tv National Security Advisers CSPAN December 3, 2011 11:00pm-12:15am EST
millions of people bought them to read books. it has opened a way to reach those readers. > i brought up the subject about state legislature which is not particularly well covered. i think the great sculduggery takes place there. at the same time, and a place like illinois and maybe this segment sacramento and albany, you have fewer reporters. when you dig down and talk to some of them and find out what their work load is light, they are tweeting and sending out video and there are ways you can go online and get video of hearings in the illinois legislature. there is a whole lot of information that one could not get before. one reporter told me he had a radio interview in quad cities and he let folks link to it and
he is a smart guy. fiber 10 years ago, he would've been like, what do you say in that? there is kind of an interesting tension here with the challenge of diminished resources and the upside of the technology enabling you to do what people really what we're to get the stuff out fast. it will be interesting to see in the era of personalization where you are spending money on what you think you want. what happens to these lower priority items? the illinois department of children and family services. you cannot imagine many people spend much money to get stuff on arcane subject. it was there once upon a time even if you pick up the paper under way to the lifestyle -- on your way to the lifestyle section or the sports section, you might stumble into that little expose about something else.
it will be interesting to see what happens. >> i think about resources a lot. we do more with less people. i love "the washington post." but there are a lot of people doing a lot of nothing. a very expensive at lot of nothing. you can pare down. we have great health care systems. we have five people versus 25. they are really dedicated and passionate about it. i don't work than any harder than i work when i was a journalist. we broke many stories. we break stories every single day. they have 10 reporters and we have one. are we smarter? are we working better? the consumers want what they
want and that is something you should respect, you can do with law -- a lot less people. i think there were people who will cover the illinois legislature better than some of the old reporters used to. >> it is easier now in the sense that someone who wants to find that can find that. i don't remember when we first met but the first presidential campaign i covered was 1988. i don't know if you are out there then. i had two suitcases, one had closed and one had all the position papers, all the speeches, all the papers of all the candidates and i carried that around. this is the information that we need. as all of us who have covered presidential campaigns know? you go to a whistle stop and a candidate gets up in 20 minutes before they give you the text of the speech. you would be standing there reading it and there will be a rope barrier and actual american citizens will look over and ask where i got that. how could i get one of those?
they can't get it because i am doing something exclusive. every voter in america now has access to with more information than we had in the days when we had information that seemed exclusive. a candidate's website has every speech, every poet -- every position paper. he is blogging, he is tweeting. it is incumbent on citizens to do more. there is more available. >> there are other formats. porpublica -- propublica has won the pulitzer after pulitzer. there are rich people paying for great journals. it is funded by the guy who was editor of "the wall street journal." someone will come up with a different system. media has to become entrepreneurial. it is not like a priesthood or they deserve to be in business. they have to stop complaining about that. you have to try new things and be willing. the consumer has taken control and they are not getting it back in music, movies, entertainment or any part of their lives. how do you fit in with accurate,
there, quality journalism? you become entrepreneurial. >> we have only five minutes left. this has been a fantastic panel. i would love each of you to take a couple of minutes and i will let you talk about what you want to say -- what will the media and journalistic environment look-alike five years from now, 10 years from now? how different will it be? you were actually doing something that is available now. that might seem like a dinosaur in two or three years. as print. look in that crystal ball and say what things will look like five or 10 years from now. >> very quickly -- on the issue of radio -- i am a news junkie. i consume news. i don't know a single dial in this country for npr. i do not know where to find in
any city attitude. i know i can always go to npr.org and i can find any story i am looking for. radio has increased because of technology. that is the underlying theme. technology will enhance journalism once some of these corporate institutions of journalism figure that out and stop fighting it but embrace it. once they figure out the best way to deliver to everyone in this room the three-minute story or the six-minute story about egypt, i am in great shape. i don't care where you watch it or when you watch it, i care that you have a right to watch it and that is the most important thing as a journalist. if your interested in a story about the middle east or sports, you have the right to be able to find it and get to it. my biggest challenge is that people don't necessarily have the choice in the past. if you are being told 22 minutes of what is the most important news story, people
will be more engaged in now. they have more information but a greater civic responsibility to be more knowledgeable. that is where reporters come in. you can see all the youtube video but you will not understand it if you don't have somebody there that you trust and go to regularly. people are more accepting of slightly opinionated news. not your opinion, but these are people who are more polemic and question. are we done enough to think these stories will be that straight forward? you will question it. what are you greasing the wheels for? that is the spirit of the old journalism which has not gone away which will always be there but now you can hear it in so many different platforms. >> let's go around a bullhorn. -- a round of the horn. jim, talk about the future.
>> my wife is a pulitzer prize winner on child development and owl broker asked -- and al roker asked her to sum up in 30 seconds childhood education and she did it. i can take out my clay tablet and i think there are some problems we now face like lack of cooperation. it is almost impossible to reach consensus everywhere. i can be mown some of the potential problems of fragmentation. on a local level, lack of social cohesion is a very complicated matter. there's a lack of sense of community and that is significant. journalists like myself are terrible historians. we too often forget what came
before us. steve jobs as a visionary but there will be another one. just like there was an alphabet act clay tablet and a printing press and a satellite, there will be something else which we will harness in intelligence, innovative ways even have guys like me go into that new world kicking and screaming. i think the technology is so wonderfully powerful as i watch my two-year old fiddle with an ipad. he will never know what a mouse is. as my seven year-old becomes a mini-chess savant playing on the macintosh, there is a wonderfully bright future and we will figure out ways to pay for quality and we will harness this technology and get it to people where they want it. whoever is the stuff is, --
whoever's stuff i its, it will be easily accessible and a golden era potentially is beckoning. >> i second of that. i completely think technology is the key and all the examples you just gave, at the end of the day, it is about the viewers have been the right to choose and that is my main concern. they need to be empowered to make the choice of how and when and where they consume the journalism. that is never going away because people will always speak in -- inquisitive. they want to be better informed citizenry with choices. >> i am not quite so optimistic. >> that's because you lived next to sarah palin for a year. >> i learned to keep my head down. people have the right to choose and there is so much more to choose from and they tend to
choose what reinforces with the already believe. people do not seek out. when sarah palin was elected mayor, she presided over first city council meeting and a friend of hers, somebody who voted for her, gave her a book at the end of the meeting because she was worried that she was ignorant in so many ways. he gave her the book called "worldly philosophers" to teach her something about economics. she would not even take a book out of his hands. she put her own hand out and said no. i never read anything that might challenge my beliefs. [laughter] i am afraid that palinization is spreading through technology. people watch fox news because that reinforces what they believe or msnbc, they will carry that mind set over to the
internet and all the wonderful opportunities that are available. who seeks out typical the -- difficult information? tell me something i know is right to strengthen my position but i don't want to have somebody arguing with me through technology. that is much less optimistic point of view. >> you are talking about sarah palin. >> we are way beyond that. >> i think media will be promiscuous. it will be everywhere. it will have to be everywhere and where people want to consume it. promiscuity is important for me going for it. it will be everywhere, meaning ubiquity. one important thing is screen technologies coming along. i was in korea and i saw some astonishing touch screens that
react to people in an environment. my kid is 6 years old and we got a big new screen and he touched the the television screen and it did not do something. he said the screen is broken. those screens have to start interacting with you and the environment. the third thing is it will be noise here. -- noisier. there is no way it will not be noisy and that is okay. you cannot panic when it is noisy. quality rises to the top and people want quality barracks you don't want bad milk or bad water. people care about quality. there's a certain audience that cares but certain people become more ignorant. the most important thing is that you have to be entirely flexible and entrepreneurialism it if you don't, you will not
exist. you have to take lessons from steve jobs and silicon valley that failure is ok. it is ok to fail. certain things go way of something else will replace it and you have to get used to that. this is how people are consuming. it is like arguing against cars or highways or something like that. it is hard to argue against them. they have been negative aspects but they have made society better. our federal government has laid down on the job. korea, china -- these other societies place an important part on technology learning and math and science and getting these technologies. we are the highest prices in broadband access for people. i think we are number 26 in terms of quality and speed and
everything else. the government has to get involved more heavily in getting this stuff out to everybody in this country at all levels. if we don't, it is like saying that tin cans are good instead of a telethon. there are roads are fantastic instead of state highways. it is important to get the federal government behind this and they are laying down on the job. it is a critically important part of our future and if we don't get on that, china will run right past us, every country. >> i think everyone has covered it very well. i would follow up on the entrepreneurial point because i think there will be a rise of smaller news entities, literary entities. the technology enables people to reach a large audience, an international audience very quickly and easily if they find
the right niche. something like the ipad which has already had a large impact on how people absorb news information is only two years old. it is really at the beginning of these sorts of things. a lot of small start-ups will start but it is not like "the new york times" will quit printing or shut down. they are on top of things. they know the impact of technology. they coopt things they see and smaller organizations. i think you will see this mix of the rise of new organizations. it is moving a lot faster but i think it is exciting because it enables smaller organizations to do quality work and find an audience. there might be a little bit of a return of the professional writer in the sense that it is possible for individuals to
create their own small models and produce their own work wetter -- whether it is direct to kindle or on the web. it is not the same money as a book advance but it is spreading out and offering new opportunities. it is taking down some of the older publishing or news industry aspects. >> i am incredibly optimistic about the future. i think there'll be more ways of information available. we have to be agnostic about what form it takes. i think there will be new forms that will be created. there will be new kinds of content that will revolutionize the way we think about things someone was saying that their two-year old of swords -- swip es everything they say. we're moving into a new era that is fantastic but we cannot keep looking backward. >> there will be jet packs.
>> the lunch hour is beckoning -- can i get a beat -- decent news on salami sandwiches? [laughter] you have to be promiscuous about it, too. [laughter] >> that is the right way to think. >> the one thing i know about the future of media is that you don't have the incredible content produced by this smart, talented, competent people up on this stage, all is lost. i know that will be true and want to thank you so much for being here. i thought was a fastening panel and i learned a lot and all of you keep doing what you are doing, thank you. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] >> tomorrow, the team's
sperling -- gene sperling talked about the economy at 10:00 a.m. and c-span. >> he did that have a lot of romantic ideas about spying. he saw it for what it was. serious. >> in "the man nobody knew," examining the life of his father. >> my father changed in my opinion after he was thrown out of the agency. if you watch the film closely and steady him, he is a soldier. he took on the toughest, dirtiest assignments given to him from eisenhower onward. but when it came time for the president to ask him to lie and mislead congress, he could not do it. >> carl colby sunday night at
8:00 p.m.. >> television can be a teacher and if we have a debate in the court room and you sure the affirmative, you can make more positive points. >> the senate judiciary subcommittee talks about televising the supreme court and we will be covering that. you can find this out and our special web page devoted to cameras in the core. look at public opinion polls and what the justices have said. you can also find a play list with members of the court and congress talking about cameras in the court. >> republican presidential candidate herman cain was joined by his wife outside his campaign headquarters today in his hometown of atlanta, where he announced that he is suspending his campaign. this follows allegations by ginger white who said she had a
15-year consentual extramarital affair with herman cain. ♪ i have got some news we are taking names we are waiting now for judgement day. i am america one voice, united we stand i am america one hope to heal our land there is work that must be done i will not rest until we have won i am america is there no end to your own hypocrisy? you are only interested in political gain
you hide your eyes and refuse to listen you play your games you stuff your pockets i have a feeling that the tide is turning i am america one voice, united we stand ♪ one hope to heal our land i will not give up on this fight i will not fade into the night. i am america ♪ [cheers and applause] >> you all are great. thank you, thank you, thank you.
i cannot thank all of you enough for all you have done, how far we have come, the things we have done. the things that we have been able to achieve. you know, i chose to run for president because the politicians in washington would not do their jobs. that is why i chose to run. they have failed to provide economic growth. they have failed to get spending under control. they have failed to make us less dependent on foreign oil. these are some of the reasons that inspired me to run for president.
[applause] if you look at the last 40 years, we have seen that same kind of failure. it is just that the mess has just gotten bigger. you were frustrated. i was frustrated. millions of other people were frustrated. it was out of that frustration that i made the decision to run because the people in washington, d.c., are either playing the blame game or pointing fingers or throwing crumbs to the american people rather than bold solutions to fix the problem. america deserves more than that. [applause]
since the politicians have continued to fail, i decided to run for president. you all responded as you are responding now. i thank you. i am honored by the deep support of so many people across this country. it expresses the frustration of so many people across this country. when i made the decision to run, i did not fit the usual description of somebody that ought to be running for president. [applause] i had never held public office
before. [cheers and applause] i did not have high name i.d. right now it is probably 99.9%. [laughter] i did not have a kajillion dollars. we learned that the voice of the people is more powerful than the voice of the media. [cheers and applause] secondly, we have learned that message is more powerful than money. we proved something else.
i grew up in a world of segregated water fountains. my father was a chauffeur. my mother was a maid. we showed that you did not have to have a degree from harvard in order to run for president. we showed that you did not have to have a political pedigree to run for president. one of the biggest things we have shown is that we, the people, are still in charge of this country. [cheers and applause] today, we're one month away from the iowa caucuses.
with over 300 million americans in our nation, i stand here because of you. if you look at the top three republican candidates right now and consider the president in the white house, we can say that i am in the final four. [cheers and applause] we are in the final four. when you think of where i came from right here in atlanta, now to be in the final four for the presidency, this is a great nation. [cheers and applause] that is why this nation is so great.
i tell you what, it is a powerful and humbling position to be in. proving that we could do this was one of the greatest things, one of the greatest gifts that you and i could give to this country. i have often said that one of america's greatest strengths is its ability to change. we have created significant change on this journey. i am proof of that and you are proof of that. [applause] i am proof that a common man could lead this nation because i consider myself one of view,
not -- one of you, not one of the political elite. i am one of you. our nation is tired of hearing the politicians blame each other. it is time for solutions. as the false allegations about me continue, they have sidetracked end distracted my ability to present solutions to the american people. i have made many mistakes in life. everybody has. i have made mistakes professionally, personally, as a candidate in terms of how i run my campaign. i take responsibility for the mistakes i have made. i have been the very first to
own up to any mistakes that i have made. even if the political elite do not think i handled it exactly the way the political elite handle it. i have handled it my way because that is the type of person i am. [applause] because of these false and unproved allegations, it has had a tremendous, painful price on my family. these unproven allegations continue to be spinned in the media and the court of public opinion so as to create a cloud of doubt over me and this
campaign and my family. that spin hurts. it hurts my wife, my family, me, and it hurts the american people because you are being denied solutions to our problems. [cheers and applause] [chanting "herman"] herman! we love you. >> here is why it hurts. my wife, my family, and i know that those false and unproved
>> i am at peace with my family and myself, which is one of the most important things. that being said, becoming president was plan a. before you get discouraged, today i want to describe plan b. as of today, with a lot of prayer and soul-searching, i am suspending my presidential campaign. i am suspending my presidential campaign because of the continued distractions and hurt
caused on me and my family, not because we are not fighters, not because i am not a fighter. it is just that when i went through this reassessment of the impact on my family, on you, my supporters, your support has been unwavering, as well as the impact on the ability to continue to raise the necessary funds to be competitive we had to come to this conclusion. we had to come to this conclusion that it would be best to suspend this campaign.
that is the bad news. here is the good news. the pundits would like for me to shut up, drop out, and go away. well, as my grandmother, who lived to be 104-years old used to say, if someone is dead wrong, bless their hearts. [laughter] i am it will not be silenced and i will not go away. therefore, as of today, plan b. plan b.
i call it "the cainsolutions.com." let me explain why. there are three audiences out there, folks, that we have dealt with, that i have had to deal with. the media class, the political class, and there is "we the people." it is "we the people" that got us this far. it is "we the people" that wants change in washington, d.c. they are responsible for this massive movement going on in this country -- the tea party movement, the conservative movement.
it is a movement by "deep -- "we the people." i will continue to be a voice for the people. that is why, today, we are launching cainsolutions.com where the people will choose, not the media, not the politicians. the people will show that the people are still in charge of this country through this new organization, i will still be promoting the biggest change and transfer of power out of washington, d.c., back to the people since this nation began and that is the 9-9-9 plan. it is not going away. i will still be actively supporting and promoting a
foreign-policy that starts with peace through strength and clarity. i will still be promoting actively an energy independence plan for america. we can and we will become energy independent. now i know that many of you are disappointed. i understand that. i know that many of you are disappointed and i certainly understand that. i am it disappointing -- disappointed that it came to this point that we had to make this decision. one of the reasons that i ran for president of the united states was so that i could change washington, d.c. from the inside.
plan b is that we are going to have to change it from the outside. [applause] it will take a little longer. we are going to have to work a little harder. but we will change it from the outside. one other thing -- i will be making an endorsement in the near future. i will be making an endorsement and i can tell you right now, it will not be the current occupant of the white house. that will not be my endorsement. america has learned something about this process of running for president. it is a dirty game.
it is a dirty, dirty game. but i happen to believe that the american people are sick of this mess and if i am not the outsider to get there, i happen to believe that the day will come when the american people will reject all of the distractions, all of the false accusations and on proved accusations, and it will make a change because that is what we have got to do to get real change in this country and get it on the right track. as i think about my parents who raised my brother and i sat right here in the atlanta area, they taught us three very valuable lessons that you share. belief in god, belief in
ourselves, and belief in the greatest country in the world, the united states of america. even though i have had to suspend my campaign, i have not given up on america. i have not given up on the united states of america at -- and here is why. look at our history when we have been challenged the most is when we the people have risen to the occasion the most. i happen to believe that we will do it again because we the people are still in charge of this country. let me leave you with this. i believe these words came from the pokemon movie. the media pointed that out. i am not sure who the original author is, so do not go write an article about the poem.
but it says a lot about where i am with my wife and my family and where we are as a nation. "life can be a challenge. life can seem impossible. it is never easy when there is so much on the line, but you and i can make a difference. there is a mission just for you and me. just look inside and you will find just what you can do. just look inside and you will
find just what you can do." i have had to look inside to find what i can do and here is what i can do. here is what we can do. we can put united back into the united states of america and move the shining city on a hill back to the top of the hilltop where it belongs. i will never apologize for the greatness of the united states of america. god bless you. i love you and thank you. [cheers and applause] ♪ ain't no mountain high ain't no valley low don't worry baby
just call my name i'll be there in a hurry you don't have to worry ain't no mountain high enough ain't no mountain low enough remember the day i set you free i told you you could always count on me i'll be there when you want me some way, somehow ain't no mountain high enough ain't no valley low enough ain't no river wide enough to keep me away from you ♪
never looking back again they're coming to america home it seems so far away of a traveling light today in the eye of the storm in the eye of the storm home its new in its shining freedom possible light burning warm -- freedom's light burning warm ♪ everywhere around the world they're coming to america every time that flags unfurled
>> hear what the candidates are saying from the campaign trail on a newly designed web site. >> this is time for america to get serious about her challenges. the big one is our budget and our spending. >> if year on entrepreneurs are not active, if investment is not landing in your marketplace, it is landing someplace else. capital is a coward and it will fully wherever proceeds it is safe. >> i'm not opponent of the fairtax. it is a interesting concept. that is an interesting theory and makes a lot of sense. but to go through that debate now, we need to do something now. >> read the latest comments and
links to c-span media partners in the early primary and caucus states all at our website. >> tomorrow, gene sperling, white house national economic council director. he talks about the economy at 10:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. eastern here on c-span. >> next, remarks from henry kissinger on his role as a national security advisor for the knicks and administration. he was the first person to officially fill the role. others joined him in the panel discussion. this is one hour and 20 minutes. is one hour and 20 minutes. >> thank you for coming out tonight. it is a pleasure to welcome you here to our program. i would like to remind you to
turn off your cell phones and anything else that makes any kind of noise. [unintelligible] tonight we are going to take a look at the world of the national security adviser, one of the most important jobs in the united states. we have an excellent and esteemed panel of experts with us tonight. henry kissinger, stephen hadley, james steinberg, and james c ondon. i would like to introduce our moderator for this evening she was the chief white house correspondent for u.s. news and world report. some of you in the audience may
recognize him. [unintelligible] you have a complete biography in front of you. i do not want to take up too much time so i can turn the program over to ourpeakers. please join me in welcoming ken walsh and our most distinguished guests. [applause] >> we have a wonderful audience and a wonderful panel. i thank you all for coming and thanks for the smithsonian for assembling such a panel and king me float -- asking me to moderate again. i have served as moderator for five smithsonian panels. our goal is always to generate -- shed light on things and not generate heat. i am sure we will keep to that premise again tonight. talking to our panel in advance of just before we started, they
have a wonderful pratt of knowledge, not only of their time in office,ut also our history of the last 40 years. our panel encompasses one of the most consequential periods of our history in foreign policy and national security. we will be talking about that tonight. we will have some time for questions at the end, but i also want to thank c-span for being here. they will be broadcasting this a bit later. of course, i want to acknowledge -- my mother has, from south carolina. [laughter] [applause] i can not mention her. -- i cannot not mention her. the president's national security adviser is one of the closet people to the president. the national security advisor is there in moments of great triumph, tragedy, success, and failure -- is there "with the
president when decisions need to be made on life-and-death matters, war and these matters. nothing is more important than what the national secuty deals with in the life of any presidency. our panel will deal with that this evening. our panelists have not only been eye witnesses to history, but they have also helped to shape history. we will talk about a lot of that this evening. dr. kissinger has to lead to catch a plane at about 10 minutes till the hour. we will get them moving onto the airport, but we will have plenty of time for our discussion. he has an early call in the morning, so we will recognize that and logistically make that work. i will introduce the panel and go right to some questions. henry kissinger w sworn in on december 22, 1973, as the 56 secretary of state, a position
he held until january of 1977. he also served as assistant to the president for national security affairs from january 1969 until september 1975. he is currently a member of the defense policy court. anyone who is familiar with national security and foreign policy for the last 40 years is familiar with dr. kissinger. he is chairman of kissinger associates, an international consulting firm. among the awards he has researched it -- received is the nobel peace prize in 1973 and the provincial medal of freedom in 1977. -- presidential medal of freedom in 1977. i would like to introduce stephen hadley. he completed four years as national security adviser in january 2009. he was national security adviser to president george w. bush. he was the principal white house foreign-policy adviser to
president bush, directed the national security council staff. from january 2001 until january 2005 he was assistant to the president of three deputy national security adviser serving under condoleezza rice. in his consulting practice today, he represents u.s. corporate clients seeking to invest and do business overseas. james steinberg is the dean of the maxwell school at syracuse university. prior to becoming dean, he served as dietary secretary of state, serving under -- deputy secretary of state, serving under hillary clinton. from 2001-2005 he was vice esident and director of foreign-policy studies at the brookings institute. he served as deputy national
security adviser to president clinton in 1996-2000. he has a very extensive rosemay in government service. a personal note -- when he was that the dairy -- deputy secretary of -- deputy security adviser, we got to kw each other quite well. i became very familiar with his diplomatic skills. jim, sometimes, would use very diplomatic language. when i pick one he did not like, he would say this is a couple less successful. i always remember that phrase. [laughter] jane harmon is the director of the woodrow wilson center and president and ceo as well. she resigned from congress every 28 to take this position. she was a congresswoman from
california for nine terms. she served six years on the armed services committees. four on homeland security. she has been recognized as a national expert on public policy issues. she received a distinguished service medal in 1998. she now serves on the board of directors of "newsweek." there is a media connection there. with that, i will take my position on the stage and the right to questions. just bear with me while i move to my next spot here. you can hear me ok, right? great. i want to start out by asking each of our panelists at the same question. how would you define the job of national securitadviser? jane, how did you see this from
your perspective on the hill? what works and what does not work with dealing with the president on national-security issues? let's start with dr. kissinger onhat. what's the fundamental objective of the national -- >> the fundamental objective of the national security adviser is to enable the president to make the best decisions in the national interest. that means that nothing should fail for the reason that was discoverable and not discovered. [unintelligible] when i was appointed, i had no such perception.
i did not know exactly how to organize the office. president nixon, whom i had not met before he appointed me, made the secretary of the national security council. we jointly called him president eisenhower. he designed the outline. conviction was that no department -- this would be difficult than for the other departments to accept it that led him to propose that the
chairman of the committee should be in the white house. that, of course, -- there were various points of view. the process depends on the personality of the president. how he prepares to work and, or course, the attitudes of the various cabinet members and the security adviser. that is the outline of the system. -- outline of the system as it emerged in its present form in the nixon administration. that is how it was -- a clear
conception of enter depart malt -- interdepartmental movement. >> there was a real continuity. a lot of people talk about how divided we are, but in the term national secity, there is a continuity. >>he national security council was establisd in statute. congress set it up in 1947. it only has four members - the present, vice president, secretary of defense, and secretary of ste. it is given a generalharter to coordinate all aspects of foreign policy. that is rely all it said. the question was what structure would come under that.
dr. kissinger really established that structure. as jim will say, subsequent presidents have modified it a bit enchained the labels, but the basic structure is the same. i draw -- under our constitutional system, the president is given a lot of authority in foreign policy. it is through the national security council system that the president organizes the government, brings up the information that he or she needs to make decisions, and having made decisions, it is a vehicle to translate to the various departments and agencies that have to carry it out. but how a president really runs that system changes amatically with the president. the details of it are not in the statute, they are an executive order. they changed by the press that. the genius of the system is that it can adapt to the management style and the personality of the
president. that is also true, i think, of the national security adviser role. your role is heavilyi guess thed say is, it is a great job. it really is a staff job. you are helping the president do a job. you are not running any agency or conducting -- that is what the cia does. your job is to try to coordinate that process and make it succeed for the president. we had a little saying that if something went well, it is to the credit of the president or the secretary of the states or secretary of defense. if something went poorly, it is because the national security adviser fell to courted a
properly. that was right. >> the flexibility is really an important part not only to adapt to the needs of the president but to the needs of time. when president clinton became president, the cold war had come to an end. the challenges were evolving. it allowed you to add that in bringing people to the table. economic issues took on a greater predominance. there was more participation by the economic agencies. issues of health and age and communicable disease became national security issues. he would have people from those agencies involved and the environment and other things. that is the duty. they can take a structure that has served so well over a long period of time says dr. kissinger's time but use it to grow his needs. the other thing to remember,
part of it is this policy formulation process making sure the information and perspective and choices are made available to the president and which you really want to have a robust debate and get the different rspectives. it also plays a critical role as a national security adviser in making sure what the president makes a decision that decision to implemented. the perspective and the mandate the ideas of the president are carried out across the board and a very diverse community of back doors that are necessary to implement national security policy. >> do you agree about the continuity. ? how did that come across to congress? >> let me start from a different vantage point i did or in the white house -- i did work in
the white house. the an f c was right down the hall. a rookie named madeleine albright worked there. aside from the fact that madeleine and i were good friends because we worked on capitol hill in the senate before that, something that sticks out to me as it was a fairly small office. it was small enough for him to be a hybrid to have that job plus the state department. i do not think that has ever happened before or sce. >[unintelligible] >> it was a small group of people. now it is enormous. yes, i am sure there has been continuity in any -- many ways, but the growth has been geometric. what i can add is that i was a
member of a totally dysfunctional body called the united states congress. feel sorry for me, will you please? i worked on these security committees. certainly, the dicey. was 9/11 forward. i intersected the national- security apparatus of the two budget terms lost early obama. -- two mosterms as well as early obama. it is supposed to write the laws and it do adequate oversight. how hard it is to get information from the executive branch, especially on a very heated and controversial issues because at least over time as i perceived it as a member of congress, more of