tv Road to the White House 2020 Eric Holder at Politics Eggs Breakfast CSPAN June 4, 2018 8:32am-10:02am EDT
>> c-span, where history unfold daily. in 1979 c-span was greater as a public service by america's cable-television companies and today we continue to bring you unfiltered coverage of congress, the white house, the supreme court in public policy events in washington, d.c. and around the country. c-span it brought you by your cable or satellite provider. >> later this morning a a discussion on the development of military technology and its impact on u.s. national security our live coverage of the discussion begins at 11 a.m. eastern on c-span2. >> a former educator, i really believe that education is most important factor facing south dakota. we have in dead last in teacher pay for many years do we have finally to governor, many others, where 48 which is in
great it's a great improvement. we must understand children are a best and greatest assets. we've got to recognize that and take care of them, make sure their good citizens that take care of us in the future. >> i think the most important issue going on in north dakota is diversifying our economy. >> i believe i feel education is one of the biggest issues we're dealing with, is really our students ought to have behavior and social problems, that emotional side, lack of support, whether it would be beds for kids that need to be in placement, whatever it might be, but just finding we really don't, right now we don't have the support we need to help these kids be successful. >> i think the most pressing issue is just public funding right now, whether it's for
infrastructure programs or if it's for public employees such as teachers and retirement funds. like a lot of states funding is really tight in our state. >> voices from the state can part of c-span's to her and her stop ineter n dakota and bismarck south daka. >> on friday former attorne general eric holder outlined his concerns about redistricting and gerrymandering at a politics and eggs breakfast in manchester, new hampshire. the breakfast is a frequenttop for potential presidential candidates of both parties. mr. holder says he's considering a r for the office. this is one hour and 25 minutes. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]
been very, very busy. if i could just a couple cover events in next couple of we, on monday will be holding an event look at the impact of the tax reform legislation that legislt recently and would love remarks from the ranking member off the ways and means committee, marksman richie reaching you fe first congressional district from the commonwealth of massachusetts. on tuesday we will hold the next event and our new england innovate series. this time we'll take a at the challenges, opportunities associate with this autonomous vehicles and there will be keynote remarks. later in june we had several congressional roundtable events including ave luncheon with senator chris murphy of connecticut kinetic and went to breakfast with congressman l keating onh the 25th. today,ng however, we are honored to welcome the 82nd united states attorney general, honorable eric holder.
he served under president barack obama as the 82nd attorney general from february 2009 until april 2015. making him the third longest serving attorney general in our history. he was also the first african-american to lead the united states department of justice. under hisis leadership as the attorney general, mr. holder made civil rights, including voting rights, a top priority at the justice department. attorney general holder vigorously enforced the voting rights act of 1965 and was a critic of voter id laws, calling them politically motivated and designed to suppress minority and youth votes. in recognition of his work in 2014, "time" magazine named mr. holder to its list of 100 most
influential people, noting that0 he had, quote, worked tirelessly to ensure equal justice. his tenure as attorney general capped off a 3 year plus career in public service which begin his legal career in the public integrity sector of the united states justice department. he went on to sit on the bench serving as a judgen t superior court of the district of columbia. then later as the united states attorney for the district of columbia. he held the o position until he became the first african-american deputy attorney general 1997. since leaving public service he's returned to private practice at the respected firm covington burlingtonn in washington, d.c. he's also pursued his passion for making our political system more fair as the chair of the national democratic redistricting committee.
the mission of the committee is to reform the congressional redistricting process to eliminate gerrymandering and ensure that districts are drawn fairly and that every vote really does count. mr. holder at the helm, the ndrc has taken a very comprehensive approach to this challenge, utilizing a four-part strategy focused on advancing legal action, , mobilizing grassroots energy, supporting reforms, and winning talented elections. and very targeted elections as well. earlier this week he spoke at the edward m kennedy institute in boston where i heard him speak about this very important work. needless to say were delighted the attorney is here this morning i will only end by saying this weekend our guest
speaker will beek celebrating hs 45th reunion at columbia university. and i spoke to one of his classmates this past week. wholayed basketball with mr. holder during those years at columbia, and he said to me, you know, jim, i knew eric was a democrat. and i said, how is that? he said, he always dribbled to the left. [laughing] mr. eric holder. [applause] >> good morning. it's good to be in new hampshire. thank you for that introduction.
will smith was my classmate at columbia and he's been using that line like the last 40 years, you know? he's a good man. and thank you for those kind inods. he said great leader. i was thinking can jump and was about to walk in or something, you know? [laughing] i think he's got othergh thingso do. as is that it is a pleasure to be here. i want to thank st. anselm frenemy here. it's a pleasure to see soo many wonderful people from new hampshire. what i like to talk about is what we are doing with the ndrc. i will start a thing something that might strike you as hyperbolic but i think history. i think o democracy is under attack. we can look at the way in which i think rule of law is under attack withw regard to the russian investigation, when the president is interacting with the justice department, the fbi. we'll put that aside for a minute. i'm sure we'll talk about that later on, that's w my guess when we get w to the q&a.
if you lookes at the way in whih there have been structured attacks on our democracy when it comes to ours artisan gerryman, when it comes to racial gerrymandering, when it comes to voter suppression efforts. the notion that we have in the united states that it is one person, one vote and that vote should count, that notion is under attack. if youook at the impact of gerrymandering across this country and what happened by the republican party, republican party did in 2011 after the 2010 census ten census and the 2010 shellacking as president obama called it, you see the kinds of distortions of our system that really were kind of unprecedented. the gerrymandering that occurred in 2011 described by princeton in a neutral study as the worst gerrymandering of the past half-century. you can see it in the way in which the numbers have shown themselves. in wisconsin after the
gerrymandering, republicans got less than 50% of you and it ended up with about 67% of the state delegation w and 67% of te congressional delegation. you see the repeated in other states as well. in penvania the delegation was 13 the five, a swing state. but this repeater also in michigan, ohio, north carolina, florida, texas piggies are places where as result of the gerrymandering done in 2011 we have had i think misrepresentation as opposed to representation. that has had a real impact on ourou nation. it is i think part of the reason why we see this function in washington, d.c. because of these gerrymandered districts, congressman inma washington, d.c. don't have to worry about a general election. you have to worry about that.
the republicans going to win the general election for all you have to worry about is being primary to. that's your main concern as result people drift further and further to thehtnd the republican party, and don't want to interact with compromise with their democratic counterparts. that leads to dysfunction. interacting, compromise and with the democratic counterpart is seen as a sign of weakness. you don't want that because that raises the possibility of a primary. as a result not much happens in washington, d.c. but even at a a more fundamentl level in addition to the dysfunction you also see a nonrepresentative congress and state legislatures where the will of the people is not really reflected in the policies that we see an active. the vast majority of the american people, i've seen numbers that go from 67% as high as 97%, the vast majority want to have expanded background checks when itch comes to the purchase of the guns.
but the possibility of that happening, of that being actually enactedn washington, d.c. is i think slim to none. i would sit zero beforho kids, those brave get some florida put together that march. that raised it from zero to slim, the possibility of that. the people who are in washington, d.c. doing things, or not doing things, come inconsistent with the desires of their constituents don't have to worry that there iss an electorl consequence to that because of gerrymanring. they are safe. all that worry about is not begin getting primaried and making sure that you are close with, tight you come to make you happy the gun lobby. it's not on it with regard to guns. at other even look issues, when people say why is this is so important and how we some of make you understand that gerrymandering is something that people should care about? not only does it have impact on ny, , it also has to do with whether or not medicare
gets expanded in different states. again something that overwhelmingly supported by the vast majority of the american people that in certain states that are gerrymandered and that have republican governors and legislators, , you don't see tht happen. it also happens with regard to reproductive rights. again, you see people, the american people basically have decided that certain things happen, and as a result of gerrymandering ucd is a kind of crazy laws that get put in place. there are a whole variety of ways in which on a day-to-day basis peoples lives are impacted by the practice of partisan gerrymandering. the strategy that we have is to try to get at this in four ways. president obama and i were trying to think about what we're going to be doing in our post official lies. we made a l determination that this is the foundation, that if we are successful in fighting partisan gerrymandering, that we
could have an impact on the life of this country really any more substantial weight than almost anything else that we might do. the the president has a didn't d this as his chief involvement in hisch post-presidency. but again four ways in which want to make this happen. we are supporting, doing direct rule support. those people will stand for fair redistricting in 2021. ralph northam who is a relatively new governor in virginia with somebody we support last you butut he said that he would not sign a redistricting bill unless it came from a nonpartisan commission. we have supported people who will take thosese kinds of stan, who are supporting people who will stand for fair redistricting, bringing litigation places where we see partisan gerrymandering and where it is inconsistent with our constitution. there is a big supreme court case that will be decided in june. it will be decided later this
month where the supreme court has before that wisconsin matter i briefly describe before but also has what democrats did in maryland with regard to a congressional district that was gerrymandered. o'malley and a deposition admitted that's what the democrats did. they gerrymandered thereto a limited republican coxswain, and that's wrong. that's wrong. stand, president obama takes the stand that gerrymandering is just a bad thing and should not engage in by either party. that is not necessarily made me popular with everybody inhe democraticde party. there are some congressmen, state legislators for city conditions that are 75, 80% democratic amble, they appeared to be gerrymandered. i think that's not something that is good for our system. they look atat me and say you ae going to make me s run in a contested r election? i'm going to have to interact with my constituents?
yeah, yeah, that's kind of the way our system is supposed to work. republicans need to do that. democrats need to do that. the november elections should meditate it shouldn't bee about who wins the primary. that's important but the november elections are the places where we should be really focus. it will mean that people will have to talk to one another in ways that they have not before. we arewi bringing lawsuits in states where that is appropriate. we also are supporting reform efforts. i think this isfo in some ways e best way to do this. we take this out of the hands of politicians because the reality that we have now is that politicians are taking the voters as opposed to citizens choosing who the representatives are going to be. if we have these reform measures in place where m you have nonpartisan commissions who actually are drunk as lines, or will draw the lines come in 2021, i think in some ways that is the best thing. that's within california, , thas the way it's done in arizona. they had these nonpartisan commissions that draw the lines.
you end up with a more fair process. you end up with contested elections and that i think is something that ought to be supported. where we can find thosese possibilities we are doing that. it's interesting because there are at least 17 state constitutions that allow the people to put on the ballot through the use of ballot initiatives, they can bypass their legislators and put this to a direct vote by the people. where that is possible we will support those efforts. if those efforts are truly designed to come up with commissions that are really bipartisan. we have seen that possibility exist in michigan, in utah and colorado as well. those are places that we will support those efforts. in ohio there was a threat of something like that. the necessary signatures were being gathered. republicans got so concerned about what was going to possibly happen by letting the people decide this issue that they came a decided to compromise with the
democrats. reform measure that about 9 of what said i said was needed but ultimately was agreedha to y the parties and just was recently passed by the people of ohio, i guess two or three weeks or so ago. in that regard, getting back to how i view this in a bipartisan way, there was at least the possibility we heard certain democrats in ohio were not going to go along with that compromise. we had a litetatent already encased democrats decided they wanted to protect their seats as opposed to doing the right thing for the electoral system in ohio, and i was prepared to be very public about the criticism i was going to levy against democrats, but they came to compromise. democrats did the right thing. republicans did the right thing. the people of ohio and a much better place. the fourth thing where doing his advocacy, trying to work with grassroots groups to try to raise the consciousness of the american people about this
issue. we are a relatively new organization. we started in january 2017, and during the course of the time i think we've seen a rise in the level of knowledge about what gerrymandering is, what impact of gerrymandering is but we need to continue those efforts were working with grassroots groups around the country to raise the consciousness of this and make people understand that they need to be ive they need to care about this issue. they need to some a push their systems so that gerrymandering is made to be a thing of the past. that gerrymandering will hopefully be done away with with the lines were drawn in 2021 but before that we have to have a fair census in 2020. one of the things we've done at the ndrc is to sue the federal government for the inclusion of a question on the long form that asks, are you a citizen of the uniteded states? that has not been included on the long form in the census taking since 1950.
there's really no need to add that on there. jeff sessions sent a letter to the commerce department said he wanted that question included on the long form and explain he needed to havehat information that he could support the voting rights act. now, if you go to the dictionary, opened it up and you look at the hypocrisy, you'll a picture of jeff sessions and page of voting rights act next to each other. the notion that sessions wants that information so that he can be more persepolis in his defensefhe voting rights act come something yes not support a beginning point during his career is really kindin of nonsense it really, this is an effort to suppress the vote, in particular communities and in particular immigrant communities. it's also not consistent with what our constitution says that since it is supposed to be about. the sentences you supposed to count the number of people in
the united states. doesn't say citizens. does not say citizens. i am concerned that if we had that questionhe long form that we will depress the count in certain f communities, and tt has an impact on everybody. there's over $600 billion in federal funds that are doled out as a result of the senses, obviously reapportionment is tied to the census. so all of that is at risk. the doling out of that federal money is just not a function of citizens. that affects everybody. it affects people like you, people who are citizens, people in different parts of the country, red state, blue state. that will all be impacted by potential and get. i think in some ways this is a very shortsighted thing that people are supporting and is inconsistent with the ways in which we have done it in the past, unnecessary for the count it a future. so we have brought a lawsuit on behalf of citizens in five
states and i think we stand a good chance of winning the lawsuit because they have not done the things they're supposed to be procedurally before they put that qnhe lon for. we will see what happens there. people say why are you in new hampshire? new hampshire, you know, well, there's some assumptions about why i'm here in new hampshire. [laughing] the reason for my being indentured to do is to talk about the ndrc and also talk about the issues that i see here in newe hampshire. in 2010 you at a democratic governor here, and he vetoed the reapportionment plan, the redistricting plan that was put in place by the republican legislature, . he thought those inappropriate. that detail was overridden and the legislature was constructed as republicans would have.
you have state legislature here, statehouse, although this is a state which has 43 moressic republicans than your democrats in your house. and as we have looked at it, it seems that is a functionf gerrymandering. you look at your executiverr council, i've members on the executive council. as you look at the map of those districts, you know where i'm going with this, they all look pretty good, pretty good, pretty good. what isat this one? district number two. this goes like this wide across the state. it's called the dragon, i understand, and if you want to look at classic gerrymandering, look at district two with regard to the executive council. executive council is a very important body in new hampshire. seems to me what you've got is what you seen in other states, these kind of weirdly drawn
districts to try to come up with a partisan result. there was one in virginia where the two parts of the district only contiguous on the james river was at high tide. [laughing] this is the kind of stuff that you see. i've got to say that the dragon is pretty good. there's one in pennsylvania that was called donald duck kicking goofy. if you one thing and it look like that that was to get out there and the other part of the district was there. so you got the dragon. you've got the james river. you've got donald duck and goofy. these are all design can we can laugh at them but they are all designed to maintain control by one party, inconsistent with whetherty or not the people supported them in appropriate numbers. it's almost as if certain politicians are afraid of the people the say they want to represent. so new hampshire, we want to make sure that we have democrat
in thecu discussion when 2021 comes around. we are up here to try to have an influence on the state legislative races and also your governors races, a two cycle effort in wisconsin. you all have election every two years and so i 28 will be back in 2020 to try to make sure that when it comes to 2021 that we have aore representative house and perhaps a democratic governor to be a part of the mix that will lead to some airline drawing in 2021. so that's what thes ndrc is doing. i think that what we are about n be successful. we've had a number of good results. we have one lawsuit in pennsylvania. we've had, discouraged the republicans from going after that nonpartisan commission - in arizona when we announced will come in and we're going to support an effort that would maintain the new child of that
commission. republicans decided it would not go ahead with the effort. we were successful as i described before in trying to pushing those reforms in ohio. we had one lawsuit in wisconsin. also campaignor i wisconsin supreme court justice. what we've done is statby-sta analysis beside who is importantnt when it comes to thes redistricting. governors always medical state legislation always matter but in certain states, in ohio, the state auditor matters a great deal. in wisconsin theud wisconsin supreme court matters a great deal. i went up there to campaign for a one-to-one, rebecca dallas, the first democrat to win for it wisconsin open wisconsin supreme court seat since taking 95, an off year election. that's an indication of the mood of the country. we talk about this blue wave. i think it's going to be a blue wave but i think the democrats should understand that that blue wave is going to be running head
on into this gerrymandered oftem, and the question whether or not that will reach the shore. we so saw what happened in vira just last year where there was a ten-point differential between the votes obtained by republicans and democrats. democrats got 10% more votes and yet were unable to take the lower house there as a result of the gerrymandered districts. i worry about that happening here again which a huge wave. .. states, you would have to have a democratic victory of historic promotions, 11%. that is not the way the system is designed to be. for the democrats to have to get , that is inconsistent with our with our system of government. so, we are being successful, we've had successes, we've had, i think, sufficient amount of
time to make sure that we are successful in this effort, but we don't have huge amounts of time. so we are focusing our efforts on spending a great deal of my time away from my law firm, pushing this, although i will say proudly that my law firm is the one that brought that census lawsuit and we're doing it on a pro bono basis because we think that's important and it's also an indication, you know, what my law firm is all about. so we would love to have all of you involved in this efforts. whether you are a republican or whether or not you are democrat or an independent. this is an issue that is, as i said, extremely importt. it's about who we are as americans, it's about whatever our system is going to be truly representative of and connected to the people of this country. you know, we have a proud history. we take on big issues, and this is, i think, a big issue that we need to be focused on. it's an issue that i think that we can, in fact, be successful at, but it's going to take the
involvement of everybody, regardless of your party label. i think that we -- this goes beyond politics. we should make this, not a battle of, you know, who can draw the lines the best, but a battle between conservative, republican, democratic, progressive ideas. who's got the best ideas. who's got the best philosophy. you know, put your money where your mouth is. have the guts to stand behind what it is that you say you stand for. if that is the battle that we have, i think, you know, democrats and republicans-- democrats and progressives will do just fine. this is not an attempt, this is not an attempt to gerrymander the democrats. this is not that. we areimply trying to make the system more fair. in some ways, it's kind of an interesting thing, this is a partisan attempt at good governance, but that's what this effort is all about and i'm proud to be associated with the ndrc and hope that some of
you join us in the partners in this effort, but i thank you for letting me speak to you this morning. [applaus [applause] >> at chairman of the congressional redistricting commission in massachusetts, it's interesting, very interesting. >> yeah, that or-- >> i'm telling you. j us-- just a question on reaching out to republicans making this a bipartisan initiative. what success have you had in getting some-- >> arnold schwarzenegger indicated he was interested in working with us, but then he had health issues, i'm not sure where he stands with regard to that. i thought that we would gather some republican support, but i think what-- and just be frank. i think what we see is that a
lot of republicans see if this effort is successful, they had lose power, that what they-- i would say illegitimately gained in 2011 could be lost by a fair process in 2021, and so, we've got seen huge numbers of republicans saying, hey, i want to sign up, eric. schwarzenegger did indicate that he was interested in working with us. >> questions for-- >> so the terminator could be a part of this effort at some point. >> massachusetts institute of technolo technology, thank you, jim. >> mr. attorney general, it's an honor to have you here and talk about this critica issue. thank you for your years of public service to this country. can you talk about the nonpartisan issue, perhaps made up by judges, judges sometimes
appointed and sometimes elected. how confident are you that the commissions are the answer? >> i think that the commissions really are the right answer, although as was indicated, mit extremely bright. they're not all selected by judges who are elected. there are a number of ways in which they actually vary, state by state. where you have independent people all picking the inpeents wl serve on the commission, sometimes you see democrats-- i think it's in california, democrats get five members, republicans get fiv members and five independent folks were chosen, really kind of by independent body. and it really is a nonpart stand group that's picking the independent members. it's done slightlifferently in arizona. but i think these commissions really are the way to go. and if there were the possibility of putting ballot initiatives in every state, i think the bills would
potentially win. in too many of the states before you can put something on a ballot initiative, you have to go through state legislature and the state legislatures are e kinds of nonpartisan support ideas out of fhat that will undercut the power that they have or make less likely the fact that folks in the legislature will be reelected. >> yes. >> oh, thank you. yes, great to have you here and talking about this important issue, but maybe you know that we come out for politics & eggs to check out people for another reason and i know there's-- i wasn't aware of that. >> there's no decision on that, i'm aware on that. e nba finals. hear my vie on jr smith, hang your head in shame. >> what can i say, the celtics are no longer in it. but anyway so i wanted to ask you something different and
maybe more personal, so we can learn more about you as a person. >> sure. >> have you or your family members of any generation or relationship been involved with the arts, whether it's music, and i'd like to hear more about any interest or knowledge you have in that area. >> sure. well, i would say tha of my family, there are-- there's limited amounts of musical talent i would say in my family. i have aaughter whola the piano pretty well, but you know, did not-- uld have been a lot better, but was really resistent to the notion of piano lessons and so, she has a couple of good christmas songs and that's pretty much it. [laughter] >> one of the port traits my son actually drew, actually hangs in my house and he's got some skills and my wife put it up, that looks like buddy,
that's a good picture. she said, he did it. very involved father that i am. ghte >> so, on personal fami-- i got a zero, i'm not aze. i ca dance pretty well, not, stuff, but more temptations. the arts are important, you know. if you go to the kennedy center, i don't know the exact quote, but john kennedy talked about the impact of the arts on our society, and how it was the embodiment of, you know, ma women, you know, at our best. when we support the creative side of us, it's ennobles us and enlightens us. you know, makes us-- it makes us better so i think that government support for the arts i think is a good thing. and you know, i actually think that a greater support for the arts and a focus on the arts
might do something to make our society lesscoarse than iis we've become a nation converse sant in wrong words andf we focus on the arts, i think we could have an impact on this. >> the gentleman over here. >> so you obviously have good government and law and order expertise. often whe times somebody runs for president the proof needs to be on foreign policy. i think in your situation it might be helpful to hear some of of your views on the domestic economy, any thoughts on jobs and economy? >> i'm here to talk about the ndrc. what i've said about the presidency is something that i'm considering, it's not-- and i said, i would make decision on that sometime next year. so with that caveat, domestic
policy-- domestic economic policy, yeah, i mean, i think that we have to deal with the whole question of income inequality. i think that's a huge-- that's a huge, huge deal and in some ways it's a foundation for many of the economic problems that we fa. i think the tax cut t passed just recently and signed was jus totly wrong. i an, you know, putting money in places where it didn't need to go. if you're going to use a trillion dollars, an infrastructure program i think something where t m would have been better spent. i think we need to focus on those folks who have the greatest needs and that's not people at the upp part of our economic strata at this point. it's still the middle class and people who are, you know, below the middle class. they are in some ways, the forgotten people now, we've got a good jobs report today. the unemployment rate ticked
down 3.8%, but wages are still not rising at a rate that i think we need, about 2% per year. the psident said we can quite easily get it up to 4% and we ha done that. again, we were doing well on the employment side, but when it comes to wages, that is not something that we have seen rise to the degree that we need. we did have policies put in place that would promote that, that wage growth. so we need toocus on the job bu i think w want to give equal attention to what does the wage increase look like. and 2% is still too low. if you're going to stimulate the enomy with a trillion dollar wage you need to on the wage number. by giving money, tax breaks to corporations who are not investing that money in the way that, you know, we were promised. yeah, there were bonuses that were given out, but not investing it for the long-term
for investing it in ways that i think would increase wages, that was a misstep and it increases our debt so that my, not great artistic kids, are going to have to pay for this and you know, placing economic burdens on future generations, you've got things very un-american. we always leave this country better for the next generation. that's the obligation that each generation has and that's something that i think we've gotten away from. we're looking for short-term gains without thinking about long-term consequences. >> starting to sound like a candidate. >> no, a concerned american. >> questions over here? i wants to make sure everyone has arn. okay. ambassador terry shumaker. >> shifting gears a little bit from your main topic, but it is related that the president, president trump has pardoned
sheriff joe arpaio, and it's in the papers today that he's considering firing the former governor of illinois, who was convicted of trying to sell a seat, worse than gerry manned manderi mandering. i'd be interested to hear your thoughts on the use of the president's pardon power. >> the president is an absolute one thesident has an ability to use. we have a history of not great pardons, but i'm a little concerned about what's going on now where i think the president is trying to send a message to some pple who potentially might be involved in the russia investigation. you know, dinesh, d'souza.
of people who deserve a pardon, what attrition has he shown. and arpaio, ain, another one, if you use all the typical metrics that we use in the justin department where the pardon attorney's office resides, very few of these people you'd consider good candidates for pardons. again, it's an absolute power that the president has, but it's an interesting thing. i don't think people necessarily thought about it this way. if you pardon somebody, all right, well that means that they are-- they don't have much to worry about with regard to whatever the pardon covers, but if bob mueller, for instance, wants to take a pardon to person, put that person before a grand jury, that person no longer has the ability to say i'm going with my fifth amendment right. that's been stripped away, you have a pardon and that person then becomes a perfect witness for the special counsel. so it might have a positive impact on the person who received the pardon, but it
will not ultimately support the mueller investigation. and you know, we-- i hope that, you know, as the president is considering the use of that power, that he would use it in ways that, i think president obama did, that i supported to use it so that people who are really deserving of mercy get it. you know, look at arpaio, you look at dinesh d'souza, rod blagojevich potentially, although blagojevich if you would reduce the sentence, i thought 14-year sentence was a little harsh, when i was attorney general i thought that sentence was a little harsh. if the sentence was reduced that would be consistent with the obama administration as we looked at vast number of people on the war on drugs were arrested, convicted and who
should have gone to jail and who should have served time, but didn't deserve to be in jail for to years, 30 years or life where they've committed a nonviolent drug-related offense, sometimes to support a drug bit. now, you know, drugs have had a society and we look at the opioid crisis you're dealing with here and people selling drugs need to be accountable, but the punishment needs to be commensurate with the action that people engaged in. we can't have these excessively long sentences because it tends to breed distrust of the judicial system. so, i hope that the president, as he's going to be looking at ways in which he wants to-- as he said make things more fair look beyond those who are political supporters as we did and those serving sentences that are excessive.
>> wait for the mic. >> you know, i was taken by your remark, make every vote count, and as a citizen, what i'm most concerned about is citizens united, what's that done to the electoral process. when it costs $60 million or 100 million to run for a senate seat here, that means big money takes first place and gerrymandering is bad and all that, but unless we make the individuals count, i'd like your opinion on what we can do about this kind of thing where big money on both sides is playing such a dramatic role in the ability for citizens to run and for them to-- r their votes to count. >> that's anxcellent point. what worries me about the supreme court court decided the end of june, you could potentially have the roberts court put in place three
decisions. you could have citizens united with i allows for dark money and too much money into our elecl system. the shelby county case that gutted the voting rights act and the this wisconsin-maryland case where they say partisan gerrymandering is okay. those three cases i think would be an indictment of the court that is supposed to protect our democracy, protect our rights as citizens and would be akin, i think, to those economic cases that you saw the supreme court put out in the 1920's, it threatened the existence of the new deal. it's as bad as that and my hope is that the justices and especially chief justice roberts who i think is concerned about the way the court would be viewed historically, that he would take that into mind. thinking of citizens united, shelby county, wisconsin, maryland, is this the way that i want my time as chief justice to be remembered, given the consequences of those three decisions, but i think you're right, you know, gerrymanderi
gerrymandering, if you put in place people who represent their constituents, they could be on a federal level might have a decision on a citizens united decision. because the court says that's of constitutional dimension, it ultimately means we are probably going to have to consider a constitutional amendment. ap and i think, again, if you had a representative congress and representative state legislatures thatou could get that passed. you have to have a requisite number in congress and requisite in the state to support a constitutional amendment, but i would support that. because i think that the decision was wrong and needs to be reserved. we have too much money in our system, it costs too much to run f these offices in the way that you indicated. and it means that the people who run for these offices are
beholdened to the big moneyed interest who supports them as opposed to the us. people generally don't give money or small amounts of money that big corporations or these pac's where they don't have to identify themselves, who are the contributors, they have way too much influence in our system in our system now. as i've said before. i think our democracy is under attack and it's time for us as concerned citizens, to become involved. we have the ability, i think, o make changes in our system. i think we also have the responsibility to make sure that our democracy is protected. >> mr. president, we do have a president here. >> thank you. two higher questions. the first here at st. anselm the majority of our students come from out of state.
do you think that students here from other states should be able to vote in new hampshire or vote back at home. >> they should vote in the places where they ar residents. it seems to me if you're a resident in a state for eight, nine mont, y'r a resident of that state. my lovelyter who is at university of wisconsin, she's a badger, the piano playing one and she-- she doesn't play the piano in wisconsin, but votes in wisconsin. i think that's appropriate. if your students are at work study jobs or employed here to pay tuition, they're paying new hampshire taxes and it would seem given that, they ought to be residents for voting purposes. >> second has to do with college affordability, rising cost of tuition and discount rates. the leaders in the sector have been calling for a summit where we can talk about pricing and
affordability, but we're bound by anti-trust laws. so my question is, would you support a temporary exemption to federal anti-trust so we would have a conversation about college affordability? >> i would. i think that, you know, the-- you know, the blind application of our laws can lead us to places to results that are inconsistent with what our justice department ought to be all about. you know, so if a bunch of educators want to get together toalk about, just to talk about the ways in which you can make college for affordable, getting an exemption for that kind of conversation, or even working, if there's a mechanism to ultimately determined to be appropriate that defines an exemption for that, i think makes a great deal of sense. >> one of the things we tried to do. we applied the anti-trust laws, what's the impact of what we were looking at on consumers. you know, we have the laws and we've got to understand that,
but as we use our power, what's the impact of what we do on the consumers. and to the extent that we have an ability to make college more affordable, and you know, all of the studies show that college graduates do better than people who don't have college degrees. and i suspect that's going to be even more pronounced in the 21st century in the sense that when i was growing up, you have to graduate from high school if uant a good job. and i think it's going to be to the point you're going to have to have some college in order to get a good job and all studies show over the course of a lifetime, a person with a college degree earns substantially more than a person who doesn't have one. this is something that's good individually and it's good for our society. so that kind of exemption should have a conversation or put in place that kind of mechanism i think would make a great deal of sense, it's logical, it's just logical.
>> one final question. >> yes. >> hello, mr. holder. thank you so much for your time and thank you for the new england council to get this together. i doot have a gerrymandering question, but i just tweeted about it so hopefully that helps. i tweeted one of your quotes. so my name is denise with mkd management and my world is around reputation, image and identity. with that you may be familiar with the crisis or scandal involving the mass state police, as well some of the other police departments around the country, really involved in a lot of issues that have damaged their reputation. so, what advice would you give them to rebuild trust, public trust? >> you know, i think that as we look at this whole interaction between people in law enforcement and people in certain communities and let's
be frank, communities of color, that trust really is the thing that has to-- there has to be the glue between those two entities. you know, the vast majority of people in law enforcement do a great job. they sacri a great deal. my brother is a retired cop. grew up with m, that always frightened me. he served honorably and did well, he retired as a lieutenant. i just remember him riding bicycles and things like that thinking of him as a police officer worried me again. but he did -- he served and did well and i'm proud of him. but, you know, coming up with ways in which we enhance that trust, we were doing that in the obama administration. i started a tour, just going around and talking in places where we identified problems in that relationship, and brought together community members, people in law enforcement, faith leaders, political leaders to start a dialog and talk about, you know, these
issues. people have to understand it's hard to be a police officer. it's hard to be a cop. it's hard to be out there in the middle of the night and approach a car and not know what youe going to face. that's a hard thing. people need to undandthat. but people also need to understand what it's like to be a person of explore and to be stopped or you know, questioned. your car pulled over for no, you know, no great reason. i remember running in georgetown, you know, to a movie one night. i waslate, with my cousin. running, you know, to get to a movie. police car comes by, lights put on us, halt. haening. , thinking what is so police officer says, who is ing? who is black, said what and i'm-- all right, i see what's kind of going on here, let's just get out of this. my cousin by contrast, loud mouth and he starts-- i i'm like, hey, come on,
really? at the time that i was doing this, i was a federal precutor you know? but to this guy, the police officer, who was black, i was a potential something, you know? and this whole question of unconscious bias is something that we have to deal with. and we have to unde that this is something that is held by not just white people or in law enforcement or white people generally. this is something that we all carry around with us, staucks ying t deal with that issue, i think, you know, i think doing a pretty good job. but that notion of building up trust, understanding how difficult the job is, understanding the historical problems people in certain communities have had with law enforcement, forcing a diag something important. i'm a little distressed by the way this administration is looking at the problem. jeff sessions almost reflects
defense in police officers, police departments at all costs really to those who serve honorably and serve well. there are certain police departments that have problems that need to be addressed and we brought, you know, what are called a practice in cases against certain police departments and help them reform, buto reflexively saying we're no longer bringing those kinds of cases does is disservice because it thwarts the communication that builds beyond the necessary trust. again, that's something that can be done if we're willing to ask ourselves hard questions and face some difficult truths. some of which are historical in nature. but progress can be made. >> and what-- >> how about this? one thing before we go, i really thank you all for letting me come up here today. [laughter] >> go ahead, go ahead, go ahead. here we go. >> i'm supposed to ignore that.
we're not that close. [laughter] >> yeah, yeah. the-- i want to thank you all for coming upayndeing as hospitable as you have been. it's something that's a acquired skill so forgive me for signatures that you probably see here op those things. i've not done as great job as i might do, but i think as i said, the topic we're talking about is important and i think kind of, i hope you see through the answers that i've given today is my belief is that an engaged american population, an engaged american citizenry can really have an impact on this nation and i think we tend to underestimate the power that we have as citizens. as a young man, i saw an aroused american people stop a war that had gone on too long.
i saw an aroused american citizenry push the united states in the civil rights movement towards an equality that has long been sought, but not yet attained, but really pushed us and i think it's time now for what i've come to call a new american engagement. we all have the ability, as i said, i think we all have the responsibility as american citizens to be involved in the life of this nation. dr. king says the universe's law and bends towards justice, but only happens when people like yourself put yr hands out and pull toward each other. if we're about pulling it towards justice, we can make this country better and it's not about making this country great again. this country is great, but it can be better. this country is always at its best when it's honest about the problems it has to face and
when it comes up with solutions to those problems. each era, i think, is defined by whether or not this country of ours has been successful at addressing those issues. if we're going to be great, and we are, and continue to be great, and we can be. ron: we have to address honestly, to look at honestly the problems that still confront us, whether it's discrimination based on gender, sexual orientation, race, econic inequalities, problems with our democracy that we've talked about today, all of these problems are solvable. these are manmade problems that are susceptible to man and woman-made solutions. so i would hope that all of you, as involved as you have to be because you've come out here this morning to hear this guy from washington d.c., i hope that you all will use the energy that you have, the talent that you have and the influence that you have to arouse your fellow citizens and
yourselves to be involved in making this nation better. this is something that we can do. this is somhinghat do. so i hope you all will do that. [applause] [inaudible conversations] >> we want to thank the general to stop by politics & eggs. and hope to see you along the road here again. we welcomed your comments and i think it was already mentioned, your public service, more importantly. you truly are a man of high integrity and, boy, we need more people like eric holder that are willing to go into the arena of public service. you don't always have to have the title of elected official and you've demonstrated it in
so many different capacities and you reflect so well on all of us, we're proud to call you a great public servant. thank you for coming here today. thank you. [applaus [applause]. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] . >> look me up and ignore the bad stuff and-- i mention-- sure, sure, great. a pleasure to meet you.
before. successfully. how are you doing, sir. >> great talk. >> thank you. >> i have a question-- [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] . >> when i think about climate change and the world they have to deal with, that, i think worries me-- >> a legacy that they are going to inherit-- [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]
>> did anybody tell you you look like elinore-- just like her. do a dna check, might be a cousin. >> in this day and age, one never knows. [inaudible conversations] . >> irish, british, i should have been invited to the wedding. [laughte [laughter]. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversation [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]
[inaudible crsatio] thank you very much, have a great day. all right. how are you? >> thanks so much for coming today. >> work with jim and larry and we appreciate that. >> here we go. >> thank you very much. >> thank you. hey. >> thank you very much. how are you doing? >> good. [inaudible conversations] we love young democrats. >> we're doing a lot of work on-- [inaudible conversations]
[inaudible conversations] thank you for doing this. >> i'm going to miss doing this. >> you can always come back. you know. >> i actually don't think i'm getting good at it. [laughter] [inaudible conversations] >> thank you so much. >> a couple here i've already done. i didn't do these. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]
finding my golf ball, that's the problem. [inaudible conversations] . >> i think we've got enough. one more picture? >> okay, sure. >> thank you. like an enhanced interrogation technique. >> welcome to new hampshire. >> i'm wondering how you character attacks against jeff seions and the fbi, sort of
not typical, you know, the way this usually works. >> it's not typical, i thi 's unprecedented. i've never seen anything like it where the president is going after the attorney general, after the justice department, after the fbi. these are people who are career. they are nonpolitical. they're trying to do an investigation based on the facts, on the law, and thises going to have a long-term negative impact, i think, on how these great institutions are perceived by people. work it going to have to be done to undo the damage that the president is doing for his own personal interests, having a negative impact on-- >> should jeff sessions step down? >> you know, it's an individual decision he's going to have to make and i don't have insight into all that's going on there, but the primary interest that i
think he should have in his own mind is protection of those institutions, protection of the-- not something that should be a factor, focus on what an attorney general is supposed to do. >> you hear is lot about the possibility of a constitutional crisis. what's the trigger for that or are we already there? >> and i think the path of inevitab inevitability. we are going to be there, as the president reacted to this investigation as it proceeded. i thk it's inevitable to be a clash. i don't have any idea who is going to be -- i think the nation can handle and even though it's bumpy things we are going to have to go through, but i think-- >> what would be your advice to
democrats, especially how much should they talk about this front and center or-- >> you know, i think that democrats ought to be focused on the issues that have been identified as most important to the people in thi country. people are concerned about issues like health care, from the economy, notion of fairness in government. you know, people outside of washington d.c. are not as focused on russia, the investigation, as people in d.c. are and i think people oughtbe mindful of that. i don't think it's smart, i think, to run on this is a vote on impeachment or not impeachment of a republican president, i think that that -- we should let mueller do his investigation. and then make a determination about whether or not further steps are needed by congress. >> when you get to a point about making a decision about 2020. what are things to look at. what would be the region that
you would bring you to enter the the race? >> first and foremost, can i win? i wouldn't be involved or do something simply to make a statement. decide to get involved in the race if i thought i could win. obviously there are personal decisions i have to make and family considerations to take into account and these are all kinds of things that i'm weighing t make up my mind-- >> and if you decide to run and jump in-- >> two guys from queens, that would be interesting, be interesting. you know, new yorkers know how to talk to other new yorkers, now? whether it's on tweets or other ways. >> would that decision be made independent of anybody else jumping in on the democratic side, somebody like joe biden or somebody from the obama administration? >> yeah, i think that will be personal, whether or not i
think that i could contribute, whether i thought that i could be a positive force and i think it would be really kind of something that i would decide in a-- how much of the fact that democra democrats-- nominees coming through new hampshire, a spreadout race, why not [inaudible] . >>. >> i wouldn't -- that wouldn't be basis for anybody, i think, to decide to run. there would be a lot of candidates, why not. that's not a good basis to make a determination. [inaudible] >> it's a job-- i think there are a substantial number of democrats who will probably seek the nomination and that's okay. we'll have, you know, a debate about approaches that we want to take as a party. and over time, you know, we'll
boil down to three, four candidates and then only a couple. >> as someone who will be voting in the 2020 election, what would you be looking for in a president? >> somebody who has the vision for the job, somebody who's got the necessary experience, somebody who has capacity, physical as well as mental and somebo somebody-- government can be pa force for good and make people-- [inaudibl we're thinking about this. >> in new hampshire, 2018, why that was so and what, if you'll have people on the ground,
volunteers, ads? >> we're doing a variety of things. we'll look and see how we can have direct support of th is, as you look at that, classically gerrymandered district and concerned with the numbers there in what is a classic state and looking for ways and parts of the governmental structure here and come up with ways that we think we could help. what does president obama think about a possible 2020 run. >> i never talk about conversations with my president. >> and wished to speak up more, and he's chosen sides carefully if he's spoken out about these issues. what do you think that is and will we hear from him closer to the election?
>> he has spoken up on issues that have been a concern to him. i think he will in this election year and especially given what the ndrc is doing and his involvement with the ndrc, he's going to focus on thg and i think you'll hear from him relatively soon. >> i have a question on voting in new hampshire, should he be subject to the same residency requirements such as registering a car, and if they're here for college and-- >> if you're going to be redent of this state to vote, you have to follow the other requirements that any other citizen would have to comply with, a litany of things if you're a new hampshire resident you have to do a variety of things or college student who is a resident you should have to do the same thing. >> on the eyed of blue wave and
if not reaching the shores, what impact the democrats want in 2018, 2018 in particular. >> talking about what's going to happen in november and as i said, what we saw in virginia i think is what really worse me. there's a blue wave, i don't know how large at that wave is going to be, but it's running straight into a gerrymandered system and a lot of questions whether the wave will be strong enough to overcome the blocking impact of those gerrymandered systems. so we'll have to see, which is why get out the vote efforts are extremely important, increasing democratic margins is extremely important. we can't just assume that the blue wave is going to happen. that the blue wave is going to be successful that the party wants to have happen. it's going to involve a lot of work between now and november. >> and some [inaudible]
. >> the candidates i talked to they always talk about reaching out to you and people in primaries, obviously, decided know the to wade into the primaries. >> we're not involved in any primary races. >> at what point will you get involved with candidates in races in states you guys are watching closely? >> yeah, well, we've identified 19 states that are our focus and we are focusing on those races that would have an impact on the redistricting process and so, once that the primaries are done, we'll look at those 19 states, we'll make determinations on a state by state basis, what races are important and we'll get the necessary support and help in any way that we can. >> one more question. >> and on the nba finals, the nba finals to comment-- >> jr smith-- [inaudible] >> i don't think so, if you're a pro you're supposed to
remember what the score is. he made a great play to get that rebound and at a minim iwol have hoped he would have put it right back up, but to take the ball, dribble out and try to-- that was painful, painful to watch. he's a good player, and we all make mistakes, but that one was painful to watch, painful to watch. >> later this morning, a discussion on military technology and impact on u.s. national security. our live coverage. discussion begins at 11 a.m. eastern here on c-span2.: tonight the communicators. ...
on programs that make partnership investments with private sector companies through the federal universal service program to bring broadband to customers that didn't previously habit or have adequate broadband, bring them more rich robust broadband in the future. >> i think it's very important as the administration, , the fc, congress considers infrastructure like the proceedings and other concepts that broadband is and has been determined to be a matter of important infrastructure to our country and to our national policy. >> that to change because typically think of infrastructure roads, , bridges, et cetera which are important indeed to be help but you cannot
survive today as a business, as an individual, someone working from home and our economy without having a robust broadband experien. >> watch "the communicators" tonight at eight eastern on c-span2. >> apple ceo tim cook, a graduate of duke university school of business, delivered this year's commencement address in durham, north carolina. he received his mba from duke in 1988. thisgu is 15 minutes. [applause] >> hello, blue devils. [shouting] it's great to be back. it's onor t stand before you, both as your commencement speaker and a fellow duke graduate. i earned my degree from the fuqua school in 1988.