. then historian talks about the legacy of george washington. and they look at a federal program to upgrade local election procedures. host: good morning. it is monday, december 26, 2011. thanks for being with us for today's "washington journal." state, federal, and local offices closed in observance of the christmas holiday. the new york stock exchange close today as well for that same reason. fairly quiet news day, but we have lots to talk about on the "washington journal" this morning. we're glad you're with us. this is the time of year when we look back on the year behind us, as well as looking ahead to the new year. in this first segment, we're going to look over the names of notable people in the a section

of the newspaper, from news, politics, and policy, who died during 2011, and ask which of those have, in your eyes, the most significant legacy, that their legacy lasts beyond their years with us. we're going to give you a number of names and talk about them. richard richard norton smith is at the table with his opinions on some of those. our phone lines and other tweets and facebook also our email lines all open for your participation. here are our phone lines. 202-737-0002 for republicans. 202-737-0001 for democrats. and our line for independents, 202-628-0205. good monday morning to you. at the table with richard norton smith. we both wish you a good holiday. before we get into our discussion of the political deaths of 2011 and the effect that many of these people had on society, we would like to show you a little bit of the morning news. it is a quiet news day, thank goodness for a change.

guest: no one to add to the list. host: lead in the "new york times," u.s. withdraws pakistani ties with limits. new here's what the reporter writes --

host: this appearing in a numerous publication, but with eight days to go, runup to iowa caucuses quieter in previous years. most of those suggest the plethora of debates this year and more social media and video interaction has taken the candidates out of living rooms and on to our video screens. and also this in many newspapers this morning, we have "the miami herald," miami police and army on hackers' hit list. this is another hit by the group anonymous.

host: with that news, we're going to look back and talk about people who departed this earth during the year 2011. our conversation with you is to look at this list and tell us which among them have the most outsized legacy, legacy that will last beyond their firs. and if we've missed people you'd like to talk about, please join us. we're going to start of international deaths. most recent are kim jong il of north korea, and vaclav pavel, the czech poet who turned to the country's political leader. stalin's daughter, muammar gaddafi, osama bin laden, the south vietnamese unofficial

first lady, and the the american-born al qaeda figure. there's some to think about. we're also going to look at some of the deaths among u.s. figure political figures. let me put up the names as well -- host: you thought it was kim

jong il and vaclav pavel departed in the same week. host: well, talk about a boxing, literally. we defined the parameters here of political influence and human character arguably. vaclav pavel, the great czech dissident, playwright, poet, a man synonymous with human rights. he was a rather reluctant president of czechoslovakia. but it's not his official presidential functions for which he'll be remembered. it's part of the greater drama. ironically, the greatest drama that he ever took part in was not one he put on paper, but one that he shaped from external events and through his own character. and then, of course, at the other extreme, kim jong il, who

even now is a rather shadowy, mysterious figure, but clearly the opposite of vaclav havel when it comes to human rights. host: a couple of stories in the newspaper related to both. in "the wall street journal" in their weekend edition, world leaders gathering to mourn vaclav havel. among those in attendance were secretary of state hillary clinton and former president bill clinton, as well as lech walesa, who led the fight against commune nism neighboring poland. host: here's an example, we have our one of our viewers already using twitter to suggest the names that he thinks are most important. vaclav havel and bin laden. but since we like to have a discussion with you, add a few more -- add a little more texture when you're tweeting us or calling us as to why you think these people are

significant and keeping us in those twitter characters. kim jong il, of course, the transition, everyone around the world is watching and trying to understand. here, for example, is "the miami herald" with a peg on the front page to the state funeral for kim jong il, and in a number of papers, all eyes on his heir and successor, including this story in this morning's "new york times." japan and china focus on north korea, and the prime minister of japan stands with the prime minister of china on sunday. speaking before he left tokyo, the japanese prime minister told reporters he planned to exchange, use information in detail so as to avert a harmful effect on peace and stability in the north korean peninsula. with regard to presidents and korea, the korean war and its intersection with u.s. presidents, can you talk about during which administration korea really focused the minds of american presidents.

guest: well, harry truman went into korea without a congressional declaration of war, something for which he was criticized then and since. but it was something unique in the modern era. it was collective security. remember we had something called the united nations, and the united nations, especially with the united states, was in the korean peninsula, resisting north korean aggression in league with its allies in the united nations. it was also the first war of the nuclear age. hear are you truman, in fact, didn't call it a war, he called it a police action. the fact is, although truman himself today is widely regarded as a very successful president and something almost of a pope figure in the popular culture, his conduct of the korean war was arguably at least as unpopular at the time as was george bush's conduct of the iraq war 40 years later.

host: kathleen, good morning, on the democrat line. welcome to the conversation. caller: good morning. thank you very much for taking my call. for me, most important person who died this morning is marvelous. her significant is critical, but one that people deny and ignore repeatedly. she was with james lovelock. she was the creator of the theory of the importance of earth as a being, as a living theory of everything being collectively united. i don't think we like to see this as a society. we don't like to see that there are ramifications for everything that happens. we think we can just ignore the earth, ignore the intraconnectiveness to all of its creatures. i think it's the biggest

mistake on the planet we make as human beings. it will be to celebrate her pass at umass, where she taught for so many years. it's hppt://wwwgeo/umass -- -- host: wow. you might suggest to people they do a search rather than remember that long u.r.l. one of the interesting things is learning about people we don't know about and why they're significant to you, and here are other names as well. on twitter, there's a tweets, pavel was a modern model modern leader, moderatest and moderate. guest: it's nothing he did, but again, because of external forces beyond his control. it has some relative, this

revolution we've been watching over the last year. remember, he was the last president of czechoslovakia. he could not prevent them from splitting into two countries. so the velvet revolution, historically significant as it was, we're celebrating as it is, opened the door to a whole new range of internal political and other problems, something that we're seeing played out in the arab world. host: next we talk about looking back on the people who died during 2011, from the political sphere, from news, public policy, journalism, politics, and who among them most significant. long island, new york, anthony, a democrat. good morning. you're on the air. caller: good morning. please give brian lamb my best. i miss him greatly. i feel that the d.c. madam got

little coverage, and she had an affiliation with the 9/11 hijackers. i just felt that her passing went unnoted and uninvestigated, and it seemed rather convenient for what had happened when you consider that she had some pretty pertinent information she was trying to bring forth. it really went under the radar screen, and i wish the media would have done a better job. host: thanks, anthony. guest: scandal has a very short shelf live in this town. it may be subject to criticism, but i think the caller has a point. host: as we look at the political figures internationally, we must talk about osama bin laden, because he seemed to bedevil a number of u.s. presidents. most early we know about is bill clinton after the first world trade center bombing in 1993, and, of course, george w. bush and on to president obama.

can you talk about osama bin laden's legacy? guest: well, there are a lot of landry list of things you can say, things that are said better than any of us can say, that extraordinary new memorial in lower manhattan. have you seen it? host: uh-huh. guest: yeah. remarkable. remarkable achievement. remarkable tribute. but i think one of the really interesting things, the almost muted reaction to obama's death, one way of measuring that, of course, was to look at the president's polls, where he got a modest bump, but it didn't last very long. i think over the years that osama bin laden has been with us, a name that we all recognize, there's been an evolution of our thinking, almost a maturity, as we came to realize that the war on terror, although this was the face of it, this was the man

who personified it, is in fact much larger than any one man. although the death of osama bin laden gratified a lot of people around the world, we're not naive enough to believe that it addresses the core issues behind his cause. host: the presidency, much of it focused around the effort to find this man and some of the aftermaths of the 9/11 attacks. can you talk a little bit about how it shaped his presidency. guest: i think he's been quoted as saying, in retrospect, one of the things he would undo, some of the language that he used early on that had the effect of personalizing this murderous contest, if you will.

as time went by and bin laden evaded escape, you heard less and less talk from the administration, that getting osama bin laden was the defining american mission, even in the war on terror. host: with regard to legacy, this story is from the orange county register this morning and, of course, all news has dozens killed in nigerian attacks. the majority of victims die on steps of church as bombings rock african nation. host: this, of course, tied to islamist group, up 059 members

of the group were believed to have been killed since thursday. civilian and security forces were also among the dead. that's from the news today. guest: it's interesting. where did the pope benedict, where was his last trip? it was so africa. one of the stories that is being written is the expansion of the catholic church in africa. in fact, it's growing more rapidly there than anywhere else, including latin america. and some of these tensions that you see here are going to be with us for a long time to come. host: well, let's listen to the president as he announced the death of osama bin laden this year. >> tonight i can report to the american people and the world, the united states has conducted an operation that killed osama bin laden, the leader of al qaeda, and a terrorist who's responsible for the murder of thousands of innocent men, women, and children. ad my direction, the united states launched a targeted

operation against that compound in pakistan. a small team of americans carried out the operation with extraordinary courage and capability. no americans were harmed. they took care to avoid civilian casualties. after a fire fight, they killed osama bin laden and took custody of his body. host: president obama earlier this year announcing the death of osama bin laden. there's a tweet, the bin laden death makes no difference to the war on terror came too late to make a dent in the problem of terrorism. looking back at those who died in 2011 from the political sphere, asking about their legacy in your eyes, next is a call from denver, and this is carl, an independent. go ahead, please. caller: yes, hello. host: good morning, carl, you're on. caller: i was calling because i was thinking that the death of -- i don't know that i'm pronouncing that right -- is

very important because it was the first time an american president ordered the assassination of an american citizen, and because the title terrorist had been incorrect al plied to him, it was basically in the majority of public opinion. it was all right that there was an assassination of an american citizen. i think this is very important. it was overlooked by the media, and that aspect of it i believe needs to be discussed further. host: thank you. comments on federal power during the year since 9/11. guest: well, it's want surprising. war, however you define it, brings about the concentration of power. we're still debating lincoln and his definition of habeas corpus. host: our next call is david on the republican line. good morning. you're on the air. caller: hi. how are you? about the other caller, i think

with the ushering of the law which is ushering in the pour of the news coverage to detain u.s. citizens anywhere in the world, domestically, it's kinds of scary. last time i called to c-span was in the 1990's when brian lamb was on there, and i think the world has changed significantly. it's a little scary, although he was a disgusting figure. i think it's being used as a symbol to expand the purview of power, and it really is not the united states united states that i remember, but i was born in the 1970's. host: victor looks, middle east tyranny and terrorism died in 2011, payful protest proved more powerful. fear is dead in syria for good. that's the viewer's thoughts on what significant deaths happened in the year 2011.

we have governor of carey of new york. former senate mark hatfield of oregon. general john shalikashvili. betty ford, two secretaries of state. the first, lawrence eagleburger, and warren christopher. in between there, we have geraldine ferraro and sargent shriver. ok, i know you are very involved with the ford leg sifment you were a eulogist at her funeral. can you talk about whether or not her legacy is a lasting one. guest: oh, i think so. i think so. i think there are so many ways of looking at mrs. ford's legacy. in some ways, she's a very unusual figure among first ladies. arguably her impact was greater after she left the white house, although you cannot, you cannot exaggerate the significance of her openness at the time of her breast cancer surgery. it is hard to believe it today,

but those are words not used in polite conversation 40 years ago. with the consequence that many women were confirmed. the fact that people can get this disease and talk about it openly was really a seachange. we measure that, and, of course, her subsequent frankness in dealing with her alcohol, chemical dependency issues has affected countless lives. host: we have a bit of her ceremony on her death on june 12, 2011. this is former first lady roslyn carter eulogizing her. let's listen. >> betty broke new ground, her public disclosure of her own battle with cancer lifted the veil of secrecy from this terrible disease. she influenced the influence of

the office of first lady to promote early detection and millions of women are in her debt today. and she was never afraid to speak the truth. even about the most sensitive subjects, including her own struggles with alcohol and painkillers. she got some criticism. i thought she was wonderful. and her honesty gave her to others every single day. host: rosalynn carter speaking about betty ford. we often hear about the special bond that former presidents have after they leave office, even transcending parties and sometimes some difficult political battles in the past. what about the first ladies? do they have a special -- guest: it's a great sorority. just as many people were surprised to discover that president carter and ford had established a very close personal friendship, i think probably there were people

surprised to learn that mrs. carter was one of mrs. ford's eulogists. she had been asked to do that by her good friend, betty ford. they had testified together up on capitol hill. as you know, mrs. carter has been a leading advocate on mental health issues. they teamed up. they were a great lobbying pair by all accounts. mrs. ford would make the case for her issues, and mrs. carter for her issues, and they worked together very successfully and developed -- it's not just politics that bring these people together. they discovered they had lots of things in common. they talked about each other's families, they wanted to know about the kids. i mean, it is an extended family in many ways. host: richard norton smith spending some time with us this morning on this december 26, the legal hole did i for christmas. we hope you have a little time to spend with us as well. he's going to come back and we're going to focus in on the presidency of george washington, a little history lesson. richard norton smith, presidential historian, wrote a

book in the early 199 's about george washington called "patriarch." today, an important anniversary for george washington. it is the anniversary of the battle of trenton. 235 years ago, a very decisive battle for him and the country, so we're going to use that as a launching pad to talk about his legacy, what traditions he put in place that modern presidents still follow today, and that's later on in our "washington journal" program. we have a tweet, betty ford addressed choice, cancer, substance abuse, a lasting legacy. let's go back to our phone lines. montgomery, alabama. doug is up next. good morning, doug, you're on the air. caller: good morning, everyone. how you doing this morning? host: great. thank you, sir. caller: i appreciate giving us citizens an opportunity to say something. we need to understand something. we need to understand that -- host: doug, hit the mute button

on your tv. that's what's causing the feedback. can you do that? caller: i want to say this now. anything that has a place in history had it comes to politics, once you respect that and be thankful for that, but even though it's gone, the fact of the matter is he was a terrorist. that's the bottom line, thank you. host: thank you for your telephone call. next up is east chicago, indiana. phillip is a democrat and watching us. you're on, phillip. caller: good morning, c-span. host: good morning. caller: first of all, i'd like to say the most significant death to me was generation x, because the stigma of division and propaganda -- host: include? finish your thought. caller: yeah, yeah, because the stigma of propaganda and division no longer exist. we as a nation, we elect the first black president. we as a nation, we make movements now through twitter and via facebook, and we as a nation right now occupy america. anything that's happened within

america, not only in america, but all across the world right now is united in a movement, and it's wonderful. now these things no longer exist and are no longer barriers. even rights for gays right now, and people are starting to be more liberated right now. host: thanks for your call. i'm glad you participated. what would you say to him? guest: i don't often hear people define generation x -- i'm curious as to, is there a generally agreed upon -- host: the dates? yeah, there are, indeed. guest: i'm still apologizing. host: well, he also talked about the importance of the country he electricing the first black president. guest: oh, sure, yeah. but at the same time, it goes back to what we were talking about with vaclav havel and the arab spring. we make history. but along with the history we

make comes a whole new set of challenges and realizations that while we can make history and shatter barriers, we have yet to figure out a way to reinvent human nature. host: ok. you ready for wikipedia's definition of generation x? the generation born after the baby boom ended, while there's no universal al greed upon time frame, it generally includes people born from the early 196 's to early 198 's, usually no later than 1981 or 1982. guest: ok. learn something new every day. host: well, that's why you're here. we can learn. let's go back to the list of the deaths of political figures and talk more about the names on there. geraldine ferraro is on our list. she died of cancer this year. the significance of the first woman to be on a national -- guest: exactly. another female trailblazer,

then-congress woman ferraro, who's also kind of a throwback to a kind kind of democratic party. ger al defer row was very much kind of a centrist, middle of the road representative, represented a district in new york, when walter mondale tucked her out of relative obscurity in 1984 and was seen as something of a hail mary pass, but it broke the barrier, and it opened the door. there are a lot of folks who thought that in geraldine ferraro's lifetime, we might well see a woman actually in the oval office. and her fellow new yorker, hillary clinton, came close, but that door will never be closed. host: and after her run, she went back into private life. guest: she did. she made several attempts by

her office, she ran multiple times for the united states senate, never quite made it. but i think that had less to do with her effect than, again, with the changing nature of the democratic party and the changing nature of politics in new york state. host: we're glad you're with us on this december 26 morning, asking you about some of the names of the people from the political world who died during 2011 who had the most significant legacy. before the next call, i want to take a break and tell you more of the morning newspapers. two economic stories about detroit that we want to share with you, as to many people are focused on the economy. first, on the "detroit free press" front page, in michigan, a decade of job loss finally come to an end. that is the lead story today.

host: talking with you about 2011 deaths and their effect of people who died and what the greatest legacy is, fairview, new jersey, is up next, and this is arthur, an independent. go ahead, please. caller: yes, good morning. host: good morning. caller: i was thinking sargent shriver for the fact that he's so connected to power was so hands on, as to try to put it into words, but that the whole thing about people talk about occupy wall street, speaking against each other, because of his family relations, obviously to the kennedys, the advantage of speaking directly to power, and he was such a tough human being. and it would be great to have a hero of that type today. host: thank you. guest: sargent shriver is a very significant figure, and i

feel sometimes overlooked in the shadow of his famous in-laws. but the fact is, this is a man who personified the idealism of the 1960's. remember, he was the first head of the peace corps, and then lyndon johnson tapped him to head the war on poverty. as we listen to the candidates this time around, who is talking about poverty? who is really talking in any significant way in either party, by the way, about the millions of americans who have really been sidelined economically, not not the middle class, but for people who live in chronic want and whose numbers, according to the census, are higher than they have been in the past. it's as if they don't factor into the debate, and it's probably because they don't have lobbyists on k street. well, sargent shriver was their

lobbyist. host: is that a theme you hear in the occupy movement? guest: i think it's one of many themes. one of many themes that one associates with the movement. you know, someone will write a book. i'm sure there are academics out there writing dissertations as we speak, to trace particularly the democratic party, where we went from our -- you know, whatever else you say about lyndon johnson, his insistence that this be part of a national agenda, and, you know, it seems to have fallen off the radar screen. host: bill beatty reminds us not of the deaths, but one that happened five years ago. he writes, former president gerald ford died five years ago today in california at the age of 93. mercer, pennsylvania, mary, republican. you're on, mary. good morning. caller: good morning. host: yes, we can hear you. caller: i just wanted to thank

you, c-span, for introducing me to christopher hitchens and also professor richard norton smith. i've enjoyed all the time that they've been on the channel. and i believe all the people on the list are important, were important in our world. thank you. host: thank you very much. guest: now there's a c-span viewer. a self-professed republican who enjoyed listening to christopher hitchens. host: we have a bit of sound from christopher hitchens in his last interview here on c-span, and this was, as far as we know, the last television interview he gave, as he fought his cancer illness. let's listen to a little bit of that.

>> the great loss is the inability to travel. i got to toronto for thanksgiving. that wasn't that hard. i've been to california. i've been to -- with a private plane, very kindly that was sent for me to a speaking engagement in montana. i finally got to little the little big horn, which i've always wanted to. and the wonderful national park. now i've got three american states unvisited. host: which one? >> the dakotas and nebraska, plus puerto rico. >> any plan to go back to your home country? you're an american citizen. >> it's sentimental, i know, but someone said to me randomly the other day, are you afraid you're not seeing it again, and i realized yes, i was. i can't bear the idea of not going back at least once. i couldn't do it now. i'd have to be told i was on what they call a chemo holiday. >> we are out of time, and i think the best way to end it is to say i'll see you in a couple

of years to do this again. >> absolutely. host: christopher hitchens with c-span in his last television interview early in 2011. christopher hitchens is on the list of journalists who died during 2011, u.s. journalists, which include, not an exhaustive list, but tom wicker, former "new york times" into re chief, and andy rooney of "60 minutes," and the "washington post" longtime political journalist david broad broder. who among them did you find yourself listening to the most? guest: oh, i listened to all of them. tom wicker, of course, had an afterlife as a very significant author and historian. he was involved in the attica uprisings and wrote a book about it. he wrote a wonderful,

surprisingly generous biography of richard nixon called "one of us." he had the capacity of any great journalist to surprise, and i think that's one of the things about all these people. you didn't know in advance what was going to come out of their mouths. even andy rooney, professional curmudgeon that he was, and i think that is something that a lot of people miss, certainly in the cable news universe today. host: next call from massachusetts, democrats line. caller: thank you. i was actually going to say robert byrd, former democratic senator from west virginia. i think during the time that he was serving, he re-created influence among the members. he was a former member of the

k.k.k. so, for somebody to go from that time and become a senator and have that influence, i think is really commendable, and i think that's why it's a really significant legacy. host: thanks so much, talking about robert byrd's legacy. he's not on our list. he died last year in june of 2010. richard norton smith at the table with us this morning. next telephone call, as we talk about the significance of the political deaths in 2011. next is delaware, george. george is a republican there. good morning, george. caller: good morning to everyone. i think the most obvious death is the death of the pentagon spending bill written into it was an indefinite detention of u.s. citizens, along with

enhanced interrogation or torture that has no limit. the american people might all be taken to fema camps because of we ridge rent acts. that's the only definition given where the military is going to be asked to take u.s. citizens away. and this is really serious. as far as i can see it, every democrat, every independent ought to register republican, and we ought to all go to primary and vote, i guess you can say, for ron paul, who seems to be the only person who is speaking against this. it forces the democrats, obama, to agree that we have to eliminate this possibility that americans will be taken away. it's a super serious thing, and it should be shown on c-span. everyone is ignoring it.

the news doesn't mention it. it sounds like an awful prospect, but it's serious right now. we have to do something about it before it's too late, because the american president has now become a dictator. israeli has created a security state. they wanted a new pearl harbor. they delivered it on 9/11. host: ron paul is the focus of a major piece in this morning's "new york times," if you're interested. here is the jump page in the paper. paul's extremist views, but not the support. and in this story, they say --

host: i'm not going to bring you into a current political debate. guest: well, can i say one thing? ron paul and iowa, and a debate that you can feel already unfolding, and that is there's already this effort underway on the part of some to suggest that if ron paul wins in iowa, that it diminishes the value of the iowa caucus, and that implicitly, looking to the future, it means that iowa is less important than it has been. the fact is, there are lots of reasons to diminish the importance of iowa.

but the identity of the winner this year should not be one of them. host: and donna on twitter, voting on her most significant death of 2011 wroits, it's got to be bin laden. his legacy is the towers and eluding the u.s. for 10 years. that legacy will live on forever. next call from maryland. cecilia, democrat. good morning. caller: hi. i'd like to ask your guest if -- well, iowa thinks it's bin laden, but i'd like to ask your guest if he agrees that we may have known where bin laden was many years ago and kept it a secret to escalate the war. host: well, the question is whether or not bin laden's whereabouts might have been known for many years and it was kept a secret to escalate the war. it gets you into an area that

-- guest: yeah, and again, we're in a conspiracy land. host: we're going to take your calls for the next 10 minutes or so on the most significant deaths of 2011. and we have another betty ford comment here. amazing list of people who died in 2011, and this viewer writes, i grew up knowing that betty ford transformed the role of first lady above party affiliation. host: well, it's true. you stop thinking, there's the horrible phrase, a political wife. and mrs. ford, in a lot of ways, was a transitional figure. she transitioned out of that traditional role of standing next to her husband with a loving, somewhat simplering smile on her face, nodding after hearing the same speech for the 20th time. she was her own woman. what i used to say is, simply

by being herself, she made it easier for whole lot of people to be themselves. host: how does that contrast with her immediate predecessor, mrs. nixon? guest: well, i'm a fan of mrs. nixon. i think there are a lot of things the public never saw. i had an opportunity to do an oral history project interviewing all the white house social secretaries. i had that view confirmed talking about mrs. nixon, the social secretary had a wonderful sense of humor. there were a lot of things about pat nixon that she really never let us know. but she certainly came to be seen, fairly or not, in the popular culture as the political wife. host: we have a couple more 2011 deaths to put on the screen, and they inclusively rights leader fran shuttlesworth. he was -- he died earlier this year at about the age of 89 or so, very much involved in the civil rights movement, as in

many of the large associations. dr. jack kevorkian, there's a name we remember, the michigan physician, i believe it was. guest: does this mean he finally got his wish? host: finally did, after serving time in prison. and steve jobs, the apple founder who died just last month. have any comments on any of those? host: i was fascinated by the response to the death of steve jobs. it was quite overwhelming. you would have thought that a head of state -- i mean, clearly a transforming figure of the transformation that he wrought is an untraditional one. it's about how we communicate, how we re-create rather than how we govern, how we conduct state craft. host: david carr writes about the media for the "new york times," and he writes about steve jobs this morning in his column, the media equation. new rules for the way we watch. here's what he says about steve

jobs -- host: have your media habits changed a lot in the past year? guest: no. i don't know how to text. host: you're going to have to define it for some people. guest: well, no one knows. we embody the best of the past.

host: next is a phone call from sterling, virginia. this is gary, republican. you're on the air. caller: thank you. good morning. i'd like to say, i think it's the death of subservience. and one thing, shout out to renee in dothan. but the egyptians and middle easterners, the bravery seems to know no bounds. i mean, the things that these people are going up in the name of freedom to all my egyptian friends, i'd say mahaba. and i think it would be wise to take a page from the rwandan reconciliation, because that was the most civil display of humanity i have ever seen, read about or heard about. and the other thing is about the civil citizens united.

i always thought it was only the heavenly spirit that could give life. and for these charlatans to assume they're going to give life, there's a lot of graveyards i'd like to take them to. i mean, this is a bunch of charlatans up on the supreme court thinking that they're going to go around giving people life. that's absurd. host: thanks for participating this morning. on twitter, i was waiting for dr. kevorkian to get mentioned. didn't like your comment, finally got his wish. he's dead and a hero. have some respect. guest: i stand rebuked. host: back to the morning newspapers for a look at stories that are playing around the country. the "houston chronicle," congress sets bar for low output. g.o.p. de ms disagree on how texas has fared is the lead story today. it says --

guest: well, it's an interesting point, and in some ways it's a good introduction to the debate we're about to have over the next year. which is little function of government and its role in society. there are lots of people who sincerely believe that if they pass no legislation, that would be better than passing 79 bills, let alone 179 bills. i mean, there are people for whom government government is

such a hostile force that they'd just as soon see it go away. host: does it hearken back to an earlier period in our history? guest: well, this huge cultural shift. i was talking to president ford, who was a republican leader in the 1960's. the fact is, in those days, people fought that cats and dogs all day, but, you know, after 6:00 famously, they were friends. and the point is, as a republican member of the minority, you tried to get your fingerprints on legislation. but at the end of the day, you were sent here to "get things done. that's what you were rewarded for by your constituency. today, there are a lot of folks who believe that they've been sent here to keep things from being done. i think that's the biggest

change. host: one says he's happy with the change of direction in washington and the budget conversation. that's in the paper this morning. also interesting, "philadelphia inquirer," arlen specter has a memoir coming out. he has -- are you ready for this? guess what he's called it, "life among the cannibals," it's about his life in washington. guest: ok. host: here is what james o'toole writes --

host: he could not deliver on the pledge because of resistance from democratic lawmakers. arlen specter reflecting back on his long career in washington, d.c. we're talking about political deaths in 2011. richard norton smith, presidential historian at the table. he'll be back with us later on on this program to talk about george washington and his legacy for the united states presidency as we go into the presidential election year. next up is elizabeth from tennessee. bill, democrat, go ahead. caller: yes, i have a comment on the bin laden death. after a while, it became a political thing, which says that it was supposed to get him. those things should not be made political, and i'd just like to

pay tribute to seal team six, all them others and all the families. thank you. host: thank you. we will end on that note with his tribute to the seal team. thank you for being here. we'll see any a little bit, talk about george washington. our next segment, we're going to learn about americans as we talk about presidential politics 2012. we'll be right back.

>> with the iowa caucuses next week and the new hampshire, south carolina, and florida primaries later in the month, c-span's series "the contenders qutsd looks back at 14 candidates who ran for president and lost, but have a long-lasting impact on american politics. tonight, thomas e. dewey, who ran against truman. tuesday, adlai stevenson, who lost to dwight eisenhower. wednesday, barry goldwater. thursday, hubert humphrey. friday, george wallace. and then on saturday, senator and congressman from south dakota, george mcgovern, followed by billionaire businessman ross perot. "the contenders," every night at 10:00 eastern on c-span. tonight, "wall street journal" senior technology editor julia anguin on privacy issues and cookie that is track where internet users go. >> eric schmidt expressed them

really well. he said, i don't think we really understand the implications, and i'm paraphrasing, i don't remember the exact quote, but he said, i don't think we really understand the implications of living in a society where everything that we do is being watched. our phones are transmitting our location. and our computers are saying -- are transmitting everything that we're looking at. it is becoming a situation where we actually are creating sort of a total surveillance system. >> julia angwin tonight on c-span2. >> michele bachmann is here, i understand, and she is thinking about running for president. which is weird, because i hear she was born in canada. yes, michele, this is how it starts. >> it's so amazing to me in washington, d.c., all this history, all these amazing

buildings, and yet here we are at the hilton. the red carpet outside was amazing. who are you wearing? what does it matter? i'm going into a hilton. >> with more than nine million views of president obama's appearance and 2 off 5 million watchers, c-span's coverage of the white house dinner ranked most the top political videos. watch them on youtube.com/cspan. "washington journal" continues. host: on your screen, kahlil byrd, the director and c.e.o. of a group called americans elect, which made news recently in its quest to get on all 50 state ballots. they made the important state of california. and he's here to talk about americans-elect and the whole third-party bid for the u.s. presidency as we begin the election year. well, for those who aren't

familiar, give us the broad outline behalf you're trying to do with americans elect. guest: sure. americans elect has brought together the best lines in business, politics, and technology to get on the ballot in all 50 states with the simple idea that if we had a bipartisan or nonpartisan ticket on the ballot, that we might have better governing in washington. so what you're going to see is the first-ever online convention in june. americans elect will be on the ballot in all 50 states, and we will have a ticket that will have a republican and democrat or democrat and republican in 2012. host: what is your ultimate goal? guest: oh, i think right now, you look at the political environment, and you think we could have said opening up the process to competition for valid access, setting a technology benchmark and reimagining the way we do primaries were simple goals. but now, i think that this ticket can run the presidency, and it's based on the american people not being very happy with the governance they're finding in washington and also,

unfortunately predictable failures of governance that have led people all around the country to keep looking just as the process usually closes up for the presidential primary. host: the largest third party was ross perot with 19%. you actually think you can win this time around? guest: i think so. i think a lot of people do. again, if you -- you just sort of take yourself back, and when ross perot was runs, the levels of satisfaction in the country was 58%. 58% of the american people thought things were going well. lieu look right now, 81% of people think things are not going well. these numbers are from gallup, and they show people are looking for something else. what they think they're looking for is an alternative ticket, another way to actually nominate and elect their leaders, and choices that open, now to the people where people are paying attention, where usually we close down our thinking to a couple of people who are running on the democratic or republican primary.

host: did you did you get host: how did you get involved? guest: this idea has been kicking around since 2006 and the f.e.c. and others couldn't really understand what. it's not a third party. it's a second way of nominating which is driven by the internet. that idea was unleashed, basically, by the court of appeals who basically said that everything that had been imagined on how to do this, getting on the ballot in all 50 states and having the first ever convention online was possible and since then, since the early 2010, more than 7,000 people have work in this organization to put it on the ballot. you mentioned california, recently but we're on the ballot in 13 or states right now zphow we're finishing the process and up to 50 by the election next year. we also have people who are working on polling and thinking through how this fits in with the political environment and technology team in new york is

building the first ever online convention. so it's pretty quieting. host: this has to be more about mechanics, though. what is the philosophy which drives americans -- is there a governoring philosophy that you hope people will buy into as part of this process? guest: americans like issues and what our main focus is giving people more choice when their choices are usually closed up. when you think about it, we've had a primary system that has been very effective for the last 100 years serving the two-party system. that unfortunately has started to break down and not only is it breaking down with regards to the issue that people think need to be dealt with right now, people are focused on jobs and economy and at this point, the candidate who is are in the race are attacking each other and that's become more than norm than the exception. what american electors is doing is giving the people the opportunity to describe and

define the rules of engagement of this convention process, define the issues that matter so that the candidates have to address those issues and finally, nominate or draft candidates in this year and for us, the exciting thing is watching people respond, whether it's the more than two million people who signed our petitions around the country or half a million people who come to our website every month. all of them are looking for at a time when politics is not a very satisfying thing an opportunity to vote for and nominate a ticket that can win next year. host: we would like you to join in the conversation. you can also tweet us a comment or question at c-span wj within twitter. a number of people, including dennis blair during the obama administration, christine todd-whitman, republican moderate, governor of new

jersey, and some of the critiques of the group suggests that it is -- well, here's todd for example, a popular third party and it suggests that you're a group of political elites and i'm wondering how you respond to that and then would you also compare with what you're trying do with the occupy movement and their dissatisfaction with government. guest: let's take the second part first. when you think about occupying wall street or the tea party, it's a representation of frustration with the governing process. if you think about americans select as process for republicans and independents can come together, these are not the people who are not going to be sleeping in tents in cities around the country but they are people who have been voting for a long time and ready to make the transition to a new way of nominating someone. you know, and in terms of this being elite or a special group

of people coming together doing this, we are hardened by the fact that we have an organizer in every state in the district in the country and these are people who are absolutely just regular americans who want to stand up and invite their friends and neighbors to come in and participate with americans select. they -- americans lefpblgt they have given to this project, our focus on one thing and an organization that doesn't an ideology or agenda but is a resentful for people who can put on the ballot and win next year. host: with a are the denials and what are the steps? guest: -- deadlines and what are the steps? guest: it's been amazing. we opened in the summer of 2011 and a lot of people saw tom freedman write an article where he talked about this being the flattening of politics, inviting in digital to politics where is they've never been before.

and over these months, we've done both online and offline activities. people coming to become delegates. any registered voter can become a delegate and gathering signatures around the country to put the organization on the ballot. as we watch the organization grow, we move now to a point where if we're generous, you have three choices left for people to choose from which are driven by the primary. at this point, americans elect opens up. in january of 2012, you're going to see the first candidates come to the site and those candidates are going to be people who have not only are constitutionally qualified but have shown leadership throughout their lives, put them the a position be able to run for president. over the spring, you'll see a vigorous conversation happen between these candidates and in april, we'll open up our online primary. and at that particular point,

just as we think, and i think you can be sure that the process for the republicans and between the republicans and democrats are going to be pretty nasty. we think the americans elect candidate from april to june and the convention will be talking about the issues that people care about. host: are you sure you will have six to choose from? guest: i think so. we've done probably about 30 briefings with potential candidates. host: them coming to you or you going to them or a mix? guest: a bit of both. you talked about our board, dennis blair and christy todd-whitman and folks like that, people are looking at americans elect and they're considering at this particular point a very serious vehicle for someone to run for office and if you go to americanselect.org, we just describe for them the exact same thing i'm describing for your viewers today. a process by which we can think about opening up the space for

someone to run for office just as usually things close up. host: we have heard the name buddy roamer, we've heard some suggestions that donald trump is talking to you. can you confirm that? guest: i can't confirm mr. trump. buddy roamer said he would run. host: any other names? guest: running for president is something that is the most serious one can do. we allow them to brief it on their potent host: some have concerns about the group of people who decides to go forward and there again is the motivation, the political elites deciding who would have a chance at the balloting process. you talk about that and how you're working to check that concern? guest: you're referring to the president's advisors talking to americans elect saying there war elite group choosing things. our rules are simple. the delegates drive them and drive the whole process and have the final decision making

process. people who are automatically qualified are those who have had the kind of leadership that you would expect for presidents, people who run businesses, universities have served in office before, governors or senators, even as vice presidents. the bottom line is those are automatically qualified in the americans elect ticket have shown the leadership. for somebody who doesn't have that, you need have a simple process where they could go and present themselves to the delegates, delegates being any american voter who can be eligible. and have the opportunity to express and if half the dealt debates they say should be on the ballot, then it would happen. host: tell you a little bit more about kahul byrd, he has bachelor's degree from hoarhouse college and the kennedy school of harvard. we mentioned his work for duvall patrick. he has been a communications

strategist for both democratic and republican candidates. can you say for instance? guest: i worked with a guy named ken block in rhode island. he started something called the moderate party and one of the things i learned in that process is a, how tough it was for people to support someone even whose policies they liked when they are working the democratic and republican process, how they actually think about the punishment that will come if they actually step forward to support someone new. and also how difficult this particular process is going to be for a candidate. so i have a greater appreciation for that. host: let's get to your telephone calls to learn more about americans elect. mary, you're on. caller: i have a concern because i think the ideas are relatively progressive and it's likely to attract more democrats than republicans.

could we end inwith a republican president which i consider the candidates to be -- absolutely inpossible to work with. remember, jesse ventura when he became independent and was elected to governor, he couldn't do anything because he had no party behind him. you need to have some constituency to get your ideas elected, you know, i mean, to get them into laws. you have to have a kind of, you know, flow of process. host: mary, thanks. we'll pick it up from here. guest: i think you are pointing out some things that help me talk a little bit about the rules of americans elect. the president can run as a candidate. you have to reach across the aisle and pick a republican to run with him. that might not be the easiest thing in this political environment but it's something that this environment encourages

and the concern that you hear about this perhaps spoiling for the president. we hear the same concerns about the spoiling for republicans. so what we think about is we must be doing something right. i think what's more a profound than that is the idea that when you're looking for -- from illinois or washington, what you're finding is that we're very satisfied with the two-month extension on a tax break for regular americans and we call that a success. well, you -- and the rest of the american people don't call it a success. you have the unit to talk about the issues, not devil into the special -- delve into the special interest. that change and also change in the calendar, opening things up just as things are close up in iowa and new hampshire is important. host: react to this comment from american hero on twitter who writes the problem with

americans elect is it depends on voting and if voting worked, we wouldn't be in this mess. host: there are a lot of american heroes who we've met who are working with this process and one of the things that all of them say is that there are so many reasons for people to select out of the process right now. we're given so many reasons because of the negative nature of the campaigns, the people that are run, the amount of money that's involved in politics. the americans elect takes three functions that are usually controlled by the parties and puts them back in the hands of the people and that is the ability to shape the issues, and finally the ability to support a candidate that somebody can believe in. host: michael is on twitter. he writes this is a great thing if the r's and d's are deadlocked. some new blood is what we need. next question is from california. this is are ray, an independent. caller: i'm like in the

coalition of callers already. first caller mentioned jesse ventura. and i was always upset that if he won 39% of the vote, that meant that 60% of the voters in minnesota had a governor they didn't want. and then the other caller talked about how voting isn't working. i ran for congress and i ran for state assembly with the ross perot ticket back in 1994 and 1996 and it just seems to me that none of this can work unless the people have a chance to run off voting. insisting -- this has to be changed that if we're going to have three choices, we're never going to have a candidate win with more than 50% of the vote. i mean, the more serious the candidates get, i should say. obviously, you can have like 50 and 25 and 25.

but if we had the instance runoff voting, i'm wondering if american elect have the option and trying to promote its use and any of the states. guest: well, thank you for your question. we're staying focused on making sure that we have an opportunity to put a ticket on the ballot for 2012. but california gives you a great example of where the american people are. you've had a lot of difficulties out there in terms of democrats and republicans coming together to pass budgets and other things. a lot of my colleagues say the things that you guys are doing in terms of open primaries, referendums are anti-trust measures. anti-trust measure which is the voters are using to keep politicians in check and that's where -- that can be term limit, anti--- or other things. california being most active but that's happening all around the country where the american people are so disappointed with

the government that they're willing to look beyond the way the system has been structured and it invites people and candidates to have a different and more robust conversation than what we've even in the primary system. host: it is a non-profit organization. you're the crovement you've been taking some heat. what's your explanation for that? guest: we live in the real world and retribution is real. people are very concerned as they came into this process that they would be punished for supporting something that challenges the status quo. what we've done is structured every dollar that comes in about $10,000 as loan so the american people can overwhelm and take this process over. we've seen more than 4500 doners come to the cross and one of the things -- host: so structure as a stallone they get their money back if you get smaller contradictions? guest: yes. and it's one -- contributions?

guest: yes. it's one of the more important ways in terms of shaping the issues and the process, but also making sure that it's the american people who are driving this process, not just large donors. which is what people are really concerned about. but, you know, i go back to the example i gave a little bit earlier about the candidate i ran with in rhode island. people have had the opportunity to support him without thinking they would be punished for it, he might have gotten a lot more financial support in that environment. to me, it doesn't matter if somebody's giving $10 or $100 if they're in the city council or a small town and they don't want to be punished by a democrat or vice versaa and somebody giving more than that. people need to have the opportunity to emerge. host: on friday, "u.s.a. today" has named the front page story was on the rise of independent voters. here is the headline --

guest: it just doesn't surprise me. i actually learned about politics in massachusetts running races there. you mentioned that a little bit earlier. there are more unenrolled people in massachusetts. that's what they call independents there than they are democrats and republicans. this is just something that's been opening up ever since ross perot ran. the idea that people are less connected to the two-party system and more connected to people who show the kind of leadership that can actually move things ford. -- forward. host: if ron paul is interested, would you speak to him if guest: he could be qualified as a candidate.

we don't have candidate who is are supporting. we have pretty simple process for someone to present themselves at americans elect or for people to draft people. our pattern of recognition forces us to think an somebody who is really wealthy running or somebody who is internet savvy, being able to be successful in the website. the real x-factor in the organization is ballot acksefments most of the way -- access. most of the way -- speaking of speaker gingrich, most of the way people are kept out of the system are ballot access. americans elect has taken that burden on. it's a $15 million bill. we've had signatures gathered all over the country who are putting this organization on the ballot and as that is happening, it opens up the idea that anyone who has the kind of leadership qualities that we consider

presidential can get on the ballot and run for office. host: are you referring to the fact that in the news today that it is reported that speaker beginning rip is not likely to be on the ballot in virginia. we're taking your phone calls. todd, a republican there. good morning. caller: good morning. i believe your organization claims and your user agreement that while you don't use the data that customers that users load into your site that you may share it with trusted third parties. and i'm wondering who specifically are these third parties? what do they do with the data? do they sell it or use it to solicit funds,, et cetera? and if you can't be transparent about who your doners are, can you be transparent about what you do with your user'data? guest: it's one of the most important thing. how you use people's information and how you keep it or in the

industry, it's actually the best practice not to keep it is one of the most important things that we have to deal with. so americans elect doesn't keep any information beyond the minimum to set up someone's profile. what you'll see over the next few weeks is it's become a delegate to actually vote, we have to make sure of two things. one, that you are a registered voter. and two, that you are the person that you say you are. so there will be a simple process of all then indication that will go forward in the next several weeks all the way through the convention in june. but americans elect doesn't keep any credit card information or social security number. it's not the right thing to do and the organization will never place the delegates in a position where we are selling their information to anyone else. host: lucy on twitter has this. another party is not what we need as much as we need to hold the elected candidates to their promises and accountability to voters. this question from roy. what is your procedure -- what will your procedure be if you

get electoral votes? guest: that's a great question. as an organization, if the americans elect ticket comes in third, we actually will do something that the framers could never imagine. we will have a sec election when it sits in january for the two major party nominees to try to place their case before our delegates. that way the elect ters of americans elect can move one way or the other. it's important for this next race not to go into the house but for the americans elect delegates to have the opportunity to speak. so between the general election and january when the elect terse make their decision -- elect ters make their zirks an important innovation that you can take the process online and the american people can have one more opportunity to have the case made to them.

host: fred johnson e-mails us. why create americans elect, he asks? the libertarian party already represents the best positions from the corrupt old parties. guest: more choice is better. host: next call, triangle, virginia. joyce, a democrat there. caller: mr. byrd, you're presenting your organization as a grassroots organization this morning, however, i saw you and another gentleman on an interview on a previous earlier show and when asked about your funding, the other gentleman said you all had about $150 million that came from -- 15 million that came from about 20 millionaires. why this crepe and i? i will take my answer offline. guest: ok. i will put the materials. we have about 50 people who give in about $20 million, a budget for americans elect is $35 million and we stay focused on two things, getting on the ballot in all 50 states and creating the first non-partisan nominating process which will

culminate in june of this year. we think it's important for people to american at this process their own pace. you will people who are joining peter ackerman but it's important in this environment for people to have the opportunity to express themselves through an organization like americans elect but also emerge in the process when they feel most comfortable doing it. host: abc ran this story on december 20 from the interwebs to the interstate, americans elect to launch a bus tour. so you're going out to the grassroots rather than staying on the internet guest: we are going from new hampshire to florida during the primary season on january and february. it's an opportunity for people of all stripes to join us in cities and towns across the country. we have at this point 3,000 organizers around the ken who -- country who are bringing their

friends and neighbors to americanselect.org and people are pretty excited about it. but it's also just another way for the organization to connect to people who are learning about americans elect. host: it's a roving billboard and people will be able to register to join as they come on board? guest: they will. we'll have things like organized college students and others to have forums, talk about the issues that matter the colleges all across the country in january, february, and march and we'll also have the opportunity for the american people to see the first americans welke candidates which will start to come online in january. host: and this from dave in tucson by e-mail. my question is about the organization's position on the laws that may result in hundreds of those of u.s. citizens not voting. guest: we as an organization just believe that the opportunity to vote is very special and that people should

express themselves. so with americans elect, for example, you can vote in americanselect.org and you can vote in your democratic orenn primary. opening up the process is what's important not restricting access. host: and our final guest is going to be looking at what's happened to ballot access rules and other aspects of americans ability to vote since the help america vote act passed in 2002. the united states has sent more than $3 billion in grants to states to upgrade their voting systems. and so we'll be talking about that to see how that money was spent and whether or not going into the election year, the systems are more assessble and more secure. dayton, ohio, next is renee and renee is an independent. good morning. caller: good morning. guest: good morning, renee. caller: good morning. ok. all right. now i understand you can hear me ok? host: we can, sure. caller: thank you.

what i want to tell you mr. byrd is i've been trying to find some additional information about americans elect which i did get. you answered a lot of questions for me which i was concerned about the money issue because a lot of the candidate, their power comes have the states which pay for their -- sit wins and it paid for the election the contributions that you've got over $50 million and that kind of confuses me again because my feeling was you giving us a forum, a voice, and i mean, we, the people, to hear candidates to hear what they're saying, to at least get their word and their views on issues rather than sitting there saying nasty things about each other. and am i correct in understanding that you do not keep the information per se about your doners so that you're not influenced by them? guest: well, there's two different issues. in terms of being a delegate or

somebody is coming online, a lot of people are concern ann privacy. we don't keep the information about individuals. for people who are giving into this organization, we allow people to emerge at their own pace. and one thing that's important to remember about the process and you hit it right on the head, renee, is that any candidate who comes has to set up a presidential campaign committee and they have to disclose the same way that a democratic and republican would have to in the same cycle. so in that particular process, candidates are required to disclose and show who's giving to them just like anybody else. host: we're getting lots of tweets on the money issue. example -- i'm suspicious says people don't need that much money done need to fear retribution. is there a debate as to whether or not you should open up the list of contributors? guest: no, not really. host: you're all comfortable with that? guest: yeah. this is an organization that doesn't take money from special

interest, pacts or unions or corporations. it's designed for the american people to directly participate in democracy. so the directors and the people who have come together to support this organization are quite comfortable about the fact that we don't disclose or doners or allow those doners to come out of their own pace and realize that we live in the real world. these are people who have participated in politics. they've been public servants and they understand how tough this environment can be. host: for mr. byrd of americans elect. daniel is a republican there. you're on the air. caller: good morning. i was just concerned about during the nomination process of people just erase their cookies on the computer and they get another nomination in and multiple times. is that any concern? thank you. guest: daniel, that's a great question. one of the question who is driving this organization is

josh what levine who helps build e-trade from 1999-2006. the system that he and the folks that defined the program is zoibed for you, daniel, to have one vote and for every american voter to have one vote. what we have to do over the next several months is authenticate that you are who you say you are and you are a registered voter and those two pieces of information will be bruced to make sure no one can vote multiple times. host: anderson, indiana, jeff, democrat. good morning. i thought i pushed the button for jeff. caller: good morning. i'm jeff and i'm a democrat and i'm also an african-american and yeah, i think third party is due, but what i really want to talk about is the whole ron paul situation. and with these new revelation --

maybe not so much new by his newsletter and his views about race that many of us are very concerned about, one of the reasons why the republican would not confront mr. paul an these views is they're afraid he will break the third-party movement that was pretty much guaranteed an obama re-election. and as as you're a conservative, i've seen you on other programs, why haven't other programs spoken out about ron paul and his extremist views? one of the people say, well, the whole libertarian party is good if you're a white male. if it was being fair and put your boots up by your bootstraps and rugged individual, that's ok if you're a white male, because everything in society is geared for your success. that's a boring us argument anyway. but the whole ron paul -- host: ok, guest, thanks.

we understand the question. we're going to jump in there. guest: you're pointing out something that's very important. the point at which usually in the political environment we only have a couple of names to talk about. what if we were able to have great americans, men and women, who you would consider maybe your own governor, maybe someone you have seen who has shown extraordinary leadership? what if you have the opportunity to place that person's name forward and actually have a new kind of conversation? as opposed to conversations about people who have just been in the system for a long time. well, that's what this allows people to do. it allows us, at this point point, to open up our minds to who has the kind of leadership qualities that we want to see and who can drive a conversation that can actually push america forward. host: next is maui, hawaii, really early in the morning there. john, good morning to you, independent. caller: aloha. yeah, i just was calling -- i'm listening to the show, and i

think that people should try different options at this time, because we're all one race, and we're all in the same trouble, and it doesn't matter what party you're in. so at this point, looking at the options, i think america should wake up and vote for ron paul. if the people are going to wake up, they're going to vote for ron paul. the constitution, the bill of rights, are inalienable rights to everything. it's being stampeded on by corporations and big government. i think that should change. guest: we did a poll internally where we looked at the republican nominee and the democratic nominee, and then the idea of a third ticket being comprised of a republican or democrat and republican, 25% of the american people stood up to say that they'd like to see this coalition taken in --

coalition ticket in 2012. what it's about, at a time when people are struggling, and it's most acute when they look at it over the holidays and they think about not having a job, or their city or town being bankrupt, not being able to sustain it's healthcare system. what people are looking for is seeing leaders come forward, put the issues forward that matter. we like the fact that this is closing down, that people can actually look forward and begin to imagine what kind of ticket they'd like to see in 2012. so we invite everyone tom to americanselect.org and make chose choices. host: our next is from miami. you're on, jerry. caller: thank you. i really appreciate you guys taking me on. and my congratulations to c-span. you guys have been outstanding.

guest: thank you, jerry. appreciate it. caller: my question is, like, this whole thing, the way you're doing it is really outstanding. i think if the founding fathers had a system in place like this, they wouldn't have started a congress. the thing is is, now you can get the consensus of the people elected, and i think that's what your organization should be trying to do instead of trying to elect a person, they should somehow determine and settle every issue that they're permanently faced with. i'm pretty sure right now the biggest problem is jobs. so my thing is, could you make this -- would you consider at

least taking this in the direction of getting issues that really affect americans to be voted on, to really get a real consensus, and i know we don't govern, they don't govern. the government doesn't govern by consensus. host: thank you very much. using technology to allow people to vote. guest: that's one of the cornerstones of americans. we don't have a platform of issues. we a platform of questions, drven by 9 delegates to come to americanselect.org. in this particular time today, of the 15 questions that they'd like to see political candidates answer in this season, talk about jobs, they talk about the winddown in iraq and how we're going to face afghanistan. they talk about concerns with debt and being in debt to china and to middle eastern countries. people are concerned that the issues that people are dealing

with this washington actually don't match their everyday lives of trying to find a job, trying to educate their children, and trying to find opportunities. host: what's your deadline in order to be on -- i'm sure the states have a qualifying deadline. guest: every state is completely different. california, the largest, 1.6 million signatures. rhode island, smaller than that, 33,000 signatures. and everything in between. we will be done with ballot access by august of 2012. in 50 states and washington, d.c. the process, we've sort of gone through 2/3 of the process. we've gotten 2/3 of the signatures needed to get on the ballot in all 50 states and took on a lot of the hardest work in this cycle. but next year, this is exciting. this is when people have the opportunity to shape this.

host: kahlil byrd, c.e.o. of americans elect, thank you for being here on this december 26. thank you very much. we are going to take a break, get an update on today's news from c-span radio. then on this holiday week, we're going to learn more about george washington's presidential leadership and the legacy that he gave to presidents as we go into this election year. we'll be right back. now to c-span radio. >> the youngest son of the late north korean leader kim jong il has a new title today. kim jong un is now the head of the ruling workers party, a post that gives him authority over political and military matters in the country. meanwhile, seoul says a private delegation of south koreans are in pyongyang to pay condolences to kim jong il and has met the late leader's son and heir. it appears to be kim jong un's first reported meeting with south koreans since his father's death, december 17. seoul's unification ministry

said they paid respects at the palace, where kim jong il's body is lying in state. the widow of former south korean president kim dae jung, who held a summit in 2000, is one of the group's leaders. the other is the hyundai group chairwoman, whose late husband had tied to the north. a new report says japan's response to the nuclear crisis at the fukushima nuclear power plant following the tsunami in march was "confused and riddled with problems." the government investigation also told of an erroneous assumption that an emergency cooling system was working, delaying word of dangerous radiation leaks. earlier this morning the nuclear regulatory commission approved the recommendations of their fukushima lessons learned task force. they proposed new safety requirements on the nation's nuclear power plants. and those are some of the latest headlines on c-span radio.

>> with the iowa caucuses next week and the new hampshire, florida primaries later in the month, c-span's series "the contenders" looks book at 14 candidates who ran for president and lost, but have a long-lasting impact on american politics. tonight, thomas e. dewey, who ran against harry truman. today, adlai stevenson. wednesday, barry goldwater. thursday, vice president and civil rights advocate, hubert humphrey. friday, george wallace. and then on saturday, senator and congressman from south dakota, george mcgovern, followed by billionaire businessman ross perot. "the contenders," every night at 10:00 usual on c-span. tonight, "wall street journal" senior technology editor julia angwin on the cookies that track where internet users go.

>> the chairman of google expressed it really well, he said, i don't think we really understand the implications, and i'm paraphrasing, i don't remember the direct quote, but i don't understand we really understand the implications where everything that we do is being watched. our phones are transmitting our location, and our computers are transmitting everything that we're looking at, and it's just -- it's becoming a situation where we actually are creating sort of a total surveillance system. >> julia angwin, tonight at 8:00 on c-span2. midland high school students, for this year's c-span student cam video competition, we want you to tell us what part of the constitution has meaning to you and why. let us know in a five to eight-minute documentary and get it to c-span by january 20, 2012. that's less than a month away. it's your chance to win the grand prize of $5,000. there's $50,000 in total

prizes. c-span's student cam video documentary competition is open to students grades six through 12. so for complete details, go online to studentcam.org. >> "washington journal" continues. host: and we're going to open up with this very famous painting from 1851 by emanuel. he washington crossing the delaware. most americans have seen this at some point in their lives. and we're talking about this today because it occurred on december 25, 235 years ago. and on this day, the following day, 235 years ago, the battle of trenton, which was decisive for the new nation as it pursued its independence. richard norton smith, author of a book about george washington called "patriarch" is here to talk about george washington's presidential leadership skills and the lepping a he's left to today's presidents. thanks for coming back.

in 1993, you gaye us an interview on that book, and you said at that time that george washington was your favorite president. you've done a lot of presidential work since then. is he still your favorite? guest: boy, that's such a charged word. let's put it this way. here's an evasive answer. he's the one president of whom it can be said that if he had not been president, we would not be having this conversation. host: what do you mean by that? guest: he was, as james famously said, the indispensible man. he defined the office. in many ways, he defined a nation. that painting is iconic for a number of reasons. and it shows washington, the risk taker. we often tend to think of him as the reflection of a conservative or even something of a aristocrat.

washington was conducting, in some ways, a guerrilla war by christmas of 1776, and very few people would have taken the chances that he took that night, knowing that if he failed, the odds were the revolution would be snuffed out. host: we hope you'll want to talk presidential history, specifically about george washington and his legacy. our phone lines are open on this december 26, and you can also tweet your comments to us or send us one by email. we'd love to have you involved. our c-span audience always enjoys talking history. "the washington post" actually gave front page above the fold to coverage and photographs of the reenactment of washington's crossing, which is reenacted every year in the town of washington crossing pennsylvania. more than 168 reenact fors participated yesterday. guest: it's a wonderful story, too. obviously it was no accident of timing. over the weekend, i don't know if some of the viewers may have seen the alternate picture of

the crossing. there's an artist who's very well known for his civil war paintings, and he was commissioned to do a -- kind of an alternate and more historically authentic portrayal of the crossing. and it bears very little resemblance to the picture we've all grown up with. host: i wish we had a color photograph. this is the "new york times" from saturday, but it is a simpler version of it. it is fleeting when he's on the river. guest: yeah, it started raining, and then it turned to snow, and then it turned to sleet. so the weather was abysmal. if you've been to the delaware and what is today washington crossing, you realize the river is not very wide. it's about 300 yards across. whereas in the painting, it seems almost like the ocean. likewise, you see virtual icebergs in the version of the delaware, and that's want how ice freezes.

it's much more the sheet of ice that we're all familiar with. the flag that you see over washington's shoulder in the painting did not exist at the time of the crossing. there are a number of other inaccuracies. host: was george washington the general of the same as george washington the president, or did he develop additional leadership skills along the way? guest: well, i think they're inseparable. i think he was, for all intents and purposes, he was president. i certainly was the executive, as well as the military leader during the war. remember, in some ways, the most important thing to keep in mind about washington and the government that he bequeathed to us was that it is a limited government. and that is particularly demonstrated in the fact that not once, but twice he voluntarily walked away from supreme power. he did it at the end of the revolution and, of course, he famously did it at the end of

two terms as president. host: he, as a communicator, we think so much today about the importance of communication. was he, in effect, a communicator? guest: he was not a great communicator, which wasn't to say a great deal of attention wasn't paid to his public pronounce ams. they were as carefully orchestrated as a major presidential speech would be today. the classic example is the farewell address, which actually went through several drafts over a period of several years. but washington himself was not comfortable delivering speakers. he stayed away from prompt few remarks, which is something that politicians today probably might profit from. it was not something that came naturally. host: thanks to the internet, "new york times" has the color version. here's had a it looks like in

all its colorful glory. as we look at that, we're going to go to our first telephone call to talk about george washington's presidential leadership legacy. tucson, gary, republican, good morning. caller: good morning. i wanted to ask your guest a question. george washington underwent many physical and mental hardships during his time. but how much impact do you think benedict arnold's actions had on him when he was second in command? guest: that's a great question, because i think it was a pivotal and shattering experience. washington did not give his trust quickly or easily, and i think it became exponentially harder for him to do so after the betrayal of arnold. americans tend to forget, he

was a hero on the continental side early in the war. host: having fought a war for independence, was he then a nationalist or an internationalist? guest: well, he was a nationalist, but again -- and we get into the age-old debate about isolationism, washington for years was trotted out supposedly as the author of a farewell address of entangling alliances by isolationist. he actually use would the phrase permanent alliance. and what he was talking about was, you have to remember, the united states was a raw, feeble power. the united states army numbered all of 600 men in 1789. it has been mauled by indians along the northwest frontier. the last thing in the world that the united states could afford was to get sucked into

europe's ongoing squirrels, particularly between the british and french -- quarrels, particularly between the british and french. so, when washington is talking about avoiding permanent alliances, he's talking about the dangers of becoming alive militarily with one world power against the other. host: here's a bit more from washington's farewell address -- host: what's the message? guest: well, washington was a man above party. he was perhaps the only american president who had the luxury of being above party. he used to say men's politics are as variant as their faces. and just as acceptable as the

product of nature. but again, you have to remember, washington's presidency is an exercise in buying time. what he wanted to avoid were these sent rig al forces. for example, americans were loyal to the french revolution. some americans were loyal to the english. and having that conflict play itself out on the streets of america as it did, we think of washington as this revered, god-like figure who was also above criticism. not so. ofingse burned in of gee on the streets of philadelphia, and he came in for more than his share of criticism in the press. host: washington never governed in washington, d.c., new york first, and then philadelphia. judy or thom tweets us, the most noble thing george washington did was give up his

power under his thumb. a less moral man, and we would have a king. we're talking about george washington's legacy. woodstock, illinois, lydia, good morning to you. caller: good morning, thank you. i would like to know if there's a powerful connection to the pledge that washington took as a freemason, and the fact that when it happened, disenfranchised from power and government. he's wearing the freemason apron as he lays the cornerstone, and for me, i'll take credit or blame for this possible theory, there's no small coincidence that the image on that apron is similar to the king's stone. you contrast that with the queen post, the king post versus the queen post. i don't think it's any small coincidence that we don't have an elizabeth or isabella or cleopatra women who have exercised power, and i wonder if there's a possible

connection with the pledge that was given to the freemasons. host: thank you. guest: i wouldn't see the connection. i can tell you that washington in many ways was ahead of his contemporaries in taking women seriously. in fact, the woman who probably had the most was perhaps was persuading him against his wishes to run for a second term . it was the wife of a philadelphia measure chanted, former mayor, and someone whose political views, not just social owner men station, washington took seriously enough to be guided by. host: winston-salem, north carolina, frank is a democrat. caller: yes. did george washington have any lob hobbies later on in his life? guest: that's a great question. washington loved the theater. washington's great passion was

agriculture. farmer washington, he was called. host: we have a picture of mount vernon we can show as you're talking. guest: sure. he was also an amateur architect. if you work at mount vernon, that was his great passion. he built up that estate. eventually he had about 8,000 acres surrounding five separate farms. he would ride every day 14 miles around his acres, checking up on other operations. that's the room that he added the great public room with the played upwindow that he added at the beginning of the revolution as a kind of stage setting. that's the room where he was, for example, formerly notified of his election to the presidency. that's the room where he and mrs. washington entertained the endless stream of visitors who popped into mount vernon with no ticket of admission other than their curiosity to see the

most famous man on earth. host: talking about george washington on these couple of days in december that were very important. he also died in december. how did he die? guest: he died rather miserably. you might say, a lethally sore throat. it was a disease, a contraction of the throat. today he could have been saved by antibiotics. he died -- host: how old was he? guest: he was 67. washington was very cognizant of living on borrowed time. his whole presidency, washington men died often in their 40's. host: he also gave us the two-term presidency. guest: he did. again, washington's example was so powerful that 150 years went by, and world war ii intervened before an american president,

in effect, dared break that tradition. of course, in 1940, franklin roosevelt successfully ran for a third term. host: freeport new jersey, pat, republican, good morning. caller: hi. i think you just answered my question, because i wanted to touch on the two-term limit that washington set up as tradition, and i thought that prior to 1940, there were a couple of presidents who thought third term or talked about seeking third terms, and they were rebuffed by either their party or by the voters. and i'm wondering if you could address that, thanks. host: yes, right you are. this woman's a budding historian. ulysses grant came back four years after his second term and tried to win a republican nomination 1880, was unsuccessful. of course, theodore roosevelt in 1912 sought the republican nomination and then split the party and ran on a third-party

ticket. host: we're getting quite a few tweets with people talking about george washington as the slave holder. guest: sure. well, george washington actually employed more people in mount vernon that -- than did he in the entire executive branch of the government. host: how large was the executive branch at that point? guest: it was fewer than 200. obviously the difference is he didn't own the people who worked for him in the executive branch of government. his attitude on slavery, you know, books and books and books have been written about it. and i don't want to oversimplify that, but i would argue, if you look at the overall arch of washington's attitude about slavery and race, that washington outgrew much of the racism of the surroundings that produced him. and, in fact, famously, he's

one of the few founders who, in his will, went out of his way to see to it that the slaves, a majority of whom, would not only be freed, but would -- and here he broke the law in virginia -- would be educated as well. host: gary, indiana, stephen, independent. good morning. caller: hello. earlier in the show, you explained how it was very important that george washington was elected the first president. how different would america have been had anyone else been elected, like the federalist john adams been president instead, or the anti-federalist, george clinton, or anyone else like alexander hamilton, if he had been president? how would that have changed america from what we have now to what we had in case someone else was the first president. i'll take my answer off line. guest: sure. that's a great question.

obviously there's no definitive way to answer it, except this -- i would actually take your inquiry back. let's go back to the constitutional convention when the delegates were designing this office. no one quite knew what a president was. was it a republican with a small r, monarch, what was it? and arguably you can make the case, the reason that the constitution got written and approved and ultimately ratified was because of a nation that just revoted against what it saw as the abuse of executive power in the form of a british monarch, believed one man, and that was george washington. so i can't receive of an american presidency without washington. i'm not sure i can skee of a

constitutional republic without washington. host: speaking of john adams, who was his vice president, did he set the stage for the role of vice presidents with what tasks he gave him? guest: poor adams. he ringers in the shadow of not only of washington, but of jefferson as well. he is representative. he wants the first unhappy vice president, and virtually everyone who's held the offense since has followed in adams' footsteps. he had an up and down relationship with washington. there were times, frankly, when he was easily moved to anger. he was known to refer to washington as old muttonhead. abigail adams resent the double standard, that is now, people who wouldn't criticize the president directed their criticism at the vice president. but imagine having to succeed

george washington. there is a great saying, one of the great tableaus in american history. in march 1887, when washington is leaving, and he attends the inauguration, we've come through this great turning point of peaceful transition of power from one president to another, and, of course, adams realizes everyone's sleeping, and they're all there because of washington, but not there because of -- they're there because of the setting, not washington tried to be as inconspicuous as he could. he could not be inconspicuous. host: we have a decision from our colleagues of george .ashington's adentures they look pretty painful. it asks whether he used --

had a terrible pain and was dosed with an opium derivatives regularly. it does not seem to have impaired his presidency. host: next is hendersonville, north carolina, william, democrats line. caller: i am calling from hendersonville. i am very delighted with your program this morning and you're having richard norton smith on. the question i wanted to ask is what was george washington's affiliation with the episcopal church or what we now know in

america as the episcopal church? i have been to the church in alexandria, i think. where there is a pew mark of a george washington. i just wondered how is he fit into that scene? host: thanks so much alexandria claims george washington in lots of displaces. guest: in old town alexandria, washington did attend services at christchurch. he was a vested member there. there are stories about his christianity. some say that almost never took communion.

there are those who believed it was a formalistic tie that he had to the third, the tide with his status in society. i'd think it was more than that, something that evolved. if you look at what he went through, the crises, the agonies, the anguish, the fact that this country was every day on the brink of extinction and that before he became president. i think washington over and time and found that he had a different view of christianity. it became much more personal form of solace and inspiration that perhaps some of the critics believe. host: next, republican in naples, florida. caller: good morning and thanks

for c-span. i think that george washington was one of the greatest presidents. i read the book that new gingrich wrote. it said that at the end of the war there was a young lad that had crossed the stream and helped to win the war of 1776. i am 91 years old. if i make a mistake, i am sorry. george washington said to his men, called the young man and said he will be decorated to the highest. he was supposed to have had a purple heart and everything. the people called him that he had pneumonia and died. george washington now stand prayed for the young man. i have always had a good feeling

toward george washington. when i went to school in a one- run school in a covered wagon. at our school we had a flag on the back of wall and on the wall/alonof the they had chapel and prayed every morning. >> thank you. we love to have viewers of your age watching. now, what can you tell about his bullish until with women, based on that call? -- his relationship with women? guest: go online and read the farewell address if you want a final boword on george washington and religion.

he writes that he believes it is indispensable. there is nothing formalistic about his wording. host: another dress, his first inaugural, here is a quote. "there's no truth more thoroughly exacted -- guest: there's idealism and -- john f. kennedy called himself an idealist without illusion. george washington could use the same words. he understood that he was dealing with human beings. he said at one time that post believe you cano ose who e said the po believe you can win a war on

selfishness -- that made him a gifted leader of men. he was a great psychologist. he certain we never would technology was a politician. but politicians, first and foremost, have unique insight into what motivates and inspires him beings to go beyond the norm. over and over again that is what washington did in the war and as president. host: mr. smith is a long time consulting historian for our projects as a c-span and was involved with our contenders series. 14 people that lost the presidency but shaped american history. thomas dewey is featured tonight at 10:00 p.m. eastern. all the rest of the week we will continue to run this.

it was a fun project. guest: it was. i learned a lot. host: here's a question from linda on twitter -- guest: yes, but there was also great ambition and some vanity. i don't know of those qualities can coexist. humility in what counts? we were talking earlier about death and kim jong il. i don't think anyone would suggest public utility was kim jong il's style. george washington understood cy of populartimate t government required to limitation of power and tenure on the part of those serving. he was on the human. host: you will probably like

this question from twitter. guest: i don't think he had irish roots. you can go to suffolk in england and c.b. ancestral home -- see the ancestral home. washington had red hair as well as hamilton and the marquis day lafayette -- de lafayette. host: this is a question from a viewer via e-mail -- guest: absolutely. that is why he is often preferred to as the farmer called away from his plow to serve his country and then returning to his ancestral

acres. to as arred as farmer. he loved fiction. he read don quixote. he read books about farming most of all. he was a very practical, self-, quintessentially american in his approach to agriculture. host: aaron from new jersey -- guest: by the time the whiskey rebellion occurred deep into his second term, a host of fischers had developed -- fissures. there were political parties. there were many who believed washington was guilty of overstepping the bounds and of

posing a danger to the liberties of his countrymen. host: a number of viewers are sending washington quotes. here's one -- luis from philadelphia. caller: it is a testament to his character that he would relinquish power. people like napoleon and cesar chavez in venezuela and some on boulevard seemed to want to hold on to power. is it true that he once said he did not aspire to become george the first? guest: i don't know, but it is a great sound bite. i do know of a george the third. if washington was serious about

voluntarily relinquishing power at the end of the revolution and he was the greatest man on earth, an. host: michigan, ed, democrat. caller: you kind stole my comment. i assume that you had red hair when you were young man. guest: you assume i am no longer a young man. caller: was dickerson also a red head? host: he was. another question, did the owner

distillery? guest: he did. he was trying to make mount vernon profitable, try to make a business out of his estate. he was quiet abstaineous. someone went to weekly dinners the president had in philadelphia. after two glasses of champagne the president became merry. host: he was the first to be able to create a cabinet. how did he do that and does its formation of the cabinet still affect us? guest: absolutely. that goes to the heart of his major political genius. the constitution says nothing about the cabinet. washington created it to be a kind of privy council. having created it, then what

happened is how he used it. what he brought into it was jefferson and hamilton, philosophical adversaries. it was washington's skill that kept both of them in that cabinet long after each one wanted out. washington was trying as much as possible to forestall the formal creation of political parties. he tried to hang on to the spirit of unity from war. host: a tweet -- you can just go to the video library to search for it. we have lots of material if you are interested in looking at web sites associated with him. and all the presidents. you do some tours with people interested in getting on a bus

and visiting the sites for themselves. guest: next one is june 8. a nine-day lincoln plus tour beginning in lexington, kentucky and visiting his birthplace and a host of sites in indiana, his boyhood home in illinois, sites around springfield, new salem, and points north. and the home of general grant, the birthplace of herbert hoover and presidential library in iowa, and other things along the way. there's a web site if people are interested. patriots.org.sand we have tens spaces left. host: greenfield, south carolina, barry. caller: good morning, thank you

for c-span. i always like to look at comparisons and now preparing president obama to george washington particularly about the fact that washington was the first president and obama was the first black president. washington took over the country when the country was in turmoil and obama did the same thing because we were in financial turmoil and are still trying to recover. i would like to know your comparison, thank you. guest: there are some parallels. again, washington sometimes in some ways is a patron saint of modern presidents, embattled president, because it turns out that he was as widely criticized and some would say unfairly criticized of any

president since then. the relationship between the president and the media is something that is evergreen. washington traveled around the country on trips that were choreographed as anything president obama might do today. what is interesting, pure speculation, washington told someone after he left office, but before his death, in 1799, the one thing that really worried him about a long-term survival of the united states was slavery and that unless we found a way of peaceful it and over time to eliminate slavery he feared that there would be a great civil war. he turned out to be correct. i think if washington could come back today he would feel no small amount of pride that we

have come as far as we have on the issue of race. host: relationship with congress, and did use executive orders? guest: he took the advice and consent clause of the constitution. 1789, august, a treaty with the indians. he goes to congress and in front of the senate and wait for them and to advise. senators made up their own rules, then as now. washington lost his temper and said this defeat every purpose of my coming here. he gradually began discomposure. he walked out. ever since, presidents have submitted treaties and other does automadiplomatic agreemente differently. host: on twitter --

guest: i get asked that all the time. it is impossible. go back and look at a farewell address. he talks about debt, which he does not like. at the same time he talks about the necessity of taxes to pay off a debt, however unpopular. host: a lot of people are interested. a number of tweets saying they have read about his having slaves. guest: it is a horrifying but quite accurate bit of history. host: west palm beach, john, democrat. caller: it is a pleasure, mr. smith. when i was in grade school you

will always see a picture of washington and lincoln as well. you don't realize until you get older, how great he really was. he is considered the greatest president by me. do we know what he sounded like? did the average person speak with the elegance of the founding fathers such as washington? did they write that way or was -- was that just the upper-class? guest: one reason he was uncomfortable in a public speaking role was he was not very good at it. there are those who say his dental problems affected his voice. second, as a young man he had been prone to pulmonary complaints. the combination of illnesses had

played havoc. you would see this majestic godlike figure standing before you, but he did not have a majestic voice. he did not project in that sense. this was also true of thomas jefferson. the other question? host: i only remember about what he sounded like. our next segment will be back to modern elections. we will learn about access to voting rights and this is a tweet asking -- ken mr. smith comment on that and on campaign finance in general? guest: the first time he ran for the house of burgesses, he came in the third. that was in part because of his refusal to comply with the custom of the day, which was to provide liquid refreshment to the voters. he always learned from his mistakes.

the next time around, this was no exception. host: how about campaign finance? guest: i think he would be appalled. host: how work campaigns financed? guest: you had your own newspapers. these were in the newspapers. he was often the victim and the newspapers, so he was not a big fan of that system. host: it's always fun to talk with you but we are out of time. thanks for being here. tap the new year. guest: same to you. host: we will take a break and and what's going on, on c-span radio. we will have the election initiatives director at the abuse center. what citizens have gotten for the $3 billion this country has

spent on ballot access and voting since the help america vote act. -- the pew center. >> the obama administration is considering whether to allow the outgoing leader of yemen into the u.s. for special medical treatment that he sustained in the june attack on his compound. the request is being considered but would only be approved for medical reasons. last month he agreed to a deal to hand power over to his vice- president in exchange for immunity. many of his opponents want him tried for his attacks on protesters. meanwhile, arab league observers are expected to arrive in syria today to try to determine whether syria is complying with a plan to end the crackdown on dissent. the united nations says more than 5000 people have been killed since protests against president bashar al-assad began in march.

more violence today in iraq. suicide bomber set off a car bomb earlier at a checkpoint leading to the iraqi interior ministry, killing seven people and injuring 32 others. the attack followed a series of bombings last week that killed up to 70 people in a single day. increasing fears about iraq's future after u.s. troops withdrew this month. those are some of the latest headstock -- headlines on c-span radio. >> ♪ >> with the iowa caucuses next week and then hampshire, south carolina, and florida later in the month, the contenders" looks back at 14 candidates who ran for president and lost but pat a long-lasting impact on american politics. , tonight.ng, ran againdewey on friday, george wallace.

on saturday, a senator and congressman from south dakota, george mcgovern, followed by if ross perot. the contenders, every night at 10:00 eastern on c-span. >> tonight, julia angwin on privacy issues and cookies and super cookies that track where internet users go. >> eric schmidt expressed this very well. he said i don't think we really understand the implications of living in a society where everything that we do is being watched. our telephones are transmitting our locations and our computers are transmitting everything we are looking at. it is becoming a situation where we are creating a total surveillance system.

>> julia angwin denied it 8:00 on c-span 2. -- tonight at 8:00. >> michelle bachmann is here and she's thinking about running for president, which is weird because i've heard she was born in canada. [laughter] yes, this is how it starts. >> it is so amazing to be in washington and all this history, all these amazing buildings and yet here we are at the hilton. [laughter] the red carpet outside was amazing. who are you wearing? what does it matter, i am going into the hilton. >> more than 9 million views of president obama's appearance and 2.5 million for seth meyers, among the top seen youtube videos. go to our youtube channel to

watch them on line. washington journal continues. guest: the election initiatives center.rate actit the pew david becker. thanks for being here. guest: thanks for having me. host: in terms of dollar figures, the report suggest that after the help america vote act, congress appropriated and awarded $3.2 billion for the city-state's. so far the states have spent about 83% a that. $2.6 billion. with all that money expended, how ready are we for the 2012 election? guest: great question.

when the act was passed in 2002 in response to the disputed election in the 2000 presidential election, it passed with large margins in both houses as a result of substantive negotiations between the parties and concerns they received on things like creating the elections assistance commission, it set up voting system requirements tha. it required states to develop statewide voter registration databases. previously the states mostly kept lists at the county or local level. someone moved from county to county or city had to sit within a stated was often impossible to track that information. pour the first time it requires states to keep statewide voter registration databases. and it provided funding to move from a punch card balance which

caused so many problems in florida in 2000. there were always problems with those ballots to some degree where someone could punt two holes for the same race and then it would be almost impossible to determine where the vote would go. it provided funding to move away from those devices to devices that would prevent those kinds of errors from happening. most of the money has been spent by the state's now. pretty much all the states have compliance at statewide voter registration databases. california does not, notably. they are likely not to have one until about 2016 or later. most of the states do have that. pretty much all the states have moved away from point card machines. card machines.

states are better off now, but there's still some work to be done. host: we will be talking about your access to the voting process in the election-year, what kind of investment you you thought it was for the money expended to upbraid the voting machines and the process since the 2000 election with our guest. phone lines are open. we will put the e-mail address and twitter address on the bottom of the screen. you are welcome to use any of those methods as well. let's move to the security issue. the latest anonymous hacking. they have packed into a security-related to think tank.

concerns that people in iowa are taking seriously and the threat. what about the security aspect? guest: i think everyone wants to make sure the votes are counted properly. most experts in the field largely agree that we are not quite ready to do anything with regard to voting where the ballots are counted via some connection to the internet. in other words, internet voting from your home will be difficult to do it this time because of security concerns with regard to the internet. most systems are stand alone. many jurisdictions have optical scanning technology where you still in a bubble on a paper ballot and it is often fed into increasing-based accounting device. that device usually has redundant systems in it to make

sure account is accurate and then there are systems to audit those counts afterwards so you have some record to go back to if there's some dispute. most americans can feel fairly secure that their ballots are being counted. host: you have a question? caller: i apologize, because i need to get back to the last segment. to find out that george washington took from his slaves. he raped his slave women. he was an alcoholic and was part of the loom and body, the freemasons. if you guys ho talk youw good a president he was. it is disgusting.

host: i will stop you because we will have another hold george washington segment. you have a question on the voting act before we go? he's gone. this question -- continuing to upgrade the system. guest: one of the challenges in voting is being able to make sure all of those eligible can cast a ballot and that the ballots counted as it is cast. but also we want to protect anonymity of the voters. there are very few systems that will allow verification of the origin of the ballot and for to be cast and counted in the proper way. we also want to maintain the anonymity of the individual. internet voting is a long way off. host: jim wants the same thing. the next call is about americans

voting as the 2012 election year debuts. spokane, washington, independent, david. caller: i am calling from the former site of expo '74 in spokane, washington. thanks for taking my call. my question is, as an independent voter i switch between republican and democrat depending on the person and the issues. but i am the 50 years old. since i was a young man i've spoken with a lot of older americans over the years who question their potency as voters since the electorial vote. i am wondering about how much ambition has been lost since the introduction of the electorial vote? is there more education they need to be done for the american

people about this, maybe to get them more involved in voting? that's my question. host: thank you. guest: the caller is referring to the electoral college. that has been around since the founding of the republic. the way the electoral votes were distributed has changed over a time. the states had power over that. now the electoral votes are distributed either with a winner-take-all in each state, the popular vote getting all the electoral votes. a couple states like maine having allegations based on a variety of methods -- allocations. some want to a bypass the electoral college. i don't know if that will happen anytime soon. but we saw a turnout in 2008

that was at the highest level of several decades. still did not reach the turnout levels we saw in 1964 and earlier. i think there's reason to believe voters are still motivated to get out there and vote in presidential elections. host: and tony writes on twitter -- - we are talking about how do you vote and house states have improved the process since the act. what is the relationship between the the federal government, states, and localities in the voting process? guest: between the federal government and the states, the federal government has the power to regulate federal elections. there have been several famous pieces of legislation that do that. the voting rights act, the national voter registration act, the uniform and overseas citizen

absentee act. largely most of irresponsibility is dedicated -- delegated to the states. the states run the elections. that's why we see a variety of laws in a variety of the aspects of the election like same day .etregistration some states you have to register by a certain deadline before the election. north dakota has no voter registration at all. they can pursue their own policies with regard to election in the state's. some states are highly centralized. delaware is very centralized. it is only three counties anyway. states like texas, california where the counties have almost all the responsibility. , the the state's overall

number of laws seems to be changing in the states about access to the balance. guest: the trend lately over the past few years has been towards things like we have seen recent movement towards photograph id. the conventional wisdom is that republicans have generally pushed legislation that would seek to further strengthen the integrity of elections or perceived integrity. democrats when they have been in power have tried to look at the lack of access with disenfranchised communities. that convention does not always play out exactly like that. with total id you have an independent governor and democratic legislature in passing a photo id bill it will

island. -- in rhode island. those in power seek to do it things that will keep them in power. and those not in power seek to do things that will get them into power. were there a number of states that were donor states? guest: there are many states that have not spent their money yet. california has over $100 million in money they have still yet to spend on things like a statewide voter registration database. but there are states -- ohio and maryland space spent almost all of their money to date and have

saw earlier compliance with the help america act. host: how with the unallocated -- allocated? guest: it was by population and some other factors. host: andre from harlem, a democrat. caller: i'm from new york. it touched on new rules would voter identification. it is a way to discriminate against minority voters. whay can't the elections be federally uniform? have's a tendency to integrity issues. red states like idaho. we want to make sure votes get

counted properly. i think they should become uniform. do they have to bring up this voter i.d. stuff, because a lot of people don't have a driver's license. it is a way to suppress the vote. and why can't boater elections be uniform? guest: the highly controversial issue, the justice department denied south carolina's ability to impose a total id law on its citizens, saying it was in violation of the voting rights act. those on the other side claims it is necessary to make sure people voting are who they say they are. and so, that dispute really will continue to resonate. host: the supreme court agreed to hear that case, right? guest: the supreme court had a

case of a few years ago in indiana. with regard to the south carolina decision, that will be litigated in d.c. host: this accord is hearing arizona? is hearingsupreme court arizona? guest: documentation and pooka citizenship to register. that is a slightly different situation. in arizona they must document citizenship with a birth certificate or a passport at the time they register. they are the only state to have such a requirement. there are citizens opposing best. host: next call is from plymouth, ohio, mike, independent. caller: good morning, susan. we do need an idea as far as voting. this is the most important things we need. when i walk into the voting booth i want to make sure it is

me that voting and not someone else. if i get pulled over, they asked my id and insurance. as far as discrimination goes, collect oral votes and a sham that's been going on, -- as far as electoral votes, an and the sham that's been going on, we should get a receipt after voting does like when you buy something at the store. everything in the bordeaux was a debacle. bush did steal the election. -- everything in florida was a debacle. guest: in south carolina those on the other side might say that not everyone drives. it looks like 33,000 if not more people in south carolina don't

have the photo id necessary to vote and had difficulty getting it. however, the integrity of the votes and proceedings integrity of voting is an important factor and needs to be a concern. one of the things that is important, the requirements that we should have statewide voter registration based is about being able to really verify the integrity of the election in a way we have not been able to before. confirming the identity of a voter is most important at the point at which they register. if you have a way to ensure the accuracy of a registration and the completeness of a registration, in other words people truly eligible have an easy path to registration and those not eligible cannot get on the role, if that is one of the most important things you can do to manage the integrity of the

election. host: body, a democrat. caller: i have a question about the new york city machines, which are very old. i also have a question about florida. the new york machines are very old fashioned. you pull the lever and the curtain opens and it gets registered. we have been using the machines may be 100 years. what is wrong with those machines? they are fine. guest: if you ask people what machines they like to vote on, almost inevitably they like to vote on the machines they have. if everyone i've spoken with in new york likes the lever machine where you walk in and pull the curtain and push all believers -- the levers. one problem is you cannot audit it and make sure the machines are counting your ballots in the way they were intended to be

cast. some of the machines date back to the 19th century in design. my understanding that is that new york state has moved away from those machines in 2010 and held their first election using optical scanning machines, where you still in a bubble on a sheet of paper. if there's a problem you can go back to the original paper ballot. host: are you still there? caller: they have a republican and democrat at the table and they are making sure ito gets registered. so that is the check. in florida and they use computers and the always happen issues about tracking and controlling it.

groups such as abortion groups can deliver more votes. you have a prominent person who gets named in the scandals and they never get prosecuted. guest: particularly interesting point the caller raised. many points in a process at which we need to manage the integrity of the process. we should manage the integrity at the beginning when eligible voters get on the lists, and manage the integrity when people take in at the tables at the present or get their ballots and send them in. and counting of ballots is a separate issue. no one watches when you vote in the ballot system. just knowing who you are does not mean the ballot you cast in secret will be counted properly unless there's a method to audit that. host: who of its individual

states? guest: it is different in each state. usually it is state laws that govern. usually it is the state election authority. sometimes the secretary of state. sometimes the state election board. they often bring in outside individuals to help with that process. the best audits are completely transparent. host: arthur groups that look across the state's and give a report card on these kinds of access issues, one state to the other? guest: we do on some of those issues, we recently released a report on state election web site, which states do the best job and which need tow improve need -- which states need to improve. and we are looking at data.

it is designed to help states identify which areas they are doing well and which areas they can stand to approve. we should be getting something out of that later in 2012. host: david is the election initiative director at the pew center. next call from new hampshire, independent. caller: good morning. pardon my cold. interesting. the subject is monitoring in general. there are deceased persons getting social security checks and so on. monitoring the seems to be a process. the most important thing is one caller spoke about, identification and mainly that you are u.s. citizens. the other issue is people are not voting because of the candidates running. my wife is from scotland and she

says how come everybody has to be rich to run? they are out of contact with the average man. and they get elected and they do what they want to do. kind of interesting. people are not voting. i've spoken with many who are not going to vote because they don't like to is running. i would appreciate your comment. guest: interesting. one of the things that is very difficult to do is to look at election administration in general and identify a single factor that affects turnout. so many factors can affect any given election. the 2008 election with obama and a large turnout, a variety of factors affected the turnout. some of them might have been laws passed with regard to election of ministration. some might of been related to the passion with which voters

felt about host: the candidate this question from twitter -- guest: that is a really good question. we don't have great statistics on that. but we did look at clark county, nevada, which is where las vegas is an 70% of nevada voters live. it is one of the county's in the country with the greatest for closing prices in the united states. anction officials there di id operation where he sent mailings to all the registered voting is over six months. over 20% of those gone came back as undeliverable. that means one out of five registered voters hadn't moved -- had moved. it is very difficult to keep up

with that kind of mobility. and involuntary mobility that results from foreclosure and economic crisis, and military families that have to be stationed somewhere else and they have to move. it is important that states develop modernized systems to try to keep up with voters as they move, so they don't have to constantly track them down after the fact. host: several dozen c-span personnel will be leaving today for iowa and we will be there through the iowa caucus. a tradition of ours since the early 1980's, we will televise two caucuses in their entirety. if you have never seen how a caucus works, and a week and a day from now on tuesday to watch how that works in the state of iowa. david is with us eight more minutes. this question, we were talking about auditing and observing states. how many prosecutions of voting

fraud that occurred last decade or so is this? -- guest: very few prosecutions. and your convictions of voter fraud have occurred in the past decade. virtually every study that's been done, the data is hard to come by, has been unable to find any kind of systemic voter fraud. those concerned about voter fraud often point to the difficulty in identifying one fraud has occurred. we even see in some ways different definitions of what constitutes voter fraud. does submitting a duplicate voter registration form constitutes order fraud? virtually every prediction that i know of, the answer is no. -- virtually every jurisdiction. usually when people talk about voter fraud they are talking

about ballots counted that should not have been. ineligible people and people impersonating other voters and so on. right now the evidence does not suggest that it is particularly widespread. even those who believe voter fraud is out there, they acknowledge the data is not there yet. host: we have a caller from reno, nevada, gerald, a democrat. caller: i hear a lot of people comparing voting to driving. remember that driving is a privilege given to you by the states. voting discipliis a right givenu by the constitution and our founding fathers. to have an id to do that, there's no prerequisite in the constitution that says you need the photo identification. next thing, are you going to need that for freedom of speech and freedom of religion? will you need an id to live?

does everybody to know who you are including the government? guest: the caller articulated the argument against voter i.d. well. those on the other side might say although id is not a particularly large burden to combat the possibility of some compromise to the integrity of the ballot. host: next is a call from los angeles. this is linda, an independent. caller: thank you. i am in favor of full id. in most states that require that, they are free to the individual meeting one. i do think if mr. eric holder had paid more attention to guns sold illegally instead of s, heing about the state'

probably would have been better off. if people are too stupid to acquire a total idea, then they should not be voting in the first place. thank you. guest: there's the other side of the issue. on, theg that's goes opposite side would point out that south carolina residents indicated 33,000 people did not have the id necessary. there's been some research that pointed out there are people for whom finding the background documentation needed for getting a full id is difficult. host: a viewer asks --

guest: due to a problem at the dmv or a problem with some third-party voter registration group, people went to their present on election day, try to get a balance, could not get it, probably cast a provisional ballots that was not counted. 2.2 million is a significant number. that is something we're keeping a close eye on. host: a question from greg in asheville. caller: i think the main issue is secretary of state is not actually counting the votes. it is about counting the votes. it is not necessarily about who is voting or if they have the proper id. we have so much corruption in government. how does nancy pelosi pour harry reid get elected, it is because the votes are not being counted accurately. guest: people have to recognize

that the state election official is not often a person counting the ballots. that is often done at the local level, county level, a recent level. there are various checks in the system and various redundancies. i bee at a thousand polling places in my career and personally been in the offices of half the state election officials. they do an astounding top -- outstanding job under tight time constraints. you can imaginein a place like los angeles, they have millions upon millions of voters and are able to get an accurate count immediately is difficult. they do an outstanding job. there are various checks and balances and audit mechanisms to make sure the people who are being voted for aren't giving

the correct. host: we have many resources on line and the u.s. election commissions assistance, some places you can go online to find more about how states have spent the money appropriated by the federal government. about $3 billion to upgrade voting processes. thanks for being here. >guest: thanks for having me. host: we will be here every morning this week during the holidays. thanks for your time. that's starting at 7:00 a.m. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011]