans are faced with, recurrence of recession, the rise of unemployment, the rise in food prices, the rise in fuel prices, and naturally, and most important, the main culprit is the energy crisis itself. these are the kinds of problems that you would face on a daily basis if elected president of the united states. what would you intend to do about these problems, the
situations, these issues if elected, and please be specific? howard baker: let me say first of all that in the energy field or inflation field, if someone says you have a simple solution for you, either that candidate is foolish or they are trying to fool you. problem.omplex the economy, inflation, i will respond to only it. we have a rational and reasonable energy policy. i think we are on the right track with deregulation, the control, windfall profits times. the safety net for the poor and elderly to provide against their freezing to death in the face of freezing prices. new funds for research and development in synthetic fuels and fusion power and geothermal steam and other techniques. the first thing is we have to get the energy problem under control. i think we are heading in the right direction. the second thing is to get the government's own physical -- fiscal accounts in order. right now, i think while the
government is not the only cause of inflation, obviously, it is the biggest cause of inflation. i think president carter let the animal out of the cage. the animal of excessive government spending which is stimulated an increase in the rate of inflation. president inrd was the final quarter of his administration, the final three months, inflation was running at less than 5% per year, now running at 13% per year. the second thing is to have a frugal and careful scrutiny of federal accounts to make sure that we hold the rate of increase of federal spending down to more modest levels. the third thing we have to do is try to increase productivity in this country. we ranked dead last in the 10 great industrial nations of the west in the rate of increase in productivity. what that means is we no longer compete with japan, germany, other countries. we are losing jobs.
our competitive advantage. to do that in turn it requires a number of things. adjustment of tax code, re-instill these -- incentive to save for the average citizen, , for installing new plant equipment, to create new jobs. reduce the burden of paperwork, regulation. i would like to see us make it is tension between reporting requirements to the agencies of federal government for small business versus big business. small business is being suffocated by reporting requirements. all of these things are component parts of a complex question that is how he would control inflation, how do you reduce the cost of living or r etard the cost of living in the nation? i will not sit here and say as president there is a magic wand that can be waived. it will take all of these things , but much more to get our house back in order. >> senator howard baker, thank you for being with us for election 1980.
>> c-span takes you on the road to the white house. the access to candidates, town hall meetings, speeches, rallies, and meet and greet. we are taking your comments on twitter, facebook, and by phone and as always, every campaign event we cover is available on our website, c-span.org. next on lectures in history, arizona state university professor brooks simpson discusses the role of the president during wars, including those wage without a formal congressional declaration. he examines the ways american foreign-policy and the president has evolved. his class is about one hour and 15 minutes. brooks: we will talk about presidents and going to war. we have talked about the constitution already, the authorization of the president to act as commander-in-chief of the armed forces. on the other hand, congress' role, they can fund military
operations, can also pass various regulations for the armed services. and as well, congress can exercise oversight through congressional hearings on what is going on committees. we know that. james madison once drew the distinction that congress declares war, the presidents make war. remember, there are only five wars where congress has actually declared war. 1812, mexican-american, spanish-american, world war 1 and 2. within the last declaration, several european countries that were allied with nazi germany. not italy or germany, hungary, romania, etc.