tv C-SPAN Weekend CSPAN June 5, 2011 6:00am-7:00am EDT
he said, talking about these three programs, that america is a better country because of these programs. i will go one step further. america would not be a great country without these programs. ladies and gentlemen, america was a great country before 1965. [applause] social goods are routed to understand that america was a great country because it was founded great. our founders calling upon the supreme judge, calling upon divine providence, saying what with at the heart of american exceptional with -- ism.ptionally a thum
our founders understood that we were going to take the principal, judeo-christian principles that had been out there for centuries and it do something radical. we were going to actually found a government on these principles. they had come from countries that did not believe that rates came from god and given to every individual. the came from countries where people were not equal. there were boards and subject. there was no equality. they took this radical, biblical concept and placed it in our founding document and said that we are going to do something radical, and that is establish a government and a constitution ultimately lose one responsibility was to keep people freak so they could pursue their dreams -- keep
people free so they could pursue their dream. it is the right that god give you that america is here to protect. [applause] ladies and gentlemen, that experiment changed the world. that experiment in believing in the american people transformed the world. i remind everybody that up until 1776, from the time of jesus christ, life expectancy in the world remained basically the same. but once america believe a new and let you rise to heights without punishing you are criticizing you for being
successful, and tolerated failure, tolerated the fall of people so they could learn lessons of the could again succeed -- without that, we would not have changed, and life expectancy in the 200 years of america has doubled. why? cause we believe in you. what is at stake in this election is a president who believes that the greatness of america is in government taking things from you and redistributing to others that he and others believe in washington are more disturbing. people ask me what is the most important thing is this election. i say repealing obama care. it is not taking care of those on the margins of society. it is not taking care of those who are needy. it is a program that says to
every working man and woman that we are going to tell you how much money you are going to spend, how you are going to spend it, what programs that benefit you are going to get. it takes money from you and gives power to washington. margaret thatcher said she was never able to accomplish what reagan accomplished in transforming britain, for one reason, because people's addiction to the british health- care system. she was never able to break that bond. what do you think they worked so hard and were willing to risk so much, including the last election, to pass that bill? why did they want to jam it down your throat? because they knew it was a game changer. they knew that as the president says, america would not be the same country. ladies and gentlemen, america is
a great country, not because of its government but because of its people. in 2010, -- excuse me, in 2008, the american public was looking for a president in a very difficult time in our history as a result of economic recession and trouble overseas. they look for someone in a president that they could believe and, and i found barack obama. he took that believe -- they found barack obama. he took that believe in him and a centralized power in human nose around him. i believe as i across america, i believe at my court that as i go across america, americans have now realize that what they need is not someone that they can believe then, but they need a president who believes in them. [applause]
ladies and gentlemen, as i close, i will say this. as they fellow proud, social conservative, we need to go out in the next 18 months, no matter who wins the primary, no matter who wins our primary, all across our country, and fight for the future of our country. this is the most important election in your lifetime. this is the election that will determine whether we will hand off to the next generation a country that is free and safe and prosperous, a country that we were given, a country that is transformational in the world. but if we do not win this election, what we will have done was given away the great
gift of america. do not, do not let that happen. thank you, and god bless you. [applause] [applause] >> thank you very much. the first thing in my of the opposite is to defend the u.s. constitution. it is something that takes very seriously. unfortunate, it is the first thing in the of the office for every elected representative in america. for many of them, they are checking the box when i say
that zero to assume the office. we have seen the evidence in virginia -- when they say that zero to assume the office. we need to reverse that trend. ronald reagan used to say that the wisdom of america resides with individual americans, not congress, not universities, not the press, not institutions in our society, but individual americans. we are seeing for the first time actual evidence that he was absolutely right, as individual americans, and prompted by organization or political parties, stepped out, rise up, and take their own country and their own constitution back. that is what is happening in america today. i want to thank you all for being here and having me here with you. you are engaged in issues that are critical to america today and that will be for a long time
into the future. your presence here alone showed your commitment to prevailing on of issues, to bringing back the founders' vision for this country in the 21st century. that is my goal in politics and i know many of you share it. our founding fathers pledged their lives, their 14th, and their sacred honor to creating this great nation. many of them gave up those live and gave up their fortunes. none of them gave up their sacred honor, none of them. no one in this room is going to be called on to make the kind of sacrifices that they had to make to establish this great country. there was nothing certain about what they are doing. it takes much less on our part
to save the vision and the foundation of this great country. there is no excuse for any of us to sit idly by at this point in time, when so much of the foundation is at risk and at issue. i'm glad you are here. i take it as a get -- as a great sign that you are engaged back in your home communities that you are here today. to win, we are going to have to affect these individuals one heart, one mind at a time. it is the phrase used most often in the pro-life movement, but it applies across the defense of liberty. that is how we are going to win. for decades we have asked government to do more for us as a people, and all government ever asked is for a little bit more of our liberty. that is all.
and we have politicians and court that have gladly obliged. we have that i lead by as a nation and let it happen. -- we have sat idly by as a nation and let it happen. we no longer have a federal government of limited enumerated powers. we have a central government, a centralized government that tries to plan and control virtually every aspect of our economy, which also includes is our very lives, from health care to banking to energy to insurance to automobile manufacturing. virginia is still a farming state. it is the biggest part of our economy. those of you who live in northern virginia might not know that, but that is the truth. there is, however, hope. in the last few years, people
have finally woken up. ordinary voters, ordinary citizens have woken up and they are pushing back against the federal overreach. it is not just health care. they are demanding accountability from their politicians and they are measuring that accountability against the yardstick of the u.s. constitution. that is new in our lifetime. they are also demanding that first principle once again be the guidepost for politics and policy in this country. that offers the real hope, not the kind you heard about in 2008, the real thing. if we have people, if we have americans who are thinking in these terms, thinking in first principles terms, before they cast about, before they decide what is a good policy and what
is a bad policy, we are going to turn america in the right direction. parties are secondary to that. they are a vehicle to achieve that direction. they are not goal. this reaction by the american people reaches back to when republicans had both the house, the senate, and the presidency and screwed up. that failed to lead in a principled fashion. there are three ways government exercises more power. more taxes, more spending, and more regulation. republicans did to ibm -- republicans did two of them. saying republicans and white rock and sellers is offensive -- to drop and sellers.
he was absolutely right -- when the democrats take over, they make republicans look like pikers in the spending category. expansion of government power, which we saw with republican spending and regulation, has burst the boundaries of a wall in the constitution. that was the natural course that we were on. you cannot blame just the last two years. it is not enough, absolutely not knops to get republican majorities back and a republican president. that is not enough. [applause] i am counting on you all across the country to bring that message and to keep in mind when you are picking candidate to get behind.
don't just pick the one most likely to win. pick the one of likely to matter for america. we are seeing federalism, a concept i know you all understand, reemerge. people want to return to let federal government that is, in fact, ltd., and living within its enumerated powers. and not acting as if it has all power to fix all things characterized as problems. if we just hand over enough of our liberty. that is the trade-off. we all remember economics -- reagan's economic pie. i talked to people about the liberty hyde. it does not grow and it does not shrink, and it has to slices, government power and
citizens liberty. everything will gain that government does to increase its power comes directly at the expense of the liberty and freedom of the citizens of this country. as we confront this head on in many facets, many from the federal government overwhelmingly, we are seeing the state's star as a check, the check in the checks and balances system that james madison talk about. everybody thinks about the three branches of government. to people who actually study the constitution, it is the
executive, legislative, and judiciary. is chuck schumer here? how about that? that check and balance is more commonly understood. i think of that as a horizontal check and balance. the particle check and balance is between the federal government and the state government -- the particle check and balance. it was put there so that either side oversteps, the other has sufficient power to bring it back into line. that is what we are doing as states today. when i sued in the health-care case, it was virginia suing the federal government. [applause] one of the more amusing aspects of the case was when we had our
oral argument in october in the district court in richmond. the federal government's lawyer got up and introduced himself. he said he was for the government, i mean, the federal government. the least anti federalist founding father, alexander hamilton, even noted these courts are here too rapidly these contests of constitutional authority. justice o'connor quoted him all the way back to the new york convention in 1788 in reminding people that the 10th amendment exists and matters and accounts, and she did that.
in exercising the state check in this federalism structure, i am proud to play a role as the state attorney general. we are the last line of defense, particularly when the conservative do not have control in washington. it falls to the state to check federal power. the new health-care law provides the prime example of this. it is historic in that 28 states now are party plaintiffs suing their own federal government for violating the constitution. that has never happened before. [applause] virginia was the first state to argue in court that the individual mandate was unconstitutional. we did that last october. we have argued that federal government's attempt to use the constitution's commerce clause
to order people, to dictate to people that they buy private health insurance -- nancy pelosi has the best title in washington -- former speaker. i really liked that one. we have argued that they may not use the commerce clause to order you to buy their government approved health- insurance, that it goes well beyond the power of congress. when people say this case is unprecedented, it is not just that 28 states are suing the federal government over violating the constitution. it is that our federal government has never in its history ordered americans to buy a product or service under the guise of regulating commerce. that has never, ever happened before. why not? perhaps every congress before
the last one and every president before this one knew and respected the fact that they did not have the power to do this. if you go back to the colonial period, which we do when we are arguing about the boundaries of elements of the constitution and have not been tested before, at least in the way it is being tested here. this is a unique case. lawyers would call the case of first impression. during the colonial period, led by virginia and massachusetts, the colonists were boycotting british good to push for the repeal of the stamp act and the intolerable acts. in response to a massachusetts convention in 1768, the attorney-general, solicitor general of the king, news that in parliament at that time, were
asked a question, isn't this boycott trees and -- treason? the answer was, the colonists of up to the line but they have not crossed it. think about that for a moment. that means that the parliament and king george the third, whom we rebelled against as tyrant, acknowledged they could not order subjects to buy british goods, but we have a president and half of congress that believe they can. that is extraordinary. that is absolutely extraordinary, historically. americans can argue about whatever piece of the constitution means, but every american should be able to agree that the results of the american revolution was that we got a
central government of less power than the one we left. a simple venn diagram, a dumb not, a big circle and a little circle. this congress believed to have more power than king george ii and the parliament of britain to be able to order you to do what they want you to do. the government is arguing that it has the power to order you into commerce. go and read article one, section eight. they have the power to regulate commerce within the state. is that just an argument about half of language? i was an engineer, i am horrible at grammar. go look at the military clauses.
power to raise an army out of nothing. that is what the practice constitutional. they can argue -- they can order you to go fight and die under the constitution, but that cannot or you to buy a product, and there is a reason for that. there is a good reason for that. they say not buying health insurance is as much of an economic activity as buying it is. activity is the word used in all the commerce clause cases. the biggest impediment to a federal victory in this case is a dictionary. it causes them all sorts of problems. in the government's eyes, not buying health insurance is an
economic decision to sell the insurer. isn't that pleasantly put? read that sentence again, and it means to do nothing. that is why the district judge ruled for the federal parliament -- i left her phrase, just because it was so blunt. she said there were regulating meant collectivity -- mental activity. george orwell would be screaming "sequel, sequel." a convenient, 2014. 30 years later than 1994. there are trying to get away from that, but they cannot. they are regulating your decision to do nothing, to sit there and do nothing. is there a more basic definition
of liberty than to be left alone? it is very simple. you cannot always be left alone, there is the draft. that is the trade-off of liberty because they are granted certain powers, but that is the argument that are relying on. it is mental activity, but let's say that a dip for white. they are claiming the right to regulate it bought if they do not like it. surely we can trust this administration with that sort of authority. the same reasoning they use here can be used to force you to buy a car, broccoli, a gym membership.
this government has a pretty significant interest in general motors. you have noticed, government motors. . drive a chevy equinoxe you do not want to own a shabby equinoxes -- a chevrolet equinoxe, trust me. i elected in the garage on the way here. this goes back to reagan. he said that when it stops moving, they want to subsidize it. it is the ones that stop moving that get subsidized. so we have that to look forward to if we lose this case. it is an astonishing got to consider that if we lose this case, there is no constitutionally logical bar to
them ordering you to buy those other products. and federalism is dead. think about that. what can the federal government not do that is left to the authority of the states any longer? it does not take a lot of creativity a pocket or you to buy products and sources, to do almost anything out what to do as a policy matter. thus, federalism is dead. people who predict we are going to lose have said the same thing. jonathan turley said a year ago, he predicted we would lose and it would be the end of federalism. that was his expectation. the mentality was because the federal barbara always wins.
in know what? they do not always win. they did not win in virginia in december, the constitution did. it has been mixed results across the country, but these are all run up to the supreme court for this will be decided. my guess is it will be decided next year. it will be before next november. it will probably be june 2012, , but we willuess see. we will keep pushing in virginia. some courts will not like the ecommerce clause. but came up with it all back argument that the penalty you have to pay it to do not by their government approved health insurance is a tax. what they do that? they have vast taxing power,
particularly after the 16th amendment. the court gives them great deference. this is their fallback position. you may recall that when the president was being interviewed by george stephanopoulos, before the bill became law, he was very irritated with the notion that his opponents were saying this was a tax. his response was that they say everything is a tax. this is not a tax increase, not at all. funny how things change want to go to court. i have almost felt sorry for some of the federal lawyers getting grilled on this point.
counsel, you have congressional leaders and a president who's in the whole time this bill was running through the legislative process were insisting it is not a tax. now you are standing here arguing in this court that it is a tax. can they do this sort of debate and switch? please ask me another question. it has been very uncomfortable for them. and that's that, i almost feel sorry for them. for all the problems on the commerce clause, think of our radical this would be. i'm congress, i can order you to do anything. if you do not, i cannot fine -- i can fine you.
it is truly extraordinary. not a single judge has accepted that argument. they are 0 for 6 on that argument. i mentioned the order was issued in december. we argued last month in the fourth circuit. we are waiting that order. it will come sometime this summer. this past week, they had appellate arguments in cincinnati and in cincinnati, 26 states are arguing the aborted deal in atlanta in the 11th circuit. june 23 there is that for the appellate court arguing it. the appeals courts are rolling through this right now. by the end of the summer i expect we will have some orders and starches the appeals to the supreme court.
at some point, the losses will hit the supreme court. in the autumn, i believe the briefing will run into the winter and a decision by the end of the term next june. that is not expected timeline. for months before election day if it is the last monday in june. but wait until the end for the more controversial ruling. you will hear some on the monday of this month. whatever way the ruling goes, we will appeal to the supreme court. i will tell you some of the reaction because of my role in enhancing the constitution as it was written. what a concept. crazy.
i am cast as everything under the sun, not able, awful, terrible, and the guy who wants to tack away everyone's free health care. never mind that all all i have said this case is not about health care, it is about liberty. because of the implications long into the future, this case is not about health care. it is about liberty. that is what this case is about. [applause] unfortunately, it is one of many examples of this administration crossing the line on the rule of law. before brought the help their case in virginia, we sued the epa, the employment prevention agency, over their greenhouse gas endangerment finding. there is no agency in the federal government that so
egregiously ignores their own rules and the loss of life to it bound their authority. that is not enough. when lisa jackson said in december 2009, i am not to transform the american economy and i have the 15,000 people of the epa you are ready to help me do it. in a statement. no mention of keeping the environment clean in that statement. transformed the american economy. they know what they are doing and how they are doing it. again, we are the last line of defense. the attorney-general in south carolina is fighting to keep those 22 states that are free of compelled unionization.
we are a coal state. we are here for a reason. coming to an internet near you this summer, this is the most brazen one of all. the fec is going to roll out again and ordered to regulate the internet. why is this the month raised -- most brazen one of all? for one simple reason. a year ago, in 2010, they had a court ruling telling them they could not do this. they thought about it and said, we will do it anyway. it is just a court ruling. talk about a brazen this regard, distain for the rule of law. we may not like what courts do
all the time, but there has got to be a place where our contests are rep read and thought out. this administration does not just this respect state and federal law, does not just this respect the united states constitution, but they also have no respect for the courts of this country. it is amazing, and this ruling, this order coming up this summer is the most brazen one of all because of that, because they have crossed one more line so brazenly. you there arell attorneys general that got elected in 2010 all over the country who are now stepping up to the plate and playing a role in defending the constitution, the rule of law in their states and our federalist system.
it is happening all across the country. reg abbott from texas has been doing it for years. scott pruett in oklahoma, luther stranger in alabama, allan wilson in south carolina, the list goes on. it used to realistic account on one hand. not any longer. there is hope, because the burden has fallen to us at the state level to carry the spot for. when i ran for office in 2009, no one had ever run on federalism before, but i did. i said very clearly, if the federal government crosses the line, i will fight back. i got elected and was called all sorts of things. i got elected in november 2009 with all the usual suspects and
he is too conservative to win, with more votes than anyone in the history of virginia running for attorney general. [applause] when the federal government crossed those lines, i kept my campaign promises, and we are fighting them every step of the white. thank you all for fighting where you are from. god bless you and god bless america. thank you very much. [applause] >> good morning. i'm grateful for our time together. my friends, and bring good news. we take heart despite the times. for as imperfect moral beings,
we realize that within these ephemeral stream of time by grants of, we will all based file and tragedy, and with his help, triumph and transcend them. his wisdom string bands and sustains us as we confront the forces of secularism and moral relativism, besieging our cherished institutions of faith, family, community, and country, wherein revives a self-evident truth upon which our pre republic was founded and perpetuated. as a full litany of burial secularism challenges at home and abroad are not the best way to start this beautiful day. a few notches examples must suffice. at home, we confront the elitist forces of big government attempting to force fight from
the public square, advance the bitter, in human harvest of abortion, interfere with parents' ability to import their moral teachings to their children, reward the indulgence of will, appetite, and agreed through the unjust act that was the wall street bailout, and in both an entitlement culture and government dependency upon our ho-- we recall at the horror of those being butchered for their beliefs in sudan and north africa. we are existentialist challenged by the people's republic of talent -- china. ruled by a communist and therefore intrinsically evil regime that still tells people how many children they might have, imprisons people for passing out bibles, compels
people to attend only official state churches, proffering a live the people's liberty threatens their security and prosperity. despite these challenges at home and abroad, we still take part in these times. because we are first in two eternal rarities'. liberty comes from god, not the government. therefore, no good government denies the presence of god. [applause] our knowledge of these true this is and still not by abstract theory, but by the concrete and glass of mercy's found in the institutions of faith, family, community and country that we have inherited from the generations. on my part i inherited it from my mother and my father.
my father was born to irish immigrants in detroit. early of my brother died from disease. later, his mother also went to her eternal reward. with his brother, frank, the father could not care for him. or my father or her sister. raised by the nuns at the st. francis home for boys, he was fortunate to be blessed with athletic ability that has skipped a generation. [laughter] he earned a scholarship to the university of detroit. he later went on to become a teacher. since he has passed, i can say this, that truman democrat never had to witnesses son become a republican. [laughter] although in all candor it is due to my mother and my father, because throughout my life day
instilled in me the fact that there is an intrinsic dignity to self-reliance and work and an innate quality to all of god's children. so, however we find our way to foster and fulfill our faith, rooted in the truth of confronting trials and tribulations, we all take part, despite the times. we will rebuild an america that works. because we understand and embrace the face of that humanity's hope flows from god's heart to our homelands and with his health improved, we will fulfil our moral duty to bequeath to our children and generations of free people yet born, a purposeful, free republic, a virtue in work of wisdom and love.
we are americans. it is what we do. may god continue to bless the majestic american people and our free republic as we go forth today to triumph, transcend, and perpetuate the eternal sparked of liberty. thank you very much. [applause] ♪ [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] >> thank you, dr. smith, for that generous introduction into our fellow patriots, good morning. i am a natural born conservative. i was born in cincinnati, ohio.
i do not know if you know what mark twain said about cincinnati. after his seventh visit he was on a train ride and a young reporter asked him his impression. he said that it feared the world was ending tomorrow, he would was ending tomorrow -- he would get to cincinnati as fast as he could. [laughter] i told some folks yesterday that my father was so conservative that he prohibited premarital sex because he thought it might lead to slow dancing. [laughter] so, do not be shocked with my conservatism. i have been blessed to be the mayor of my home town, the secretary of state and treasurer for the great state of ohio, representing the united states in that band of confusion, the
u.n., as president george h. w. bush's ambassador to the u.n. in charge of the human rights portfolio. i had the opportunity to work with josh bolten. let me put it to you plainly. elections are about winning. because elections matter. i want to give you a couple of examples and then tell you why i have been spending his time working. working to build, precinct by precinct, word by word, an operation in ohio that can turn out voters who can turn an election. ralph has told many of you that no republican, no conservative
has won the white house without carrying ohio. let me give you some perspective. in 1976, the race was between gerald ford and jimmy carter. carter won ohio by 11,300 boat. there are 13,000 precincts in ohio. if we had overturned one vote per precinct, ford would have won. while he may not have been everyone's cup of tea, he was measurably and demonstrably better than jimmy carter. [applause] fast-forward to 2000, 2004.
george bush verses, you know, carry. coming down to ohio once again. george bush carried the ohio by 118,000 votes. just a tad bit under 120,000 votes. you turn 60,000 votes in ohio for john kerry, and you have a different america than we have and that we had in 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, and 2008. john kerry was wrong for america. obama is wrong for america. what will make the difference is
whether or not we are able to go into every precinct in the country, every ward in every county, turning out the vote. we are going to do a lot this weekend to motivate you and educate you, but we are depending on you to activate voters. to train and to activate voters and get them out to the polls. that is what we are destined to do. let me tell you more about 2004. it is important. everyone was talking about a retreat on social issues. we would not have had george bush and we would have had senator kerry if, in fact, it had not have been for an issue that social conservatives put on the ballot that year.
it was a simple amendment to the constitution saying that marriage in ohio would be recognized as a union between one man and one woman. interesting demographic to look out across the country. george bush won 10% of the african-american vote. in ohio that year, he won 18% of the african-american vote. it was due to the fact that an issue was on the ballot that was an issue that said there was a difference between john kerry and it was not just a distinction, it was a real difference. and that a basic and fundamental, cultural
understanding of what a family is, of what a marriage is, and as many have told you this afternoon, but one of the basic intermediary institutions in our country, marriage and family, what they are and that they were at risk. african-americans came out and voted for bush in numbers greater than the rest of their colleagues around the country. i would suggest to you that issues matter. and that as one of your speakers said this morning, the only way the to get limited government is by having a strong family and strong churches and synagogues that carry forth of the message that it is our responsibility, not the government's responsibility to craft a kind
of future that we want. [applause] in the bible there are a couple of passages that i would like to share with you. and the first is in john 3. those that want to do evil love to talk to us. in matthew 5 we are told that each and every one of us has an obligation to put our life on a candlestick and not put it under a bushel. to raise it high. so that we can magnify the glorious god. it is, in fact, our responsibility, at this time of economic and cultural darkness
in this country, it is our calling not to retreat to the sidelines, but to go to the front lines with our candle on a stick and to lifted high. and to show that we understand in that dekker ration of independence the second paragraph, quoted time and time from this podium, the central message there is that ours human-rights, our fundamental rights are not grants from government. they are gifts from god. and anybody that tells you to retreat -- [applause] that tells you to retreat, anyone that tells you to call timeout on those issues, they do not understand why we are an exceptional nation. we are an exceptional nation.
you know it. i know it. president obama might not know it. [laughter] but we are going to elect a president in his place that knows it. [applause] but we also know that while we are an exceptional nation, we are not exempt from limits. moral limits. that limits. limits that basically are imposed by moral discipline and folks that understand that you cannot run faith and to god out of the public square and not destroy the very basis upon which our exceptional listen -- i -- sm -- exceptionalism is
based. [applause] i had an uncle. his name was d.r. hubbard. the first african-american to win an olympic gold medal in a track and field event. yes, jesse -- before jesse owens. in 1924 he was to run in the 100 yard dash. there has been a transatlantic debate as to who was the fastest human being on the face of the earth and they were going to resolve it by and paris with my great uncle. when he got to paris, the international olympic committee would not allow him to run in the 100 yard dash for the high hurdles. both that you had to qualify
for. that would not let him do this because of his color. as you know, eric little did not run because the final hundred yard dash was on the sabbath. he told my generation that one of the greatest investments in his life was learned by not participating and by getting to meet, interact, and cray with their acquittal. there was a term that became our clarion call in our family. it was fidelity of faith. fidelity the faith was a system. proud americans.
fidelity to faith is what would lead us to take a stand for life. take a stand for marriage. take a stand to end of this crazy as in terms of the national debt. take a stand for freedom. i asked you to put your candle on a stick. unite and rushed the darkness of our time. just as it derek lowe, we would be winners because of our fidelity to faith. god bless you. [applause] >> next, live, your calls on
"washington journal." then on news makers, michigan democrat sander levin. then a discussion on raising the debt ceiling. >> he was known in the name as czar reed. >> during has three terms as the speaker of the house, thomas reed changed the power structure of the house. he was impugned as a tyrant because he overturned a longstanding custom in the house, that the minority would be on equal parliamentary footing on the majority. >> you can also download this and other part cast, one of our many signatures interview programs, on-line at c-span.org /pub cast. they andis morning, freedom coalition executive director gary marx talks about director gary marx talks about the role