tv Life and Career of Pete Domenici CSPAN September 16, 2017 8:00pm-8:59pm EDT
in 1979, c-span was created as a public service by america's cable television companies and is brought to you today by your cable or satellite provider. 2008 interview's with new mexico senator pete domenici, who passed away this week. then deputy attorney general rod rosenstein talks about the attorney -- the importance of the constitution. after that, a conversation with the president of the federal reserve bank of dallas. former new mexico senator pete domenici died wednesday in albuquerque at the age of 85. just before leaving the senate in 2008, he sat down with c-span2 to talk about his life and career. susan: you are in your office at the end of your senate career.
what is this all like for you? --. domenici: the tough pretty tough. people think it is like you quit one job and start another. 36 years in the senate and all of a sudden you get a set of rules when you get out of here. pretty soon you are not a senator anymore. i'm not terribly thrilled with the product of the congress i've belonged to come at least for the past 10 years. i don't feel too good about it. it is a great institution, there is no question. it is not easy to say goodbye or to figure out what to do next. i'm 76 going on 77 . i have some elvises, but -- i -- i have some illnesses, but
people who watched 10 years ago would sit and just about that good or that bad, whatever it is -- would say that i am just about that good or bad back, whatever it is . there is a lot more that could've been done but i decided that it was for someone else to do, and that i could try and maybe take a little more care of my family, and do other things. it looks like it is working out. host: we have some viewers who are very much aware of the announced meant. the newsand from report the you got some encouraging news lately on your health situation. would you mind sharing that a little bit? >> i was diagnosed as having a frontal lobe disease. very serious brain impediment or ailment. it is even worse than alzheimer's if you put it in the category that is similar.
there is nothing you can do about it, supposedly. movedas getting myself out and getting accustomed to wifedea of leaving, so my saw an invitation from a great doctor who is a researcher in this field, of this disease and he was putting together a large team to work together, to see how we might help each other, or how we might help him as a researcher. she told me that i should just do that because it would be helpful. she literally talked me into it, so i did it. the doctor -- the research dr. said sure, but everybody, no matter who, no matter where their diagnosis came from, can
have a good doctor, but you have to take my test to get in. -- tests. of tax= host: my goodness. and it is just not too bad. it is just that you have to do this and you find that you cannot do certain things that you think anybody can do. when i was finished, two weeks past or so, and he called up and said, i have news for you. and i said what is it dr.? and he said -- you cannot be in my group. "why? to do something wrong?" "no, of course not . our research and all of the tests we put you through revealed that whatever impediments you have, that are cognizant -- cognizant impediments, our real, they are not big at this point, but they are real.
we find no evidence that they come from the frontal lobe of the brain. so, i said, whatever you would say, do you mean i do not have it dr.? to which he said, i am a researcher, i will write it i find, and i will write what i just told you. the entire history of the test. i said fine, that is enough. i cannot ask anymore. i took it to the doctor who had diagnosed me. and showed it to her. -- she was anent eminent doctor and was befuddled. had concluded that whatever had happened to me, i was a lucky one, and there no movement in of the disease. it had not moved it a bit. so i said, does that mean that i do not have it?
happened, i thing think that you do have the disease, but i do not know what that means, since you are totally without any movement, any activity, and i do not find any changes in that regard. to this point, another two or and while i have a lot of other ailments, that one was of course the giant one. i decided that nobody was going to be able to tell me why that happened. i tend to have a lot of faith, -- anhave enormous faith enormous faith group in my and family led by one of my sisters, not just one, but one that spent 60 years at it. who devoted a huge amount of her efforts to getting the lord to
understand that their brother should get well. so, even the doctor was impressed with that. that is where we are. >> so now you find yourself expecting that you're going to retire and facing a pretty daunting illness with a world of possibilities. >> not quite. host: well, half a world of possibilities . many more than you anticipated . how are you going to sort this out? what are you going to do? hard, to kind of get used to not being a senator. so i have not done that yet. , you are here,re and and that is good use of this office for an hour or more, to talk to people about what we do and do not do.
i think at the end of my career, the last 10 years, because i was lucky enough to get away from the budget, which i had to do so many as for the republicans, there will never be and the senator to serve as chairman of the budget committee as long as i am. one who changed the budget, changed the way that we do business, because of the budget act, as much as a were able to do in our lifetime. things,able to do other the -- it wase thrust upon me, the ability to work in the field of energy and contrary to everything that has been said about as, not doing much in the field of energy, we have done a lot in a short time. some of the lead items remain with me and finished, -- remain with me and unfinished, but the big one is nuclear power, which i've become associated with as a senator, and i think caused it
, as much to do it with bringing america to the threshold of and saying, we're going to have our renaissance of nuclear power in the world. we are getting that. americans want to be back in front. we have 104 nuclear reactors. in a prior years of strength, when we did things, and everybody wanted to sue us, everybody was scared to death. we are moving ahead now with , thereer 25 applications were not any for 27 years. we have passed this law that i had a bit to do with, after learning what it was about, and who we are with all of these big utility companies, taking a risk. putting up to $60 million of money and getting ready to go.
i would think, the one thing that i am hopeful is that i'll be well enough to see the shovel turned when they start doing those. >> when you expect that to be? >> in three years. host: the nuclear power equation certainly takes care of the question of american infrastructure. but it does not affect the issue of fossil fuels. what are you doing on that? sen. domenici: we made some giant strides in the world of and they leadership, said, we need a new president so that we can do the whole thing. the truth of the matter is that the biggest thing we have done in automobiles is to finally change the cafe standards, the standards that we had mandated for fleets to be able to make sure that we were not using big what you call them, gas-guzzlers, and move in
another direction. law, -- we wrote that law is part of a second bill that we passed and the second bill we passed hundred us on the path of nuclear. alternatives, wind, solar, all of them got opened and we are moving fast. in the automobile area, we are also moving fast. right now is batteries, and we have put a lot of money and a lot of pressure and power behind the proposition that we must enhance at her ease, so that battery capacity will move up to maybe 100 miles without having to be recharged. ideaat is going on, this of having your automobile on batteries and getting to plug it
wordery night, there is a -- a phraseology for that which escapes me -- >> rechargeable? >> yes, rechargeable. that is the new field that i believe will take hold and move, because it will be easier to get the scientific innovation to break through. so i believe it will be automobiles that use electricity with will be matched petro products. i am pleased to hear that democrats will muffle around with oil to react are able to produce more crude oil just by opening the intercontinental oil shelf which we also did in the. of time -- which we also did in that timeframe that people said we were not going to do that.
the lunacy of tying it all up, we have opened it, and it will produce -- america will produce a lot for herself. there will be a long bridge time to get out of oil, no matter what is said, it will take a lot of time. the issue will be how much we produce, that is our own, during that bridge. so that we are not giving all of our money away as we have in. -- as we have been. that is the way will go, in my opinion. of a you gave something farewell speech on the floor of the senate this week and a major theme of it was bipartisanship, saying that this place needs more of it. i was struck in thinking that you arrived here in one of the most artisan times in american history, the watergate years. so, is it more partisan than when you got here? sen. domenici: yes, much more so. watergate was an incident,.
and it could not help but make partisanship, until it finally broke and it was cleansed. not there is just bipartisan spirit that there was for many of the years that i was here, which is 36 years. i don't know what it is, it is very hard to explain. >> can you trace its roots? i cannot.ici: no, some things are very different, i can give you one. although i did not know it, we know that there is a big animosity between the democratic leader right now. last election, the democrats in the waning of
our republican leaders'campaign, dumped a huge amount of money into the opposition to the republican leader in kentucky. unheard of in the early days of we are talking about. one area that you might trace the roots of this is that this place stayed out of the politics and did not run against leadership as early did not go into these dates and campaign. all of these things are gone now . you go to a state and campaign against a fellow senator of the other party. we did not do that before, there was a degree of comedy --comity. that might not be everything, there may be a lot of roots as compared to one big one. host: you can certainly point to that happening with senator
daschle's race. yes, we may have invited it, but clearly it is there and it is too bad. however, we have not touched a minute in this discussion, and maybe we will not have time to, to come upon the fact that the united states of america is in bad shape today, probably just as bad shape as it has been in my 36 years. recessions,ple of not bad ones, mediocre ones. -- ronaldt reagan reagan had one that was a most a bad one. but something is really going going amiss in the american economy today and we do not even know how to fix this we are one. going to stimulate this economy , the president-elect is owing to pump about $500 billion to stimulate the economy, but
something's happened to the financial system which carries all of this act a video. which was -- it might have had its internal warts that we did not know about, and it might have been cheating, it might have been fraud, but it was a great system, enemy of the world system, and it is falling apart. and we do not know how to fix it. we loaded it up with bad stuff, toxic, rotten mortgages. we did that. we in the sense of, i do not think i did, but in the sense that nobody found out about it and rooted it out early enough until it had infiltrated the system. i do not know how long it will i amto get out of this, so really hopeful that smart, intelligent dedicated, nonpartisan thinkers will get
together and help us with this issue. and then, democrats and republicans will be joining and trying to fix it. but i am talking to you right now, and i can almost say, i hate to see eight, but can you imagine the speaker of the house willing ton her own sit down with republicans in the senate and try to work out a solution to something like this? i cannot. i do not know why. i know her, i used to know hurt much better, in a different way. it is just the way the leadership has set itself up, it seems like it will be a very hard task to deal -- to work these solutions in a bipartisan manner, especially the big ones confronting the country. host: i just heard on the news this morning that a 100 page report was prepared for the incoming president as is the case in each change of the administration.
,rom the security agencies projecting america's future over the next 10 years. they paint a picture of an america in the klein globally -- and america in decline globally. d.c. that as well? sen. domenici: yes. terribly hard thing to put myself to saying, being american and being a senator is that you were really proud to be able to say that we are number one right? in many respects we are the number one powerhouse militarily, democratically in terms of freedoms and rights. wewhat has happened is that at leastht the world,
some of the lessons of capitalism in my opinion, which is how to produce wealth area itna has learned, japan got earlier, right after the war, they made it out, and learn how to produce great wealth. they were held down, because the ave not been able to become tyrant in a defense and foreign matters, but china has learned, and learned quickly. china is not communist, in terms of the philosophy that operates the economy -- the operates its economy. togetherto hold itself as a communist country by saying that these evil run the country, and what do they get? they all get a car, so they look like they are part of the commonest already, and they can go to meetings.
but what is going on out in the countryside is they carry little signs saying that we are the best them capitalists that you have ever seen, we are the best capitalists that america will ever be. -- we are better capitalists then america will ever be. learning, theye start with the notion that their kids, their youngsters and young adults must be well educated, not just in history not just in , poetry, but they must be physicists, scientists, engineers. boy, are they coming! and of course, india has some shortcomings because of their past system -- there caste system. they have a huge population, they are doing a great thing. top, but wee at the are stuck in the mud. much, -- we argue too
much and we do not want to accept the things that i think are necessary to stay in our full capacity in this very competitive world. what is interesting today as you and i talk is that the largest of the competitors, the most powerful potentially of the competitors, china, is too busy producing well for millions and -- producing wealth for millions of people, that they are not currently engaged in being a warmonger, they are not trying .o yet they're not trying to be the world leaders in defense and that kind of thing. but if this 100 page report is true, it could happen. i think i have given you enough of the edges to know where i would come from. you can add to it without any question that there must be a lot going on in terms of defense
activities by the same countries that i am referring to. the material wealth that they can produce, and i do not know where the old america is going -- little old america is going to come out. we are small in number compared to them. we used to do it, because we were well educated and all of the breakthroughs occurred because of the scientific powers that we are not quite capable of doing that to the extent that we did. host: what do you think it would take to turn the areas that you have described around? sen. domenici: we have had a --gressional and valuation, we did a congressional and valuation starting a few years ago where we put together a team initiated by senator bingaman, domenici, and the senator from the state of tennessee, senator lamar alexander.
from that, came a very bipartisan group put together under the leadership of norm doctor, who phd used to be the head of one of our giants defense contractors to my a superb engineer and producer. report thatduced a clearly said that the way to do it is to double the american expenditure of money in the next in hard science, physics, mathematics, engineering of all types. he went way below that and said that one of the big problems is that you will have to retool the teachers who tried to teach our kids math and science, started -- starting in the sixth and seventh grade. people,hers are nice they are good folks, but we have put it upon them to teach
subject matter that they do not know. and if they do not know today's subject matter in math -- so they suggested retail and about 600,000 to 800,000 american a good promotion by doubling national science foundation and other parts of our government that are involved in the subject matter we are talking about. host: will there be money for these kinds of initiatives after what we have been going through over the last couple of weeks? sen. domenici: i do not know. the budget,good at but i can tell you that it has gotten so far over the line that i cannot tell you what the deficit will be this year. i guess we will have to sit around and wait for some more numbers but i do not know, and i do not know what the deficit will the. -- will be. it is big. when the american economy is capacity, -- i for
throttle, you know what happens, you cannot produce your way out of a hole. why i amight now, beginning to read that the new president will spend money, whatever amount it takes to get the economy going. cuts,at may be tax directives on expenditure, but you have to have a more vibrant economy, producing, before you can pass judgment. lasto answer your question, can it happen? it has to happen sooner or later, we have to get back to producing the way we were when we were able to produce -- to project a balance budget at a reasonable date. so, i am not negative. in fact, i would like to close this little section by reminding you that from my own standpoint,
because of where i come from, my folks were bought in a foreign it is beyondy -- belief for me that out "the to be a senator for 36 years. to see the great things that our american country has done, it made me so proud, and so confident that we were the best. and now, to see things kind of falling apart and have to answer your question, which i must do honestly, when you ask me if we are going to be number one, and i said i do not think so, that is not good for all of the hundreds of people in new mexico that might see your show that love me, and they, what is happening to pete? he is losing his confidence! -- no, i'm not.
changes to do.al it is on both sides, it is personal as well as ever mentalist visibility. people are falling apart, to o in their beliefs and in their traditions and their cultures. it is going away fast. when you look at countries and you say, why do we let that happen? we were such a good country, we had to throw all this junk on top of it! but we say, that is freedom. lemmie bring you back to the institution of the senate. in the speech that you gave on the floor this week, you said you were concerned about two things, the overuse of the filibuster and the amendmentry process, and he wrapped it up by saying that the senate was becoming more and more like the united date house of representatives. can you explain what you were thinking there? sen. domenici: you do not have
to be in the senate very long and you do not have to have served in the house, and i didn't, to come up with the conclusion that the founding fathers intended a house and the senate to be very, very different. -- i hadt me suggest another opportunity to give a speech this week and it had to do with ted stevens. of course, i was not talking about his trial that he had. i do not think you will end up being found guilty, incidentally, i am pleased to say that now. we will see what a few months from now revealed, that pete --enici made a prediction but i had a chance to talk about the fact that he worked so hard state hadate, his come into the union as a poverty laden state, and it was not
going to get well, monetarily, physically, until it started using its resources. loaded withte eskimo indians and the culture and traditions were far removed from those that would make them a strong, so he had that kind of state to look for. that isfounders clearly one of the difference. permitted ted stevens to be proud that he got a lot of things for his state. if they didn't need it, you could probably say that is hogwash. but they desperately needed it
and if they didn't work for it, they would not have it. the other thing that was different between the two bodies, from its inception they decided there would be unlimited means --hat >> filibuster. >> filibuster. and we would have unlimited amendments, and the amendments did not have to be relevant or germane, which is why you could get a war amendment late in the afternoon by a western senators who was playing to the west coast states and introduced an anti-vietnam amendment. he would get a vote. during my time -- i'm just using an example.
that is because this was the senate. it goes both ways. the senate, when it was operating that way, was hard to move, and did not get things done very fast, and clearly filibusters were not used as much as one would think, even though they were available. they were used for big-time issues. the ones that come into your mind, that you know about. >> sure, it made the news when it did. >> absolutely, now it is being used all the time. conversely, to change the process, where you cannot get any amendments in unless you are the majority party, which is recognized by parliamentary rule. that is completely different from the senate i just described. the answers that those who do it
will give, and they are more averse than i, i assume, like the leader, my friend harry reid, who knows more about this than most of us because thatis how he decided he would become a leader. he would spend his time on the floor and he would help everybody and they would elect him. that is what happened. but he would say that he hasto do that because the process we have adopted -- historically, the system cannot move, because it gets too tied up in filibusters and the other things that used so much around here. all of that leads back to the idea of partisanship that we spoke of 20 minutes ago. you get more and more partisan when that happens because you get more and more angry, more and more upset, getting more and more opportunity in the back
room to talk about those darned democrats and what they're doing to us. the opposite happens when you're in control, anger and anguish, and that is what happens. i thought that we found a way to get out of this and break out of the mold, but i think we're back in it. i broke the mold on filibusters -- excuse me, i was part of the budget committee and i shared it with my wonderful staff and a couple of senators who helped. we change the filibuster rule without anybody knowing it for a few years when we did the reconciliation -- used a tool called a reconciliation to get around the filibuster, and
it worked for many years to get bills passed, implemented a budget -- with me? implemented the budget, and it was privilege by the budget act itself, which created the rules. no filibuster, very limited amendments. but we did not live by it all the time. maybe we abused it. it sure was used a lot. i hope, and i leave it to you as an expert, that we are making sense for the american people with all this and jibbering that i am doing. >> our audience is not just the public at large, it is the congress watchers.
i think your explanation is interesting for them as well. i want to move to an issue that was one of great importance to you. part ofinto being as the financial markets bill. washe reason it came to be because it was running out of time. thead to get it done and tedrity leader knew, ofnedy, we spend a lot
time getting it done with great staff. you can put that on and send it to the house. what that bill did is after years of the united states of america, hiding its head and denying that the mentally ill people in america were sick and denying that there were people with a diseased, therefore, they could be denied health coverage under health insurance policies. they could be given less than people with other diseases. we finally got around to that great civil-rights issue of
treating them with parity, a treating them equal. if you are sick with depression and you need to go to the hospital for four days, you will get hospital coverage just like you would if you had a terrible disease and they put you in for all kinds of tests. i have been battling that for about 14 years. we passed one of parity, but it was weak. we called it parity one. and i'm so pleased that among the myriad of things, large and small but i have been able to participate in, this one i was able to keep going. even though it was the last minute, it got done. >> we're talking about how these
-- the senate operates. your story of interest with mental -- mental parity is also a personal story as well. it is a story of how the lives of the members of congress affect legislation. >> it is true. in my case, it is pretty well known i have a daughter that has suffered for many years, maybe 18 now, from one of the mental illnesses. i became part of a group of americans that just began to love each other and understand what a terrible predicament a mother and father were in if one or two of their children came down with schizophrenia. they went broke, that is all there is to it. the kids were in trouble all the time. we did not have facilities to put them in and you could not get them paid for by insurance policies.
and i found all of thatout by going to meetings. most of the meetings were attended by people with the same problems. just to be honest, i became their leader, more or less, and with my wife and many other women were helped. my wife does her share, but many do and many senators helped. but we really got it done. and there are others. when someone is stricken with cancer, we probably can think back 10 years and without naming names, it did double the research money in the next decade on cancer research. i do not think it is as much as people think. i mean, it does not change the mold too much. you still use the money in these fields. most probably where it ought to go anyway. and we do pass along the other
goal anyway. but it does help when you have a senator who knows what it is all about. and you push it based on personal feelings. >> is that the way it should be, ? >> it is not the worst thing, so i do not want to worry about it. we have a lot worse problems than that. >> and other bio-sciences issued a you have been very involved in over the years is the genome project. >> i'm very lucky that i came from the state of new mexico. most people think it is a desert, right? it is next door to arizona and most people even think it is hot like arizona, but it does not. it is a high desert. we have two laboratories, one in los alamos and the other in albuquerque, called the sandia. one started when the united states first put together an atom bomb and a hydrogen bomb. that is a place where basic
science took place. it is a big, powerful -- thousands of scientists and master's and ph.d.'s of all disciplines. goucher became the engineer in place for the kinds of things that you did. sandia has the same, but a little less mix of high science, but plenty of them. i got to rub shoulders with them and become part of the exciting things they do. they brought me many things -- the country ought to do this or the country should not do that. they got me indoctrinated into their power, which made me probably the most committed
center to bring back a and civilian nuclear power and bring it back like right eisenhower spoke of it when it was first done. one day they walked in and put in front of me this genome project. this is where we are. to keep -- take the human genetic system and map it and by mapping its feet it was hoped that he would find all of these reasons for disease. they convinced me that america should be doing it and the national institutes of health, in this instance, refused to do it. for some reason they did not want to. they talked me into having the department of energy do it, contrary to most people's thinking. the department of energy had huge resources in this matter because of hiroshima. they were charged with many of the follow-up items. they talked me into getting involved. i said, what is wrong with nih?
and today again repeated it. so i introduced a bill with no support in the executive branch at that point. i got it moving and then nih came to the party. i put it all into the department of energy and they can crank to -- they cam crying to me that they are to have part of it. if i took my fellow senator, lawton chiles, and said, let's do it together. hewas working in the other field. we put it together and this was one of the biggest ear marks that we have ever done. it was not executive. they did not support it. we just put it on and it ourselves. we started it. we did not do it. that was done by a battery of scientists and a terrific american plan of how to implement it, handing out the different genes to institutions
to do them. in the middle of the projections for getting it done, the new computers came. believe it or not, something of the most edu could imagine was done ahead of time. we scored and great -- something a of the most complicated that you could imagine was that have hundred and we scored a great victory. i got a call early that it was finished. some of the people that had started out were thrilled.
but by the end, it had been quite dispersed. i had a hand in choosing some of the directors because they had asked me. i thought we should really keep it scientific, keep it highbrow. we were not playing around with favorites, but who is out to keep a big project like this going? and congress would have to oversee it. it cost about $90 million per year after we started it. after 14, 15 years, and you look at it and it is not much. >> are you surprised at some of the commercial uses that have been developed? >> yes, i am, but i'm still not surprised -- i am surprised that it is not used more. i thought we would use it more for wellness activities. it is not going to work yet.
you are not going to just be able to change genes by marrying them up and operating them. that is not going the way they talked. but it will still be one of the most worthwhile projects we have done. >> we have about 10 minutes left on our hour with you. you have worked with joe biden and now he is one to be vice president of the united states. over the years, your name was on the short list for vice presidential possibilities. are you sorry that it never worked out? >> no, i do not think it would
have been good for me. my temperament and my behavior, i think i am better at what i have done than what i might have done. i was mentioned twice, but one time seriously. i'm kind of glad that i got back to reality kind of quickly after that. and many of the wonderful things that we have been able to do occurred after that. >> what are your thoughts about your old colleague ascending to that role? >> that is a really funny one because in those days when i came to the senate, they did not take care of the new center's very well. they really do now, go all out and get them in place quickly.
they did not care much about us. they put you in a basement most of the time. i was there in very small quarters and biden had not come because as you recall, joe decided that after the death of his wife and one of his children in an automobile accident, he said, i am not going to be a center. the democrats would not close it out and they got him. they had to put him somewhere and they put him with me, even though there was not enough room for me where i was. they said, double it up, put two desks in the front, one as his receptionist and one as yours. they said, we will get you an office, but it took them a long time. we became good friends. if we do not work on the same
things. by coincidence, he went that way and i went this way. i got this way most of because i wanted to get a chairmanship early and i played it so i would get the budget. nobody thought about what happened, but i did. that got me over here on this side of the ledger working with money and a gpsgdp's and things with economics. >> i wondered what you would have to say about the historical record and the experience of going for the ethics committee process. >> yes, just briefly, though. i think it's a very unfair process in the sense that it can be done much more expeditiously. it can be done without so much trepidation injecting into the system.
right now, because it is so fearful, not the direct consequence, but what happens to people who testify and state been strong, make a mistake, they are the ones who are in trouble. -- and state ofthings wrong, make a mistake, they are the ones who are in trouble. that means everyone has to hire a lawyer and face controversy, even by a simple process. in my case, i am so lucky that it did not have an effect on me at home. if i can see where it would have if it had stayed a life story for six, eight, 10 more months, but it did not. and of the answers that i'm giving you today, the one that is least stuck in my brain is a tough one. i'm not even very good at telling it because i do not. i just put it out of there. it was such a terrible expenditure that we have to pay out of our campaign funds and all of my staff had to be protected because they inquired of all of them as if this was some kind of big trial when it
was pretty simple. i am hopeful that they will learn how to do it better and, certainly, that it is kept quiet until they are right at some conclusion. >> it is very challenging to cover 36 years, even in an hour. we only have about five minutes left. i guess it is time in the process to get to the concluding comments. i wanted to ask you, after -- you know this day is coming when you are one to walk out the door for the last time and a turn around and switch off the lights for the last time. you have a sense of what your thoughts will be? >> i do not think i'm going to do it that way because that is too hard. somebody else will shut off the lights and close the door. i will know is happening and i probably will be at home right up the street here with my wife and will know that is closed and then done it and i do not think we will make it an event.
>> but will your thoughts be of i do not think so. i would hope so. these great opportunities yielded some successes, i would hope that they would pop back. >> but now you are just sad? >> yes, there are a lot of them sitting out in mexico because i cannot forget that people have so generously and thoughtfully named them already. i have -- over on one side of the state there are four or five targeted programs that came about by my efforts. i will not be able to forget those because if i go there, they are going to be staring me in the face. so many hundreds of people that are friends, maybe thousands, that will be an interesting thing to see how about the work.
will they be forgotten? it will be an interesting opportunity from time to time to meet some. i'mhoping to use than in new mexico state university where we will have a building to put my things in it and i will probably teach a little bit, maybe, one course or the like. that will keep me in touch with people that i have worked with over the years and will keep the experience alive in my veins. >> i'm going to conclude by -- if you can do it in a minute and a half or two minutes -- because we have talked about some great things, energy policy and the human genome and the like. you told me before that you wanted to use the story of the washboard as and the sample of how you can affect individual lives. would you like to tell that story as we close? >> i would love to. we started out this way and it is just as well that we close it on that event. at first, let me say that i have been lucky.
i had staff that stayed with me for a long, long time. i did not have to turn over a lot of people. much of that staff work compassion staff, especially in the state. they really worried about people, that we could help, especially if i was not helping them. the kind of course me into helping, and that happened all the time from some of these beautiful people. kind of coerced me into helping. one that comes to mind, two elderly women, both about 80 that came to a party that was being thrown by those that were part of the electric co-ops, which were still big when i started because we have not gotten themall done yet. they brought me a present, these two elderlywomen, and they use their arms to say, the top of the amount where we live, the end of the road. what do you mean? the endof the an electric line. well, what you mean? we had no aelectricity, but we went to a meeting and you said you wouldhelp and, sure enough, you helped. and we have electricity at the top of the mountains and we have a washing machine. we have been using a washboard for all these years and we have brought one fromfor you because we think you ought
to have one. we do not need it anymore and we think you should have won. among the sophisticated paraphernalia that i take with mefrom the laboratories that were so genuinely a part of my life, it is here. this wash board that was given to me he earned a degree in education in new mexico and taught junior high math and science. he earned his law degree from the university of denver in 1950 eight and later served as the mayor of albuquerque. he is survived by his wife and nine children. -- tor roman ag was 85 domenici was 85. >> c-span's washington journal his life every day with news and policy issues that impact you. enter law discusses republican efforts to change the tax code. theauthor of why are all black kids sitting in the
cafeteria discusses the hate in classrooms. then we have a guest about the women's suffrage movement. be sure to watch c-span's washington journal live at 7:00 eastern on sunday morning joined the discussion. new york congressman hakeem jeffries, cochair of the democratic policy and vacations committee, he talks about daca and immigration legislation, working with president trump, health-care legislation, and other issues facing congress. tomorrow, 10:00 and 6:00 on c-span eastern. deny dr. melvin gave senator menendez always trips on his private jet or that camping country visions were made of it nobody -- made. nobody will deny senator
menendez made -- on his behalf. the question is, why he did it. it was because of the crop relationship they had an menendez was acting because of those tickets. >-- those gifts. talked aboutsson the ongoing trial of new jersey democratic senator bob menendez and other clinical corruption cases. sunday night at 8:00 eastern on c-span usa. now, activity attorney general rob rosenstein talked about the importance of the constitution and the rule of law. this heritage foundation event is about 40 minutes.