tv Washington Journal CSPAN November 9, 2014 7:45am-10:01am EST
poor states, cut it away from them. they do not appreciate nothing. point percent could not pass the drug test, 20% held a background check. show back upven for the interview. these people do not want anything. these reports want to go to war. want to start a war. send them all over there. that is willing to go. for the call.u richard or smith is out with a biography on former governor nelson rockefeller. morning, a review from the
new york times by andrew nassau. . look at the life and career richard norton smith joined us on a q&a program. the program is available on www.c-span.org. another comment from our viewers saying that the media will force congress to new extremes. caller: my party is certainly ready to lead. i'm glad i came on after the last caller. the irony of him talking about republicans in the war, when obama just sent 1800 more troops -- 5100 -- my main concern about all this is not necessarily the willingness of republicans to lead or not, it is the knee-jerk reaction from democrats, playing
the race card. give me a moment to explain my point -- so my point is well taking. i was almost 40 years old in january. for over 20 years, i was a democrat. voted democrat straight down the line. would not consider any alternatives. now, i voted for obama in 2008. i had some of my friends him.ign for what he asserted to do to the country, it was antithetical to what i viewed the democratic party to be. i did not have my idea of democrats clearly defined until change inthe lack of the progressive movement. essentially, we go from 20 years of being a democrat, now i am 18 partier -- now i am 18 partier.
i am called a racist constantly. i voted for the man. it hurts my heart to be labeled a racist by jaded black women. i had a black roommate college. i'm a racist because i do not agree with the current policies of the president. friends think this is policy driven. host: another viewer sing republicans are ready to lead the u.s. back to 2007. another book that we want to .ention from chuck todd it is called "the stranger. " we will take a deeper dive into midterm election results.
payton kreg hill will be joining us. discussames server to whether divided government can work and how it worked among past presidents and congresses. first, we want to share with you what the president said over the week that -- over the weekend. here is more from the announcement that took place yesterday morning. joined by eric holder. she has distinguished , anself as tough, fair independent lawyer who has twice headed one of the most prominent u.s. attorney's offices in the country. she has spent years in the trenches as a prosecutor, fighting terrorism, financial fraud, cybercrime, all while defending civil rights. a graduate of harvard college and law school, loretta rose
from assisting u.s. attorney to chief of the long island office. prosecutedcessfully the terrorists who planted the bomb -- plotted to bomb the federal reserve. she has boldly gone after corruption, bringing charges against officials in both parties. she is helped secure billions in settlements from some of the world's biggest hanks accused of fraud -- biggest banks accused of fraud. one of her proudest achievements was the civil rights prosecution of the officers involved in the assault of adler -- abner louima. beretta might be the only american who battles terrorists and still has the reputation as a charming people person.
she looks to make a difference. she is not about splash, she is about substance. i cannot be more confident that loretta will bring her intelligence and passion and commitment to our priorities, including reforms in our criminal justice system. she has consistently proven her leadership and earned the trust and respect of though she serves. since 2010 she is been a member of the committee of u.s. attorneys who advised the attorney general on matters of policy. she is served as chair of that committee since 2013. it is no wonder that the senate confirmed her to be the head of the u.s. attorneys office in two separate situations. once under president clinton and once in my administration. it is my hope that the senate will confirm her eighth or to time without delay. >> washington journal continues. host: we want to welcome payton cry kill area
thank you for being with us. we want to find out, for those of you who actually voted in the midterm elections. if you did not vote, we ask that -- call who voted and why? most important thing to member is the partisan component. 35% of the voters were identified as democrat. 36% identified as republicans and the rest were independents or some other party. that gap in favor of republicans, it is a narrow gap, but it is instructive for the
different groups that make up who those democrats and republicans are. the thing to consider is how that compares to 2012. if they different electorate. in 2012, the press had a six point advantage in the exit polls area the fact that more republicans showed up this time led to their victory. host: let's look at the numbers you put together. was one of the reasons you voted for the house today was to express opposition for obama? that is a pretty direct finding there. showed up to they vote in opposition. only 19% showed up to support barack obama. when you have that disadvantage, the president is going to be a dragon a lot of places. -- the president is going to be a drag in a lot of places.
there were a lot of people who do not turn out in midterm elections. the composition of a midterm electorate is different from the composition of a presidential electorate. the presidential electorate have been more favorable toward the democratic party and toward president obama over the last two election cycles. , a lotidterm elections of his constituents did not turn out to vote. the democratic party needs them to turn out in broader levels. host: politics 101 often says that people often vote their pocketbooks. gas prices are on their way down, and unemployment is down. fewer voters say that the importants the most issue facing country. is.t: 45% still say it
even with increasingly good measures, if the public does not feel that, that is reality. the reality of an improving job market and lower gas prices does not mean much. you cannot run on that good news if people do not express that as good news. you have to find a way to thread that needle, recognizing an improving economy through objective measures. if people tell you that they do not feel that, you cannot run on positive news. what are the underlying factors that are causing angst among the electorate? is it the situation in the middle east? what are the factors that are creating this anxiety? the broad thing that underlines all this is
government dysfunction. people are truly unhappy with the direction of the country. 65% say we are off on the wrong track. that is the most with said that in a neck's and pull since 2008, when things were dreadful nationwide. 78% say they cannot trust the government to do what is right. when you have these negative feelings about the government, there is a perception that people cannot coordinate and cooperate get things done. until the public can see government working together, it is unlikely to see any real improvements. host: if you did not vote, the -- for thosel is20 who did not vote, what are the reasons? guest: more often than not, it
is a lifecycle thing. if there is not a big national picture -- figure on the ticket, there is less of the motivation to vote. when you have a presidential election and a big nationwide campaign and one central figure that describe the campaign, you're going to be more interested and engaged. , whenidterm election perhaps the only significant personal the ticket is your member of congress, your house member, you are not as engaged or interested. a look at the numbers available online at washington post.com. what surprised you the most? guest: what surprised me was the for that despite this wave republicans, the landscape does not look like the country has moved dramatically to the right.
i do not think that republicans necessarily have a mandate based on exit poll findings, to govern in a conservative direction. one of the most interesting numbers is the fact that 23% of voters identified as liberal. that they are outnumbered by conservatives, but that is the highest number that identified as liberals in exit polls, midterm exit polls going back as far as we have had exit polls. it has been increasing over the last several election cycles. host: those viewers were tuning out of politics entirely. the voters who tuned out the cycle were of theortionately part democratic coalition. ,hese were younger people
generally nonwhite voters. that has been a problem for democrats in the last two midterm election cycles. they have not had their key coalition show up to vote. jesse is joining us from connecticut. why did you vote jesse? -- i votedot of the last time, but because a lot of information -- i did not vote because of all the racial stuff that i see. in my mind, i have given up on this whole idea of a true democracy. i know there is not one. they are not telling the whole truth. why the really killed qadhafi.
a number of just factors that are leading to great angst. other indicators moving the for on -- 48% said like the next generation will be worse than today. we have a finding that never seen quite so much pessimism and that exit poll question. that has been asked since, i believe, 1996. >> and who turned out on election day? a little bit wider, it was a little bit -- whiter, a little bit older. between the addle 2010 electorate when we saw truly massive wave election in favor of the republicans.
it wasn't quite in republican an electorate as 2010, but it was certainly far less of a democratic electorate in 2012. one of the biggest drop offs was among young voters. 2012, 90% of voters were age 18 to 29. in this election, only 13% were in that age group. this is one of the most reliable voting groups for in 2008 in bama 2012 and their share of their vote, going to the democrats, was quite a lot smaller. your polling director -- one of the storylines is that had the president acted on the immigration, that could have spurred more hispanics to go to the polls. issue ying to offset that because the fear of how will find some of the red states. suppress the t hispanic vote?
disaffection among hispanics with president obama has been building over time. i think the incidents over the of her were somewhat breaking point and we saw a real decline in president obama's approval numbers among hispanics in our own polls. acted on know if yet immigration reform -- if anything truly dramatic would've happened. because of the structure of the states that were in play most of the senate, states have very small hispanic voting populations. would've ifference been very marginal and, of course, every vote counts, but such a small population in many of the states that it is hard to see that it could've made a dramatic difference. i think the only thing that really could have been in play may have been colorado, where a significant number
of hispanic voters. >> are against his peyton craighill, the polling manager for the washington post. the exit polls be any accurate than pre-election polls? can you explain? >> sure. so an exit poll, you are actually speaking with someone who just literally voted. so it is a true population of people who voted. a pre-election poll that you conduct on the phone, you are trying to identify someone who says they will vote. is -- that is an incredibly important difference. that is the real challenge in a pre-election phone call is you are trying to estimate the that doesn't exist yet and you have to do that on a number of factors. you can look at people's past voting behaviors or what they tell you they intend to do, but
says they are going -- they plan to vote, they may not necessarily vote. that is one of the big reasons why pre-election polls are not always as accurate as you may want them to be. whereas with an exit poll, actually speaking with someone who literally just walked out of the polling place. then, the other benefit of the exit poll is they can weigh the results to actual vote counts. >> it was my intention to vote, but it was not a priority. am in new y because i and cory booker -- who i would have voted for -- had such a large lead. i think it is all about the human animal. and what i mean by that is --
that i saw where, was, 90% of minorities would have president, but 90 -- just as large a majority of poor whites voted republican. very telling statistic because the social stamps, all the assistance is going to help but the r whites, knee-jerk instinct reaction of poor whites to vote against the president is real. and until we can get past looking at skin color and than ng at policy rather skin color -- the republicans, in the beginning, they said, what are we going to do. to support t going
the president no matter if he has a good idea, no matter if he has a bad idea. we're not going to support him. now fast forward to here where he doesn't have support. i guarantee you that when presenting ideas and policies, they are going to be some of the same ideas that the president presented and that the republicans voted against. >> okay, we'll get a response. thank you for the call, ron. >> so ronald brings up a very point about the demographic of blue-collar white voters. we usually categorize them as whites without a college degree. that is kind of a lower socioeconomic voter. and they have been voting reliably for republicans in past elections. group that -- key group that democratic should be think they
appealing to. a growing divide between educated white voters voters college white the the values -- for economic concerns -- that a white order should on oritize -- focusing middle-class issues -- that is something that democrats feel they should be winning. issue of the immigration -- at one point, the present is supposed to make some sort of decision. on the question of should most illegal immigrants working in the us be deported. republican say 74% yes. 65% of the democrat said yes, the democrats said yes. a very divisive issue.
57% of all voters are for some type of path to in the exit -- poll. it is one of the interesting in the s that are found exit poll that on a number of social issues, voters were tilting towards more progressive responses. a path to ferred are zenship -- these important talking points for democrats and voters basically sided with the democratic disposition overall. what gives me an indication that this is not necessarily an election with a far right r a very social agenda. >> we're talking about the exit polls, who voted, and why. from the washington post, we listeners on c-span
radio and xm channel 120. all the data is available on washington post.com. darrell in north carolina. you did vote on election day, correct? >> yes, i did. my reason why i think people to vote is because there are a lot of people who are complicit changes that y have happened -- the lower gas prices and that sort. of people who are unhappy, they are the ones who went out and voted. they are the one to another and voted against president obama and the affordable healthcare act. marketing that lower taxes give people more money, but failing to realize that taxes and smaller government leads to government regulation. much is why there is so from out of state
and north carolina against kay hagan trying to get the democrats out of office. a democrat, but hey, i'm happy for the republicans that they won the election. >> okay, thank you for the call, darrell. >> yes, it is an interesting theory that the non-voters did not vote because they were happy. it is possible, i do not have one way or ve that another, but what we do know very, very clearly is that the people who voted were very unhappy. we keep repeating the numbers i how dissatisfied people with the economy and the direction of the company. are these people who were dissatisfied with these measures overwhelmingly voted republican. >> from augusta, georgia, art is on the phone. you not vote, art? >> one reason is that i did reregister when i moved
and the second reason i didn't just because i didn't think it would make a big difference anyways. i'm disgusted with the policies. i could care less what race the person is. i will disprove your theory about unhappy voters voting. i did not vote and i am a very unhappy person. the way i look at it is this -- you do not have anybody working in the middle. we do not have anybody in the office looking at this from the middle. msnbc is far off on the left, off on ve fox news far the right telling people to shut up in the crowd. is a government leader and i think it is a disgrace. line for a channel minute -- can you stay on the line for a minute? >> okay. >> art, this is a great question. talk about t us to
two numbers. you are d that dissatisfied -- 55% have unfavorable views of the 53% of can party, unfavorable views of the democratic party. i'm curious, there is an exit poll question about the economic system and i think lot of the ies a dissatisfaction with what is going on. system nk the economic favors the wealthy or is generally fair to all people? >> will, i think -- i think what has happened is the groups have st taken control of our politicians. so a citizens out here, we have let that go. can have said no, they
control of politicians, so and special interest groups, and they all this money and control our politicians -- that is what the direction our country and that going in. so, in general, i like the economic system. i don't think the system supports the wealthy. it is how the citizens have let echo. the only ones -- let that go. only ones controlling it other special interest groups. you for your point. we go to ward from oxford, ohio. >> i voted -- i always vote. i have not missed a vote since 1957. a nd i believe that i have responsibility to vote for change of our country in line with the rest of the world.
our country is going down so -- its reputation -- no matter how much cheering we yet we have no -- stop doing what we're doing and love each other. >> okay. >> you know, bringing in the issue of us foreign policy and doing around the world, this is, clearly, a thing over the summer when we saw many, many issues in rging -- the situation ukraine with russia, with isis in iraq and syria, with ebola -- there is all this discord around the world. but it turns out that foreign of the smaller issues for voters. said this was a top issue. was left by healthcare
-- it was worth by healthcare. these are very complicated that -- that hold back -- helped to hold back obama's approval rating. >> the college and the unhappy as you want, you have that right, but what are you going to do to change things? based on your polling and these exit results, did you find anything? >> people really want the together to work and, i think that what we're dissatisfaction with president obama, but we're also seeing high with the action republicans -- the fallout of the healthcare was extremely damaging for both sides and we
saw it approval ratings of congress really plummet. and it has not really recovered since then. is a tremendous -- tremendously damaged feelings about what the government is capable of. 78% think they do not trust do what is right. and 54% say they want government to do less rather than more. >> let's go to art joining us from north carolina. he also voted on election day. good morning. >> good morning, sir. i regard and have always that is is your obligation and right -- so i have voted almost all my life. i think most people things voting is two
and that is that there's a tremendous amount of apathy by simply do not care. as our efforts -- and i am an activist within my party -- our efforts to motivate some of they will tell you that there is no difference, but at the same do not inform themselves or even make an themselves nform of the difference in the philosophies and the actions people try to do. of there's a great deal apathy and voters and the is, by and large, really gone to be a purveyor of bias rather than use. >> thank you for making the call. as he was making his point, also weighing in saying:
so to that sentiment and to the college point about media, your response. it is a rational reaction to the situation. if you see a government that dysfunctional, why play along? why make the decision to play along? the best way not to how things change, but if don't like the system, it a ems like it could be rational decision to not play along with the system. that apathy manifests in seeing all these things that working, including a polarized media environment. >> generally speaking, how closely do people follow what is happening here in washington? >> you know, there's so many different stories. it all depends on the magnitude of the story.
a big story like the government shutdown, people followed really closely. but then day-to-day issues are -- people i less engaged, let's put it that way. >> let's go to james and new -- in new york. you voted and why? >> the reason i voted was because i have always believed it is my civic duty to vote. i went into the polls voting down the line t and i knew at the time that going to lose because talking to my democratic caller a i think your few back hit on something when talked about complacency -- prices and things like gas and not going down -- i think anger did drive the polls.
republican issues -- abortion, immigration, gay rights -- i think that drives go to the polls and say only thing i got to about all this is republicans seat pretty iver much now and i hope that they will lead and do good things, ask themselves o what question -- specifically would god or n -- jesus tried to turn children away at the borders? thank you very much. >> thank you. >> james makes a good point a number of callers have been talking about -- that voting is a habitual thing and do it one going to more, but not voting is going to be habitual as well. is your pattern and you're only going to turn out on a presidential year, that have seen very consistently.
about the s point illegal immigration, this has been a very contentious issue. to a path t a path to citizenship, but 3739% do not. is a big number. so it is certainly a very big issue and it is one of the has probably led to real dissatisfaction among hispanic voters around the towards president obama. not on the phone, you did vote last tuesday. why? >> i did not vote because i do not feel that our votes count. have a true democracy and i feel the lobbyists control the nation and how people vote by judy, by advertisements, by marketing.
since -- also, i used to be a hard-core democrats. the last time i voted was 2008. but obama's ineffectiveness -- to push the congress to one direction or another -- just presents he and s but doesn't push make decisions -- even though i do not like bush, he did it. >> did you vote for barack obama in 2008? >> yes i did. >> and you think you will vote in 2016? >> i don't know, i don't know. who do we have? hillary clinton and maybe elizabeth warren. i do not know who the republicans have for the president, but i feel that the decision should change. financing should be
all -- and coverage -- the regular people should be able to run for congress. otherwise we would get mitch mcconnell for 36 years. is this, a dictatorship? >> i don't want to put words in your mouth, but you sound dissolution. is that correct? >> i have a great job, everything is working fine, but think the congress -- the way they play the game -- it is not about the people. they are to blame. they do not work with obama. >> so this issue about how we pay for our campaigns and our elections is an interesting one. hour polling shows is that it is not a very high priority for people. they are not all that broader scheme e of things about campaign is a really t this
interesting statistic -- $3.7 spent on this campaign, in terms of early figures. that is, i believe, the most expensive midterm campaign ever. be even m sure will more expensive, but if you put the context, people spend twice as much eye candy for did for n than they -- much on candy for halloween that they did on the elections. so the amount of money in a is not that shocking in terms of what we spend our money on. think what is troubling and as t our caller identified was financing it and it is a very small group of people, mainly very wealthy people, were getting involved in spending money i campaigns. that sense of
disenfranchisement that, if you have more money, you will have a bigger say. a very s -- that is dispiriting thing i could be one of the reasons why people are not voting. >> and yet the new york times is writing about that this morning. helps when the senate -- special interest money ever raised in the congressional election. what are the chances that it be taking action to decrease the influence of money in politics. mail, of course -- nil, of course. >> we welcome your participation from scotland. good afternoon, tom. >> good afternoon. i would like to carry on from of the last speaker, but perhaps the of the election
years and that people enjoy halloween candy much more. to be a oes seem movement to prevent any further reform. i think that obama care right a nerve with the thing, and this.cash which is in -- dark cash which is coming in suits to be in to prevent hillary from taking over from president obama. >> okay, we will get a response. >> sure, the issue of healthcare was the second-most important issue to voters in this election. those voters went, overwhelmingly, to the democratic candidates. my sense is the -- the issue of obama care as a real be turning a bit. polls have shown that it to be relatively
unpopular, but it is thinking the questions asked was -- does the far, dable care act go too not far enough, or is it about right? 48% said it goes too far, but 46% said it doesn't go far enough. so it is not a complete failure in the eyes of voters. >> from texas, elizabeth is on the phone. who did not vote on election day, why? i didn't vote because i didn't think it would make a difference. i am wondering -- $15 food stamps. i think everybody in the house have the budget -- and let me tell you, --
and let me tell you, when i go there are d bank, people starving with $15 a month. that is all i have to say. somebody needs to be in there to represent my class of people. >> okay, elizabeth, thank you for the call. let's hear from another viewer who also did not vote on election day. rick from corpus christi, texas. why did you skip the voting box? >> okay, basically, i am new to politics. c-span back atching in august and i was trying to of low -- you know, because course you hear to get your things like and that -- but, of course, i was blind to everything. going to go vote to just say i voted. watching c-span and watching
all the news coverage of, you know, politicians. my basic e, i had understanding -- politicians corrupt and whatnot -- but watching c-span has actually made it harder for me go out and vote because for me, it seems like i need a masters degree in political science to understand exactly what is going on. >> rick, thank you for the call. to different reasons but a common thread between the two the lack of understanding or lack of interest. all rates, we are hearing different reasons today and all of them make sense. if you feel you don't understand the issues, you will be less comfortable getting in that ballot box. and in a lot of states, voting is, frankly, quite collocated. have ballot
initiatives -- trying to figure out what that is all can be very t complicated and states where positions any, many all at once, it can be daunting. if you're not into the habit not oting and you are familiar with it -- a lot of people have busy lives and they don't, quite frankly, have with the ep up day-to-day politics, to know what's what. partisanship e helps people ques to where where they s are to want to vote. >> where joined by peyton craighill, a pulling manager for the washington post. our last caller is a voter from louisiana. raven, good morning. >> good morning. vote on did you election day?
>> i'm trying to bring common sense into our politics. it seems to allude a lot of these guys out there. i mean, really -- yes, they are educated -- they are supposed to be educated, that they are out there -- but, excuse me, they have a lack of common sense. and we need common sense bad. you want to respond? >> absolutely. final call s encapsulates exactly what the voters want. they want government to works and they want people who cooperate and get things done. the last congress, i can anything that they produced in terms of actual legislation. not a ven if you are political scientist, you can see that things are dysfunctional right now. and, clearly, people want to different path. >> finally, as you look at the
polling data from 2014. does that lly, how compare to what we saw in 2006 going back to 1998? >> you know, there have been so many interesting swings. huge way there was a for republicans. different shift towards democrats. back only ou hearken to 1998, after six years of clinton's administration, he is the one person in recent history to actually gain seats during his midterm election. it is extremely difficult for who is in power after six years to gain seats in congress. so it is not unexpected what happened. we are very familiar with the types of turnout patterns and midterm off year elections. so it is not unusual, but obama ran into a
extremely dissatisfied electorate. >> peyton craighill of the washington post. thank you for stopping by. >> my pleasure. >> on her facebook page, we asking this question -- is the gop ready to govern? continue the conversation online at facebook online/c-span. we're going to focus on what next for the gop. thurber, a professor here in washington dc, will talk about whether the gop can work. also, on this date, the berlin wall began to fall 25 years ago. we will talk to a professor about what it means for the us, for germany, and for europe. coming up later as the "washington journal" continues on the sunday morning, but first, a look at the other sunday shows. as always, nancy, c-span radio studios. good morning.
>> good morning, steve. topics of mourning include the midterm elections. the 25th anniversary of the berlin wall. and the president's trip to asia. you can hear rebroadcast of programs and c-span radio beginning at noon eastern. guests include scott walker, newly reelected republican governor of wisconsin. glenn graham of florida. mike brown of south dakota. and former house majority leader eric cantor. of abc news, -- and mark halperin, editing manager of bloomberg politics. is fox new k, sunday. john, republican
wyoming, with chair representative javier. at ate of the union follows 3 pm eastern with senator john thune, senator chris murphy, and delaware democratic senator chris cooper. representative steve israel -- is the outgoing chairman of the democratic national campaign committee. at four eastern, it is face the nation. today, it is their anniversary broadcast and have interviews with president barack obama and former president george w. bush. buy a public service by the networks and c-span. a rebroadcast of the shows 2 pm at noon eastern, fox's sunday, at three cnn state of the union, and face the nation at four.
listen to them all on c-span radio at 90.1 fm, across the radio on xm satellite 120 -- us un channel on channel 120. night on the communicators, dir. of center for technology and innovation. people who oppose -- this and look at the internet header. called a something low latency -- services, different kinds of services -- that was designed from the beginning. when we redesigned the internet because we were out of internet
not only that field, we actually included another field to do form of prioritization. prioritization was never intended to be allowed -- i think a little engineering knowledge goes a long ways. feature from ign the beginning and if you talk to the people who are actually using it today -- they're using it to deliver, for example, voice services. that you, completely ip-based to your phone is known as volte. a lot of video and other things with the same way. night at eight eastern on the communicators. "washington journal" continues. >> our topic, can divided government work? someone that knows a thing or
two about this is prof. james thurber, coming out with a new book in march titled -- >> "american gridlock" the party phrase on of no to the party of, now what? one of the points they make in pieces that speaker weiner and mcconnell will have difficulty. how difficult will that be for them to govern within the gop? >> already, senator cruise out and attacked mcconnell for compromise. the system necessitates compromise and both leaders tough for the e caucus -- it may be a civil on for a while with the far right and those want to get something done. >> has that helped senator
mcconnell? look, he is out there, but we are trying to work with the mainstream gop. >> what helps them was a whole republican senators get elected. so he can sort of marginalized as he goes forward because of his newer people that were elected are not tea party people. he inserted himself to make party people tea didn't win in the primaries -- ones that would have a tough time in general. so i think that he has the him, that is important. and he has the main caucus with him, but he is going to a lot of criticism. >> the other store that people this morning, out todd w book by chuck titled "the stranger". is this an appropriate title? >> i think he is a stranger to some institutions in washington.
he said he was going to change he titutions in washington, hasn't. a do not think he is stranger to himself -- i think he knows himself very well -- a stranger to washington. he brought a lot of people from chicago and has had a lot of changes in the white house, but he still does not trust washington. the lobbyists in washington -- even though he needs of the the affordable care act, but also the people on the hill. the doesn't engage with leaders very much -- he is to have to engage. is going to have to realize no longer has amended, by the republicans have a mandate and he has to compromise and work with them. >> if you were in the room cameras left, the president had a luncheon with congressional leaders on friday. this is a moment that was open the president
spoke briefly. on one side by speaker weiner, on the other side by senator mcconnell. and democratic leaders, as well. off camera, what do you think the dynamics were? first of all, podesta is going to be leaving, it looks like. it is somewhat dysfunctional and the white house right now. i think the dynamics were that, boy, we have to stand tough on immigration. if they do, it will be like a front of the n republicans. to have to compromise on that. off a little bit, he has all kinds of unions and all kinds of other people who are going to be pushing him to do something. i'm sure the talk about that. sure they talked about how to limit the damage that
will be done to the affordable care act. one thing the republicans want to do is be to the tax -- get rid of the tax on medical devices. he might go along with that. another thing that probably talked about was the keystone pipeline. he might go along with that. there are some areas where can read some accommodation. of will irritate the base the democratic party, but after all, these are the last two years. is a lame-duck -- he is not a cooked duck yet, but he is a lame-duck. in the last two years, he can a little bit more, but the republicans have to, too. so many new people in the house of representatives, i think is going to have an easier job now. >> let's talk about the institution and the senate, in particular. i want to let you listen into mcconnell said on
wednesday and how he wants to see changes. the last few e in years basically does not do anything. we do not even vote. senator -- may have had a explaining to people why he didn't vote in six years. the first thing i need to do is to get the senate back to means working at more -- i don't think we have any votes on anybody's memory. it means opening the senate up so that amendments are permitted on both sides and it burning the onally midnight oil in order to reach a conclusion. i can remember the way we used to get bills finished was for the majority leader to announce on monday that we are taking up a particular bill and we're going to finish it. changes may mean some
for our c-span2 viewers, but when you hear that term regular it mean real change? >> let's talk about regular order. regular order is what are children learned at sesame street. it means that you introduce a look at it -- it goes from the senate committee you have to and liberation and you have debate and to have votes. you do not go directly from the leader's office in the house to the rules committee to the floor. or you just don't sit there and kill things by the threat of filibuster. so, yes, many leaders want to go back to the regular order. in fact, mcconnell said he was willing to get rid of the two ear option about months ago -- there's not a lot of talk about that -- with me to go back to being able to filibuster nominations. he also wants to get rid of tuesday thursday club.
you know, people work year and california for o a fundraiser -- the day after than ection, sometimes -- they fly the redeye and come back to work. everybody said they were going to get rid of the tuesday thursday club. good luck. that he does that. he is a person who grew up in the senate as a stock member. he knows what it used to be like and it used to be more more open to amendments. hard , people worked very -- long hours -- not 95, but very long hours every day of the week and into the weekend. i hope that he turned it around. i doubt it. >> will get your calls in just a moment. you can also share your
comments on our facebook page or send us a tweet. the other part of thurber, the . democrats family drama. the senate democratic leader harry reid stared stonefaced into the distance. his chief of s by staff basically dissing this his 47% saying approval rating -- you need to do it you need to do. is comments never would have been given to the washington post had harry reid never off on it -- not signed off on it. >> it was shocking to hear what he had to say. these are very critical of the president. the now majority leader approved it. there is a split to the president and the majority leader on what to do and what strategy should be taken.
>> chrone discover present as drag on democratic president. house arge of the white had senate democrats from tapping some of the most loyal donors. the hit was the political equivalent of the kind of uppercut that senator reid during his delivered boxing career. >> that is a great quote. yes, he was a boxer and it was of the e, but many people that -- that he was to ing with, do not want let the president to their and campaign for them because it was so unpopular. 43%, 30% support for the president in kentucky. there was a real drag. >> our guest is james thurber, a professor at american and the director
for the center of congressional and presidential studies. on the republican line. >> good morning. thurber made a statement talking about the rights when he initially started speaking. he was referring to the tea party. about the progressive party? nobody ever talks about them. from the congress the y webpages, progressives are socialists and nobody ever talks about them. like to hear somebody -- nobody ever does. in my book do called "the american good luck". i talk about -- "the american
gridlock". the blue dogs are gone on the left. who has replaced them are a fairly pure party on the left. is a bimodal ave distribution, nobody in the middle. the endangered species are moderate republicans, but also moderate democrats. we have gone from 58 blue dogs 2008 to about six, if they're willing to say it. that is totally republican except for african-americans that represent districts in the south. it is totally realized in the also , but it is realigned in america. we have this ideological purity on the left and the right. i would not call the democrat there's a whole discussion on what a socialist is -- but certainly they believe that the intervention
by government is okay in terms of health care and education and other things. but that is not the pure definition of socialism. >> one of the more liberal senators, elizabeth warren, has a piece this morning in section of washington post. work on me to america's agenda. we're joined on the line from new york. good morning. >> good morning, thank you for taking my call. you anted to comment that saying about the president -- congresses it down into 9% or something like that. so i think people fail to realize. >> well, yes, congress has from single digits -- in
those asked if they are doing a good or outstanding job -- to about 50% in the last two years. met one of the -- but it is the members on a hill saying they are doing an outstanding job. america has had it with this gridlock, they have had it way the institution works, and congress is always lower than the president. just before 9/11, president bush was in the 40's. 9/11 occurred any shot up to 91% in five days. was in the 30's and 60% and they shot up to in the polls. what the president is doing affects congress. congress is always lower in terms of the public evaluation. >> bill joins us from inglewood, california. >> good morning to you.
i want to strain of a little of this immigration deal. being a black person, the worst thing that has ever happened to us was all of these immigrants coming in from mexico. we were saying this over and over and over and over again. nobody would listen. the first immigration deal they had, we knew that was not going to work. anything n't have worth it -- employers, the one that is hiring these people. get this never straightened out as long as you are hiring them. stop this want to illegal immigration, make sure it is like every other industrial country does. people ure that these are not hiring illegal people -- you will be surprised they won't come because as and overstay come
divided party government. now, we know that during a period of divided party government, we don't get a lot done. for example, when we had unified party government under obama, he had a 96% presidential score. >> that's like a batting average. what he w what he got. it dropped to the0s dropped to the same thing happened to clinton when he lost the house in 1994. he went from 86% down to the 30s. he built it back up. the point is, when we have divided party government, we can't get a lot done unless both sides are willing to reach out and compromise the way newt beginnigingrich and clinton did we shut down government, republicans got blamed for it. they came together and he brought his preside presidentia score -- in other words, his success back up into the high 50s. i think this president will read the election, try to reach out and work with them. >> that's very different than the flow of money like the
mississippi and flood stage into these campaigns. it's obscene and much of it does come from business. >> that's what she's talking about. >> you work on capitol hill for among other senators hubert humphrey and bill brock. as you look at the senate, who do you look at those key players who could really bridge the divide between their party and the opposing party to get something done? >> well, first, we should look at mcconnell. mcconnell is the leader. it depends upon how he leads. the senate gets the leader that it wants and some people on the far right don't want him to compromise. they want to threaten to shut down government and they want to get rid of the affordable care act. i think he will be more mad rat even though he is pretty conservative, and he will reach out, try to do the right thing. and believe it or not, mccain who is very critical of the president on foreign policy is a guy who is willing to work with the other side. he's a person to look for leadership. you know, hubert humphrey when i
worked for him, i asked him one time, i said why aren't there more statesmen around him? and we looked back. dirksen and humphrey were statesmen. he said a statesman is a dead politician. so when they leave office, they are dead. when they die are, they are dead. so they don't look like statesmen now, but i think they will reach out and try to work together, and i think we have got to look at both leaders. you know, boehner is pretty moderate guy in his background. he got in trouble for it in the past. i think he will bring people together. we will see more compromise than you realize. >> this is speculation but do you think this is the final term for mitch mccog? do you think harry reid will run in 016 and you mentioned senator mcca mccain. will he leave when his term expires in four years? >> i do not have inside information on all of that. i think mcconnell will probably try to stay around if he's in the majority, but remember, there are 24 republican senators up in 2016. >> that's half the caucus.
and if they do poorly in 2016 and he is in the minority again, he may not run. senator reid, i think will stay here for a while. there are poerz who would like his job. alan for professor james thurber here in washington, d.c. >> how are you doing? >> fine, thank you caller: why do you characterize ted and demean ted cruz as on the fringe? >> guest: one way to look at it is to look at statistically -- it's a little boring but we can show where people vote on an ideological con tin uum and he votes on the far right consistently and he never has a common vote with the -- with the democrats. he's come out one day before the election attacking mcconnell for being too moderate. and he has statements just in
the last couple of days saying that we should threaten to shut down government. >> that's not moderation. >> that's somebody on the far right. >> alan, do you want to follow up? caller: yes. i have two more points. follow up with this and another question. he is a constitutionalist. do you consider constitutionalists on the fringe? >> no. it depends upon the individual. we have a constitution that sets up a framework where people have to get along and compromise and work together, and he doesn't seem like a guy who really wants to work together. he seems like a guy who is running for the presidency that's trying to make a stand that appeals to the tea party. the tea party is pretty far to the right on a whole lot of issues, domestic issues, leaving aside the question of whether they are constitutionalists or not, they would like to get rid of a whole lot of things that the government is doing. >> that's considered conservative. >> that's considered out of the main line and that's why i mention that. host: do you want to follow up
with a third point? caller: yes. why do you give democrats a pass and not the pure socialists? there are -- there are wages and income and they abhor economic signism and private industry. you cannot give them a pass on that. how do you do that host: okay. >> guest: well, the redistribution of wealth is coming from our primary entitlement programs which are from the aged, social security, medicare and medicaid. half of it goes to people who are retired, mainly single women, and for over 60 years, we feel felt this to do. one way to judge government is the way it treats the sick, the elderly and those who cannot help themselves. i don't see the democrats pushing for a major
redistribution of income at this point. many are very close to business. clinton was, and he put in policies to be more friendly to business. maybe you don't like that but this is what he did. >> mr. thurber, well done on bomb-throwing extreme right-winger ted joe mccarthy cruz. is that analogy fair? >> i don't think it's fair. joe mccarthy was a person going after individuals in government that he felt were associated with communism. he mistreated a whole lot of people in due process. he ruined people's lives. he's been repudiated for the way he attacked people. so cruz doesn't do that. cruz is conservative. he's dynamic. he wants to run for the presidency. he's out there on the campaign trail helping people, building up chits so that when he runs -- and he is running now -- he will
have the support. now, mccarthy didn't do that. >> he wielliott from mayorriott georgia, democrats line. caller: good pony, sir. i wanted do make a couple of points. one point is about immigration. i ha happen to be an immigrant from senegal and have a lot of friends who are illegal, but the thing people don't realize is that once you allow illegal immigrants to get their paperwork, what's going to happen is that they are going to be taking the $60 job anymore. they will ask about a regular wage like anybody else. so 11 markos moulitsasl million people are going to stay. how about letting them come out,
participate in the economy, work like anybody else and ask about living wages host: how long have you been in the u.s. caller: i have been here for 15 years now. host: thank very much for the call. >> guest: there is no doubt and there is evidence that undocumented workers in the united states are discriminated against by business people but most businesses pay them the going wage, minimum wage. i am from oregon. okay? when i grew up in oregon, there were immigrants them then working in the fields, the farmers absolutely need them then and they need them now and they pay them the prevailing wage for that and treat them the way they treat other workers. now, there is lots of exceptions, and he's referring to these exceptions. the question is: how do you set up a situation to send people who are fell options, very few are fell options, back to their countries out of the united states and how do you have a pathway so that they can be
documented and citizens in a reasonable way over a long period of time and, therefore, be treated the way citizens are? >> the debate. security versus the freedom of these individuals to be americans. it is a tough one. i think we will see process. >> cruz, rubio, portman, rand paul, all potential 2016 candidates. how does that affect senator mcconnell's role in trying to harness support within his own caucus? >> the senate is an incubator of people who want to run for the presidency they look at the president and 13s i am smarter than him. i can do it. it's a tough place to run. i think we will see governs have a better chance or unemployed governors like jeb bush have amount of time but it's hard to control people in the senate that have this ambition for the next office, and that's what he is going to have.
they are going to be speaking to a national audience rather than getting behind closed doors and legislating. mccain will be an inside legisla legislator, a guy who works hard. there are a bunch of people like that. but there are four or five people that are going to be thinking, jeez, i can be president. i am going to make some statements and it's going to be hard to get things done with those people host: next fromwic. good morning, keith. caller: good morning. another beautiful day in america since tuesday's results of the election with the republicans taking over the senate. it's the fact that the best governor in the last was re-elected in scott walker who has won for a third time in four years. my comment is that, of course, divided government can work. we have seen it with tip o'neill and ronald reagan working together, but now, we have a pure i'd log in the office who it didn't take notice of the result after 2010.
was re-elected in 2012 but now, after seeing his post-election conference, he is not going to give in to working with the republicans after this election. we have seen a previous caller call in and talk about the low approval rating of congress. when you realize that republicans have passed over 300 bi-partisan bills that have been sitting on senate majority harry reid's desk and not giving a pass, we will see that cities pate with the mitch mcconnell taking office we will see things get past in the house, in the senate and the true obstructionist barack obama veto most of those bills. hillary read or whoever the democrat is will not get elected. >> is keith cracking? >> yes, about 10 statements. i don't know whether he's accurate on all of them. but let me just comment on a little bit on second-term
presidents. en r-- even reagan had this problem. 16 of them in the history of the united states. there is a little problem with overestimating mandates and had you beenris and failure to adjust to circumstances, a little problem of you still thinking they have a lot of political capitol. richard nixon in 1972, he was lee elected by 61% and then he resigned. r because of impeachment. reagan was hobbled by the iran contra schedule. little got done. george bush in 1990, the george bush 1st didn't get re-elected but pulled through a balanced budget, worked with the other party, increased taxes, read my lips, no new taxes. he did that. got the economy on the right
track. bill clinton inherited that and yet clinton in his second term promised to build a bridge to the 21st century and then he was impeached for lying under oath about monica lewinski and george w. b bush was re-elected tonal see his rating plummet and difficulty with the hill because of divided party government with scenes of violence in new orleans and baghdad and the financial crisis. obama, i think obama knows how to read the tea leaves from 2010, on, when he lost the house. i personally thing that he will begin to moderate and work with the republicans. i hope that he does. i think he also is very worried about the 3338 pieces of legislation that were passed in the first two years. it's not only the affordable care act, dodd frank, lily
ledbetter, lots of important acts. he is going to try to hang on to those for his legacy. >> means there will be confrontations over the affordable care act. there will be confrontations over tax reform, but they will find common ground in my opinion in trade, the surface transportation bill and a variety of other things that the house and the senate will agree upon. i think he will go with it. so, i think it's going to be hard for the president. he is go to go have to recalibrate and adjust, but the iranians are going to have to do that, also. i don't think it's all going to be threatened vetos and veto did over the next two years. >> this question, i know, has come up in your class on so many different occasions but do you think if you could go back to the founding fathers and change the way the executive branch was set up and have a single six-year term for the president, would he that effect change? >> one thing would be to have a 4-year term in the house of representatives like a parliamentary system where every
four years you elect the president and you have a potential coattails in the house of representatives going up and down with the president, getting him -- giving him enough members to governor. one six-year term for the president means he is immediately a lame duck. >> means he gets more degrees of freedom to do what he wants to do. but that doesn't mean that the hill, house and the senate, the other party, will go along with it. they may just stall. our problem in america is everybody is thinking about the next election. everybody today is thinking about 2016, presidential election, senate election. they are using wedge issues to get more votes, meaning things that them don't want to resolve, they are going to use it as a wedge issue against the party next time. senator reed read kept a lot of votes off of the floor because he was afraid it would hurt his members. mcconnell is going to do the same thing. i think they should go forward and govern. >> that's what the american people want. they want them to come together
and govern. it's hard because there is nobody in the middle. that's our crisis in our democracy. >> from chicago, jason on the phone, independent line. good morning. thanks for waiting. couple call i want to ask a question: is mesh the only country you can come to illegally and not go through the due process and actually fight for your rights, which is not right at all but still get them in return? have a good day. host: a lot of questions on immigration today. guest >> guest: i am not a comparative politics person but other countries have very strict rules about immigrants. german has always had -- not always. post world war ii, they have had issuesimmigration. the eu generally does right now. they have very strict rules about that. what we have in america is we have first amendment rights. we have the right to organize. we have the right to have freedom of speech, assembly,
government for grievances. it's relevant here because we have the right for people who are undocumented to organize and proce protest without being thrown into jail. that's something to be very proud of many nations would arrest these people for speaking out against the administration. >> this conversation is going online at c-span's twitter page and on facebook, at facebook.com/c-span. ken is joining us from cincinnati, democrats line. good morning. caller: good morning. excuse me. i am somewhat nervous. a little bit anectdote. i grew up overseas and when i was a junior at the american school of milan, i went to title college at montenola. i got in a conversation with the professor of political science and he said, you know, he was talking about the east and west
during the 70s. we basically said, i blame americans more than i do russians. i said why is that? he was an american professor. he said, we do not vote. i have eastern bloc students in my classroom that would give their right arm to be able to vote. they know their votes don't count. yet when you have an electorate that only votes 40%, 61%, 63%, national elections, how can you call that a democracy host: okay. ken, thanks for the call. made that point as well on wednesday. >> guest: we do not require people to vote in the united states. we make it difficult to vote in the united states. the turnout has gone up slightly in presidential elections from 55% average from f.d.r. to obama to 62% primarily because of early voting. we make it easier to register, easier to vote by mail and, therefore, people turned out at a higher rate. but this turn out in this
election showed that there is a huge enthusiasm gap, i think, about the candidates, especially for the democrats. it hurt them. it looks like it's about 37% for the last 30 years, it's 38.8%. you know, the real election for the house of representatives and to a certain extent in the senate is the primary election in america. the turnout there is 18%. in some cases, it's eight % and who turns out in an 8% election? the real election, because if you win in the primary, there is no competition in general. the people on the far right or the far left. >> turns americans off. the main thing is the main difference, though, in terms of turnout throughout the world, it's 95% in australia because it's required. you get fined $250 australian dollars if you do not vote. sne rarely do that. we should have more people voting but we should have more people voting that know what
they are voting about, also. that's another aspect of this host: wade from pleas antsview, tennessee, you get the last wofford on all of this. good morning. caller: good morning. i would like to say to the professor, mentioned jeb bush, saying illegal people are coming over here for love. if you was the daughter and son in mexico and they wasn't living there illegally, would you go there and try to fight for the stay there or ask them to come home. >> during the height of our recirc we had more people leaving the united states than coming in believe it or not, going back to be it with their families. jeb bush's comment is, it's not only -- it's not all about economics.
it's about trying to get together with their families. now, if you -- if part of your family is in guatemala and you have a dysfunctional government, there are gangs and threats, you don't go back to guatemala. you try to get your family here i think that's the point of jeb bush. the book is more complex than that, but that stuck with me because it is so different than the rest of the republican party. it will be a controversy in the primaries and with republican voters as he goes forward. >> we will look forward to your book coming out in march. again, the title is? >> american gridlock. it's about the sources, characteristics and impact of polarization, not only in congress but with the media and, also, on state legislatures and with the voters, with interest groups, with the judiciary. it's not only just the hill that's polarized. it's happening throughout america. >> that's an issue we didn't even talk about is which is what
we see in states across the country and the increase of the republican majority in state houses. >> it's historic. >> james thurber, your final point? >> the number of republicans, state hoisz and governs is historic. this was a wave election, especially at the state and local level. >> our guest is the director of american university's center for congressional and presidential studies, stwramz thurber thank you for being with us? >> all right. host: we will take a short break. when we come back, we will turn our attention to the events that began to unfold 25 years ago today, the fall of the br helin wall, we are heard on c-span radio. we continue and we are back in a moment. >> there are some who say -- there are some who say that comunism is the wave of the future. let them come to berlin.
there are a few who say that it's true that communism is an evil system, but it permits us to make economic progress [speaking german.] [applause.] >> many difficulties and democracy is not perfect. but we have never had to put a wall up to keep our people in to prevent them from leaving us [applause.]
communism is the most obvious and vivid demonstration of the failures of the communist system. for all of the world to see, we take no satisfaction in it for it is as your mayor has said, an offense not only against history but an offense against humanity, separating families, dividing husbands and wives and brothers and sisters and dividing a people who wish to be joined together [applause.] freedom is indid i have visible and when one man is enslaved, all are not free.
all free men, wherever they may live, are citizens of berlin. and, therefore, as a freeman, i take pride in the word ich b ich bin ein berlinr. >> president john f. kennedy made those comments on june 26th, 1963, two years after the berlin wall was put updating becausing to august 13th, 1961. the top secret code name was operation rose. the second wall was built in june of 1962. a concrete wall was added in 1965. the final wall constructed in 1975 also included some mesh fencing, signal fencing and anti-vehicle trenches, barbed wire and 30 bunkers. by 1989, the wall included
45,000 concrete blocks, 259 dog runs and more than 302 watchtowers. 25 years ago, the "new york times" carried this headline: joyous east germans poor through the wall -- pour through the wall. a professor at georgetown university from east germany, dieterd dieterdit, as you look back 25 years later, is germany united? >> yes. germany is united. certainly in spirit, certainly in national unity. economically, there are still some questions. unemployment in east germany is a little higher than west germany. living standards are almost even if you go tobl berlin today, su you see some remnants of the old
regime in east germany but living standards are very even and equal we are getting to a point where you have equal standards in both east and west. there is some nostalgia and some suffered from the lack of freedom. but we are getting there nobody really wants the old regime to come back and wants the wall to come back. >> that's over and we are looking for a new more european germany. >> why did the wall fall and why in 1989? >> well, that was a mix of necessity and accident. it was an accidental event. the soviet regime was
unsustainable. the way it was constructed, it was not a coherent system. it clasped of its own weight. the soviet regime just couldn't continue. the weigh it ran the i am pioneer as a central command economy t that couldn't last. the lack of freedom. you had over years building up enormous pressure to get out of the system, change it, reform it. but it turned out it couldn't be reformed. it had to be replaced. >> that's what happened in november, germany in november of 1989 but you had signs of change earlier in hungary and policyland, these were movements that would restrict the next of the communist party, would under mine the one-party system of the
east and it brought changes towards, you know, democracy. and that's what people were asking for. very helpful was the hen sinki act in 1975 which was practically a way for east european movements, democratic movements, to ask for freedom and to ask for participation, to to be the dimomination of the communist party. i think about seth havel who at the charter of 77 in czechoslavakia who saw that as a way to bring lights and freedom for people in europe, in czechoslavakia, in poland, in hungar hungary, you know, there were movements to ask for change of the system. >> i want to share with you this headline from the "new york
times" again, november 11th, 1989. the situation in east german redefining europe and then there is a photograph next to that of an east german soldier handing a flower to those who are standing on top of the wall in west berlin. i mentioned this because we want to take you back to what congress is dealing with, a headline from the "new york times," what the senate democratic leader had to say on the floor, senate george mitchell as the wall began to fall. >> for nearly 30 years, the berlin wall has food as a symbol of the failure of communism. many saw that failure occurring overtime and now, it is evideene communists, themselves and to the east german leaders. today, it is not an act of
democracy not an act to placate the west but a desperate act of survival by the east german government to permit their people to leave represents the symbol issue destruction of the berlin wall. it has, in an ironic way, served a useful purpose because it has reminded on a daily basis every person in this world of the vast difference between dem occasionracy and communism. >> you listen to what senator george mitchell had to say 25 years ago, your reflexes today. >> i would say to some degree, the symbolic act of the fall of the wall took place a little earlier. it was on october 9th in leipzig where you had thousands of east
germans demonstrating against the communist regime in east germany. you had the churches filled with people who were demanding their rights and the pressure was building up and in many ways, you can see that the wall, the berlin wall already fell on october 9th in leip zing with these enormos demonstrations and the east german regime didn't have the courage to stop it and didn't have to use force and the reason was, of course, gorbachev. we have to talk about his role in this process. he really took -- pulled the carpet from under the east german register e-mail by saying, you are on your own. i am not going to use force in order to stop people from demanding rights & i am not going to stop demonstrations against you. you have to fix it. you have to do the reform. you have to join in this reform effort that he started and
perstroika and he was not willing to do what other communeit leaders, soviet leaders, should have done before. in hungary in 1956, to use military force and crush the demonstration of hungary, to use force in 1968 in prague. they crushed the demonstrations then. they crushed the arab spring and further back in 1953, in german, we already had a kind of revolution that was put down with tanks and with the use of brute force. >> all right. i am ask you about your own background. the headline from the "wall street journal" on the reunification of east and west germany coming with a big price tag, estimated between 1$15 to $2.5 trillion. that's with a t, leo is joining
us from the bronx in new york. good morning. caller: yeah, good morning. how are you doing host: fine, thank you. caller: my question is to the guest: what happened to all of the people who were in the east german secret police when the documents and files were opened up to everybody? >> guest: good question. they were taken to a town. there were court cases. there were trials some were, particularly those who used guns to shoot people and there were people shot at the wall. actually, up to february, 1989, the last person was shot near the wall and these people were taken to court. some were sentenced to prison
terms, but you have, of course, a difficult situation with the east german leadership. some were taken to court and sentenced to prison terms, and served prison terms. but in many cases, you couldn't do very much in terms of trials so it was mild if you looked all together in an effort to hold these people accountable, hold them accountable. in any case, you know, what stalin did was, of course, ugly spying on people, people who were guarding the wall, of course. they used force and that's a different question. but the spying activities, that's harder to judge and hold people accountable. so, it was from an effort to, you know, make sure that this system is
judged correctly and the people who took on a personal responsibility for crimes, they were sentenced. but it was all together the numbers were not very high who were 70sed to prison terms. >> if you are tuning in or listen okay c-span radio, our guest is peter dettke, originally from east germany as we reflect on the efforts that began to unfold 25 years ago today. the fall of the berlin wall. a number of stories relating to all of that including this from "new york times," photographs from the scene 25 years ago and flex on the berlin wall anniversary. somber notes amid revelry. how do the germans view this anniversary? >> they celebrate for the first time and as we speak today, balloons are going up to mark, you know, freedom and liberty for the first time, but they were also difficulties as you look back. the first years after the fall
were not easy. you saw the economic difficulties in eastern europe. you saw even in russia, where they went through difficult times. in german, take okay this enormous burden of unification as you mentioned the numbers up to 2 trillion u.s. dollarsness in order to build up east germany and bring this part of the country back to, you know, decent standards. and you probably have to renew the whoeft -- review the whole east german economy. it was lagging behind. there is nothing really attractive in the economic system there. you had to bring back the entire administration of east germany and you would have to make sure that east germans would be taken care of in terms of social security and in terms of health and in terms of you know
employment benefits and the unemployment was, of course, an enormous burden. >> the fact that the east german economy collapsed brought about an enormous unemployment. >> and that needs to be taken care of. the costs were tremendous. at the begin, we had to introduce new taxes. but the advantage of the situation was, of course, in east german was able to introduce state-of-the-art technology in terms of infrastructure n terms of telecommunications, and so, you know, they did have a foundation for a functioning economy and then you had, also, an enormous drive for young people in particular to go west instead of staying in east germany and helping to rebuild east german, which was very, very necessary. >> when the wall was in place, it was to keep the east germans in. obviously, the west.
>> absolutely. the would have been depopulated if you would let people go. and that was the pressure that was building up towards november 9th, '89, the pressure of east germans wanting to leave the system. and first, they had to go to hungary and then hungary in order to get the issues there opened up the border to austria knowing, of course, that east germans who went to hungary had a chance to go to west germany. then pressure built up in czechoslavakia and prague. people stormed to the german embassy in prague in order to have a way to get to the west. and this pressure was building up a long time in east germany, and so the tragedy after the fall of the wall was, of course, a lot of young people were leaving, going to the west, having a better future there ininstead of helping to build
and rebuild east germany. >> between 1961 and 1989, about 5,000 fled from east germany successfully into west berlin. the wall is actually two walls divided by about 180 feet and there is what's called the death barrier that included mines and guard dogs and watch towers that shot and killed those who tried to escape. we are looking at scenes from the early 1960 did and much of this will also be on c-span 3s american history t.v. jay is joining us from lorraine ohio, ohio, good morning. caller: good morning. c-span recently aired the communist party of the u.s.a. and their convention, and they said pretty much or he said sam meade said that, you know, embrace the progressive ideas i wonder what you think about communim here in america. thank you hoecht. host: thank you.
guest: get there is a difference a joke about the difference up to '89. the difference is in the united states you do have a communist party and that's a joke. i think here in the united states, it's an absolutely minority would follow these ideas and you have several ideas that are still left over in many ways. you have the north korean type. you have the cuban type and china is a different story. china, by the way, introduced market reforms and am was able to reform its own system which the soviet union did not do. >> was the tragedy oh, go gorba was not successful with his
program of pair striperostroika. nothing is left over and i don't think here in the united states there is any chance of going that direction after the experience we have with a system that just is brutal and has no chance to provide any formal human dignity the reality is a different one and certainly not an september alan. >> 11 months after the wall began to fall down in east and west berlin, this from the "new york times," from october of 1990, courtesy of our producer, john gallagher, should germany uni unite after 4 years. >> when was the capitol, from bohn? when did that take place? >> that was gearhart schroeder
in 2005, and he took over from him in 1989 and he moved berlin to -- he moved the capitol, the actual seat of the government to berlin in 2000. it began as a process right after he came to power. >> we will go to joe in greenwo greenwood, indiana. good morning. >> good morning. your lead-in, has j.f.k.'s speech given in berlin at the time and, also, the senate majority leader had a spot on your show, but i had always been taught that the policies of the reagan administration did more than anything to cause the communeit regimes throughout
eastern europe but you haven't had anything about ronald reagan. i just wonder what your esteemed author there would have to say about that. >> let's share with the audience from june of 1987. ronald reagan traveled to west berlin. >> there is one sign the so far yes, it is can make that would be unmistakable. it would advance dramatically the cause of freedom and peace. general secretary gorbachov, if you seek peace and prosperity for the soviet union and europe, if you seek liberal eyes acres come here to this gate. mr. gorbachev, open this gate [applause.]
>> mr. gorbachev, tear down this wall [applause.] >> professor dettke, your reaction >> guest: there is no doubt that western firmness helped to bring down weapon containment, helped to bring down the soviet system, the soviet empire and had to bring down -- helped to bring down the empire of communism. if you look at the fall of the wall, it was certainly a combination of factors and we should not under estimate this forces from inside eastern europe, the democracy movement in poland was very, very helpful in bringing down the system.
the movement to demand rights for people in eastern europe and finally, the eastern german movement, the people who were prep pressuring the regime to open up thing knew opening up would be the end of their regime and that, indeed, happened after 89. there was no way of reforming. there were some ideas, too, of reforming the east german system but that was certainly not successful it had to be replaced and people in east germany had, of course, a clear alternative. that was west germany, joining the republic of germany and that's how it happened. there was a possibility through the german constitution based
upon making east germany and the states, the old states of germany part of the fair republic of germany. that's how it happened. these two parts of german, east germany and west germany grew together. it worked a combination of factors inside east germany, inside eastern europe and the soviet union. go gorbachev's reform was an important factor in allowing this to come to fruition. in november of 1989, you know, it went and came to the collapse the wall. a unification of germany and even larger than that, a unification of europe. this was called the return from czech chesh in eastern europe,
the return to europe because for the older cultural tie ins europe that came back and brought this usefication of europe together with german united statesfication. >> dr. dettke is a professor at georgetown university. he is also with the bmw center for german and european studies, born in berlin during world war ii. how long did your family stay there? when did you come to the u.s.? >> well, my family lived in there from 1953. my father was in the opposition, and in 1953, he had a choice: you go to jail or move to the west. >> that's what we did. at that time it was easy to transfer inside berlin. you took the east to the west because they are still running and in that respect, it was easy after 1961, everything was
blocked off. and only through arrangements that were made in berlin visiting and people had to pay for in order to visit east germany unless they had a visiting rights and it was practically sealed off in order to save the system. if you would have left in berlin, you know, the gdl would collapse and impact of immigration and people looting the gur that was, you know, elections of the this was an election. >> you say gdr, referring to it as east germany? >> yes. >> let's go to joe in denver, pennsylvania, with dieter dettke with georgetown university as we reflect on the fall of the
berlin wall which began 25 years today. joe, good morning. >> good morning. i appreciate the last fellow kind of stole my thunder about ronald reagan, but ronald reagan, while he was president, instituted a number of things. he worked with the pope extensively and slight to the pope which he gave to lulec luleck lewenza. any time there was movement of government forces, he knew immediately beforehand the solidarity movement knew. england was heavily involved with margaret that arer. this was a concerted effort by a number of great leaders that, thank god, we had at that time in power that were able to put these things in motion that eventually brought down the wall because without -- it's sad that
c-span didn't give ronald reagan the real right off of the top appreciation for what he did for the people of the soviet union and eastern europe in freeing them, and i talked to people when i went to ronald reagan's fuel in dc, you could not believe the amount of people who came from eastern europe. there was one guy who had -- was in the gulags who came from russia just to be there. >> as you mentioned, the pope and his role, the polish group, that was critical because he was the one who could go to poland and tell pols, do not be afraid and that encouraged, of course, people to stand up against the regime that was critical. so that created a critical mass
against the dimination, against the one-party state. >> stood over into parts of europe. in germany, too. and, you know oh, gogorbachev, entirely to stop this e maybation of the soviet system through reforms and when he found out that it was too late, too little, if he had was not around at the time from his soviet prospective from moss cow, you saw a dynamic china, you know, economic reform. you saw a dynamic universe of america. you saw a europe that was, you know, beginning to create an internal margaret and were sliding. the only country that was really stagnating and not moving forward was russia.
and gorbachev opened up and the difficulties that russia had right after him were enormous. and now, we see putin in charge in a way, and recreating and trying to recreate, you know, a russia that begins to dominate this. we have seen it. we have to make sure our leadership, you know, begins to understand that we need to keep up the idea of poland free and peace and peace has been shattered by putin with his movement or his actions in shain. >> i should point out gorbachev is 83 years old. he is in the berlin for the 25th anniversary of the ceremonies. barbara joining us from kansas
ci city, missouri. i want to remind you of our viewers and listeners you can check out this program can and a lot of our history programming every weekend on c-span 3s american history t.v. and check out our new website through c-sp c-span.org. >> i grew up in berlin and when i first walked through the branburg gate, i touched the walls and cried like a child. i am wondering [audio delay host: go ahead barbara? >> i am wondering what is happening with the dire prediction of the nuclear. >> his reference to a new cold war. >> yes. that has to do with putin's action in ukraine and the establishment of russian
enclaves in eastern ukraine, the donetsk, people's republic, these are basically russian creations and it is an effort to undermine the stability of ukraine. we have to stop that. yes, the new cold war could emerge and we have to do everything to keep that. >> you know, macho of a europe whole and free and in peace alive. this will have to be done either with russia or without. and the difficulty is from the western side to really support the independence of ukraine. >> has to be the key and it may be ukraine has to be a bridge between russia and europe but the key is that we preserve the
index of ukraine and that needs an enormous effort on the western side and of course for purposes of determines in containment to have boots on the ground in eastern europe to make sure there is a limit to what putin can do and changing that that tenants of the post cold war settlement. >> is territorial integrity and independence and freedom. >> we have less than a minute. i want to ask you quickly. angela merkel from east germany, how significant is that that she continues her tenure? >> she has the experience of this east german register e-mail and that is a very important element for her. she speaks russian, which is an advantage. she can speak to putin directly who happens to speak german,
too. so her role is critical and germany is critical in finding ways of not putting the index of ukraine at risk and at the same time, do everything to stabilize the country and that needs probably a greater german effort, comic effort to help in mccain and be ready to use a stronger position of nato in the area to make sure that you know, other countries that are a part of nato and the european union are not intimidated by putin. >> dieter dettke from georgetown university, a professor at the bmw center for germanan studies and with the center for execute stud i recognize thank you for being with us. >> thank you. >> we will continue the conversation tomorrow morning
joinings from brookings as he talks about how washington will try to tend gridlock between both ends of pennsylvania average and bonnie glaser from the center of strategic and international studties and the asia pacific conference getting underway this week in beijing. geoff kouts from space news to talk about your money, monday segment looking tomorrow at nasa and commercial space flight tomorrow morning on the "washington journal." thank you for joining us on this sunday. hope you enjoy the rest of your weekend. have a great weekend. ♪ ...