tv Antonia Felix Elizabeth Warren CSPAN November 3, 2018 8:00am-8:46am EDT
ladies and gentlemen, thank you we will do this again in the spring. we bring you book tv for the next 48 hours current events. we are live at noon. taking the risk calls. she is the author of several books. and her most recent spark of light. and on afterwards vice president vice president mike pence's daughter charlotte pentz shares an important life lessons learned from her father.
i have to say that it's cannot start with a confession. the confession. when i first got this book i thought i pre- mention of everything that there was to know about elizabeth warren. by the end of the first chapter i realized that the story i put together for elizabeth warren was a resume the story that antonia put together as a portrait. it's riveting. it's human. it's a really important book about a very important public figure. serena talk a little bit about the book and the things that you will discover when you read it. you should read it, it's worth
reading. let's start not at the elizabeth warren beginning. it is during the debate that senators were having about whether jeff sessions should be nominated as attorney general weeks of arguments. in the any incomes elizabeth warren and she has a letter with her from loretto scott king 1986. and in that letter is a statement that she had written ears earlier. they had used the awesome power of his office to chill the free exercise. they tried to read that sentence. what happened. she was silenced by her senate colleagues. ultimately by mitch mcconnell.
there was quite a few little steps that happened in a very dramatic it was a majority leader mitch mcconnell. she was violating a rule. she was saying that rule was made back in the early 19 hundreds. it wasn't uncommon for a gentleman to show up on the house for any rated and making a real ruckus mess. and they weren't supposed to do that. it had developed a rule. that was the role that was brought up because they were same you are basically
slandering senator sessions. and you're not allowed to do that. you can do that. ultimately she kept talking because there were steps as i said to this rule. at first you are warned she was warned, and i forget what the middle part is. nevertheless, she persisted. it was time for another big thought.
she was silence. she went out to the hallway. nevertheless she persisted and became the rallying cry for so many people. i'm sure they'll make a tote bag. it's almost ironic because as we are going to discuss elizabeth warren really persisted. let's go back to our childhood. did always have the money to go to the tournaments. tell us a little bit about
what she needed to do this as a child even. what was her early life like. she did learn very early on. even as a kid in second grade. she decided she wanted to be a teacher. this is in the early 60s. and she came back to school and said i decided i'm in become a teacher. her mother was from a generation where she felt a woman's place is in the home. her one daughter should aspire to be a wife and mother and nothing else. they really had even on to
college. even when she decided she wanted to go to law school. there wasn't that foundational support from her mom but she persisted through that. the personal aspect of that. what you say about her mother. she did internalize it. she did draw out of college at the age of 19. to get married. there has to be some grain that stayed with her. there was a message coming from home. and also from society. in the homemaker. it was quite sophisticated course.
and be good citizens and things like that. it was about becoming a good citizen and a wife and mother. it did not talk about giving -- getting out there and with the career. in the inner drive to do something. it's interesting also that she does end up going back to college she finishes her degree at rutgers. she doubled the number of women on the faculty. it's pretty remarkable. and back on that theme of
doubling the number of women. she suffered major sexual harassment there. she was part of the meeting movement. there was one particular professor as some other professors have said. have a real crush on her. at one point when she was alone in his office with him. he tried to grab her and chasing around his office. she have to live with that type of tension on the job. because of this one particular professor. and she said in the meat to movement she recorded that story that went on television and a lot of people one more
story about a woman who had to take that kind of treatment on the job. a pivotal moment in her career also came in texas. it's actually really dramatic and interesting. in 1978 there is a major overhaul of bankruptcy law. it was assessable to families in need it was assessable to families in need no one had ever really studied bankruptcy. nobody knew who the people were who were filing for bankruptcy. and they came to a class that they were teaching. people for who file for bankruptcy are made sure -- are mostly people who live on outer limits.
she asked him a question and he was in transit about it. and it can it changed her career. why did that launcher. he assumed that they have some sort of factual basis to backup for that. that they're all in this one certain little section of society and she ask him and he said everybody just knows it. it was the most unscientific answer that they could get. it sparked the interest in the field. she formed a tight research group.
and they did a long qualitative study about who is actually going bankrupt in this country. in turned all of our understanding about it upside down. they found all of these stories about being at in the regular middle-class households. it just sent them right over the edge. and if that happens this is a safety net. give a second chance. companies had that same chance and it doesn't have the same stigma as a personal bankruptcy. it really changed that sentiment that most people have and get out of pain their
people don't really know. she felt like they couldn't support the d regulations. how does that play out. tell us a little bit about that. it's an interesting story. back 30 odd years ago. when she was starting all this research. the more they realize that. they believe in markets. the markets weren't working
very important book. she explained the financial crisis so clearly. that they burst into a clause. and stewart said stuart said if her husband wasn't backstage he would want to make out with her. people have this idea when she began writing for the general public with her daughter amelia who is also a very accomplished woman. her message about our finances in the plight of a lot of working americans really got out into the public square. she went on dr. phil, dr. phil
surprised her by saying we had three different couples here who had different problems with their financial lives and we want you to advise them. it was interesting to go back and look at those little videos. millions of people watch those shows. a lot of people read her books. her trademark ability to be so clear and straightforward about complex issues and also the outrage that many people had have over the recession and it didn't seem like they really came out of it without a scratch. people resonated with that message and the intensity.
to be such a populace. so from that as her star was rising that was born in july of 2010. i'm not gonna list them. but it's on page 192. you call that one of her biggest life disappointments. why didn't she have the agency which she conceived that she birthed it. in case some of you don't know. we have a rather polarized washington.
because of her stance on regulation in the stance that came very clear when she was overseen that was before she became a senator. they didn't want the agency did exist at all. came into being as dodd frank. they were not allow her to become director. obama was forced to select someone else. they tried some finagling to make it work.
what some people say now is probably the worst thing that her political enemies could of done as we all know elizabeth warren became a senator. and still is one. that gets into the whole campaign to become senator when the incumbents got down and used the false claim during a debate. and accused her of getting jobs by falsely stating that she was native american. they have a major investigation where they interviewed every from every
school that she applied to as a law professor about whether or not she had use the claim of native american descent. and everything said no she did not. it should put that to rest. will it, now because these are american politics. that is an easy target that of course the president has made all the more use all of his vitriol's on that one aspect calling her pocahontas she came in february of this year with the big speech about her ancestry and that's it she
grew up hearing. she is egg and a call her family liars. and that she's part of who she is. i do write about this quite a bit in the book the very complex issue of native american identity in this country. and what it means through ethnicity and culture. but making her a political target by using her claim of native identity and coming up with racial slurs. she's getting use it as an opportunity to raise more
awareness about issues that are confronting the native american community. i think we will hear quite a bit more that. you actually write in the book white her family does have that. they didn't want them to marry into a family of native americans. and that's just a fact. that is the reason her mother gave. that story is actually elaborated on in the book. i wanted to talk a little bit about the things the book i
should say is pretty positive about it. it's quite a glowing biography. i don't thing it's one-sided. i think it's pretty factual. you actually talk about the missteps that she made. she said and then backtracked and regretted saying that she created the intellectual foundation for what they do. she doubt that back later. it was in a statement. the moment she was the moment she was why she have made that mistake versus the totality of years that she have done it. it has nothing to do with the performance whatsoever.
she gets criticized for being shrill. even people who say i'm on the left or progressive. he complained, that she would be so effective. even with the laundry list of accomplishments that any man why are we still talking about whether her voice is too loud. it is a double standard for women leaders. there is quite a bit in the book about women in the senate in the house. and how they've come across the same double standard and they find it every day in their work and what they do.
the quality of confidence and straightforwardness. in knowing your self about a topic and being very clear they are very strong and great qualities of leadership. when a woman exerts that kind of authority with that kind of energy and intensity. she is being as i said they have said but if she wasn't so shrill. it's a double standard. and we are so far behind other industrialized nations and how we look at women as leaders. we haven't has head that in a president yet.
and why do we linger with that double standard in this country. it's a fascinating question. is it because of the judeo christian upbringing that women are supposed to be the help meets. is that so deeply embedded that it's always a part part of our nature. as we see more and more women getting elected at every level local state national. we will start to become more comfortable with the idea that women are capable leaders. and that we should be looking at gender at all. we should be looking at their ethics in their qualities in their strength. when you read about all of the different people and the different things they said.
it takes you back even though you sort of know that that goes on. we think we've come so far. elizabeth warren is still very active. do you think she's gonna be on that roster of the presidential candidates. she did something and just this past month. that makes me think yes. she's always denied that. i'm working for the state of massachusetts. you know a lot about elizabeth warren. two weeks in a row. they brought out the sweeping bills. to make capitalism
accountable. our capitalist system. our corporate entities need to be more humane. and people need more of a voice in them. very interesting bill. people who work in the government. it's too much of a conflict of interest. several other points she made about that. those are big statements i think the timing for that was intentional. it really sounded presidential to me. i would not be surprised. this book is so incredibly detailed.
did it occur to you or did you have any interest in interviewing her for the book. i was curious when i read it. when she was in her first campaign and people started to really perk up their ears. that you didn't they didn't do this alone speech. that thing that went viral. that really got my attention i thought. who is somebody that believes and the social contract. i started looking at her and started a file. if i'm this interested i think other people are really interested as well.
i guess the timing wasn't right for it. we couldn't sell the project way back in 2012. i kept researching her and following her and last year, i revamped that proposal at lunch one day with my agent this is early last year. what he thinking about. who do you want to write about next. i know i can sell this. it was great to finally be able to dive into it. so long story short we contacted her and what i wanted to do was shadow harper a few days. it's hard to ask those
questions until you've really gotten into the material. but it didn't work out schedule wise. and she writes her rates her own material of course. i can completely understand that she didn't want to give me time. i was one of many who didn't get a chance to do that. the other people i've interviewed our tell you are telling things that she's never going to even remember or even talk about. we get a picture of her throughout all of these other lenses. there was no lack of information. thank you it's all super also super interesting. i recommend the book. i did when i first picked it up. her economics and the legal
and having seen her in person. she tempered herself honey see that coming across in other places. >> that was a very interesting thing for me to hear from. they have said when you're one-on-one with her like in her office talking about a class or something she is so soft-spoken. and personable and calm. it seems so different from what they see on tv. when she is doing a 6092 bit on tv and she just sticks to asked her point of course.
it seems as if the clock is always ticking for elizabeth warren. i've been talking to people about this. to try to slow down a little bit and show more of that. and show more of the other side of that. when she's on air. maybe her advisers are gonna tell her that. she's more adept dimensional than that. a lot of people that talk to me. that's not all of her that most people see on television.
i hope that we get to see that. whether people are going to vote for her or not. we deserve to see the well-rounded person that any of our candidates are. it's an important point. i'm glad you brought that up. but women's voices are higher. and when they did the same thing it is heard as a shrill as opposed to i think that it has come across to the ear. as more shrill. that was a hard place. the rock been that if she does this more soft thing.
then she falls into the category that is a cultural she's just a soft woman who well never be able to get the job done. if she's able to find that middle ground which i don't think has been forged yet i think that would be really good. and some women have a more resident medium pitch to their voice. they could be just as intense and is everything. but it would not come off with that same effect. i don't if it's true it's just what we've heard.
thank you, that's really interesting. i'm just curious. do you think that she thought about going into politics years ago when she entered law. her story was that she was drawn in by these economic crisis and she understood and was able to explain it in a way that no one else was. otherwise she might just be a law professor still. i'm just wondering what your impression as of her trajectory having worked through all of this material. what it's like for your work as an academic. a direct impact in the world.
she got on this to spearhead a real head close analysis. with all of the knowledge and research over the decades. and the research to bring that to something concrete a solid mind between academia and the rest of the world. and then when harry reid invited her to direct the bailout and the watchdog to the bailouts. she was able to put all of that insight into a real-world practice that was important and gave her that maybe this
was fantastic. there is so much more that a person can do. and then the tarp oversight. it group. directing that. it's that public service thing. and i think she would've realized something she would enjoy doing if she have not first gotten into government by people that invited her because of expertise to contribute. it's been a real pleasure. thank you so much.
c-span launched book tv 20 years ago and since then we had covered at thousands of thousands of authors and book festivals standing over 54,000 hours. in 2003. i bet you didn't know that they declared me first lady of the century. this of course accompanied by a picture of my have superimposed draped over a harley-davidson bike. biker babe of the century was one headline. it was quite an honor and certainly worthy of another book. there were two sons and one who became governor and one who went on to be president.