Transcripts For CSPAN2 After 20240704

David, welcome to after words on booktv. Your book is titled you report to me. Who was reporting to . Guest this book is really titled based on a conversation i had with President Trump right as i was becoming acting secretary of the interior and i sate down with the president and had a discussion about potentially taking this role after serving as the deputy secretary. And in our discussion, we got to the end of the discussion and i said to him who do i report to and he said you report to me, which was a very different perspective than i expected. I expected to be told i reported to the chief of staff or someone else. So i walked out of there come out of the oval office with that crystallized in my memory and it turned out that it was actually true, that as i worked with the president , but i founded is thai called him, discussed issues with him and he made, you know, the input that he wanted to make and it turned into a working relationship that was very, very efficient and much different than the experienced i had experienced in the Bush Administration. I use that title but as you read the book for those that do read the book it has a broader meaning and my view is all of the individuals in government whether they are in the Civil Service or elected officials or in the judiciary ultimately all of them through their oath of Office Report to the American People, and we should remember that. We will talk a lot in the conversation about to the agencys relationship to the president , the leader of the agencies relationship to the bureaucracies. But maybe we should talk first about the interior department. Its a Large Organization that does a lot of things. A lot of people are there, but my guess is that its not necessarily the most famous of the cabinet department, no offense. For those who dont study interior quite so closely, can you talk about what it does . Absolutely. First off, it is an Important Agency with a very important mission. In the department of the interior, they manage approximately one in every 5 acres of land in the United States through its administrative jurisdiction thats been converted to by congress as well as activities that take place on the outer continental shelf. And so, it has responsibilities related to those lands depending on the Direction Congress has provided for example some of the Areas Congress has designated to be National Parks and others, fish and wildlife refuges. Other land as our designated multipleis use lands administerd by the bureau of Land Management. The department of the interior also manages water responsibilities in the west through what is called the bureau of recommendation and has a very Important Role in delivering water for agriculture and municipal and industrial uses. Then there is scientific responsibilities such as the u. S. Geological survey. Whats really interesting about theab department is that its a very old agency. It was actually established in 1849 and when it was established, it was the outcome of other cabinet departments hoping to get rid of certain activities that they had within their jurisdiction, so the department of treasury was able to get out of the Work Associated with the general land office, which was largely in charge of transferring lands as a means of creating revenue for the federal government. The department to transfer the e responsibilities associated witt American Indians to the department of the interior. The veterans pensions and benefits were part of the department of the interior and the Patent Office was initially part of the department of the interior so it was even back in the 1840s and 50s it was this organization that was very complex based on a lot of stuff that other departments didnt want to focus on. Host when you come to washington often you see these other agencies and feel like theyve been here forever but some of them are very new and some are old and you start at the history that reminds me 20 years ago when the government created the department of Homeland Security and had to bring together so many different component parts, some new, some old and sometimes its hard to work out how all these things grow in the same direction. And i gather that even for an agency that is almost 200yearsold sometimes it is difficult to Row Everything in the a same direction. What you have added an agency like interior is specific within the departments specific agencies hadat a very different statutory missions and so in the role of deputy secretary or solicitor or even secretary, youre often harmonizing the mandates of these different agencies in a way that works for your overall responsibilities and so historically that can have tension. That can have a lot of public attention. And you learn through that process how to try to manage the responsibilities in a way that is consistent with the law and the fact is and obviously to the extent that its appropriate consistent with the policy direction that the president has. Even before you became deputy secretary, this is an area that knew pretty well. You had a long career. I spent eight years as a political appointee first as a very junior appointee working my way up in the Bush Administration. I ultimately served as a solicitor in the department, which is the chief legal officer and the end of the george w. Bush administration then of course returned to serve as deputy secretary in the Trump Administration. Host back to the theme of the book you reported to me, how would you describe the relationship between a president and his cabinet secretaries . Thi think that it really is a relationship that is largely dependent on the views of the relationship the president wants to have. If you look at the constitution, there is not a lot of direction on the Job Description of the relationship between the secretary and the president. The president appoints you that you have to be confirmed by the United States senate and then the constitution basically says the president can ask you for a written report. And ultimately, the responsibilities associated with of that job are laid out in the law but you have to have a relationship with the president and what he wants. For example when i sit down with of the president to talk about potentially serving as secretary, one of the questions i had for him is what did he want in the job of secretary, because depending on his interest, the role may be something that i was not the optimal candidate for, so we talked about that. And ultimately, the president decides how that relationship is going to work and what the involvementt is that he wants withcr the secretary and its a very personal choice in my opinion. This is a big place. The president has not just the core staff and advisors, the domestic policy council, economic council, National Security council, all of that. So when President Trump says you report to him, i understand that in the sense that you are his appointeee and you will have a oneonone relationship and a lot of your work, but you are still surely working a lot with the broader team of the white house and at its best that larger structure helps the policymaking process. So how did you navigate that reporting to the president and working with the broader team . First of all, you are right if there is an entire team and my perspective on the president s direction was as follows. You are working with everybody collaboratively because you are a team. And you want to accomplish what you need to accomplish and you are part of an effort where the white house is raising issues potentially. You are giving them solutions over raising issues to them to ensure that they are aware of activities. The president said here are your goals. But what that statement meant to me was that ultimately i have the ability to talk directly to the president when i needed to were wanted to, and that to me was a difference than the experience that id seen in the Bush Administration. At times in the Bush Administration, i witnessed it taking literally months for a secretary to be able to raise an issue directly tohi the presidet while working through that white house process. With President Trump, you could move forward and get that call back very quickly and that allowed you to resolve issues and move forward at a pace that was dramatically different than my experience in the Prior Administration and that was important. Toto me it was at least importat and i think it would be to any manager. What you want as a manager i think of any role is, you know, you want clear direction, you want a degree of consistency in that direction, and when you need feedback or a response, you want that quickly and you want to know that the superior has your back to c a certain extent. I think anybody that works for anyone once those kind of things and as i lay out in the book, you report to me, i felt that i had to that with the president. Host what is an example of that . Guest an example would be one of the first actions that i took i came in as an acting secretary. It was in the middle of a Government Shutdown and i explained this in the book and i made a decision to begin to utilize money for recreation that was from recreational fees to address some issues at the National Parksks and actually go wto some of our folks that were in facilities and maintenance who were really hurting back to work right away during the shutdown. And in doing that i knew it would be controversial. I was confident it was legal, but i raised the issue with the white house and directly with the president , explaining to him what i was going to do and he said to me hey, three things essentially. Youre doing this now, even though its been a while in the shutdown maybe you should have thought about doing this sooner which i thought was a completely legitimate and responsible issue. Second, youre the new guy, and because you are the new guy and maybe you ought to say i directed you to do this which i found incredibly interesting given that i told him it would be a controversial decision that he would have my back. And third, and this was important to me, he said when you have something you think is right and you need to do it, just do it and let me know and run your department the way you need to. That was very enabling. To have that direction from the president of the United States to move forward on his policy decisions i thought was an incredible act of management. Host now youre dealing with a broad interior team and thats one of the core messages of the book the difficulty of leavingg a large cabinet agency, cabinet level agency with many statutory responsibilities and a huge team of Civil Servants and others who dont necessarily agree with the given president s particular agenda. How would you describe the relationship between the cabinets, the agencys leader and the Civil Servants . First off, it starts with the role of the respective secretary, and in the case of the secretary of the interior, congress has clarified that the secretary of the interior supervises all functions of the department of the interior and then it lists those functions and whats interesting about that ive always thought is the word supervise. Supervise, to me, is a word that conveys both an active sense like you need to be on top of things and an element of accountability. And then the word all added to that means you are responsible for everything that is occurring in that department, which is significant. The folks in that office believe it was their mission to help the secretary shine no matter who the secretary was. And so that was an experience to work with her staff taught me a couple things first off it taught me that i could over perform if i worked with them. If they collaborated with me. If i was able to learn from their expertise and then use that to move the ball forward. In 2016, after the election what we saw in the press in particular was a lot of media highlighting efforts to suggest that folks in the Civil Service should be resistant to the new president. That was encouraged in that media if you go look back and look at bloomberg stories and others i highlight some the stories in the book. That was very troubling to me. At the end of the day you take the same of everyone takes too well and faithfully execute the law. In doing that, you buy into the system of whoever it is the is n that is elected, you need to carry out the mission according to the direction the American People have picked. My first message as deputy secretary laid out my view of the need for us to work together. And to highlight you know, the respective roles of the Civil Service on one hand and political appointees. Now the book outlines a whole series of events from other agencies where you see a lack of collaboration at different times. I also highlight some great points of collaboration. A president s frustration with the bureaucracy is a very old store inn washington. President trumans frustrated with bureaucracy. If i remember correctly joked president eisenhower would arrive thinking he was a general everything he did what he meekly get saluted and he would find out it things are a lotan slowe. Kennedy and his Administration Professor with bureaucracy but president clinton, president obama were often frustrated with military bureaucracy. We often think about this as republican president s being frustrated by domestic policy Civil Servants but this happens on both sides of the aisle. That said there does seem to be a difference recently in the last few administrations. Legacy of the outset of the Trump Administration had Civil Servants protesting on the arrival of their new leadership. I remember stories of the epa bureaucracy protesting outside thepa epa building. Even before administrator pruitt was appointed to the agency. What has changed in the last say 20 years . I would say a couple things. I also think all of these things can be overcome. But i do think on one hand it became socially acceptable to engage in this activity. And on the other hand its also a result i believe of a feeling of impunity. There will be no consequence for acting in a manner that is unacceptable. And i think in some instances they actually believe the activities are beyond appropriate. I highlight in the book an example of an individual who is working with the white house on communications. And she divides the methodology or if the white house does not like what she has written sheet will make the changes to the edits. But then reinsert her own language that was not approved back into the document and other places and send it forward as a quote workaround. In any other line of work that would be blatant insubordination. Here the person wrote a book highlighting her utilization of doing that. So think on one hand it became acceptable. Now why is that . Part of it in my opinion is the leaders of these agencies themselves have allowed some of this tof happen from a standpoit of not being clear that they are responsible for these document. They are going to truth check them for their going to edit them. They are going to own them and in doing that theyre going to the effort to be rigorous in their review. What i really found if you are rigorous in your review and you are willing to do the work people will find a way to accommodate you and realize that ultimately the buck does stop with you if you are willing to shoulder the burden of the responsibility, they are typically willing to work with you. Professional Civil Service nonpartisan Civil Service is actually one of the great achievements of American History. After the civil war the late 19th century we have laws like the pendleton act that were enacted to get us away from a spoiled system were each newly elected president would come in and hand out jobs like politicau gifts. You had a professional Civil Service so it carry over from one administration to the next for the sake of stability and government. Her expertise in government and more. A moment ago you mentioned the respective roles of the Civil Service versus the political. What are the respective roles of a political appointee and Civil Service . I think at the end of the day just as i said the secretary is a supervisor of that agency whether people like it or not. Whoever is appointed and confirmed is in charge. The policy views of the president are on one hand and important components. But equally important are the milaws you are tasked with administering. Those are ultimately your true responsibility. And then you have facts. It is within the realm looking at the confines of the law. Looking at the facts you have and the extent there is policy discretion is the difference in election should make it. But ultimately, all of that responsibility rests with the senior appointeesdo and then its delegated down. As its delegated down those responsibilities are there for the Civil Servant to help the actual official, the principal make the right decision or take the right action and help them and inform them. They are there to be an aid in terms of assistance in carrying out their responsibilities. They are not there to be the policy director. They are nothe there to be the advocate for a cause. They are there to faithfully carry out the law as it has been conferred by congress and envisioned by whoever is in charge subject to the policy discussion that exists. And to do that there are incorruptible people. Early on in my tenure in the Bush Administration i worked with someone sheet basically had worked on the same issue for many, many years through a consecutive administration. Andn every time a different pay camed into power, they would change on that issue 180 degrees. She had a document called an Environmental Review eis Environmental Impact statement. I was looking through it once she had a literally colorcoded it the facts associated with the documents for those facts that were the best arguments for one administration versus another to save thats our time every time somebody came back and said hey we need help with this. Those are the people that can really help you make phenomenal progress. For whoever is in charge. Conversely if o you have a 1 of folks resisting is one thing. If you have 2 thats another. If you have 10 or 20 or 15. My fear is if we do not recognize thet importance of Holding People accountable to the responsibilities that number could grow depending upon whoever they happen to not like being elected and we cannot have that and have outcomes that are good for the American People. Is set aside the obvious case where a Civil Servant is making life difficult for the president because hes a republican or because hes a democrat. Setting those aside what aboutll the cases were Civil Servants a politically appointed leadership is just wrong on an issue, is misinterpreting a statute. Is misconstruing the facts. Not so much a disagreement about the policy discretion they think the law or the facts on the other side of the decision. They could resign but there must be some kind of dialogue or process per clicks there is. First off any employee can go to the general counsels office of the Solicitors Office they can raise issues with her supervisor. They can go to the Inspector General there are entire mechanisms if they think its really inappropriate in terms of a political activity they can go to the office of special counsel there is a whole host of remedies that you can take beyond resistance or bad behavior. Those remedies should be taken. Many times an employee may not necessarily know the law. Or have the facts or have a perspective. In that dialogue is helpful. Other times the political appointee may be misinformed. As the role of the political appointee, and my opinion is the ability to identify the law and identify the facts and be able to get the information you need to make an informed decision. Ab that is really a maximized when you have collaboration back and forth with the career staff it. And you often have it. Sometimes its educational for both parties. Click to recount a story in the book there is a debate around applying the endangered species act the lawyers during statutory term i think it was indirect effects here iss. What the law means. There were other experts in the agency or outside the agency were construing the term indirect effects much y more broadly of people in and around thead agency and had a very brod sense of the agencys mission and then hadrs lawyers within te agencycy were focusing much more on the statutes. I thought that was in interesting examples that a common occurrence in the agency in your experience . Particular issues related to science. The legal and regulatory terms. And then you can have issues people think are relevant. We live in a society of law. Veand so at the end of the day o have any certainty of our decisionmaking to have predictability in the law. But how the law defines or how the regulation to find something is really important. Somebody can have a view on what they word it might mean like it regulation should be a broader definition or a different definition that is legitimate but the issue that needs to be taken up you should change or regulation or change the statute you do not get to insert your view. Theres a number of examples in the book where there are terms that are commonly used have it may be a meaning that is somewhat different than in a particular or regulatory context. A burden on the agency is to follow the regulation or change them very quickly when most famous examples a decades long fight over the statutes that govern thes. Waters of the unitd states the epa and they army corps. You have long scientific documents on how different bodies of water are connected or not connected. First and foremost the legal requirement that congress is put into law with agencies are governed by law but when i talk with folks in Civil Service and i mean good folks in Civil Service who are doing the best job that they can they often talk about the agencys mission. It is my sense Agency Personnel first and foremost have a broad sense of the agencys mission its not always rooted in statutory checks i dont blame them, they are not thew lawyers. How can politically appointed leadership really move the agency when the agency staff feels like the new policies are at odds with their general sense of an agencys mission . That would require trust between the new leaders and the incumbent staff . First and foremost a requiree clear. You have to be directing what you lay y out and you have to be rigorous and insisting thats the way youre doingng it. It takes time to change an agencys culture. A lot of folks are passionate about their mission. And that is fantastic. That makes things a great but that passion has to be cabin by the reality of the law and then as we try to have it in the book. At the end of the day congress decides what the law is. The executive branch clarifies clear guidance on regulation and guidance on activities and then we have tore apply that. If we want a different system thee way to do is change the law and theres nothing wrong with that, thats great but thats the role of activists. Its not the role of the Civil Servant simply deciding with th lot might be. Were talking very high level of generality but the subtitle of your book is accountability for the failing Administrative State. Your bottom line in the book is there some very significant reforms that are needed. Reforms to Civil Service and more in order to bring about a new generation of agency work that really does follow each president s directions and enforcement statutes. Absolutely. Much of the environment that is the lack of accountability is from 1964. What is interesting that when many appeal mechanisms are put in place thats also the same time the executive branch really began to expand the scope of the Administrative State. You have these things happening together and all of this authority was executive branch. Without a lot of oversight. My view isto that we need to do the opportunities consider moving more of an atwell system. These are all questions for congress notth for david bernhat or others appeared to think about how do we improve the system so we get bettere outcoms for the American People . I also believe leaders of these agencies need to be better prepared. That preparation to move forward. A bunch of different laws in play here. Theres the procedural laws howw agencies do theird work. The last dimension governing Civil Service and accountability. Then there is a substantive law the agencies are administering you talking about how broadly the statutes are written it. Believe immense discretion in the hands of the agencies. A lot of the subjects the interior department and others are administering are very complicated. They require a lot of judgments. How could Congress Actually write laws that are clear and specific but still enable the agency to make judgments based on thelo fact . Congress could decide whether they play a role in the issuance of regulation. Congress could have to approve them. Congress could ask, i found it interesting whenever he testified in congress no one said to me are you accomplishing your mission . What are the goals of this l program . Every program should be looked at and congress should stay what aree we trying to accomplish here . Andwe if we are not maybe we out to think about doing this program differently. T with oversight by congress involves a lot of work and involves a lot of effort. They really should examine these programs instead of the program just simply being on autopilot. You are in, you are out. Its never about dramatically decreasing a program. They are really about is how fast are we going to increase the program . And what does a it mean when you do . We have limited resources and you assume you want the best outcomes we can have we are in the middle of a technological revolution you would think congress would be saying what is the purpose of this program . How can it be done more efficiently . Where can it be done . And in doing that should we be restructuring the way the Government Works . At the end of the day the interior has organized pretty much the same way he has been organized since the very beginning of time. One local field office a little bit always. Another larger management office. Estate office, a Regional Office and then headquarters. Thats the way it has been aligned since the interior started. B each president is going to have his own view about the right policy is within the field of discussion. What that means is we have huge swings in policy from one administration to the next read the story you told early about Civil Servant with the colorcoded Environmental Impact statement, on one hand i like that story. It is a good example of Civil Servant who was trying to work with leaders from both political parties. On the otherer hand its a think civilo servants have to think about the inevitable wild swings in policy from one administration to the next. Each president comes to office wanting to put his own stamp on the policies. What could it administration do to ensure some stability from one administration to the next . Exit the choice of congress. For example there some statutes, bloods take determination as a listed species under the endangered species act. Five. Most five do not change under any circumstances. One Political Party and the other the end ofiv the day the five are immutable. Does the facts support a determination based on those five. Congress decides ultimately in these areas and that scope may vary that is the role of congress to determine that. And then i see executive jobs to implement accordingly. I was in the courtsci get to decide whether or not the executive looked at those five factors apply thefa facts to the five factors. I made a reasonable decision on the lot on the one hand and effects on the other. That is the decision because last few years the Supreme Court has shown great interest. Maybe recalibrating parts of the Administrative State work. The cases involving Agency Independence or the independence of peoplenc with an agencys to. They looked at the discretion agencies get nondelegation doctrine questions delegated an unconstitutional amount of power to an agency. Chevron deference which is not deference to the Chevron Oil Company but its named after a case involving chevron as a deference to the agencys interpretation of the laws. You work through some of those doctrines that he would like to see the courts rethink some of these things. Maybe ath little less of deferee to the agencies and little less deference to congress and dell getting so much power away. That is right. As part of a phenomenon. Chevron basically allowed agencies to believe that they could push the limit on the interpretation statutes. To the extent they could find an ambiguity, they could dry that ambiguity to a place as a matter of policy. And the courts by deferring to them encourage that. And the courts have a view that may be the executive branch is the best place for this issues to be workedut out. My view personally is that stretching. It is not good overall. Was encouraged so much was taken away both to some extent. Is essentially advocating that role to an extent. My own view of that is a limiting principle would help the agencies be a little more thoughtful in the grounding of their policies. It is so much easier as an executive to want to find a solution that does not require having to go to the United States congress. Could we maybe push this little further but those are the cases that often create extraordinary situations. We are living under a government now where it seems each of the administrations is making a lot of new policies. Congress is sitting back sitting in judgment of it all. A lot of decisions are being made once a policies enacted by court judges who get lawsuits and hugely important decisions about policies Going Forward are not Going Forward. It seems like everybody else is doing everybody elses job here. Maybe the courts could damage the Political Energy back to congress for that is going to require huge judgment call by the court itself whether to create a new nondelegation. Except for the courts willing to go on that . I think the last term has indicated they are at least going to nudge things and a in alittle bit of a direction. I think that is important. It does put onus on the other branches. And at the end of the day, at the end of the day it may be discombobulated but we have to move to a place, here is my underlying concern. This is early in the book. The American People have to feel believe fundamentally the government at large is accountable. They act fairly. If we dont make some changes, i fear were going to move further and further away having that confidence. And when i seeol folks actively resisting the president that simply cannot stand peacocks the time we have left lets talk about these specific examples they grappled with. The controversial decisions made with the decision to move the headquarters of a subcomponent of interior. Bureau of Land Management move it out last bite move it out there when i came here in washington . From the moment he was nominated he began working on her organization plan. Trying to reform the department of the interior this management regime. And from the very beginning was to begin to think about who it turns out for example the bureau of reclamation within the department only has a few here in washington at most are out west. Other agencies have done that. With the bureau of Land Management when i look at the situation of your folks and state offices we could deploy our assets to the states. We could set up most of the Land Management land and activity are in the west. He could keep the folks needed ndc with people that deal Different Things that need to be here. You could put them out there and the perspective they would have would be number one difference in that theyd be closer to the issues they work on. Theres also a factor people did not appreciate publicly and that was this. That for many years interiors struggled to get the best people at the land that management to come to washington d. C. To work. Why would that be . The cost of. Housing is dramatically different. The commute time is dramatically different but some of our best managers really love their western lifestyle. And so the ability to recuse the best and the brightest to serve in these Important Roles i thought was a very positive thing. Every organizing the facilities in a differentn direction. And now today with the Technology Associated withh zoom and all of these other similar applications, i had a harm hard time believing there is not a benefit a substantial number of positions to different parts of the country. I can assure you there is certainly an impact. If you are making a decision that affects a community then you have seen that community and you have interacted with that community. That adds a difference in the way you approach a problem then if you dont pay cuts have to admit i come back and forth on this issue over the years. You point out all the reasons why to be closer to the communities in the places they are really affecting. On the other hand if moving these agencies are parts of them out to different places usda to iowa. Use the department of transportation to detroit. Move housing and urban development to a major u. S. City outside of washington. That might actually more difficult to really supervise and manage people in distant places they be there is wisdom and the founders putting in the constitution we have a 10mile square district that be the seat of government it would not necessarily have everything but focusing as much as possible in one place where we would all work together. That is certainly an argument for that. My view on that would be we have your position is likely to prevail over time. A dramatic elimination of the federal government and washington d. C. But at the same time i would say when you look at limited resources you have to ask yourself how you optimize to serve the people and having a bunch of people here may or may not optimally utilize the resource. Versus putting them that have functions. My view is maybe you do not need a headquarters of 1500 people wherever it is. Over thousands of people. Maybe those are activities that would better be restructured some other way. For example, what a document comes in for the bureau of Land Management to d. C. To be reviewed. When i got to interior 30 or 40 people would review that document before it came to the desk of the secretary of the interior to be sent to the federal register. And my question is, are all of those positions really critical . Oros could we put those positios and places in field offices that really need the support . I think that is really thees question when you get down to the analysis. How do you optimize Productivity Organization that is effective and do our leaders really need to be there . Might view of that was absently not spirit i can interact with him and his deputies just as easily with him located in Grand Junction as i could with him having an office. And i could talk to him just as often but. Surely thats the right answer. Moving some jobs out of washington would achieve everything you described it would also help people along cities to feel part of the government. We talked a lot about documents i am a lawyer, i know Legal Process around administration very well. It seems to me we create a system thats very good at producing documents and analysis. But not necessarily good at actually administering laws that makene real changes in daytody life. When rulemaking is an Environmental Impact statements and on and on and on. That is not the sum total of administration for at the end of the did the job of administration is actually to change, to carry out the process in a way that makes change in daytoday life. How do we get out of this trap where we are producing documents over and over again but not actually implementing them . You cannot build anything in america anymore othervi than stacks and stacks of Environmental Impact statements and that is just one example. How do we move administration from a process actual outcomes . Quickset the great question but one of the things about working with President Trump as he is an outcome person. Quicksets not always the best thing. At the end of the day the government is here to serve the people and deliver the outcomes the American People need. And to do that effectively, you have to look at the processes you have in place and say how can you make them better . Youro look at the permitting process theres lots of ideas out there have how to improve that process. When i was the secretary or even a deputy secretary we sat down and said what can we do administratively to improve this process in a way that makes it meet the goals of the act which was to ensure there is a Public Participation process. And the decisionmaker is informed of alternatives to the proposed actions and the environmental consequences. We took a massive slow process and consolidated it into whose truth of calls, briefings, facetoface communication. Just recently and explained to me the recollection of that meeting with me too discuss an environmental document that we streamlined i basically said hey on page 2 30 you said x and im not sure he got that from. His reaction was what dhec can we say unto 30 . He was surprised people would read the document. We have set up processes that are more about the process then informing of the decisionmaker and moving forward. And ultimately congress is going to have to grapple with the best way forward with some of these things. They are trying to. But when it takes years to develop a plan for something, years to litigate its it really begins to freeze but we can do as a country piglets are the greatest challenges we face right now is the unsteadiness of administration from one administration to the next. The changes and the uncertainty. If you have a huge capitalintensive project a huge Energy Project the green Energy Projects are running into this theres a a planning horizon ofa decade or more in investment horizon beyond that. They want to w do that they need stability what we are seeing as uncertainty that will deter investment and innovation, how do we solve this . The problem you identify is clear. Investors realize that. Our operators are Government Agencies so what did they do . They try and get to the process or c they simply walk away. Our challenge particularly in a time where the public and many governments are expecting major infrastructure change is that something has to improve. My own view of this is that the reality today and our society is virtually every meaningfully thought through in terms of potential Environmental Impact. That is an important consideration. We also have to factor in the social benefits. And make decisions collectively about do we want to move forward with these items and a responsibleca timeframe . We are wrapped up in red tape literally. A book is titled the report to me accountability for the failing Administrative State that the authors David Bernhardt former secretary of interior. David thank you for joining us. Thanks a lot for having me. Healthy democracy doesnt just look like this. It looks like this. Americans can see democracy at work. Our republic thrives, get informed straight from the source on cspan unfiltered, unbiased, word for word. From the nations capitol to were ever you are its the opinion that matters most is your own. This is what democracy looks like. Cspan powered by cable. Cooks this yearbook tv celebrates 25 years of presenting nonfiction books and authors. The 22nd year in a row book tv is live with the library of Congress National book festival. Since 2001 book tv in partnership with the library of congress has provided signature in depth coverage of the National Book festival featuring hundreds of nonfiction authors and guest. Watch saturday book tv once again brings you live all day coverage of the National Book festival. Guests and authors includes imported judge on his book lives and to tell you for young adults. Former nfl player author of the yards between us. Complete book festival schedule online at booktv. Org. National book festival Live Saturday beginning at 9 00 a. M. Eastern on cspan2. Weekends on cspan2 our intellectual feast. Every saturday American History tv documents americas story and on sunday booktv brings the latest nfiction books and authors. Funding for cspan2 comes in cspan2 companiestelevision compe including charter communication. Charter is proud to be recognized the best internet providers. We are just getting started. To reach those who need it most. Cooks charter communications