Professor green absolutely, i agree. And what is interesting about that statement, it was made at the time when speakers had a lot fewer responsibilities and duties than today. If anything, it is even more so it is the most difficult job in washington. Susan unlike the senate majority, this position is named in the constitution, without a lot of detail beyond that. I am wondering, when the framers created the position, they were look into the english model, what are they have in mind . Professor green they were thing about a model of the speakership where it was a position that had parliamentary responsibilities. So the job was to preside over the chamber and make sure the rules were being followed fairly. But they also understood the position could take on other responsibilities. I think it is telling it is only mentioned once in the constitution, and says only, the speaker,ll choose the and leaves the rest up to the house itself to determine what the speakers responsibilities should be. Susan over time, has it evolved as the institution has changed or have the people that have been in it changed the job . Professor green i think it is a combination. Certainly, the larger context in which speakers have to operate, the house itself, our national government, a larger has changed. Political context there have been new duties imposed on speakers. But at the same time, there have been individuals who have made a profound impact on the speakership, and changed the way it governs and operates. Susan our viewers see nancy pelosi on the news every day. They say her in her role all the time on cspan. We thought we would learn from you about some of the powerful people of the past who have shaped the role and shaped the country through legislation. But along the way, lets start with the modern speaker. And if you could give us an overview of how the office is organized today. What are the tools . How large is the staff . Give us some sense of what nancy pelosi really oversees in the congress. Professor green to think about it in the broader context, the speaker of the house has a number of responsibilities. Part of it is presiding over the house chamber, although they rarely do that. They have someone doing that for them. But theyre technically responsible for presiding over the house, and making sure the rules are being followed. They are also the leader of their party. And with that comes some expectations they will help the party pass its legislative agenda, they might help set the agenda. They are expected to help with campaigns, raising money, these kinds of things to help their fellow partisans get elected. They also have a public role to play. Theyre expected to do so interviews, to be in the public sphere and represent their party as well as the house as a whole. And those are just some of the many responsibilities they have , which is why it is such a difficult job. Susan do you have a sense of how large their staff is today or the administrative budget of the speaker has . Professor green i do not know offhand what the number is, but it has grown significantly over the last several decades. So it has become a position with a lot of staff and a large budget. Susan what are the tools they have in order to keep their caucus or the entire congress in line . Professor green speakers have both formal and informal tools at their disposal. They do have the power of recognition. So they can decide who gets to speak on the house floor. They also have within their party a number of powers. And the republicans and democrats differ here. But they usually have the power to influence committee assignments. So they can decide who is on what committee to some degree and also who chairs committees. , that way, they can reward who are loyal and punish those who are disloyal and shape the legislative agenda, what works its way through the legislative process. Susan how about their ability to raise money . Professor green that is one of the things speakers are expected to do. It is not a formal job. You wont find it in the rules of the house of representatives, but they are expected to do it. It is one of the things speakers simply have to do. They need to go out and raise money. They need to do fundraisers. They go to member districts when they are running for reelection or election. There are doing a lot of the Campaign Work to help members of their party. Susan in recent years there have been some organizational changes to the congress under various speakers. One of those is the end of earmarks. First off, explain what earmarks are, and did that change the power of the Speakers Office . Professor green earmarks are basically putting special , targeted funding into a larger spending bill. You might have a bill for transportation, for example, that allocates x billions of dollars for roads. In that bill, it might say or in some other related language, x amount of money might go for this road or that bridge. And those are targeted to districts. This was something that was traditional in congress, that members would do this, but they grew in size and expense in the late 1990s, early 2000s. So when republicans took control of the house, they banned earmarks. One of the criticisms that have been made of the ban of earmarks is that it takes away a tool available to speakers who wish to build a majority for legislation. They cannot say anymore, if you both for this bill, you will put in some money for something in the district. There are indirect ways of doing that, informal ways but it is no , longer allowed under the rules to put those explicit earmarks into bills. Susan another thing that has changed in somewhat recent congresses is the seniority of the Committee Chairs. Tenure is the word i am looking for, sorry, the tenure of Committee Chairs. In past congresses, Committee Chairs were every bit as powerful. Now, they have a tenure under which they can serve. Does that give more power to the speaker . Professor green that is one of the reasons speakers are more powerful, yes. And that started under speaker Newt Gingrich, who imposed term limits on Committee Chairs. That was something the party had done before he became speaker and they maintain that rule. The term limits, that means you do not have folks who are chair for 10, 20, 30 years treating their committee as some , sort of personal fiefdom. They have to constantly be moved out. And that weakens their institutional authority. And that has come, i would that their power has declined as the power of the speaker increased. That is one reason why speakers are more powerful than they used to be. Susan on the senate side of congress, the majority of minority leaders are the powerful ones. We see them all the time in and their public roles shepherding legislation on the floor. In the house, there is both the speaker and the majority leader. So how does that relationship work between the two . Professor green the easiest way to think about this is both the house and senate have a top constitutional officer. In the house, it is the speaker of the house. In a the senate, it is the Vice President. But the key difference is that Vice President s are elected by the Electoral College and the public at large, and speakers are not. The senate did not always have a Vice President who was of the same party. From the Majority Partys view, giving power to the Vice President to the same degree the Majority Party in the house might give to the speaker could cause a lot of problems if the Vice President was of the other party. So instead, what happens, in the senate, each party established their Top Party Leader whom they elect as effectively the most powerful person in the senate. For the Majority Party, it is the majority leader. But in the house, the speaker, because the speaker is chosen by the whole house but effectively by the Majority Party, the majority felt more comfortable giving the speaker more authority. So there is a majority leader, but really, the top leader of the Majority Party in the house is the speaker of the house. Susan before we delve into history, i want our audience to know who they are listening to. You are teaching now at catholic university. What kind of courses do you teach . Professor green i teach a variety course variety of courses on american politics. I teach introduction to american politics. I also teach a number of courses on political institutions. So i teach classes on the u. S. Congress. I teach a class called power in american politics, where we talk about how power is exercised in the executive branch and the legislative branch and interest groups. And i recently finished a class called politics in the age of trump, where we talk about trumps election, why that happened, and the politics that surround the trump presidency. Susan how did you get into teaching and join the academy . Professor green my father was a professor actually, a history professor. I ended up after College Going to capitol hill and working as a legislative aide for a number of years. I ended up combining my interest in academia with my fascination and love for legislative politics into the job i have now. Susan what period of time were you on the hill . Professor green i was there from 1993 to 1998. Susan and how close were you to be able to witness leadership . And did that quite your interest did that wet your interest whet your interest in leadership . Professor green i do not know how close i got. I was not working for a leader. I was there for the 1994 election, which was a phenomenal experience because the democrats had lost control of the house for the first time in four years. You really got a sense of how consequential elections can be when you see a switch in power, which i saw. I tell the story of walking down the Office Building hallway the next day. And you could tell who was a democrat and who was a republican by the looks on their faces. The democrats looked like death had passed over them. The republicans were jubilant. It was a phenomenal experience. And then, being there for gingrichs early months as speaker made a big impression on me about the power of the speaker. Susan he is on our list. So we are going to talk more about him later on in our conversation. But as people search for you, they will find you are a participant in a blog called mischief of faction, which is all college professors, political scientists. What do you do in that blog . Professor green it is about Political Parties. That is what unifies the group of contributors. But what we write about are everything from the Majority Party in congress and leadership in congress to the democratic primaries. We write about the power of the president. There are also contributions about parties in other countries like in south america. , how do other parties work in Different Countries . So we all come to the subject from a different perspective. But the idea is that we are writing about Political Parties in contemporary politics. Susan where does the name come from . Professor green i believe it comes from the federalist papers. I believe it was alexander hamilton. Im pretty sure that is it. [laughter] susan mischief of faction is the title, and we will send people in that direction. They can find more about its origin. There have been 54 people who have served as speaker of the house over time. How many of them are history percentagewise . Professor green percentagewise . I would say depending on how you count it, maybe 10 to 15 . Susan what makes for a successful or powerful speaker . Professor green from my perspective, i think several things make for a powerful or important speaker. One is, it could be any combination of these things. One is exercising significant influence on major legislation helping get major bills passed , in your chamber. Another is bringing about significant institutional change in the house of representatives, changing the way the house works or the structure. Another is finding new ways to use the powers you already have to get things through maybe in , terms of how you appoint folks to committees, for example. Those are some of the ways i think speakers have distinguished themselves from others. Susan are important speakers always significant parliamentary tacticians . Professor green not necessarily. Some are very good at parliamentary politics and no rules and procedures, others defer to their staff or the parliamentarian and instead are more effective at influencing politics through their relationships, with other members, for example. Susan to get started, this is peaking my interest uing my interest. I thought it would be interesting to start with speakers the house itself considered were so important that they named major Office Buildings after them cannon, longworth, and rayburn. We are going to start with joe cannon. He served from 1903 to 1911. He had a nickname, uncle joe. Tell me about him. Professor green uncle joe cannon was a character. He had a white beard, a stovepipe hat. Always had a cigar in his mouth. He was quite a distinguished character on the hill. But what really made him stand out was his use of power. I would say he represented the apex of power in the speakership in the house of representatives. He was the chair of the rules committee, which is the committee that decides what can come to the house floor and what terms it can come to the floor. And there were only three members on the committee. So he effectively could decide what bills came to the floor and what did not. It was entirely up to him. He was also not afraid to use his power in the rules committee to block legislation even if a , lot of members wanted it. He was also not afraid to punish members of his party who he felt were insufficiently loyal. He famously punished some insurgents in his party who were causing him trouble, kicking them off committees, moving them to bad committees. He famously moved one member to the committee of ventilation and acoustics, which is probably one of the worst committees you could be on in the house. Susan it does not exist today. Professor green it does not exist today. There is a story, it is probably apocryphal, but there is a story about a member of congress who got a letter from a constituent saying, could you please send me the rules of the house of representatives . And the congressman sent back a picture of joe cannon. He was the rules of the house. Susan just so people who do not follow closely, today, the rules committee is not presided over by the speaker of the house. Professor green correct. The speaker does not serve on the rules committee and is not chair of the rules committee. Susan this description of how he wanted power sounds counterintuitive to someone called uncle joe. Do you know how we got the nickname . Professor green i dont. I dont actually. Susan it was someone who was it sounds like someone who was affable rather than someone cutting off people at the knees to achieve legislative means. Professor green he was not disliked. He was not a dislikable person. What was the problem from members was his use of power. Particularly, the insurgents. The democrats were not happy either, but most members of his party were perfectly happy with cannon and his use of power. Susan the time in which he served was also the time of theodore roosevelt. How did the to get along . Do you know about their relationship . Professor green there was certainly conflict between the two. Roosevelt was advocating for more progressive legislation than joe cannon wanted. And there were times when roosevelt would be writing letters to joe cannon saying, could you please let this bill come to the floor . There was no sense that the speaker should just do what the president said. There was an understanding the speaker had the power and the president just needed to ask. And cannon often said no. He said i do not agree with the progressive legislation. It is not coming to the floor. I dont care what you have to say. It is not going to happen. So they often did not see eye to eye on policy. It was very frustrating for roosevelt and the progressive insurgents in the republican conference. Susan what legislative achievements did he accomplish . Professor green i would put him more in the category of what things that he prevent from passing . There was a lot of progressive legislation that simply did not get to the floor did not move , its way through. I mean, some things did, but it was often because of cannons great reluctance or some other means that progressives managed to get things to the floor. I think what cannon is most famous for is inadvertently being the last speaker to have that much power, because of a rebellion that took place against his authority in 1910. Susan it was also the age of muckraking newspapers. So how did they treat him and vice versa . Professor green certainly cannon got a lot of criticism from a lot of the press. Democrats in particular had a and field day with that and would say he is a czar, he is a dictator put us in charge and we , will not govern the way joe cannon does. Some of that muckraking journalism was useful for the progressives because they would bring up things like unsanitary food conditions or canning facilities. And this would create pressure on congress to enact progressive legislation, regulating food supply for example. But i dont think cannon cared if the press was critical of him. He saw his role as being leader of his party in the house. Susan it came to a head with a revolt inside the house on march 17, 1910. That is st. Patricks day. Is that at all significant to the story . Professor green i dont really think of it in terms of st. Patricks day. I think of it more in terms of how procedure happened to be used that particular day. This was a group of insurgents who were plotting with democrats to try to weaken the speakers power. Susan were they generally the progressives . Professor green the progressives in the Republican Party working with democrats. And what they wanted to do is change the rules so that cannon could not control the house floor through the rules committee. And to make a long story short, they managed to bring to the floor a privileged motion that would take the speaker off the rules committee and expand the rules committee from three members to, i think, 15. And cannon fought it vehemently from the chair. He spent hours trying to get absent republicans to show up to defeat this motion. And he ultimately failed. And a coalition of democrats and republicans were able to pass this, and effectively strip the speaker of one of his most important tools of power. Susan did he stay in the congress after he lost that power . Professor green he did actually, interestingly enough. There was an election in 1910, and republicans lost the house. But if memory serves, he did in fact stay in the house. So you had former uncle joe cannon, the most powerful speaker ever, now just a regular member of Congress Like everybody else. Susan next on our list is the longworth building, named after nicholas longworth, also a republican who served from 1925 , to 1931. Wheres his home state . Professor green ohio. Susan what should we know about him . Professor green so longworth was an interesting character. I think of him as a quintessential 1920s leader. He is dapper. He and his wife, Alice Longworth, formerly alice roosevelt, dr. Of a former president , would have these social events. There was certainly a lot of drinking going on despite prohibition. If you see a picture of him, he looks like a quintessential 1920s character. He was a speaker who, like joe cannon, believed in strong party government. But the problem is, he came later than cannon. So the speakership did not have the formal tools that cannon did. And longworth especially hated what he called block government, which is when a group of the Majority Party works with the Minority Party to do what it wants against what the majority wants. So he had to find ways to be powerful without the tools that joe cannon had. Susan lets go back to alice roosevelt, daughter of the president. Did that enhance his relationship with the white house . How did that play in the larger washington scene . Professor green roosevelt was not president when he was speaker. Susan but he tried to come back. 1912. Professor green that is true. I dont really know if it helped him or hurt him. I mean, Alice Longworth herself was quite a character. We could spend a lot of time talking about her. Susan she would represent the progressives, right . Theodore roosevelt was more of a progressive. I assume she was aligned with her father. Professor green i do not really know about her politics. I dont think of her in that respect. I think of her more as someone who had strong views about personal behavior and was not afraid to express herself. She was a very strong, independent minded woman. That certainly came from teddy roosevelt, who was himself an independentminded president and raised his children to be similarly inclined. Susan the aforementioned John Nance Garner was around during some time in this congress. I read about something that the two of them created the board of education, where they brought members together. How did that function . Professor green this was an interesting example of how you can be both a partisan leader bipartisan, or more emphasis on cooperation. Even though longworth believed strongly in the party but he was not afraid to open his door to democrats and work with the democratic leadership, including John Nance Garner. So they would get together in this board of education and it was kind of a social scene. It was a way for them to socialize, interact with each other, to communicate, so there were not misunderstandings about what each party was going to do. The kind of idea that in order for politics to work, you need to communicate, even with those you disagree with. I believe that alcohol was also served at the board of education meetings, which might have helped lubricate the discussions between the folks who were there. This was a tradition that actually continued, i dont think the drinking did, but continued with sam rayburn. This idea you sit down with members and it can be members of the other party as well, to just talk, to just communicate about what is going on and what you expect is going to happen in the agenda. Susan does anything like that exist informally in Todays Congress . Professor green not to my knowledge. Susan is that a loss for the institution . Professor green i think it is a loss for the institution. Yes. I think there is nothing wrong with leaders communicating with each other. There could be leadership behind the scenes in modern technology, for all i know, nancy pelosi and kevin mccarthy, the minority leader, texting each other. I have no idea. But this idea of a social place where you could go without scrutiny from the media and others, i dont think we see that in congress today. 1931 susan 1931, that would have put him in the chair during the crash of the stock market. What happened in the congress . How did the house respond to devastation happening in the economy . Aofessor green it was period of transition, partly because at one point, i think 1930, it was young on it was unclear which party was going to be in the majority, members had passed away, longworth died , so that created a Leadership Back a leadership vacuum. Thein terms of dealing with recession, you didnt have fdr until 1933, so both parties were trying to deal with this economic downturn using older techniques, and an older agenda, if you will, this idea that the government should spend a lot of money and go into debt to improve the economy was not something many members agreed with. You had some democrats saying we should cut spending, because that is how you get out of a deficit, you reduce spending and then you have a budget surplus, and then things improve. So they didnt necessarily have the tools at their disposal to figure out how to deal with the great depression. Then the third building is rayburn building, named after sam rayburn. Tell us about him. Professor green sam rayburn was the longestserving speaker in house history, he started in 1940. He is from texas. A former speaker of the state house, and in many ways, he personified and helped implement a way of governing that characterized the house of representatives from the 1930s to the 1970s. It was a system in which he deferred to committees, a system in which, teachers were very powerful, a system in which seniority was the most important thing, because you became a chair if you are the most senior on your committee. It was a system in which you had a careful balance between two wings of your party, in his case it was the northern liberals and the southern conservatives. And it was in many ways a small c conservative house. You didnt see the house doing major legislation, they would generally take the lead of the president , particularly on foreign affairs, and because rayburn was there for so long and helped enforce this system, it made the house, it really put his imprint on the house for many decades. Key to his was the longevity . Why did members continue to elect him . Professor green there were a number of things. One was that he was a master at are getting. There is a whole theory of speakers called the middleman theory, where speakers have to be in the middle of the party and work with both sides. Auntie was very good at balancing those two wings. He had almost the automatic supporter of southerners support of southerners because he was from texas, but he also had his door open to liberals, a Smaller Group in the party, but he did not shut them out or try to defeat them. The other thing is that he recognized that it was an ideological balance and a regional one, so he set up what he called the austinboston connection, where you always have two people in leadership from the south, the texas area, and from the north, the boston area. John mccormick was from boston and when John Mccormick became speaker, the majority leader was carl albert from oklahoma, neighboring texas p so by keeping the regional balance of leadership, you have both sides more or less satisfied, and that allows you to maintain power. Susan he had a famous protege, Lyndon Johnson. You know how the relationship do you know how the relationship started . Johnsonr green lyndon was elected when rayburn was speaker, and Lyndon Johnson was a master of figuring out who how figuring out who had power and getting into their good graces. Through his charm and whatever tools he had at his disposal, he managed to win over rayburn. If memory serves, i think it was the only person who rubbed rayburn as head, he was bald. It was johnsons form of affection. I dont know how other people thought of that, but by trying to bring himself closer to rayburn, i think that helped. The other thing johnson did is serve the party. He helped members get reelected by raising money from wealthy Oil Interests in his district in the state of texas, and doing that kind of service to the party is something that can win over other members, including leadership. Susan i ask about the relationship because we have a clip of san sam rayburn, and it comes from Lyndon Johnsons biographer. It was taped in april 2012. Lets listen to him talk about sam rayburn. Power doesnt always corrupt. Power can cleanse, for example in the case of sam rayburn, who had to keep quiet as a representative until he became first a powerful Committee Chairman and then speaker. Moving thee him house of representatives to populist legislation. As he gained power, he became more physical, more visible, more vocal. He also said, nobody can buy sam rayburn. Can you use those observation to tell us more about sam rayburn . In terms of, no one can buy sam rayburn, one of his most noteworthy characteristics was that he was seen as a very upstanding and moral individual. There was no sense that he had, that he was trying to benefit any particular special interests, other than the district. In his own there was no belief he lacked any sense of principle, it wasnt that he could be persuaded to take one position as robert caro points out, even though rayburn may have been more upfront when he was speaker, he was still fairly quiet, an important tool as a leader because you keep your cards close to your vest. So there are instances in which he actually helped liberals, for example on civil rights, but he did it quietly, behind the scenes, so it wouldnt alienate a wing of his party. Visited the rayburn papers in austin, and he didnt write very much down, he didnt put a lot to paper, so it is hard to know many times what he was thinking, and that undoubtedly extended to the way he governed as speaker. Onen you said earlier that wasy speaker has visibility, was the public seeing much of sam rayburn at the time . Professor green they were not. There were no televised house proceedings. Rayburn was famously resistant to electronics in the chamber, voting machines, cameras, radios, none of that. He didnt want it there. I think people might have known what he looked like from a picture in the newspaper, but it would not be the same as seeing the speaker at a press conference. Susan i found two major legislative things i wanted to ask you about. The first major crisis was world war ii, after he came into office, and he shepherded through the victory on the draft. Do you know anything about the story . Yes, a reallyn good story because it shows that even though rayburn didnt have the formal tools like joe cannon had, he had ways of influencing the legislative process. So there is a temporary draft that is going to expire and president roosevelt wanted to extend it another six months, because there was a war going on and it was possible the u. S. Might get involved. A lot of people dont want this. They are either being drafted or their sons are being smart being conscripted and they dont want it to continue, so it is an unpopular bill. Rayburn agrees with roosevelt that this needs to happen, so he talks to the president , they craft a bill they think can get a majority, he starts lobbying members of congress, he lobbied a lot of them, at one point he doesnt have enough votes so he delays floor proceedings for a day to get more votes, it comes to the floor, still doesnt have the votes, he is lobbying on the floor while it is being debated, then the vote count starts and he presides over the house ismber, and at one point it just narrowly passing, by three votes, and a member gets up and changes his vote. Now it is only passing by one vote and other members of congress are asking to be recognized and rayburn slammed the gavel down and says the vote is done. It has passed. It is a great example of how critical he wasnt getting major legislation passed. Without rayburn, we might not have extended the draft. Time he came back as speaker, but this time Lyndon Johnson has moved to the senate. Also had a democratic president. I did the access work between the three . How did the access work between the three . Professor green you had inherent deference rayburn would give a president of either party , to give the president a chance to succeed, coupled with political skills, of rayburn and Lyndon Johnson. Johnson believed in winning and , soelieved in understanding going up against an opponent wouldnt be smart politics unless it could get you something, and then it would be. Rayburn, johnson and eisenhower didnt agree much. Didnt disagree much on legislation, eisenhower wasnt that president andf a rayburn wasnt that liberal of a speaker. Members of seven congress at the time he was speaker, including the majority leader, were aware of the Manhattan Project which developed the atomic bomb. How did he do that . Professor green that is a story i am not familiar with. Trulynow that rayburn believed in working with the white house, doing things behind the scenes, that if memory serves, he worked with the Appropriations Committee and appropriations chair and said, this is what we need and lets get it, with the understanding that National Security was at stake. It wasnt that hard to do. You also had less scrutiny about what congress was doing back then, so you could find ways to get money and spending bills without having people blog about it. Susan im going to dip into history because this piece on youtube is interesting. I want to talk about henry clay. We found on the internet, a Transylvania College seminar, they are in kentucky, in 2011. They invited three people to talk about henry clay. I want to play that an get your reaction to lets watch. It took you 12 years to become speaker of the house. It took you 20 years, it took you 20 years. When you hear about henry clay becoming speaker on the first day, [laughter] does it make you feel like kind of a loser. [laughter] a slow learner. And if you look at the period from 18201860, there was no one person in the United States more responsible for holding our union together than henry clay. Right outside of what used to be the Speakers Office, it was the Speakers Office for tip oneill, jim wright, and it is now the Speakers Office moved to another location, but exactly right outside the door of the Speakers Office is statuary hall. Henry clay is looking very distinguished, dapper, looking into the mist, and you try to imagine that statesmanleader, where is he looking . Served ine henry clay the u. S. Congress both in the senate and as speaker, was an amazing time in the United States. In kentucky, this was the frontier. Going back to the missouri compromise, the treaty of ghent that he signed, which takes us back to the war of 1812, you had some amazing influences he really had some amazing influences. Clay served in a number of Important Roles, including famously secretary of state, and the socalled corrupt bargain. He was also in the senate. Why does he belong on our impact if speakers list. Scientist put it best and said clay was our first strong speaker. And political scientist randy streit had said he drew on all possible sources of power. He was the first speaker to do that and use them effectively. He was an assertive parliamentarian. He was going to enforce the rules. He was very strategic in committee assignments, and to get legislation through, particularly tariff legislation. He oversaw a dramatic expansion of the Committee System in the house of representatives. He was a forceful individual. I believe he had been speaker in the statehouse before. So in some ways, the fact that he was the first freshman, and only freshman to be chosen speaker, other than in the first congress, really speaks to the assets he already had coming into the office. And then he just used them very effectively. Susan would you say a word on the two former republican speakers, john boehner and dennis hastert, and where they might be in history . It issor green iteresting, denny hastert, have written about has to attend the conventional wisdom is that he wasnt that important a speaker because his majority leader, tom delay, had more influence. Tom delay was a very powerful majority leader before that, but that understates the Important Role hastert played on a number of occasions in winning over votes. He called himself the coach, his job was to bring the Party Together and keep it together. And you have to do that and not just use whipping or threats or promises, you have to also have a sense of unity. He was very good at bringing members in and persuading them to do things. Susan the first line of his biography will also be the personal problems that sent him to prison. Professor green that came out after he was speaker. When,s one of the things you are trying to analyze the contribution of the speaker, you have to think about what they did before there were speaker, when they were speaker and after, and determine how you are going to evaluate them. Thinking about it as a political scientist, his leadership in the house is one thing, and then thinking about the personal issues and ethics in criminal problems he had is another set of issues to consider when evaluating him. Boehner, one sentence or two because i am going to run out of time. Professor green i have written that john boehner was a rayburn speaker in a gingrich house. He wanted to compromised or he wanted to negotiate. He wanted to make deals. But his party and the larger political contest made that too difficult for him, so he had to deal with factions like the House Freedom caucus, that really caused him trouble and ultimately he resigned from the house. Susan another speaker had a nickname, zara read, thomas reed of maine, three congress is between 188918 99. What shooting know about him . What should we know about him . Professor green he was the most influential speaker in terms of the way the house operates. When he was rising and leadership in the 1870s and 1880s, the house was becoming paralyzed by filibustering and dilatory tactics. Among others, things, the rules of the house made it easier for individual members to slow things down. You had what was called the disappearing quorum. The house requires a quorum to do business, usually a majority, but you could choose not to participate in a vote, even if you were on the floor. And if less than a quorum participated in a vote, there was no quorum and everything would have to stop until you could get the quorum back. The idea was, it is very easy to slow things down that way. When read victim speaker, one of the early things when reed became speaker, one of the early things he did, a contested election bill was coming to the floor and the democrats chose not to participate in the vote. There was no quorum and reed just started counting members who were in the chamber but hadnt decided to participate. That they were furious. The democrats said they didnt want to be counted. Reed had funny lines and somebody said, i dont want to , theunted, and reed said gentleman protests the speaker counting him here. Does he deny he is here . And of course everyone laughed, you cant deny you are there if gas deny you are there without being there. So he brought about a change in the rules called the reed rules which prevented dilatory action and stops the corpsmen made other changes that made the chamber, atritarian the Majority Party gets to run the show, which is what we have today. In partybig believer loyalty, but he also was a big believer in the party agenda. Was happening with president mckinley was, the country was moving towards war, what would become the spanishamerican war. And reed felt strongly that was not appropriate. Imperialism,r of expanding territory, which was not the proper role of the government as he saw, and he tried to use his power as speaker to prevent issues related to going to war to come to the floor, but he simply could not, and he eventually felt it wasnt animal to remain as speaker, so he resigned. Significantext brought television to the house. Tip oneill served from 19771987, we had people who were longer but they came and went, longest uninterrupted reelected five times. What was his leadership style like . Professor green tip oneill was, i would say the first partisan speaker since longworth, and definitely since cannon. What happened was in the 1970s, the Democratic Party in the house was becoming more liberal in the southern wing was shrinking. There were changes being made to the rules of the party that weakened committees and gave more power to the speaker and the party as a whole. But the speaker at the time, John Mccormick, was not interested in governing in a partisan way. And his successor, carl albert, somewhat more so but still not comfortable being highly partisan. Tip oneill was the first to embrace these tools and include and encourage more rules changes to give the Majority Party in speaker more power. During this time what you saw was an increased number of restrictive rules. So a bill would come to the floor, and the rule that went with it would maybe limit the number of amendments allowed or limit debate time that was permitted. And that was usually more harmful to the minority part, to thecan spirits of Minority Party, the republicans. Oneillaid that, tip was also a likable person, a very social person. He was known for just sitting on the house floor while things were going on, just to get a sense of what was happening. And any member who had issues could come to him. So that was one of the reasons he had some degree of popularity with members of both parties. Susan he and his republican counterpart bob michael led ,aucuses in the house postvietnam era politicians who were younger and more technology oriented. Stylesheir leadership more akin to the people they were trying to oversee . Professor green yes and no. Yes in that they were more so than their predecessors had been, like say on the republican side, john rhodes, and on the democrat excited, folks like carl albert, although albert did start using radio and television for the first time, but i think there were generally were comfortable with it than their predecessors had been. But they also found themselves challenged by some of those members. So from the democratic side, dick like dip get gephardt and on the republican side, Newt Gingrich, upandcoming members who focused on television and media to cultivate not only their districts, but also state or national reputations. New phenomenon that i would say michael and oneill had to adjust to. Susan we have a piece of video as republicans were tired of 40 years in the minority begin to use television as a tool to make their case. This became dumb i the news media at the became dobbs by the news media at the time as camscam. You stood in that well before an empty house and challenged these people and challenged their americanism, and it is the lowest thing i have ever seen in my 32 years in congress. Mr. Speaker, if i may reclaim my time. [applause] we take the speakers words down. [applause] susan people wont understand what it means to take the speakers words down. How significant is that . Professor green at the time it was highly significant. The rules of the house follow that all members require all members to follow decorum. You cant question their motives, and for the speaker of the house, who is supposed to be in charge of the quorum of the wase to break that rule, significant. His words were taken down, although the punishment, which would have been to not be on the floor for the rest of the day, the republicans graciously said we want to impose that punishment. For a was unprecedented speaker to have their words taken down. That showed a couple of things. I said oneill was a likable person. He also had a temper. And republicans found a way to get oneill upset, not knowing what might happen, but as it turned out he ended up losing his cool and saying things on the floor that ended up getting him in trouble. Gingriche group newt was aligned with, the theervative it of conservative opportunity society, ultimately took out power in 1995. Speaker,rich comes replacing bob michaels, longterm leader, so what time what kind of speaker was Newt Gingrich after being the revolutionary . Year,sor green his first certainly his first few months, he was the most powerful speaker the house had seen in decades. Was willing to ignore seniority in choosing some Committee Chairs. He said this person is next in line, but they dont have my vision, so we will go down the seniority list and find somebody who will be. He and the republicans drafted thiscontract with america, Campaign Document about the things they would do if elected, and that became the agenda of the house Republican Party in the house of representatives, and the agenda items were being , throughough leadership. Did carmi, majority leader,. Armey, others, they determined procedures on the floor, communications, framing to egg your out how to sell it. A lot of these things went through task forces appointed by gingrich, so he would control all the members to review the legislation, and it was a remarkable period during which the house was the center of policymaking and gingrich was at the center of that center. Susan ultimately, what bottomed out what brought him down . Professor green a series of things ended up bringing down Newt Gingrich. The precipitating factor was a pair of government shutdowns in 1990 five, show down between republicans and the house and president clinton. And the idea was, we need clinton to sign our legislation, if he wont, the government will shut down because he didnt sign the legislation we want that has funding for the government went and called their bluff. And people were upset about funding for the government. Clinton called their bluff. People were upset about it. They blamed gingrich on the republicans. It was ultimately not until there was a coup attempt in 1997 with this quintal republicans, but after the 19 98 elections when republicans in the house lost seats, the first time a party that does not control the white house, but does control the house, lost seats, since 1934. Many republicans had it. They said, we have to blame somebody, and gingrich should go. So he left. Susan how money of the major changes had he brought to the institution . He came in with a package of changes. How many are still followed . Areessor green a number permanent. Getting rid of some committees, the office of technology assessment, i believe he abolished. He also instituted this idea of term limits for Committee Chairs, and also for the speaker. That didnt last under hastert, they got rid of it, but this idea of term limits has remained a potent one in the house. Startednd they experimenting with televising the Speaker Press conference per it that didnt last long. Professor green that didnt last long because gingrich would sometimes say the wrong thing and it is on camera and you cant undo it. I would say, other changes, besides the idea that the speaker should be at the center of policymaking, which in many ways we see today, one of the most important changes was changing how the house operated. One of the things they did was an audit of the house of representatives, and found there were financial regularities. Things were not done professionally. So they streamlined the process and made it more professional. And that was, in my opinion, one of the most important and longlasting changes gingrich and fellow republicans brought to congress. About fiveave minutes and i want to spend those on nancy pelosi, guaranteed a place in history as the first woman to lead the house of representatives, the third speaker to preside over a president ial impeachment and our history. When historians begin to assess her term, what kinds of things will they be looking for . Professor green they will be looking at a number of things. One of them is her legislative leadership. Very involved in majors legislation major would beon, exhibit a the Affordable Care act, obamacare. Her negotiating with different factions and her party, figuring it figuring out how to get the bill through the house, particularly in the senate when democrats lost their filibusterproof majority, negotiating with them, she was a major player in that. I think they will also note her incredible, dogged determination to help the party in campaign politics. Her ability to raise money in the districts is phenomenal. I dont know where she gets the energy to do that, but she has been doing that consistently as speaker. Unrelated to that is her ability to keep her Party Together. There have been divisions, but she manages to find a way to keep different factions in the caucus together when it matters. Itether it is or her is her ability to count votes or do favors for members, those skills set her apart. Our last videos for boris six, state of the unite lets watch. February 6,video is state of the union night. Lets watch. He misrepresented all of that to get the attention of the american people. This is not true, and this is how it affects you. They are vicious and mean. Vicious. These people are vicious. Nancy pelosi is a horrible person. She wanted to impeach a long time ago and she said, i pray for the president. She doesnt pray. She may pray, but she prays for the opposite. But i doubt she prays at all. Susan the morning after the state of the union, where the speaker famously at the end of the speech, tearing the president s speech, the copy that he she had the copy that she had, apart. The animosity, has there been anything like this . Professor green we have come a long ways since the days of sam rayburn and dwight eisenhower, the idea that you Work Together even if you are in separate elected institutions, the idea that the speaker should be deferential to the president , that is not what we are seeing now. There is a way in which that is a sign of healthy differences, if you disagree with the president for speaker, you shouldnt be afraid to say so. And i haveoubles me, written about this, there are certain ways in which we expect our elected officials to share common agreement on issues, or at least a sense that have Important Roles to play, institutional roles, that should rise above their policy differences. And i think what happened at the state of the Union Address on how each of the players reacted shows that things like the state of the Union Address arent serving the purpose that they used to. It is a way for elected officials to come together and say there are problems to be solved, but it is more of an avenue to say i am right, the other side is wrong, either through what i say are the gestures i use. And that kind of thing, i dont think is healthy for the republic. Susan matthew green, the author of a number of books on congressional leadership. Working on you are an autobiography of Newt Gingrich. When will that be out . Professor green we are wrapping it up now. Susan and also a professor at tufts university. Line onor giving us the these powerful speakers and how they affected our country in the institution. Professor green my pleasure. Thank you. [captions Copyright National cable satellite corp. 2020] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. Visit ncicap. Org] a programs are available on our website or as a podcast, on cspan. Org. Is American History tv, exploring our nations past, every weekend on cspan3. Historiane civil war, Michael Schaefer looks at the life of Thomas Wallace colley, who served in the first virginia calvary cavalry. Discusses the battle of antietam, the amputation of his foot, writings of his postwar life dealing with the struggle of what we now call posttraumatic stress disorder. At 7 00 p. M. Eastern, George Mason University professor examines the various ways early americans respond to the natural and manmade disasters, as outlined in her new book inventing disaster from jamestown to the johnstown flood. At 8 00 p. M. , professor Jenny Martinez teaches a class about the confederacys economic policies during the civil war. At 8 45 p. M. Eastern, a discussion on u. S. And japanese perspectives of world war ii. Grandson of an Intelligence Officer who served under general dwight eisenhower. Thats whats coming up here on American History tv. Again for the invitation to speak here in the old dominion home. I want to take just a couple of specifico thank two groups. Long story short, i was invited to speak at a church in Washington County in july of 2016