tv Key Capitol Hill Hearings CSPAN June 6, 2016 11:30am-1:31pm EDT
washington reports that bernie sanders is staying in the presidential contest even if hillary clinton gets enough elegance in tomorrow's primaries to give her the nomination. senator sanders is holding a news conference this afternoon in california. one of the state's primaries in tomorrow and the one with the most elegant at stake. we will have live coverage at 2 on c-span.tern tonight, we will bring you live coverage as hillary clinton holds a rally in long beach, california. after winning two primaries over the weekend, hillary clinton is now 26 delegates short of the 2383 needed to win nomination "associated an press" count. >> our live coverage of the
presidential race continues tuesday night the primaries in six states -- california, montana, new jersey, new mexico, and north and south dakota. >> a more different vision for our country than the one between democrats for progress of prosperity, fairness, and opportunity than the presumptive nominee on the republican side. >> we are going to win for progress, on education, no more common core, bring it down, bring it down, we won it local. we are going to win with health care. we are going to win at the border. we are going to win -- >> we have got to be defined what politics means in america. we need people from coast-to-coast standing up, fighting back, and demanding a government that represents all
of us, not just the 1%. [applause] >> join us live at 9:00 p.m. eastern for election results, candidate speeches, and your reaction, and we will look at the fall battleground states, taking you on the road to the white house on c-span, c-span radio, and www.c-span.org. up next, a look at the potential vice presidential candidates. we begin with former house speaker newt gingrich. we interviewed him on donald trump candidacy, the state of the republican party and whether he would be a vice presidential candidate if asked. then twootential -- potential vice presidential candidates for hillary clinton. in aor sharon brown fundraiser earlier this year. we got up to speed on the potential running mates by speaking to the "washington post" political reporter.
>> joining us from the "washington post" news room is chris cillizza, the founder of the six and a political writer for the "washington post." thank you for joining us. >> thank you, steve. >> let me begin with five candidate you say donald trump who never he select as his running mate. who are they? chris: there is a bunch. it is way more than five. the reason i put them on the list, is they don't need to do it. these are not people who are going to say, yes. ted cruz is probably your best example. the guy who finished second to donald trump in this race. -- but someone who is is young, ted cruz is in his 40's and probably very uninterested in latching his wagon to donald trump because in the event trump
loses this race, ted cruz will be a front runner in 2016, excuse me 2020 as he runs for , president. so probably not worth the risk , for a ted cruz and i throw marco rubio in that same category. another senator, though unlike cruz, he is retiring. someone who has a bright political future, who did some good in this way 16 campaign, and who is not, i think, going to hook himself to donald trump with the fear that donald trump is unpredictable in a way that could really jeopardize your future if you were one of the candidates sharing a national tickel with him. >> one of the names mentioned most often, and number one on your list, former house speaker newt gingrich. what does he bring to the ticket? chris: there is a wonderful
story i would recommend by by eliana zwrones national review. she wrote about the increasingly close relationship between gingrich and trump. what does he bring to the ticket? . he has also maintained an outsidery status that trump finds appealing. what trump needs more than an in depth knowledge of policy. his knowledge of policy is extremely limited. in picking gingrich you would get someone with a big brain. some people would take his ideas are wrongheaded, but he is someone who knows public policy, who is been around public policy for a vary long time. -- for a very long time. and someone who is not uncomfortable with the limelight. newt gingrich, deeps not having been speaker for more than a decade, has the remained very, very active in republican
circles. >> and he has run for president before but more than anything, he is somebody who is interested in the job. he's been publicly talking about it and we'll hear from him in just a moment. chris: >> that's right. that's why i made the who wouldn't take it list first because there are a number of people who would have to think very, very, very hard about taking the vice-presidential slot in a way that with any other candidate they wouldn't. trump poses a unique set of risk and challenges for someone looking to take on that job that he hillary clinton or a ted cruz, frankly, as a nominee was not present. >> finally, do you know how donald trump will go about the process of selecting a running mate? chris: well, he has talked somewhat openly that they have become the process. ben carson, his name is sometimes mentioned, is helping
me the process. here is what we know -- everything we've learned about donald trump is that he's basically his own best and advisor. really only he does what he thinks is the right thing. my guess is a group of folks corey lewandowski, his campaign , manager will be involved. they will come up with a smallish group of people, vet those and trump will either pick one of those or pick one of his own. what we have learned is that there is not a blueprint, what donald trump decides is what gets done in that campaign. so we're going to spend a lot of , time handy capping who he might pick when in pact he has -- when in fact he has more potential to go off the beaten path and pick someone than anyone in modern history. >> and of course we'll follow your list available on line at washingtonpost.com as that -- as this process unfolds. it thank you for being with us. >> thank you. >> with that, our conversation with former house speaker newt gingrich.
>> speaker, the state of the republican party in 2016 is what? newt: exciting and dynamic. >> how so? newt: well you have a brand-new , candidate we've never seen before. you have thousands of people coming into the party. i think, ohio alone, there were 100,000 former democrats who voted in the republican primary. you have a really vigorous and will debate about policy in a way that is buried healthy, i think. you have the most state legislators in the history much the republican party, going back to 1854. more than ever before in our history, you have republican state legislatures. it's going to have a lot of stresses and strains but i suspect that the republican convention will be actually better and easier than the democratic convention this year. >> why do you think so many people in the political class looking into this race a year ago, very few, if anyone, predicted donald trump?
newt: i wouldn't have. i've known trump for years and it wouldn't have occurred to me to predict that donald trump could win. athink that he has exhibited level of skill, and a level of understanding of the american were botht will both unknowable when he first started running. and i think he has also changed some of the game. he's the first candidate who really understands the sort of kardashian model of social media where you can tweet, you can facebook, you can instagram, you can do so many different things that are very inexpensive and yet very effective. and i think he's up to about eight million people on facebook following him. well, he communicates with them for free. it's very different from the model that existed a year ago where you were supposed to do
what jeb bush did, go out, raise buy ads and have a big paid $1 billion, staff. also he's a guy that's uniquely self-confident and willing to rely on himself. >> but you ran for president. you know what it is like. past candidates -- mitt romney, john mccain -- some things that got them in trouble don't seem to get donald trump in trouble. why? newt: i think the country is more frightened. it's more worried about the economy and about national security in terms of islamic supremacist and i think that as , a result, the vast majority of republicans, it's not true of democrats, but the vast majority republicans have concluded that you need somebody who is going to kick over the table. they are just determined to change how washington operates. and what they concluded actually
starting with the very first debate that fox hosted, which was the first time i really leaned forward. i've known donald a long time. calista and i have a good relationship with him. i knew he was going to run, we talked about as early as january of last year. but that first debate had you -- but at the first debate, you had all of the elite saying he had done terribly and you had twitter and google and facebook saying he had won. i thought, wow, something is happening out there. we are luckily still a country where the average voter is, in the end, is as important as each average tv analyst because they each get one vote. trump was on to something that none of the rest of us understood. he had 16 people running and he's the only one left the >> i -- >> you draw the analogy, and i want you to drill down --
what we experienced as a nation, not a typical of what we are seeing with donald trump on the republican side and senator sanders on the democratic side? >> that's right. i think what you've got is a country in which, if you combine the sanders in the trump vote you are probably at 70% of the , country, which is just that appeared you know, people forget that when the americans decided to rebel, and this is part of why calista anltd i decided we had to do "the first american" and do a biography of washington as a movie. what happened was they gradually over a ten-year period, came to the conclusion that london the longer cared about them. then they came to the conclusion that london was arrogant and determined to impose its will on them. you had this constant reference back. washington talks about we are
either going to be on our knees and submission, or stand and fight for independence. i think what you see now is people look at the total mishandling of the financial mess in new york. they look at the arogance of the washington bureaucracy. they look at the radicalism of many of the judges now. they look at the failure to win a war after 14 years of fighting and sacrificing come almost 15 years. all those pieces come together and they just say, you know, it's time for a profound change. you know when i looked into it a , couple years back to write a paper, the number two demand after no taxation without representation was british judges. they saw the judges as instruments of the state, they saw them as imposing a radical view on the american people. that's why they were so strong about trial by jury because the
jury could set aside decisions and they were really against what they saw as a tyranny. i think you have a lot on the right and the left. they're really disgusted with the current establishment. if donald trump is our next president, how do you think he would be as a decision-maker? newt: this is a guy who is made a lot of money as a decision-maker. would see him being decisive, but constantly learning. i think he would hire barry good people -- very good people. you can't run a system the size of the trump system without hiring could people in delegating like crazy. he has hotels, golf courses, restaurants, buildings, real estate, the number one tv show.
i meet all of these different things are out there, miss universe. you can't juggle all those just by being smart. you've got to have some system by which you delegate and i think he would try to recruit , and he said this himself in one of the debates, he would try to recruit very energetic people to be cabinet officers and give them assignments of very dramatic change. >> but if you look at specific issues, the second amendment, guns, abortion, taxes -- he has changed or shifted his views on these fundamental topics. is that a problem for him? a little bit of a problem. he is having to deal with it. on june 16 last year, he had been a businessman shot his mouth off and had opinions like rich people do. all of a sudden on june 16 last year he became a candidate for , president and is he's having to learn in public in real time and it's a tough league. it is a much harder league than people think it is. and i think he is learning some
things that sort of, i think that cause him to slow down and think a little bit more. he is better today than he was six months ago. he will be better in three or four months then he was today because he doesn't constantly. he's not just a loud, bombastic person. he's a very smart, thoughtful guy, but he is thoughtful at a sort of profound strategic level. he is going to fudge some here and there. he will start out over here as -- and a negotiated position, then fall back to hear. but the general directions are going to be very clear, and the general directions are going to involve, i think very profound change. host: 22 years ago, contract with america. that was your mantra, your mission statement for the american people should you gain control. house. should the republican party have that in 2016, or some version of that? newt: >> yes. they need a simple doubt.
not a giant, 3,000 page platform. they need, by september, two -- to find 10 things that we can agree on that they would do in the first 90 or 100 days if they were elected, and they need to bring back together in the house and senate. mostnk that by september, of them will be happy -- most republicans will be happy to be on the same ticket. i think by cement most republicans will be very happy to be on the same ticket and very happy to pick really big, decisive changes. host: why do you think speaker ryan has been so hesitant to endorse donald trump? newt: i think what happened is everybody thought they had 60 days to finish up the process and ted cruz, wisely in my judgment, decided to drop out after indiana. all of a sudden, instead of having 60 days to get to know each other, they were confronted with the knowledge that he's the nominee. he wasn't ready to be the nominee that fast. ryan had a strategy in mind to spend developing a set of issues
may so they could negotiate with trump. there are differences. but it is really fascinating. i think -- i know, as a matter of fact they have staff for both , teams working together and they're putting stuff together and i think presently everything , will work out you. i don't disagree with ryan about this -- it is better to go slower and make sure by the time you get to an agreement, that it is real rather than to jump in, paper it over, have a brief, happy press conference, and then find out you have nine fights coming. host: how is speaker ryan doing? dardarn well. much better. they worked at things to get control of the system and i think both are going to turn out to be very effective leaders. host: since tip o'neil voluntarily stepped down, every speaker of the house was either
forced out of office, lost reelection, or decided not to seek the speakership in why is 1998. it so different today than 20, 30 years ago, the job of speaker? newt: well, i think you lumped together several different things. hastert lost the majority. pelosi is still there but lost the majority. those two are the natural part of the process. raburn twice lost the majority, and 1952. those things happen. , i thinkse of boehner he was genuinely worn-out. he was caught between an obama who had contempt for the republicans, and a hard-core group of republicans who were growing in strength who were furious at their leadership for not figuring out a strategy to stop obama. we were with the boehners on the day that the pope came, and mrs.
boehner turned and said, you know, it's just really, really hard. you could tell how tired she was. so, i was not surprised. that was sort of the high point of john's life. it wasn't going to get dramatically better than having pope francis there. so, i think at that point, they decided it was that her for him to leave. in my case i lost seats in an , election where people thought we should gain them. and i had led only by the virtue of providing victory because i was a very aggressive, very tough speaker. and, so i had no natural reservoir of coming you know, let's hang out even if we did win. and it was the first time since the 1920's that we kept control for three cycles, and deny kept it the longest time of any republican speaker in history. so we had a heck of a run for a party that had not been in power for 40 years. but it's probably good i left
because i needed to go renew my energy. and the congress didn't need to deal with me. host: why? what do you mean by that? newt: i was very tough. i pushed people all the time. you don't balance the budget for four straight years. when you get bills to reform medicare, welfare, the federal communications act, all those things without having a fair number of people who are bruised up in the process and after a while there were more bruises than smiles. host: you probably saw the headline from "roll call," the case for gingrich as trump's running made. -- running mate. [laughter] a lot of speculation. what will you be doing the second week of july. newt: first of all, i think i will be in cleveland, but i may well be there as a commentator for fox. i have no idea.
you know, i have an unusual name. it's a name that's been around a while. so people know if they write newt gingrich and puppy dogs that they'll get a certain level of readership just by definition. so there are a lot of really , good candidates for vice president. this is the first really big decision trump will make. it will be entirely personal. he has people doing lots of betting. in the end, donald trump will decide. i have no idea what he's going to decide. >> you have said you would, quote, listen carefully. first of all, have you had any conversations? newt: we've had no conversations about the vice-presidency. as you know, because you were there -- finished our ninth document he on george washington. she has her sixth ellis the
elephant book coming out in october called "hail to the chief." i have my second novel about , "treason," coming out in october. so we're fairly busy. it's not like we're hanging out hoping somebody will give us a job. we would want to sit down and talk it through. i think if it was a position that in trump's mind that would have a cheney-like significant role we'd certainly have to consider it. if you get to go to lots of funerals, we would probably pass. >> who has redefined the java vice president? cheney more than anybody in modern times. for the first term, he was enormously strong and involved in everything. johnson played a bigger role than people think.
he was never an insider with the kennedy clan but they gave him , some pretty good portfolio, for example, he was in charge of space. i would say george h.w. bush played a significant role. i think reagan did including him on a regular basis. i think al gore played a significant role. if you go back and look there , was a very good chemistry between gore and clinton which unfortunately for gore did not come through in the 200 race -- 2000 race where i think clinton could have won the race for him if he had allowed him to. i don't have quite a sense of what biden does, but he does seem to be an intimate of the president. that's where it starts. presidents define vice presidents, not vice versa. if you have a president who wants a colleague and wants somebody to do real things, then they can do that. if you have a president who
doesn't -- there is a great new book about nixon and eisenhower that i think is called, "the statesman and the apprentice." very flattering toward nixon and toward eisenhower's interaxes with nixon the gives you the sense he was the first modern vice president. host: if you were to ask donald trump, what would you ask him? what does he have in mind and how would you wanted to find a role for you? some substance to modernize the government. we are so clearly 20 or 30 years behind our capabilities that it's going to require a very substantial amount of effort to get us back on track. host: would it be a fun job for you? is it something newt: -- newt: everything i've ever done has been a fun job. i wake up in the morning and i'm like the 4-year-old who knows there is a cookie somewhere and my job is to find it.
i'm almost always happy and doing fun jobs. host: have you always had a curious mind? >> i guess. as far back as i remember i've been curious. host: why do you think hillary clinton wants to be president? newt: i suspect at one level, that she, as a. woman in high school and college, billy got the sense of trying to help the country, in her terms. i think that she probably thinks she's far and away the best equipped, given everything she's done in the life. she has been in the room for eight years with bill. senator,n a u.s. secretary of state, she's a bury bright, hard-working woman. and i think that all of that kind of fits together. host: but as you know, she talks a lot about her husband in the eight years he was in the white house. you worked with bill clinton on a couple of key issues, welfare reform and balancing the budget. if you are on the ticket does
that take away one of the issues she talks about on the campaign? newt: i don't know. she'll have her version be reality, we'll have ours. host: for example? newt: initially they were against balancing the budget. an example of slight difference of view. host: will the impeachment be an issue in the fall? >> no. not the impeachment per se, not the lewinsky case as a legal issue. if they go after trump on these personal things, he will come back very aggressive but that's what he does. he has a very special of
constantly counterattacking. host: what do you think the debate will look like between trump and hillary clinton? >> i cannot imagine. i think it may be surprisingly dignified. both of them are capable of playing big roles and both may have this notion that hover gets down in the mud first will lose and they might stay at an issue level more than you might expect. on the other hand, if hillary decides she wants to slug it out, i am confident trump will be ready. host: back to where we are as a country. the defining issue in this campaign -- is it about restoring faith in the american people? what's the campaign all about? mr. gingrich: the campaign in the end is about, whether it's jobs or security or your personal freedom, that you have a government that's out of control, you have elites who have failed you and that you had
better dramatically change the system. and everybody who thinks the current system is working -- i'll give you an example. in detroit, i think that the number of students who cannot read is around 91%. in baltimore, the number of students who can't pass the basic reading and math test is 87%. hillary is adamantly in favor of the teachers' union, which is failing in both those cities. she cannot get away from it. so she has no answer to what are you going to do for -- you want to talk about income inequality, what are you going to do for 87% of the kids who can't read and write? she has no answer because she's owned by the teachers' union. look at the veterans administration. we have this insanity, this example of a guy who came out of procter and gamble, bob mcdonald, who is now so surrounded by the bureaucracy that he suggested that waiting
in line to get into a v.a. hospital was comparable to waiting at disneyland for a ride. i mean, you have to get to a point where you wonder, what were the conversations that took a really smart guy, businessman, west point graduate, guy i admire, to where he so loses touch with core reality? if you are a veteran trying get into the v.a. hospital, it ain't the same as taking your family to disney world. yet this system is so corrupt now -- corrupt not in the sense of bribery, but of being dishonest with the facts. the v.a., in los angeles, eliminate 3,000 appointments in order to say that the line was shorter. that's illegal. that's criminal behavior. and nothing was done, nothing happens. host: part of the problem is that the democrats and republicans are not talking to each other, they're talking at each other. how do you get beyond that? mr. gingrich: you talk to the american people. i always recommend to people who
want to really understand reagan, there is a wonderful small book called the education of ronald reagan, about the time he was at general electric and what he learned there. he had a quote, saying he would turn up the light for the american people and they would turn up the heat on congress. and that's how you bring them together. the v.a. is a perfect example. it is absolutely criminal what we have tolerated in the bureaucracy at the veterans administration, and yet the unions are proud of the fact that they have defined what you can do. including -- my favorite example is there is a woman in puerto rico who pled guilty to armed robbery who got reinstated in her job because the union made the job that her two immediate superiors included a convicted sex offender and a guy who had been convicted of drug abuse and, since they were both criminals, there were no grounds for not rehiring her, too.
you look at that if you are a normal american and say that system needs to be picked up by the neck and shaken until it is changed. host: is there anything you wish you would have done at speaker but did not? mr. gingrich: yeah, i wish i had done training for the house and republican part that would allowed us to become a continuously modernizing party. i couldn't figure it out. host: biggest success? mr. gingrich: winning control. we changed the balance of power in this city in a way that's lasted now over 20 years. that what they remarkable difference. host: at what point in the campaign did you know you were going to win? mr. gingrich: september 17. we were leaving to go on a fundraising trip, and dick armey's chief of staff was with
us, an advisor and joe gaylord, who had been my political partner. i said ok, we were going to plan on the plane in between campaign stops. i said, all right, we were just leaving national, and i said, are we planning speaker or are we planning minority leader? gaylord said, well, you better be planning speaker because you are going to be. at which point dan myers said stop, we're not going a step further until you explain that. and for the next hour or so, joe started in maine -- excuse me, he started in maine, went every district from memory for the entire country, ended up saying he thought we would pick up 52 seats. we picked up 53. host: this is your latest documentary, called "the first americans." let's watch.
[video clip] >> this way! >> if jefferson and adams went to william and mary and harvard, washington went to war. war has his crucible. >> it's very hard to see anybody like jefferson or adams or madison getting on a horse and leading an army in the revolutionary spirit. washington was the indispensable american. mr. gingrich: for generations of americans, george washington was essential to understanding the creation of the united states of america, commander in chief of the continental army, first president, father of our country. >> the very principles that make us americans. he was a farmer.
an architect. a surveyor. he commanded the continental army against the military powers of great britain. he lost more battles than he won, but he still won america's war for independence. >> the revolution was a marathon. he is on horseback for seven and a half years. washington is the star of the american revolution, not because of his cunning on the battle field, but he kept the spirit of the continental army alive. >> i, george washington, do solemnly swear -- >> eyes the father of our country because at a time when wre -- we were being torn apart, he held us together with his rectitude and his honor. >> he is more important for us in the 21st century as an example than he was perhaps at any time since he was alive. >> in his eulogy, he was remembered at first in war, first in peace, and first in the hearts of his countrymen. mr. gingrich: more than any other president, george washington enabled us to better understand who we are as a people and as a nation. he remains the greatest figure
in american history. >> if you don't understand george washington, you don't understand what's important about america. >> it is washington who makes the american experiment, as he called it, a success. host: the film is called "the first american." besides the obvious, why george washington? mr. gingrich: oh, this is a great story. callista had been doing these books, we're both passionate about american history, she had been doing "ellis the elephant" for 4- to 6-year-olds. one morning, at one point he sees this young lady, i suspect a college assistant and he says, who is george washington? she looks at him blankly and
says, oh, i think he was a president. didn't he come right after lincoln? literally as we were leaving "fox and friends" that morning, we said we have to do a film about washington. he is so central and a generation of young americans are so locking in knowledge that we need to find a way to bridge the gap. host: what did you learn about george washington that you didn't know? mr. gingrich: i think the most amazing thing. the most famous american, he decides to go out west for two weeks by himself. there is an indian guide with him. after a while he sends the guide off. here is washington riding along and when he would see a settler's cabin he would knock on the door and ask if he could spend the night. imagine, you are a settler, nobody near you, knock on door, here's george washington, who is
physically huge for that time. you know who he is. and he says, you mind if i spend the night? that level of relaxed and curiousity and comfortable. host: if he came back and saw the system today, would he be happy, do you think? mr. gingrich: i think he would urge on both trump and sanders. it's the jefferson rule. every generation or so you need a revolution. i think all the foundings fathers would look at the current mess, the arrogance of our judges, our bureaucrats, the corruption of our system and they would say, clean it out. host: how often do you talk to donald trump? mr. gingrich: occasionally. i wouldn't want to quantify it but often enough. host: what's he like off camera?
>> first of all he's likable, a story teller. constant energy. i compare him to theodore roosevelt, constant energy. but he's really good to have any conversation with. partly because we know each -- each other so well. he's known me for i think a decade or more and we actually belong to trump national out along the potomac river. so i feel like if there is something i want to get across to him, because he's been a very good business executive, i can say look, there are three or four things i've got to cover and he will switch gears and go through things like a business. if we're just chatting, we'll talk about whatever is going on, just had a great rally or poll came in. this guy spent his whole lifetime selling. made billions selling. so his basic theory is 365 days
a year you ought to go sell something. host: how do you think he would structure his white house? mr. gingrich: very lean. much smaller than the current white house would be my guess. i don't think he believes in multiple layers or unnecessary people. he's very frugal. one reason he is wealthy, he doesn't spend. you look at the amount he's spent on this campaign compared to the people he beat. my hope would be he would say don't tell me about the bush and obama white houses. tell me what functionally needs to happen and let's see if we can get by with the fewest possible people. host: two final questions on the vice-presidency. if he offered you the job, would you take it? mr. gingrich: i don't know. we would have to talk about what did he mean by the job. host: if you liked the parameters and the portfolio? mr. gingrich: i think you would
shall hard-pressed -- my dad served 29 years in military. the president of the united states asks you to do something, very hard to say anonymity hosting: and if he doesn't ask you? mr. gingrich: there are lots of good people. kasich of ohio, ted corker, governor falone -- fallon of oklahoma. is a very attractive option. senator tim scott would be very compelling. african-american, republican, has done very well, very popular back home. i think trump has a lot of choices. host: and finally what does this campaign feel like to you? you've been through a lot over the years. you laugh? mr. gingrich: i have two parts of me. i'm a gemini so i'm allowed to have two parts. one is that politics is a sport in the same sense as football or what have you, and the other is
this year as a historian, the two come together perfectly. this is the wildest, most unimaginable, unpredictable year i can remember in modern history. i think you have to go back to election of 1824 and 1828 with jackson. host: and that year's election year files like? mr. gingrich: so wild and woolly. the number of friends i have who are very knowledgeable who say to me, "i have to forget everything i thought i knew about politics because it clearly no longer is correct," that's amazing. host: so how does donald trump win the election? how does he get to 270? mr. gingrich: he was to get more votes. pretty old strategy. one strategy is he has to be more likable the people in the end walk in, they have three real choices. don't vote at all. vote for trump. vote for clinton.
so one of his strategies has to be to make sure that voting for clinton is so unacceptable that trump becomes the obvious alternative. one of his strategies has to be to reach out as he did recently on the supreme court judges and offer people a vision of a presidency they would like. and i think you will see him did more and more of that. i think by the convention you will begin to see the shape of a trump presidency that has really compelling and interesting, positive things for people. host: you think he can win? mr. gingrich: oh, i have no doubt he can win. first of all, he came out of nowhere, beat 16 perfectly competent people. all of us thought last fall, boy, we've got a great set of candidates, and they all just one by one disappeared. you have to say for a guy to come out of nowhere and win this decisively, give him a couple months to campaign and offer a
plan to beat hillary, yeah, i think he can. host: speaker, thank you. >> update. newt gingrich said yesterday mr. trump's focus on a judge's ethnic background was inexcusable. the candidate said the judge and that trump university lawsuit cannot be impartial against hisp university because parents were born in mexico and trump wants to build a wall along the border. donald trump said today it was inappropriate for newt gingrich to demand he dropped the subject of in a manner can judge's ethnicity and start acting like a leader of the united states. no work on the possible application of vice presidential prospects for mr. gingrich.
host: joining us against from the wall street "post" is chris sill izza. let's turn our attention to the democrats and the choices hillary clinton will have to make once we move beyond the primaries on tuesday. one name mentioned most recently is senator elizabeth warren, the only neem senator to endorse either clinton or sanders. skeptical camp. i don't think strategically it makes a ton of sense for hillary. the only female senator not to endorse former senator clinton. i don't think their relationship is particularly warm. elizabeth warren has been critical of hillary clinton for being somewhat of a late arriver on things like economic inequality, wage stagnation, and clearly bernie sanders' appeal has grown out of the elizabeth warren wing of the party. why would hillary clinton pick
elizabeth warren unless she felt there was a gaping ideology cal hole on her left that needed to be sewn up. could she possibly pick senator sanders? yes. that could end badly. this is not if it's him it's no one. if it is not -- so i think it would be a little bit of a hail mary by clinton. i do not think she has a hail mary position in this race. host: do you have any insights into the relationship or lack thereb between hillary clinton and elizabeth warren? >> not as much as i would like, is the answer. i wish they would call me and explain it to me. but it is not terribly warm. i also think privately many in the obama administration roll their eyes a bit at warren and her work at blasting some obama administration officials about
their closeness to wall street, tim geithner, for example. there is a shared mindset that there that sort of views warren and sanders similarly as people who say and do things out on a fringe that have never had to work within a system like you would have to do if you were president of the united states. so i don't think it's a terribly warm relationship, and i do think the fact that elizabeth warren is the lone female democratic senator who has not endorsed hillary clinton tells you if not all you know, a significant amount you need to know about that relationship. host: and you have heard the saying in washington, those who know aren't talking and those who don't know -- based on that, how serious is it that elizabeth warren continues to appear as a potential running mate?
mr. cilizza: not all that serious. it's what a group of liberals in the party would like to see happen as opposed to something that is being seriously considered in the clinton operation. host: senator warren delivered the commencement address in may of last year at berkshire community college in massachusetts. here are her remarks in their entirety. [applause] senator warren: thank you, thank you, thank you. thank you, president kennedy, administrators and most of all, thank you class of 2015 for having me here. it is good to be here. i am really tickled. it is a great honor to join you at tanglewood. i am deeply grateful to stand on this stage and share this very special day with you. as i stand here, i can just hear
the echoes of the boston symphony orchestra playing some pb the world's greatest music. i can hear james taylor singing about friendship and love in the berkshires. i can see the future, too. in a few weeks, lady gaga will walk across the stage just like i did. ok, she will use more explosives ands she will have a cooler outfit than i do, but know what i mean. today we celebrate the 55th commencement of the commonwealth's oldest, first community college. 55th. it's where it started. [applause] senator warren: so we start with
the word of the day, congratulations. i want to offer my congratulations not just to this graduateding class, but also to your parents and families and kids, your family and friends and teachers and advisors and, for so many of you, to your employers and co-workers because i know as well as you do you do not get through college all by yourself. making it to this stage requires the support and understanding and encouragement of people who love you, people who care about you, and people who really want to see you succeed. so today we applaud your success and the success of everyone who helped get you here. that's what we do. [applause] senator warren: i know that this moment is a time for celebration, a time to taste the success. but i want to talk about what you had to master to get here. and, no, i am not talking about mastering elementary statistics. although 77.42% of you did that.
i'm not talking about overcoming the long, long, long trek from campus to the fitness center. i'm not even talking about surviving the roughest winter on record. nope, i'm talking about mastering the hard art of making something happen. i'm talking about learning to fight for what you believe in. sometimes it means fighting for yourself, and sometimes it means fighting for something bigger than yourself. either way, figuring out what you want is the first step, and fighting to make it happen is the necessary second step. now, president lincoln said determine the thing that can and shall be done, and then we shall find a way. and today we celebrate a graduating class full of people who determined that something
can and shall be done -- your graduation -- and then you found the way. now, you faced down some real challenges, even some tough ones. i have no doubt that along the way there were plenty of people who told you what you couldn't do, plenty of people who said how hard this part would be or how that part would stop you dead in your tracks -- money, child care, work, plenty of other things to do besides homework, plenty of reasons not to enroll again next semester. but you hung in there and you made this day happen. one more time. [applause] senator warren: one more time. you did it. so, today, you're going to walk across the stage. we're going to celebrate reaching your goal. but i hope you'll celebrate even more the hard work, the determination, the grit that got you here because those are the ingredients that you will need
to reach the next goal and the one after that and the one after that. now, graduation speakers are supposed to inspire, but i know my limits. i can't play music like the b.s.o., i can't sing like james taylor, i cannot put on a fashion display like lady gaga. but i can set a goal and make it happen, just like you did. so i'm here to urge you to use the same skills and determination that got you to this day to help you get to a lot more days that are just as meaningful. you know, i once had a day like this. graduation. for me, it was a celebration of fighting for what i believed in. the president partly talked about this. i had grown up in a family that had a lot of ups and downs money-wise and college wasn't in the cards for me. nobody in my family had made it
through college, but i wanted to be a teacher, and i believed that i would be a good teacher, and i thought that was a goal worth fighting for. the path was tough. i borrowed money. i married young. i dropped out of school, i went back. and finally i got lucky. i got really lucky. we moved to a place that was about 30 miles away from a commuter college where the tuition was $50 a semester. i grabbed that chance and i held on for dear life, and i pieced together enough classes, including correspondence courses, and i graduated. and best of all, i got that job teaching special needs kids in public school. i loved that job. i think i was good at it. but i had a baby on the way and back then there were rules about pregnant teachers. so i had to give it up.
but i had won a big battle. i had graduated from college. i had gotten a job as a teacher. and that made me bolder. and each time i fought for something i believed in and won, i believed i could do it again. the challenges got bigger. the results got better. the twists and turns in my life became more and more unexpected. so i just want to fast-forward to a fight from a few years ago. at the time of this fight i was a professor, yep, just like your teachers. and for about 20 years i had been doing research on what was happening to america's working families. year after year, i saw people getting slammed, cheated on credit cards, fooled on mortgages, tricked on payday loans, and it got worse and worse. i watched as big banks raked in billions of dollars by trapping people in debt, and i watched as millions of families lost their
homes, lost their paychecks, lost their hope. what really burned me deep was that there was plenty of law to stop those banks, but the government agencies that were supposed to enforce those laws couldn't be bothered. i wanted to change that. that's when i had an idea. what if we built a new agency? when what if we gathered up all those laws about for mortgages and consumer loans and gave them to one agency and gave that agency the tools to enforce the law, a sort of financial cop on the beat for american families? and then we held that agency accountable, a tough cop that was willing to take on wall street and big banks. what would happen then? so i talked to everybody i could about this idea. i went down to washington. i talked to folks in congress. i talked to policy gurus. think thanks, newspaper people. anybody i could.
and pretty much all of them told me two things. first one was that's a good idea. that is actually an idea that could make a difference. and the second thing they told me was don't do it. now, think about that. they gave me 1,000 reasons not to do it, but the reasons all boiled down to one very painful point -- you can't win. don't do it because you can't win. don't even try because you can't win. you will never get this consumer agency passed into law. they pointed out that the biggest banks in the country would hate this idea and they would spend hundreds of millions of dollars to stop it, and they said to me, you're just a teacher. you got nothing. you got no money, no organization, no political juice. it won't happen, so don't even
try. now, i heard this, but there was something deep inside me that just refused to believe them. they said don't try, and what i heard was try harder. and that's what i did. i jumped in and i fought for that little agency because i truly believed it could make a difference. the way i figured it, you don't win anything that you don't fight for. so i was ready to fight as hard as i could. the fight was just about what you would expect, only worse. the banks hated the idea of a new consumer agency. duh. these guys had built whole business models around cheating people. and they spent millions and millions of dollars to make sure that there was no cop on the beat to stop them. they hired an army of lobbyists. and i say that, no joke, as the battle heated up, when i wept
-- went down to washington to fight for this little consumer agency, those lobbyists be thundered through the halls of congress in herds. people like me were pushed against the walls like we were invisible. the biggest, most powerful lobbyists in washington, they thought they could eat us for lunch. and sometimes when i was pushed up against those walls, i thought they might just do it. but i didn't back down, and neither did anyone else. we kept looking for ways to make it happen. writing papers, talking about -- talking with people, organizing groups. this is david taking on goliath. and you know what eventually happened? we won. we actually won. [applause] senator warren: i still can't believe it when i say that little consumer agency, the consumer financial protection bureau, is now the law of the united states. that's pretty good.
now, before you go home and you say to yourself when this is all over, you say, yikes, i just clapped for the creation of a government agency, i must be turning into a total nerd, let me just remind you about this little agency. it has been up and running for just about four years now, and it has already forced the biggest financial institutions in this country to return more than $5 billion directly to people they cheated. now, that's government working for us! [applause] senator warren: that's how it works. so look, i get it. i know that building an agency to keep people from getting cheated on credit cards and mortgages may not be on your bucket list. it sure wasn't on mine. at least it wasn't on my bucket
list until it was on my bucket list and that's really the list, and that's really the point. i believe in the good that this little agency could do, and so i fought for it. even when people told me i couldn't win. the truth i learned along the way was pretty basic -- you can't win what you don't fight for. so i say to each of you, you want to change something? nobody's going to give it to you. you got to fight for it. i wanted to be here today, not just to be on the same stage where the boston symphony orchestra, james taylor, and lady gaga go their stuff. i wanted to be here because i believe in what you can do. i believe in what you can do if you fight for what you believe in. no matter the odds, no matter who you are up against, if you fight, amazing things can happen. amazing things will happen. after all, we're here to
celebrate your amazing graduation and to think of many more amazing things to come. so thank you, all, and keep fighting. [applause] senator warren: thank you. thank you. thank you. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2016] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, we move from senator senatorh warren to sherrod brown of ohio. how serious do you think the clinton folks are about his potential name as a running mate? mr. cilizza: i think senator brown is going beyond the short
list. i think he makes a three-person cut. i don't know if he makes a two-person cut. i think he is being seriously considered. he is many things that senator clinton is not. on trade, he is much more protectionist. he's more of a populist in terms of both record and approach. he's got a great, gravelly voice. he has someone who has made good in a swing state like ohio. i think he complements are in many ways without being what she views as someone who might be difficult to work with in elizabeth warren or bernie sanders. sherrod brown is more of an idealist i think than hillary clinton who i think is more of a pragmatist, but he is not in her view so far off on the idealistic wing that he doesn't know how to get things done. he has spent considerable time in office. he knows the compromises and sacrifices that need to be made.
he has a relationship with her. they did serve together in the u.s. senate. host: there seem to be a couple of variables in terms of what the clinton campaign will want to do. do they want to move more to the left, move to the center to help get republican votes, and what does bernie sanders want moving ahead? mr. cilizza: it is a complicated because there are so many factors. i would add, how do you drive the strongest possible contrast against donald trump? usually, a v.p. pick tends to be complementary in some way of the president. does it affirm something? 1992, bill clinton picks al gore, another young son of the new south. in picking sherrod brown, i think hillary clinton would say this is a serious ticket aimed at governing. this is someone who has spent time in the house, in the senate, who has these relationships.
it would also be a little sop to the left. it is a very complicated calculus, what they are uprising today in terms of what they will prize in the day they make the pick. that makes it hard to predict who they wind up picking, but also totally fascinating. host: ohio has been called the swingiest of the swing states. it is where the republican convention will be in july. governor kasich is a republican, and harry reid has made it clear that he does not want to see somebody selected from a state that would result in the senate losing a democratic seat. mr. cilizza: you just outlined the strongest argument against picking sherrod brown. kasich would be able to pick a republican to fill that term until another scheduled election. that would complicate the map for democrats.
again, sometimes, what the white house or the candidate running for the white house and what the senators in that person's own party want run in cross purposes. that does happen. i don't think it rules sherrod brown out, but it is clearly, if you were picking, it is the first argument you hear from people on why not sherrod brown. host: what is the first argument for "running for vice president?" how do these names and these candidates and these individuals go about the next couple weeks? mr. cilizza: it is like fight club. the first rule is you don't talk about it. the more you campaign to be vice president, the less seemly that is generally regarded. what you see, and this runs the gamut from sherrod brown to elizabeth warren to julian castro to tim kaine. you want to stay enough in the
news so that you're not forgotten, but not so much in the news that it looks like you are needing to be picked to be vice president. it is a very delicate balance. you don't want to be forgotten. you also don't want to look like you want it to do much. host: i'm going to ask you about the timing. when do you think we will know? mr. cilizza: the republican convention is a week before the democratic convention. trump has said he will not announce his pick until the convention. of course, it is trump. he may change that tomorrow. if he does that, my guess is hillary clinton will wait until the republican convention is over and then announce her pick in the run-up to the democratic convention. possible she does something different and announces it
two or three weeks early. but i think you run the risk of trump having this convention that will be decidedly unorthodox and very watchable, getting drowned out if you don't have a new thing for your convention. so i think a lot of it depends on what donald trump does. the hardest thing for anyone watching is predicting what donald trump will do. host: with that background, chris cillizza, his work available online, thank you very much for being with us. in march, senator sherrod brown introducing hillary clinton. we will show you his remarks in how he referenced the democratic candidate. >> ladies and gentlemen, please welcome to the stage u.s. senator sherrod brown. [applause]
senator brown: thank you, ohio democrats. thank you, joyce, cedric, and sheila. thank you for joining us from the congressional black caucus. special shoutout to the stokes family. lou was a mentor to so many of us that came to congress, and we always will remember the tone he set and the gentleness that he brought to his job, always the commitment to justice. i like these dinners because i got to sit with my wife, connie, and my daughter, columbus city councilwoman elizabeth brown. elizabeth showed me pictures of our 5-month-old granddaughter. the first time she sat up was yesterday. the reason i bring that up is,
she doesn't really send pictures very often to their daughter's grandfather. maybe she will start doing that more since i'm saying it in front of 3000 people. to ted strickland -- i know something about this, because i know what the forces of darkness did in 2012 in my race when they spent $40 million, setting a record of any senate race in the country in negative ads. they've already spent $10 million, the koch brothers and their allies, against ted strickland, yet he still leads in the polls over rob portman, which tells us everything. and to my friends and our democratic candidates, hillary and bernie, welcome to the most important state in the union this tuesday and the most important state in the union in the first tuesday after the first monday of november. some years ago, a guy from
connecticut said to me, we are sick and tired of every four years there's a race for the president of ohio. so there is, and again, ohio will win for democrats in november. thank you to bernie and hillary for running a race that makes democrats proud, a race about issues, a race about principles, of course watch much the republican grade school fight and then watch the two adults talk issues and about the future of the country. also look at the difference, while republicans are busy trying to disown their front runner, or actually disown their two front runners, democrats are proud of both of ours. thank you to david pepper. i saw his mother here, who i
know is so proud of her son. thank you for putting in front of of us those volunteers and employees of opd. i know how hard they work. i see them a lot. i know what they did in 2012 and 2014. it is incredible, the energy these young and sometimes not so young staff and volunteers bring to the table. and special thanks to the wait staff. [applause] senator brown: as progressive democrats, we always honor hourly wage earners, especially when waitstaff is paid so much less than they should be. if you visit my office in
washington, you will see a sign under my name. you will see a sign that says, this senate office was occupied by barack h. obama from 2005 to 2008. so all these people come by and i'd like to think they came by to take a picture of my sign, but i think they didn't. but it is a privilege to serve in the office of the senator from illinois in those years. it is also such an honor to serve with the first african-american president of the united states. [applause] senator brown: now, you've watched these republican debates. it is a little bit like watching a car accident. you kind of rubberneck and watch these debates and can't believe you are really wasting your time doing it, but just listen to the tone.
most importantly, look back to think about where we were in january 2009, january 2009. our economy was in freefall. we were losing hundreds of thousands of jobs and month. the day barack obama put his right hand up, we lost 800,000 jobs that month. in the next month, it wasn't much better. the auto industry was on the verge of collapse. the zip code my wife and i live in in cleveland, that zip code in 2007 had more foreclosures than anywhere. think of where we were, but after the auto rescue and the recovery act and as we did dodd- frank and the affordable care act, we've had 72 straight months of private-sector job growth, 14 million new private sector jobs. [applause]
senator brown: gas prices are at an historic low. more than 600,000 ohioans have health insurance now, many of them for the first time in their lives. and, as we saw in the video, jim, now marriage equality is the law of the land. god bless america. and don't forget the auto industry. republicans told us to let the auto industry go bankrupt. republicans called it un-american. as ted strickland said, some republicans called it a lousy deal. a current republican presidential candidate, the one that is 0-22 in states, happens to be from ohio, he said this is throwing good money after bad.
we rescued the auto industry this past year. 17 million new cars sold in the united states. i would add, connie and i and will drove down 71 today in our jeep cherokee, made in toledo, and our other car in the driveway in cleveland is a chevy cruise made in youngstown. i speak from personal experience when i tell you, you can't drive a better car anywhere in the world than ones made it here in ohio. [applause] senator brown: of course we have a long way to go. i'm not going to do a litany of the problems we still have. hard-working americans still struggle. despite worker -- working
harder, paychecks do not keep up. retirement, security, i met with a group of teamsters today, with a group of auto workers who are scared to death that their pensions will suffer major cuts if congress doesn't do the right thing. all of that is so important. yet washington republicans still cannot convince washington republicans to simply do their jobs. they shut down the government in 2013, and they are trying to shut down the supreme court in 2016. think about that. they think barack obama was elected to a three-year term. think about this. my guess is most of you have not thought about this before. barack obama is only the second democratic president since the civil war, only the second democratic president since the civil war to have won a majority of votes in this country twice. only franklin roosevelt and barack obama -- there is no
question that he had a resounding mandate for a second four, not 3, not 3 1/2, 3/5 of a term if you get the history, but a second four-year term. now watching these other side of the debate it reminds me of a , story i've told before. i want to repeat it because i think it is so poignant in thinking about donald trump, ted cruz, marco rubio, the cast of walker and jindal and all these guys that have disappeared into the trash heap of history. january 21, 2009. the tradition is the president goes to the national cathedral for a prayer breakfast. there's been a natural prayer breakfast after every new president is inaugurated since george washington.
the first woman ever to deliver a sermon at the service shared a piece of wisdom attributed to the cherokee nation. one evening, a grandfather was teaching his grandson about the internal battle that each of us as human beings face. there are two wolves struggling inside each of us, the old man said. one wolf is vengeance, vengefulness and anger and resentment and self pity and fear. the other wolf inside us is compassion and faithfulness and hope and truth and love and reason. the old man stopped. the grandson said, which means? -- which wolf wins? the grandfather said, the one that wins is the one you feed. now we know which wolf republicans have been feeding in
these debates, in these rallies in chicago and kansas city and dayton. we know that republicans have dog-whistled about race for 50 years, but now they are shocked when donald trump starts barking. [applause] senator brown: tonight i am proud to stand with a person who says we shouldn't be building walls, we should be knocking down barriers. yesterday, i was in akron, and i was on stage with william jefferson clinton, and i looked at him -- he was in akron probably because of the ohio primary, and i turned to him and said, no offense, mr. president, but hillary clinton is the most
qualified person to run for president in my lifetime. [applause] senator brown: and she is. and he smiled and laughed and clapped and i think he meant it. here's what it is about hillary. i trust hillary clinton to fight for children and families because she has done that all her life. [applause] senator brown: from her early days with the children's defense fund, to her time in the senate, leading on the children's health insurance plan, and i trust hillary clinton to fight for human rights and voting rights and women's rights. [applause] senator brown: from her time in alabama as a civil rights worker when she was 25 to the work she did as our secretary of state on
behalf of women all over the world and women's rights. and i trust hillary clinton on trade and manufacturing. i'm leading in the senate, as you know, i'm leading the opposition to the transpacific partnership and i think we're going to defeat it. a decade or so ago, i wrote a book on trade, so i don't come to this issue lightly, but i trust hillary clinton on manufacturing and trade. she has the best manufacturing policy of any candidate in this race, and i know that what hillary clinton is proposing on trade, a special trade prosecutor, unprecedented in our country, tripling trade enforcement by putting on more investigators, unprecedented, by coming down hard on currency that china has debased and
manipulated for years, and what she's doing on rules of origin and what that means for the american auto industry. i trust her because i know what she will do, fight for american jobs with a different trade policy, a different tax policy, and a different manufacturing policy. [applause] senator brown: so it is my honor to introduce -- on monday afternoon, i usually think i will go off to washington. because of that, this week, tomorrow, i'm going to the board of elections and i'm going to cast my vote for the next president, america's first female commander in chief, hillary rodham clinton. [applause]
senator bernie sanders is holding a news conference this afternoon in california. it is the state with the most delegates at stake. we will have live coverage at 2:15 eastern on c-span. anight, hillary clinton holds rally in long beach, california. 26lary clinton is now delegates short of the 2383 needed to win the nomination, according to an associated press count. >> live coverage of the presidential race continues tuesday night with primaries in six states, california, montana, new jersey, new mexico, and north and south dakota.
mrs. clinton: a more different vision for this country than the one between our side of forcrats or progress prosperity trump of fairness and opportunity, then the presumptive nominee on the republican side. trump: we are going to win on progress. no more common core. bring it down, bring it down, we want it local. in healthng to win care. we are going to win at the border. we have got to: redefine what politics means in america. we need people from coast-to-coast standing up, fighting back, and demanding a government that represents all of us, not just the 1%. p.m.in us live at 9:00 eastern for election results,
candidate speeches, your reaction, and we will ahead to the fall battleground states, taking you on "the red to the white house," on c-span, c-span.org. 30-year-old privacy act requires the government to get a warrant to search e-mail old,is less than 180 days written before most americans used e-mail and cloud storage. congress wants to expand protection to those forms of personal data. the house passed the e-mail privacy act in april, and the senate is considering legislation. two guests have different perspectives on the legislation. they are joined by a technology reporter. unfortunately, the rules have
not been updated until 1986. there have been courts that have said police have to get a more e-mails or private facebook messages. this would put that protection into the law. >> from the investigative and law enforcement field, that is really what our can turn is, -- what our concern is, to make sure that it has the same protection, not an extra layer of protection. >> tonight on "the communicators 2.on c-span ♪ >> this week on "q&a," wisconsin senator tammy baldwin. senator baldwin talks about her career and wisconsin political history.
brian: senator tammy baldwin, go back to that apartment, that empty apartment on convention night, 1984, in wisconsin. what is the story? sen. baldwin: well, i was fresh out of college, had yet to land my first job. so the ink partly -- hardly dry on the diploma, double major in mathematics and government, and michael future -- and my whole future was ahead of me. my first efficiency apartment, sparsely furnished, mattress on the floor, little tiny television on the ledge, and i watched the democratic national convention. i watched geraldine ferraro take the stage, and with my whole life ahead of me, i said to myself, i can do anything.
i can aspire to anything. that image of a woman for the first time being nominated to one of the highest positions in the land, in the world, it was a transformative moment for me. brian: let's watch that moment. we have video from 1984. [video clip] geraldine ferraro: as i stand before the american people and think of the honors this great convention has bestowed upon me, i recall the words of dr. martin luther king jr. he said, occasionally in life , there are moments which cannot be completely explained by words. their meaning can only be articulated by the inaudible language of the heart. tonight is such a moment for me. brian: anybody tell you that you looked a little bit like her?
sen. baldwin: [laughs] not at the moment, because i was a 22-year-old college grad at the time. brian: i'm sitting here looking at the both of you -- what was the inspiration, other than the obvious? sen. baldwin: it was the obvious. i think it matters, the contribution that women make substantively, but i think there's an element of symbolism that we many times ignore, the idea that i had never seen somebody who looked a little bit like me in a role such as that, the nominee for vice president. and i think that when you begin to see people have shared life experiences, especially when there are glass ceilings, when there are barriers and obstacles, i think when you see that, it opens up doors of possibilities that you felt
didn't exist, you weren't able to open them before. brian: so you are in madison, graduated from the university of wisconsin. sen. baldwin: smith college actually. brian: smith college. what was the atmosphere at the time and what did you do from there? sen. baldwin: i had just graduated from college. i took a year off from school before beginning law school at the university of wisconsin and it was a fascinating time. i launched fully into local politics. i volunteered for -- every, well, not every activist organization, but a lot of advocacy organizations. i got an internship in the governor's office, working on women's issues. we were working on an initiative in state government where we were looking at whether we compensate fairly between not
just people who work side-by-side, but employee classes that were female dominated or ma le-dominated or mixed. it was perfect for a math and government major because a lot of it was numbercrunching and statistical analysis and calling for policies to create fairness and equity in pay across state government. so, a combination of doing that during the day and following the city council and county board in the evenings kept me out of trouble. working on people's campaigns, demystifying the process. i think between that and watching that convention, i had this inkling that first of all, this brings me great joy, working to better people's lives, but maybe i might run some day. it wasn't long after that, that
i entered law school. i started studying law. before you knew it, there was an empty county board seat. my county board supervisor who represented the campus district announced she was retiring and all of a sudden my hat was in the ring. brian: how long are you on the county board? sen. baldwin: eight years. that spanned the time from 1986 to 1994. i was advised by a wise professor that i should think carefully before i ran while in law school, but he got a glimmer in his eye and said, if you decide to do this, you will have my full support. the county board, it was
dangerous for a law student, because i could write local laws or i could study law. and i found the work that i did on the county board to be so exciting and so wonderful. i did finish law school. [laughter] brian: while you were on the county board? sen. baldwin: yes. brian: what was the first year you got elected to the house of representatives? sen. baldwin: 1998. between that service in local government and federal government, i did serve six years in the wisconsin state assembly. brian: and the first time you ran for the senate was what year? sen. baldwin: 2012. brian: so this is your first term. sen. baldwin: this is my first term. then senior senator herb kohl, after many years of exemplary service to the state of wisconsin, announced his retirement.
in may of 2011. and i geared up and it was a very exciting race. brian: let's go back to madison, wisconsin. sure.aldwin: brian: you were raised there by who? sen. baldwin: my maternal grandparents. both were -- first of all, i'm very lucky they were there for me when i needed them. my mother was very young when i was born and going through a divorce. so, i was lucky to have them there for me when i needed them. my grandfather was a professor at the university and my grandmother, during my early years, was on staff at the university as a costume designer at the university theater. my grandfather, a biochemist. so i would go from costume to
biochemistry lab and look at the fascinating work that each of them were doing. it was a wonderful upbringing, interesting, and again, i was so lucky to have them there for me. my grandmother was 56 when i was born. born in 1906, before women had the right to vote, and lived to 94 years old, which meant she got a chance to vote for me for congress. quite a span, right? brian: what was your relationship with your mother over the years and is she still alive? sen. baldwin: she is. my mother, for my young years, was always in madison. after having me, she was able to complete a university education. it took a few years. i'm actually up to about her shoulder in her graduation picture.
i was in madison. i would often see her on a weekend, almost like a custodial relationship that divorced parents might have if you can imagine that in today's terms. ultimately, in my adult years, she had an employment opportunity in the twin cities area of minnesota. so that is where she is. she's now retired. brian: how would you describe wisconsin? sen. baldwin: oh, my. i think of it in sort of three respects. one is the people. hardest work ethic you will find. incredible group of people. descendents of immigrants who built a state that makes things, builds things. very impressive.
also a strong agricultural tradition. oftentimes, artisan methods that were brought from europe, various places, a lot of norwegians, swiss, german immigrants across the state, so i think a lot about the people. i think about our natural resources. we are a state that is blessed with freshwater sources. we have three coasts. our east coast is lake michigan. our north coast is lake superior. our west coast is the st. croix and mississippi rivers. inland, we have these incredible natural resources that we cherish. and then, i think about it s history and political figures of great stature.
i think about the progressive tradition, the involvement of people in the democratic and political process, and i think about our policy legacy, whether that be the mark that we made on national policy by helping draft the social security law that still stands to this day, one of the greatest things we ever did in this country. it was two economists from the university of wisconsin who went out to be part of that drafting process. i think about all of our firsts in education, in labor law, and civil rights arenas. i think about the historic
figures who shaped those. i also have to say, today, i think about how we lost some of that, and it concerns me greatly. brian: i read somewhere that wisconsin was responsible for the first statewide primary? baldwin: the first -- now, b laow, for example bo sr. helped shepherd the change whereby senators were not appointed by the legislatures, but demanded elections. so i guess -- i don't know if it was the first, but the idea that it wasn't going to be the party bosses that made the decision of who the nominees were, but rather the people, who were going to get a chance to vote in free and fair elections. brian: we need to go back to the early 1900's to look at bob la follette.
here's a minute of it. [video clip] >> your passive citizenship is not enough. men must be active for what is -- aggressive for what is right if government is to be saved from those who are aggressive for what is wrong. there is work for everyone. the field is large. it is a glorious service for the country. the call comes to every citizen. it is an unending struggle to make and keep the government representative. each one should have a patriotic duty to build at least a part of his life into the life of his country. to do his share in the making of america according to the plan of
the fathers. brian: now, he was a republican. sen. baldwin: yes, he was. brian: but a progressive. sen. baldwin: he founded the movement. he founded the party. he was instrumental in that. brian: put him in perspective in your life. when did you learn about him? sen. baldwin: i don't remember when i didn't know about fighting bob. we had a high school named after la follette. we had lots of ways to remember him growing up. i don't remember not knowing of him. i do remember learning more about him, especially some interesting things when i became a member of the senate. i admired his political legacy. but i'll give you an example of something very small that i learned about him. there's a tradition in the senate of making a big deal about your first floor speech.
you are supposed to wait a few months. many of your colleagues come and sit and actually listen, which doesn't happen very often when people are giving floor speeches. i wanted to study what my predecessors had risen to talk about before i gave mine. i learned that fighting dog had folletteng bob la sr. had given his maiden speech on opposing a railroad regulation bill because it didn't go far enough. he was known for fighting the monopolies of the day. his maiden speech went on for three days. he, in fact, let's say antagonized some of his colleagues by taking such a long time. he wasn't filibustering, but he was making his point. the galleries were filled.
as i started, noting some progressive and populist themes, i promised my colleagues that it would not take three days. brian: so a progressive you are. what does that mean? give us a couple major issues. sen. baldwin: i do think of a lot of overlap between populism and progressivism. i think it really is about restoring power and a voice to the citizenry and having a check on unfettered power, unregulated power, especially of monopolistic-like entities. la follette went after the
railroads, went after the power plants, the ones that almost controlled washington, and at the time, almost controlled madison, which is the capital of wisconsin, always arguing for a stronger voice for the people. you raised this issue of the first primary. again, it was, do the bosses decide who these people are or do the citizens play a role, a meaningful role of deciding who these candidates are going to be? i do see it as a real next of -- a real mix of populism and progressivism. brian: the other senator from wisconsin is ron johnson. sen. baldwin: today, yes. brian: at one point, "the new york times" did a piece where they said you disagree with each other 75% of the time.
how can one state have somebody who is progressive and somebody who is very conservative both being united states senators? sen. baldwin: we can add to that mix our governor. then you can reflect on other folks that wisconsin has elected over time. the senator, my senior senator, is a product of the 2010 election. i think that was known commonly as the tea party revolution. so was our governor, scott walker. it was a moment where perhaps president obama's most significant achievement, the affordable care act, had recently passed. there were folks storming town
hall meetings and saying that the sky is falling. it swept into office a significant number of people who had very, you know, an ideology that i think was common among them, and it was a national election. it was not played out necessarily on local state issues. i think that is one way in which you can explain how we can have senators who are so strikingly different in much of our outlook. that said, i will say that there are specific issues that we have worked on that shouldn't have and don't have a partisan element.
i would give the recent example, last friday, senator johnson and i, who both of us sit on the homeland security committee, had a joint field hearing in wisconsin on the opioid and heroin epidemic. we took testimony from a couple of panels, wide range of perspectives. i think we both acknowledge over and over again that this is an epidemic that sees no partisan lines and that we must work together to face this. brian: i looked at some statistics about the election in wisconsin back in 2010 when ron johnson was running. there were 2.1 million votes cast. in your election, there were 2.8 million votes. that is 700,000 votes different. one was a presidential election
when he ran and one was not. how much do you factor -- when you are up again in 2018, no presidential election. does that worry you? sen. baldwin: i would note that it would also be a gubernatorial election. so, it will be interesting from the perspective that another candidate, scott walker, was also elected in the 2010 tea party revolution, will also be standing for reelection should he choose. and he is saying he will. so, i think there will be reason for wisconsinites to participate in perhaps unusually high numbers for nonpresidential election. i think this variation in voter turnout probably exists in every state, but it has been pretty profound in the state of wisconsin. especially given what we've been through as a state in recent years, which i've been calling
out, especially with regard to funding for our university system, and policies that are increasing the level of poverty in our state in astounding and frightening ways, i think that there's going to be a great interest in participation in that election, fighting for the very soul of our state. brian: here's another wisconsinite who is still very prominent in history. what do you want to tell us about this guy, joseph mccarthy? [video clip] >> just what do you believe you symbolize? >> i don't know if i can articulate -- let's put it this
way. many people have been waiting for someone to expose the extent of which our suicidal foreign policy has been dictated from the kremlin. they've been waiting for someone to get up and fight corruption. the way that men like senator williams have fought it. i think my people in wisconsin were voting in approval of a fight against communism, corruption, the sellout of american interests us. americanllout of interests. they weren't voting for joe mccarthy. i happened to be the recipient of the votes and i appreciate it a great deal. brian: didn't turn out well for him. he died young, 49 years old. what impact did he have on you growing up? do you know much about him? sen. baldwin: i certainly had heard from so many felt like careers were threatened, lives were harmed, by the sort of witchhunts that occurred during his tenure. whether it be academics, other
community leaders, i think there's agreement that that was a very dark time for our nation's politics and for our state. i do sit in the la follette seat and the mccarthy seat. it was la follett senior, then junior, then mccarthy, and now i have the honor. i also have sat on the subcommittee that he chaired, where he so abused his authorities and privileges.
it is one of the few subcommittees with subpoena power, and he abused that power. i remember when i came to the senate and met with our subcommittee chair, carl levin, and it was a private meeting between the two of us, but he showed me his gavel and he said, i take this responsibility very seriously because it has once been abused and i will never oversee that happening again. it was a very moving moment for me. brian: it has been proven since then that there were communists in the government. i wonder, where do you draw the line on this? should it have mattered back then? i know senator mccarthy used tactics which, as you say, people did not admire. what would you have done if you knew there were communists actually working in the state department? sen. baldwin: you know, i can't imagine -- that time was before i was born.
the blackmail, the tactics, were despicable. lives were ruined. there was innuendo. people were sort of caught in a widely-cast net, illegitimately. there are orderly and better ways to, i think, appropriately deal with anybody who is not loyally serving this country and their government. brian: how did you beat former governor tommy thompson for the united states senate seat? sen. baldwin: i would not like to think of it as that, other
than making my case in 2012, that we needed to address, and we still need to address reviving the american dream. and dealing with the fact that when you work hard and play my the rules, you should be able to get ahead, but today you are not. there are unfortunately too many struggling. this was a couple of years post recession. people in wisconsin were really hurting. we have a significant manufacturing base, as i mentioned earlier when i told you about our work ethic and what we're so proud of in wisconsin. but it has really taken a hit.
it is because, in my mind the rules are -- it is rigged and we need to fight for fairness and economic justice. for a set of rules that is fair to everyone. brian: both sides say it is rigged. sen. baldwin: the prescription is different. brian: here's an ad that you ran in the 2012 campaign. [video clip] >> tommy thompson left wisconsin for washington. boy, did he. working for george bush, tommy cut a deal making it -- it cost taxpayers $156 billion. then, tommy made millions working for a firm that represents drug companies. >> we went to washington to change washington. washington changed us. >> tommy thompson. he's not for you anymore.
brian: when did you make the decision to go after him on the basis of him being a lobbyist? sen. baldwin: it is the issue. medicare should be able to bargain for better prices for american seniors. v.a. bargains with drug companies and medicare, which covers over 40 million americans, and doesn't. meaning seniors need to shoulder these costs. it costs government a lot more money and it costs medicare a lot more money. i was in the house of representatives at the time the medicare part d, medicare modernization act as it was called, that the program was debated and passed. i voted no. i felt very strongly that we should not be forbidding our