california. >> privilege and pleasure to host a group or by military veterans and families called we the veterans but it includes a coalition of different specific organizations that are fundamentally unified around the idea that veterans have a lot to contribute to our country and at a time where our country is in turmoil and maybe even in danger. they have a big part of potential solution to this problem not that we should be relying exclusively on the almost 20 million people who have served this country and no longer are in uniform but that is remarkably capable dedicated of individuals. and probably for a group that can lead the way to help some of the rest of us make some inspiration as well as for ways to strengthen our democracy and serve our country even out of uniform. i'm going to bring out the panel when they finish getting wired. it's an incredible group of folks. i will not spend a lengthy time on the introductions of each of them but we've got admiral steve abbott one of the most accomplished navy officers of the modern era who did a lot on homeland security towards the end of his government career emerald -- admiral thad allen ellen gustafson, was been involved in lot of grassroots efforts to get military families involved in various democracies, strengthening national service and third's. general craig mckinley who ran the national guard bureau, a four-star general who is our senior military leader on matters concerning the reserve and national guard. then our own elaine kamarck who has a tradition of military service and her family and her kids are in the military and she has worked on a broad array of issues in strengthening and reforming democracy, our government, very famous for working on al gore's efforts when he was vice president in this vein. but has continued to study the role of military and veterans in our society. so without further ado would you please join me in welcoming the panel to the stage. [applause] i know that was an unconventional start but i didn't want to keep c-span waiting or any of you. we are going to launch right in. the unifying scene here is what can military veterans and military families do to help strengthen our democracy? we are going to hear a range of ideas. rather than try to summarize them all myself i'm going to let the panelists to work down the row and talk about how they define the problem or how they see this challenge and what they think can be done about it. they're not going to speak come pensively they're going to begin with what -- one or two ideas of what they are most involved in and then we will have a bit of time for discussion here in a bit of time for discussion with you. . i would like to begin with elaine kamarck because she has began a study on current political races, beginning with the general election season for this congressional round and also elections across the country at different levels. she has a lot of data that will be useful for helping us understand the role that military veterans are playing at the level of potential elected office. there will be just one of the many things we will hear about today. >>. thank you, thank you very much i don't know about you but this is my first time back in this room in more than two years, because we have all been on zoom. thank you for making this possible. i have been -- this is the fourth year of a major study that brookings has done, studying people who run for congress, house and senate, in primaries. that gives us a very good idea of what the two parties are going to be like, what the factions within each party are about and what the factions within the house caucus, or the house democratic caucus or republican caucus, senate caucuses are going to be talking about. and what the candidates themselves will be worried about or the members of congress who get elected about what they will be worried about, what kind of primary challenges they will try to avoid. that is -- this is a comprehensive study. it's not a sample. we looked at over 2000 candidates this year and in previous years. and we looked carefully veterans . let me tell you a bit about what we have found. first, veterans constitute 17% of all the candidates running for office this year. that is a very large number because no other demographic subgroup was that big. this was about the same, a bit bigger, then in 2018 which was the last time we did this. it was 2018. it's a bit bigger. of those, 72% were running in the republican primaries, 20% were running in democratic primaries, which is consistent with studies about what we know about this officer court in the military being slightly more republican than democratic. by and large, is candidates tend to reflect their political party. however there were a couple of things that stood out. first, we asked only two questions about international affairs, which, i sort of laugh at because when it comes to american elections, presidential and congress, a lot of what they do is foreign affairs. but almost nothing that they do on a campaign trail has to do with foreign affairs. it's not a voting issue for us. however, what was different is that the veterans really had long and mostly well thought out positions on foreign affairs. they talked quite intelligently and passionately about america's role in the world, what they saw, what they thought should happen etc.. it was a stark difference from all the other candidates with the exception of some of the incumbents who obviously were doing this as part of their job and knew a lot about it. that was the biggest difference. among the republican veterans, they were quite critical and quite carefully critical, not just slamming about the pull out of afghanistan last summer. and critical of biden and his leadership there. the democrats simply didn't mention it or defend it, they simply didn't mention it. those were the two things were there was differences. , basically one of the things which we saw this year and we have seen in previous years is that both political parties back in 2021 when you had to recruit really soft out veterans. they wanted veterans to run. was equally intense -- that was equally intense and political presence. they found that there was a reason for that. veterans were more favorably perceived by the voters than nonveterans. it didn't matter the gender, female veterans were as well perceived as male veterans. and they definitely had an important leg up on other candidates. and then they had to in fact, perform well as a candidate. we did find a lot of districts where veterans were running against other veterans. so, that ended to happen and veterans with districts with a lot of military people so that was to be expected. that is the top of our findings. we don't have complete win/losses numbers yet. there are still primaries to happen. it -- veterans are very important part of the pool of picked ash part of the pool of candidates -- pool of candidates. let me move to closing to a tale of two veterans who have run for office. both of these guys are featured in a 2016 book by the journalist, joe klein, called "charlie mike: a tale of two heros who brought their missions home". we focused on veterans who give back to the community. since he is a political reporter for his career, there's a heavy overlay of politics in their. and you can see him thinking in between the lines the skies presidential material, this -- this guy is a presidential material. when he talked about the two veterans in the book who were prominently in the news in literally the last three months, one of these, is eric of a mystery and the other was from -- of missouri. he was featured prominently in the book, he had future president written all over him. he was a navy seal, bomb star and a purple heart winner. he founded that the mission continues which i'm sure many of you know about. he ran for governor in 2016 and one as governor of missouri. he ran as a republican even though he had been a democrat. and he was in office a little over a year when angst began to implode -- when things began to implode. there was an affair with his hairdresser. there was maybe or maybe not a series of pornographic pictures of her. there was maybe or maybe not some abuse. anyway, things fall apart along the way he was charged with using his fundraising list for the mission continues, for his political work and that is a no no. you are not supposed to do that. basically, things began to fall apart. by 2018, the missouri legislature was voting articles of impeachment against him, his party had refused to support him and he went to the woods for a while to think about things. he came back in 2022 to run in the missouri primary for senate, republican mary for senate -- primary for senate. things started out great. he was in the number one spot. things sort of fell apart. his estranged wife accused him of abuse. he ran an ad showing himself as some other guys, breaking into his house with semiautomatic weapons, going from door-to-door, looking for rhinos. republicans in name only. the ad was widely panned. he went from first-place to third-place be -- he got 20% of the vote. i don't think joe klein will be writing any more books about him , that have future president written all over them. contrast this, westmore. he was in the army, an army officer also arose color, successful entrepreneur, he founded a company that produced military for people like oprah winfrey then he was head of the very prestigious robin hood foundation this summer he ran for governor of maryland and a tight three-way primary one by about three points. and of course the city of maryland is a democratic state, we can anticipate he will probably be the next governor of maryland. if, of course, nothing implodes. that is the problem with running for office. that's why i'm sure we're going to talk about other ways to improve. democracy then running for office. if you think your first battle was bad, running for office is your second battle and it is a bear. that is clearly had an advantage in politics, they go into it with clear advantages in the electorate. veterans votes at a higher percentage than nonveterans. 74% for veterans, 66% for nonveterans. there is a clear advantage for veterans in elective office. once they get in the fall prey to all of the four liberals that all the other candidates -- all of the things other candidates fall prey to. we gotta watch out for that. having looked at hundreds veterans websites in the last congressional cycle i can tell you that the thoughtfulness is there, the integrity is there. and i suspect we will very soon have another veteran as president of the united states, may be a she not a he. >> thank you, fantastic setting of the context and now admiral abbot, if i could turn to you, i met -- i mentioned your distinguished biography, we took up a lot of opinions and views and experience about what veterans can do to give back and i would love to hear your thoughts today. >> thank you. i am grateful to be here. grateful to brookings and to be here with this group of folks who i have known for a while. by the way, we are all believers that veterans have been doing a whole lot for this country for a long time. as elaine said, voting at higher rates and participating in volunteer positions, generally good citizens. of course they're not all perfect and we mentioned to some examples, i thought i would try to paint what i think is the picture broadly of the participation of veterans that includes retired people like the three of us here. how -- what they've have done for this country and i believe they could do more, that is the bottom line. i think everybody knows a bit about the founders of the country and the fact that a lot of them served in militias and therefore worst -- were military people there was actually 31 presidents who have had military service out of the 46 presidents we have had, that's a pretty good number. two thirds. a lot of veteran serving in other positions, cabinet officers, all of us know examples of prominent veterans who have served in legislative positions. those in the naval academy were very proud, john mccain. they continue to do so as elaine says at a remarkably high rate. i think that is admirable but all of us are involved with organizations which are promoting the notion that veterans could do more. i hope my colleagues might get into a bit more detail about those organizations. i would like to just briefly mentioned that the political scientists see this issue of veteran participation as a element of a larger, broader issue of civilian military relations. now, in the broadest application of relations it is talking about every intersection that the military has with the civilian community. that's admiral allen down in new orleans, general mckinley and all of the places that the guard are in. many people tend believe that it is a more narrow issue of just what is the relationship of the military leadership in washington to the civilian leadership and that is a very critical and important issue related and it has been in the news a lot, this week with an open letter from prior secretary of defense and the former chairman. we could possibly get into some of that but i would like to say that the participation of veterans in the country is not just tradition it is what we have encouraged veterans to do over the history of this country. and they've performed wonderfully well. we mentioned that there are some exceptions and i certainly would include those where for ins tance, retired military people worked to promote the candidacy of an individual with the implication that that person was speaking for all of the active duty military, which is clearly not the case. and ash but nevertheless there has been a norma's -- but nevertheless there has been an amount done, i we can get to the details. >> if you and elaine have had encouraged veterans to get involved in political life even as candidates, i agree with you. i happen to remember there were fairly ok presidents like george washington, and dwight eisenhower did well. it's hard to imagine a blanket prohibition against political life retirees. are there any thresholds or lines that people should not cross? i will be blunt and smart -- and start by mentioning the name. i think mike flynn crossed the line. he was speaking in an incendiary way. i don't like the choice of his candidate, but i will leave that aside. the way he spoke was to suggest a lawlessness towards the other sides candidate. it seems to me he was using his military reputation to incite some kind of militaristic response against the opposition. that is something to avoid. elaine gave an example, don't be a criminal and don't abuse your wife. but are there any other general guidelines you would acknowledge that people should be careful about in period immediately after they take off the uniform or the rhetoric they use in their political activity? any constraints that should be self imposed by veterans who want to be part of our political life? >> i would say this, relations and the theory regarding participation and behavior of a veterans and former military people should be one that is debated within political science fields and the academics, because indeed, there are no restrictions on what veterans may do. they are that his sins, they have the rights of citizens and they have -- they are citizens and they have the first amendment to say what they want. there is an objection to individuals like general flynn and my friend and colleague general allen to do things that put the relationship between the leadership on the military side and the leadership on the civilian side at risk. that would occur if the public at large began to think that veterans and retirees like us were indeed speaking for the department of defense, speaking for the military services and that of speaking as a citizens who were involved and interested in what the civic duties they should perform should be. yes, there's going to be some norms which are violated. norms is a term that the political scientists like to use but what it means is normal. the normal activity should not include that crossing the line, as you say of implying that veterans and retired military people speak for the active duty. >> thank you. let's keep moving. ellen i would like to go to you next, you have done amazing things even as you have a spouse in the military unit and a family to raise. a lot of energy and commitment. tell us a bit about what you are up to and thank you for joining us. >> thank you. one thing that is interesting about this conversation is the distinction for military family members like myself and veterans in wanting to serve democracy, serve the country, serve the constitution, as distinct from serving a political party, a political agenda or promoting a political agenda. something that has been hard to be in this nuance spaces how military veterans and military family members can actually promote mock receipt, can help -- promote democracy, can help support institutions and norms of our country while not engaging as a candidate for party. we, as an organization, that i cofounded with my fellow cofounders who were all veterans, we looked at this opportunity, this group of 17 million veterans plus way more family members like myself as an incredible opportunity that has not specifically been engaged through other service organizations in the support of democracy. we know veterans volunteer in general a higher rate. we know they vote at a higher rate. what an incredible group of people to engage in activities that are not political, not for a party but really are supporting our country. the organization that i cofounded, we the veterans, with a military family members, is the second part of the organization, is looking to find ways to connect our community with opportunities to support institutions of norms and democracy at large we're looking at issues like civic engagement, issues like countering violent groups and antidemocratic groups and countering mall information which can be detrimental to our country national security. and we have looked across the opportunities of civic engagement and felt, where with this population best serve again? one thing we're focused on is this election cycle, is not just voting but have military members to serve as poll workers. we believe it is a great opportunity for a trusted group of americans to actually be in the polling locations were americans do their most sacred duty. as vesely defended this democracy and right to vote -- previously defended this democracy and invite to vote, there will be civilians supporting votes to happen. we think this opportunity for how you can be engaged in the political life of our country, the civics of our country, but not try to be connected to a party has been an open opportunity. we think that so many members of the military understand what -- the victim engagement elements, also like working with military volunteer veterans and organizations that can remind you that incredibly important thing for the fabric of our country, what it means to work party lines for the betterment of democracy. so, i think there is this conversation that is alive and well with this open letter for military leaders about veterans remembering the roles of civilian leadership, but there are important if our democracy itself does not have the power or energy to be maintained with the norms and all the things that we used to defending as military veterans. it is going to be hard to go back and have all these amazing candidates run successfully. we think there is an incredible opportunity to connect the community, military family and veterans with pro-democracy initiatives. that hopefully will allow people to serve again in a way that becomes a new norm. that benefits all americans to support the movement of a new civic life that veterans and military filling members can lead. >> can you give an example or two of the kinds of activity you are proposing? i have a question about the state of what you see in today's know terry. it it -- military. it is a trouble time, the military remains a venerated institution. we appreciate what they do with the country, january 6 with other trendlines as well as concerns about mental health, suicide rates, have a lot of us worried about the overall state of these addition. i will ask you that because you are close to it right now. can you give a couple of examples the kinds of activities you propose people get involved in? ellen: as a military spouse, i live in and ecosystem that is much more broad and diverse. in social media and typical life than most americans today. there is this, this, this extract believing -- extrapolating on that to get people engaged with democracy itself. our first program is to engage veterans and daily members to sign up -- family members to sign up throughout to be poll workers in their local communities. to use existing military and veteran organizations to ask them to do this for their country and reengage in this way. talking about those organizations that is how you pull and maintain the connective tissue of the military into that her life, we have an incredible network of organizations in our country. people engage in those organizations cannot have as many dollars -- tend not to have as many challenges. tend not to need the brotherhood that nefarious groups offer. these organizations serve an important service to our country and democracy, looking at them in that way, not just that it is important for veterans to be available for disaster relief. like the mission continues for veterans to volunteer. it is important for military family members to have blue star group to connect with our community. two can -- to use those existing networks and get folks out volunteering for democracy. saying let's be inoculated against bad and miss and this information, we military fan -- family members are the leaders away from any of those various messages or groups, the existing networks that people build from the terry service into civilian life -- military service into civilian life is essential for keeping democracy strong. there is a lot of great data on civil society organizations and the connective tissue on that. a great book about pulling -- bowling. bowling alone, right? as a military family member i regularly go on base. it is a reminder that we have this connective tissue built into motor life. we can teach -- nila terry life. we can teach americans a lot, working together for the common good, following the rules and norms, those are all things we are really good at in the terry -- military, let's use our skills in towns to better our democracy. michael: you started to answer my other question for you, it is impossibly big, get your reading , if you will for lack of a better phrase, the moral and institutional health of the armed forces at a time where some people started to doubt. see more extremism in the ranks, a higher percentage of january 6 insurrectionist from military service than the general population. suicide rates is high, we may have asked too much from too few for too long in the general country, we are as people in uniform to go back on read -- repeated tours. you are saying good things by the state of the military take -- today. that is encouraging, i want to get your degree of anxiety or worry. ellen: with the veteran population for the military if you have met one veteran you've met one veteran them military is not a monolith. like america we are victim to all of the bad elements we are dealing in society. misinformation, stratification, silos of information. one thing interesting about the military. as a military spouse i would say this 100%. a lot of veterans would say this, we are given credit for knowing more about civics than the general population. we do not necessarily, that is a problem my organization is interested in engaging with. when you give them credit with knowing more about the general civics, constitution, how our country operates, you give them ready for something therefore putting them on a pedestal making them experts in an area. i did not marry someone in the military and get a civics education class. maybe i should, if i will get credit for that. if a veteran will be held up as the beacon and pinnacle in knowledge and how -- how our country should work come we should invest in them. that is a big opportunity for us today. >> admiral allen, privileged to have you here today, the space force is the smallest, as you remind me, one that lives in the communities in this country where it does its work most directly. the coast guard has some unique vantage points on this set of challenges and opportunities. can you speak to those? >> i am happy to, thank you for having us here. the coast guard is radically different than the other services. we are an armed force in time of war. we can be moved to the navy. we operate as compounds with joint combatant commanders around the world. -- components with joint combatant commanders around the world. generally in the navy we -- we control the ports and waterways as we did with 911, we evacuated 500,000 people from lower manhattan. i have come to believe in my time in the coast guard, any hardtack -- problem we deal with, becomes exercises in applied civics. they test the resiliency and load test because addition and the ability of us as a nation to react to it. there are direct transferable skills and talents, at least from my experience in the course guard and working with people in the coast guard that can be brought aboard -- there at the community level. i came in after mike brown after hurricane katrina and the deep verizon horse -- oil spill. radically different issue, natural disaster response is the purview of state and local governments with the help of the federal government. oil spill have a federal preemption. in both cases i worked with a republican president and a democratic president reporting to them personally and held accountable to them. i focused on achieving and effect, and succeeding the problem. with people that worked with me over the years, or getting ready for hearings, i've tried to explain to them that this works at all levels. you need to learn to be effective in a political process without being clinical. that -- political. that is what is being said by the people here. just because you are working in the political process you do not have to be partisan. you have to purchase a pay if you are to be successful. the -- participate to be successful. the organizational structure of the armed forces are directionally -- directly transferable and add value to the private sector or working in your communities. coaching soccer, becoming a member of the local school board, openly running for office. my pitch is we need to understand why we are effective when we wear a uniform, how we are able to achieve effects without becoming political, and how we can transfer the complex problem that to do with being in the community. they are all exercises in applied civics. >> are you saying to stay out of partisan politics after retirement? are you talking about people still in uniform and can contribute while they are. that is a great distinction -- >> that is a great distinction to make come i'm talking about people still in the know terry -- military. when you retire you can do that. i have a number of friends that are running for office that have held office both republicans and democrats i can do a terrific job. if you are going to run for office and be successful, as we have heard need to restart with the effects you want -- you need to start with the effects you want to achieve. you need to be relevant. you have -- not the perks, privileges that others do not have. you have the opportunity to be relevant. that is the goal if you are to do something like this after you retire. >> thank you very much. john mckinley, our cleanup hitter, thank you very much for being here. with your expertise and the guard and reserve, you deal with population even while in uniform. that has opportunities for service in both stages of life or career. craig: thank you for the invitation and brookings for hosting us, you have the privilege in time here today for people on a friday afternoon in d.c. to hear great people talk about this subject. i want to start off of the couple of historical dates significant to all of us on the panel. 21 years ago in september was september 11, 2001. that was a high watermark in terms of my career to see young men and women running to recruiting offices to volunteer to serve. a very patriotic response to a very tragic incident. so, i always look back on that, because of the frame of reference, much like what we see today in england with the death of the queen. the other data i would like to suggest we think about it is 50 years ago when president nixon ended conscription. there are not many people in this audience that had a draft number. our country has moved beyond mandatory forcing young men and women into service. we have. done it very well there is a georgetown study co-authored by george casey called, " supporting veterans after 50 years of the non-volunteer force -- all volunteer force." i caught your attention a case anyone wants to go deeper into this. the national guard is for deployed, we like to have a bumper stick that there is a national guard in every zip code, i had to do the measles chart, there is a national guard in every state. an old organization when there was a regulated leisure with rules and laws with what you did -- militia with rules and laws of what you did. those organizations that train, organize, equip us and provide hundreds of resources for us. we can do two or three different things going -- things, we can have a job in the civilian community. if the national -- if the governor calls us, or as governor abbott in texas has done calling 10,000 of his national guard meant on his time to go to the border because that is where he thinks his interest should be. in florida they are thinking of putting national guard in prisons because there is a shortage of guards. what we train, organize, equip ourselves for is to augment our services. the last 20, 25 years has made a difference. the effect was to create a place where i can serve alongside admiral allen in the tank, on the joint chiefs of staff. we did not have that rank or privilege before the long wars took the toll on lot of soldiers, sailors, air guards, coast guard, women. to become a member of the joint chiefs, to spend this all the way around, michael to your question, the two chairman i worked for, mike mullen and general marty, cautioned all of us during times of political campaigns. midterm or major election. two just stay out of it. it was a gentleman or gentlewoman's agreement to do your civic duty, but stay out of the headlines. do not cross red lines that do not exist. there are no red lines that i am aware of for members of military serving or retired to cross, it is just common sense to be pro-democracy. count every heroes the reason i'm here today. we have 10 cochairman of people, three of them on this panel, seven more with former secretaries. it is a pro-democracy group. we do not advocate for a specific candidate or party. we believe the nation needs to focus back on what it means to be a citizen in the united states. >> let me ask you one follow-up question as well. are you saying, that when veterans get together to form organizations, maybe this goes back to admiral allen's comments as well, those organizations should try to be nonpartisan. whereas individual veterans can obviously exercise their rights as americans, and we need them to, as elaine was saying to run as partisan candidates. sometimes, admiral allen encourage people to show a measure of restraint in their rhetoric. heightening their goals, that is a very appealing and inspiring way you suggest candidates coming out of the military could present themselves and serve the country. is that a distinction? organizations of veterans should be nonpartisan's even though individual veterans should be encouraged to run for process -- office. >> i schedule my volunteering, that is important part of giving back to the nation as we did with military service by choosing organizations that is nonpartisan and nonpolitical. joe encouraged 10 of us to join count every hero. to make sure things we express ourselves, but do not cross redlines. at -- that is how i will leave it. maybe they have a comment on that. >> it is a good time to open up the conversation. thad: i am a member of count every hero as well. the me give a good example of what is controversial. states and voting and why it is important to us. absentee voting. you can find contentious arguments pro con, how it is running your state. what if you are deployed? what if you are in the middle east? there is a restriction on absentee vote for time limits that make it impossible to meet that. that is where we come together, represent the veterans, active-duty or so in this case make sure we count every hero. every vote counts. there is nothing partisan about that. it is everything the democratic country, and the ideals we hold that is all it is about. elaine: i think this is where, our work we are so impassioned, that is a civic norm. that is something we always as a country supported people that are living overseas, stationed overseas, military family overseas to vote absentee. that is in some context under threat. that is apolitical, nonpartisan, it is political, nonpartisan, pro-norm. there is a love that now that -- a lot of that now that veterans it should be leading the conversation protecting like the senior leaders are. making sure everyone up and down the service understand why it is important and why we should fight back against the various narratives against it. >> i want to come back to you if i could, elaine, i want to get your thoughts as well on the question i posed to admiral abbott. what kinds of constraints should someone leaving the service self-imposed or consider self imposing if they are considering a run for office? maybe the answer is nothing. there is no way shape or form constriction or restructuring on these find americans than anyone else. eddie feel like the middle -- military as an institution has such a prestige. that is good for the country we should keep that that way. for the good of the military that there should be certain kinds of self-discipline, self constraint, i would love to hear your thoughts on the question. elaine: yeah, one of the things i think former military can do once they get out. this is unique, and a very polarized environment -- in a very polarized environment they could talk to the other side. i heard a veteran just this morning talking about this in a council of military families. saying a military vet can go into a meeting of the other party. they will be greeted with some kind of respect, yuri -- you are a democrat? of, -- oh, god, but have a beer with us. there is an ability veterans have when entering politics to reduce the heat, if you will between the two sides. we are in a situation we have not been in a lot of time. people say to pollsters, no i would be very unhappy if my daughter or my son married someone of the other party. that is kind of unbelievable. that is where we are. i do think, there is an opportunity to reduce the intensity of polarization. and, frankly the violence this leads to at some points. other than that, other than trying to be a more civil, create a more civil dialogue. the fact is once you enter politics, you are in a different game. you are in a different game. it is about your political party, your supporters, which piece of the electorate you will get, etc.. i think, i will say this because admiral allen hit a chord with me about your focus on operations and mission. ok? politics, it is interesting about politicians. they get screwed up when a mission fails. afghanistan being a very good one, took down joe biden's approval numbers and they have never -- he has never gotten them back. they do not going to decision-making with an operational point of view. most politicians know about messaging, and talking, who is for me, how do you make this deal, etc.. they do not know about operations. that is a big consequential operation. hurricane katrina, right? the -- barack obama's website pat -- crushing. big operations e-government in in charge of -- the government is in charge of have enormous counts quizzes. when you unwrap -- consequences. when you unravel these there are plenty of warning lights, plenty of blinking lights, politicians are not trained to think of these. or even pay attention. for a military background, for you the operation is life or death very often and you have to plan carefully. a military helps you think about operations. it would be a very good thing if more of our elected officials had some sense of operations and consequences, etc. as opposed to what they usually do. they say to the speechwriter, get me out of this. how do i spin this? we have a mess here, what do i do? what did obama do two days after, three days after his websites where crashing? he went to boston and gave a speech. he was suffering the worst operational breakdown of his presidency. what was the reaction> ? let's go give a speech. that is a chronic problem, democrats and republicans in our politics today. military amilitary --a military background can help that. >> i would like to have a word on the issue should veterans and retirees can find their -- confined their activities to nonpartisan. i recently read the macola biography of john adams talking about james madison drafting the constitution. madison, believing at that point that there would be no need for local parties in the country. men and women of good will could speak to each other and find common ground. of course, even before he was president, there were parties. i have served both with non-partisan organizations, i have also been part of a partisan effort. i think as a practical matter for veterans, just the way the united states exists in terms of its political makeup it is not possible to expect that veterans would either only or even largely be identified as nonpartisan. it is probably not practical. but, they can be, as elaine described, enormous contributors to trying to find that madison ground of reasonable people talking to each other. frankly, help with the stabilization of what many would say is a deterioration in the democratic process in this country. >> that is a compelling answer. i wanted to ask. how do you feel about a group would say, veterans for democrats or veterans of four republicans? should veterans organize as groups with a partisan angle and use it veterans as a central angle to expend what the group is about? is that going too far? >> this is one of the big debates, as many of you know for the last 8 presidential election cycles there have been what i call beauty contest. with each candidate enlisting their supporters from among the retired veteran ranks. it also includes enlisting individuals with diplomatic experience for other national security experience. my answer to that is, the genie is out of the bottle. i believe that will continue. i believe it can be -- organizations which contribute more than simply getting names on a list. there is an organization i am part of now called, "national security leaders for america. the objective is to improve the democratic process with individuals who have national security experience from both sides of the aisle. and can in fact support, specific candidates for office, run the states. but, with the knowledge that they are working to help improve the understanding of, the explanation of, the national security requirements this country has. >> thank you, let's go to admiral allen them we will go to you all for your questions. >> i was reminded of alexander hamilton's caution against factions in the federalist papers. looking at the political landscape now, you operate within this, my big concern is we are losing the distinction between campaigning and governing. the more we extend the campaign in two and administration and do not focus on governing, including basic blocking and tackling, hr, and accounting, operations, that kind of stuff to me are less ready to operate when something occurs. this is my own purpose -- personal view, the less transition does not materially harmed, bush 41 relieved president reagan. ever since and there has been a drop in continuity. it confuses the advice from the military and even the goals you are trying to achieve, say, during covid. when all of a sudden medical advice becomes politicized. are we campaigning our governing -- or governing? >> if you want to pose a question, raise your hand and identify yourself when you get a microphone. we may take a couple. i will take one or two from the crowd. sir, over to you. >> my name is matt james, i am a former navy veteran. i work in the security space. from my perspective, a lot of the political sphere is a clown show. it looks like a celebrity contest versus normal boring government. how can veteran step up to leave, whether in political service or not. but, staying away from this extreme kind of political sphere in helping bring things more towards normal operations of government? >> does anybody want to take a first shot it back? -- shot at that? >> i think there is a lot of opportunity for leadership in this, in actually talking about norms, institutions, and the boring stuff. i think that when i experienced foreign policy as a military spouse, my political views are not represented in my feelings about what is happening with foreign policy because they are actually affecting my life. i am actually much less partisan in my own military self experience that i am if i were just watching a news journal and thinking -- listening to people talk about their views, the clowns talking about their views. i think actually reminding americans and having more veterans and military families narrating the experience of actually having politics affect you operationally and talking about the institutions you engage with end of the norms that help you live your military life, that is actually incredibly important for americans. it is totally missing as we have just discussed. so, i think maybe there is a way that this is how this next class of veterans running for office changes the dialogue. >> to elaine's point, this is a large number of veterans running. it kind of makes me feel good that it's happening. the core values of our military services are such that that breeds people that believe in our nation for things that are bigger than themselves and that is why it gives me hope. i hope that it does come true. but, politics is a rough game too. >> oh, yeah. let me just say about the clown show. there are a lot of things voters do not really know about. foreign policy being the very top. world affairs. military affairs. i can remember very clearly a certain presidential candidate a couple of years ago who clearly had no idea what it was. no idea. most americans don't know what that is either, but they will not be in charge of it. there are a lot of things americans do not know about and do not really care about. they leave it to other people. the reason political parties are essential to democracy, and we are not getting rid of political parties, and there has never been a democracy die did not have political parties, is because political parties are the shorthand for most voters on what they want. it is a shorthand, a summary. yeah, i kind of don't like government messing in my business and i do not like high taxes. i think i will be a republican. i do not necessarily know of the telecommunications act of 1996 is about. i have no idea what it is. a huge, important piece of legislation. most people cannot tell you what on earth it did. but, i know i want to vote this way, not that way. those are the things. so, political parties, which get a very bad rap, are a shortcut for voters. and that is why they always, always persist and in successful democracies you have strong political parties. campaigns tend to get run on the sort of very gritty at home issues. right? what is the price of gasoline? but, what we need in our politics is people who can now do only talk about the price of gasoline and connect with voters, but, people who can go on the armed services committee and talk about the future of the nuclear triad. what should we be doing about that? that is the sweet spot. i think that veterans can fill that spot. in a way that a lot of others, no matter what party they are in. a lot of these issues, for all the hype around this, a lot of these issues turn out not to be very partisan, ok? i think veterans can fill some of that sweet spot and be what the political scientists call quality candidates. >> let's get the admirals in and go to one last round. >> one quick comment. one of my favorite definitions of leadership is the ability to reconcile opportunity and competency. i would ask any veteran, what are you competent in? what are you passionate about? there is a place to take that that does not have anything to do with politics. >> well said. >> i would say that there is an elephant in the room in a sense in a discussion of this kind of thing about how to make this come -- this country stockers -- countries democracy run better is in many respects it is not running well. if i was trying to answer your question i would not say, well, you can be effective if you are just, you know, not identified with anything or anybody. i think we have to look at what it is that is causing the machinery not to work well. then, we veterans need to be part of the solution. one of the things that count every hero is working to support is the electoral count act which we believe is essential to improving the function of a democracy. we are watching some supreme court cases coming along which deal with one of the serious deficiencies of the democratic system, gerrymandering. we believe what it has produced is much of the extremism that exists for the two parties and we believe that has national security implications. that is why we are on it. that is my answer. if we fix democracy, everybody has to be involved. >> other questions from the audience? then i will see what we have from email. that may be it, actually. >> you mentioned the disproportionate number of veterans involved in january 6. in my work i study right-wing extremism, militias, accelerationism. the on seeing the disproportionate number of veterans in these groups. what role can veterans play in the radicalizing the veteran community? what role can society play in better addressing some of the neglected needs of veterans that lead them to be involved in these groups? >> i should've asked you to identify yourself, sorry. >> sir, we will take years at the same time. then i will throw in one myself. then we will go down the line and we can do final concluding remarks. >> i am nick. i recently finished my phd in linguistics at georgetown where i studied language in military and veteran populations. i am active in veterans service organizations. i am a navy veteran and i served for a year during don't ask don't tell. i am active helping lgbtq service members and veterans. how can these bso's find common ground when it divisive rhetoric is pervading political discourse and being legitimized by state legislation, specifically states like florida and texas where we have a lot of families, service members who are there, that place votes that play service members in precarious waters? >> one question by email is distinct from what we have heard. i hope i am not testing your memory too much but grapple which ever question you most like. someone asked about gun control. i thought i wanted to bring that up at 5:08 on a friday afternoon. it builds on admiral abbott's point is that there are some issues where veterans may have a particular lot of space or interest or perspective. -- a particular knowledgebase, interest, or perspective. is that an issue where veterans should get more involved in the debate or is it just guaranteed to inflame things and not shed more light? the final question i want to add , it is inspired partly by admiral allen, general mckinley, and in the date of september 9. i do not know when c-span will air this but it might be september 11. we want to extend sympathies to the victims of 9/11 and their families and think the first responder -- thank the first responder community. i wonder if the first responder community should be thought of as his overall community of veterans of public service. that have a special loyalty to the country, a special affinity to serving it. maybe, if there is any way we want to reach out to them in this same conversation. that's a lot on the table. please be selective as you each wrap up in about a minute or two apiece. >> if i can go first, i will just say that extremism, including the kind you describe, is a severe problem in the country and it needs to be attacked by all the means available. one of which is the proper treatment of individuals who violate our constitution as the they did on january 6. the country needs to see what the result of that is and to understand that that is indeed what would happen if that behavior continues. >> if you gave me five veterans of completely opposite political, social, and cultural differences, and you put them in a room and you say, what is something you can all agree on? tricare health, pay, and housing. food, clothing, shelter. start there. >> i think there is a real generational difference in the united states when it comes to, particularly, the lgbtq community. i think you will see that generational difference all across the board including among veterans and in active duty military. so, i think there is a little bit of this is just kind of, weight, right? just kind of wait. things will get better. what we are seeing now in terms of the more radical social issues that the -- that some people have been promoting. we are seeing the beginnings of backlash. there is a backlash definitely coming out of on abortion. that will be a tsunami. it will be followed quickly by a backlash against some of these things that are going on in texas and in florida. about gay rights, about gay marriage, about all of that basket of social issues. political parties tend to get ahead of themselves and overreach. when they overreach, democracy has an amazing way of pulling them back. i think that is what is happening now. i think that is what will happen. >> so, last night, nick, the modern military association of america, the lgbtq mother the terry family organization have their first gallup -- the lgbtq military family organization held their first gala. my colleague who works there was there and photographed all over the place, leadership of a major long-standing military family organization at the gala. to me, that is the first year. that just happened last night. it is a sign of the times. we are moving in the right direction as a community. i feel that way as a military spouse. in my own experience, we have military spouses of all family makeup and that is relatively normal and not questioned in the military i exist in now. that is a hopeful statement for you. the work that we the veterans is doing is 100% focus on using the exact same factors that are so attractive to violent extremist groups as the protective factors against them. tight bonds, desire for brotherhood and sisterhood. deep social connections. trust among the american public for the perspectives of military families and veterans. those same factors that are attractive to nefarious groups are good protective factors. the work we are doing at the national consortium for the study of terrorism and terrorism act. -- activities, bill braniff behind you is the leader of that, is to say let's lead those protective factors to go against nefarious groups. as a new yorker, on 9/11, and as a military spouse, my husband and i were both in the new york area and we would constantly say, if we are going to get military members in uniform on the plane first, why aren't we getting other first responders on the plane right behind them? that is a reason, a cause, a maintenance of the divide that is bad for our country. people who serve should be engaged in the same civics work and conversation military members and veterans are. that is a conversation we are interested in. i think military members are interested in seeing change too. >> michael, thank you for the opportunity to set up your talk with interested people in these subjects. i would say first responders definitely need to be part of this group. admiral allen and i spent a career working with first responders. they are amazing. they do not get enough credit for what they do. new york, the pentagon, shanksville pennsylvania are great examples. it was very visible what they did. many gave their lives. i would say i am concerned about a couple things in our military today. one, we are not recruiting at the levels we need to to sustain ourselves in an all volunteer first -- all volunteer force. all of our services are suffering from that. we did studies in the national guard about parents advising their sons or daughters whether it would be a good idea to join. many parents are not recommending it. i do not know what is causing that. maybe this panel and others in the audience can think about ways by which we can convince people that the military is not broken. that we are not bringing home their sons or daughters in a mental state that would be classified as sick or ill. we have to work on that. parents have a huge responsibility in recommending service. whether in the military already thought of government. so, we can get back to a nation that its young people feel empowered to be part of something bigger than themselves. so, thank you again. >> thank you all for being here. our hearts will be with the families and others on september 11. thank you for taking the time and for all of what you do in this group as well. >>[applause] >> father christopher