May four. Executive Agencies to Congress
We were I guess finishing up on some of the words and

concepts that were Mr. Rooney Goes To Washington for those

of you who remained and saw it. Some of you disappeared;

some of you didn't show. And weren't here any ways and

that's why I decided that one of two questions will be

strictly on Mr. Rooney goes to Washington so that the people

who weren't here gets screwed and those who were get

rewarded. That will teach you. We talk about contracting?

Did we? Yes. And then sunset laws? Did we get to sunset

laws? Just contracting and double dipping? Because we only

had ten minutes after the end? Yeah.

Well basically our topic is the executive agencies which

are often known as the fourth branch of government. Now

that leads us to two questions. Number one -- I did not

define the term fourth branch of government, did I? Nor

have I defined -- of state earlier. One of which I should

have defined, one which I still can define. The one I

should have defined previously and did not but it's on your

word list is the fourth estate. And the reason I need to do

that now is so that you don't confuse a fourth with the

fourth branch of government. So you got to be careful

because that's a tendency people have to mix up those kinds

of things easily enough.

The fourth estate refers to the media. The news media.

But I just don't give you to you, that's the way you're

going to memorize it, but I'd like to try and explain why we

refer to it as the fourth estate. Because the concept

becomes important even though I should have gone over it

earlier. Previous to the French revolution and for those of

you that are numerically directed, the French revolution

took place in 1789. Began -- previous to 1789 France itself

was divided into three estates. They were basically

classes. The first estate was the clergy, second estate was

the nobility, and then the third estate as one said was

everyone else. In reality it was the lawyers, the

professionals, the businessmen. Well, why estates? Because

each estate had its on rules and regulations and own

courts. So they had separate laws pertaining to the

individual estates. Was there a fourth estate? No. why do

we call the press the fourth estate? Because the press

often sees itself as being separate from the rest of

societies. They tend to think of themselves as having

certain rights and privileges that nobody else should have

because the press sees itself as -- and in sense it is the

watch dog of democracy, that it protects democracy by

revealing the abuses to democracy which it does do. But it

demands, certainly, rights that in most cases the courts

don't give.

For instance, the right to withhold sources as you know

they do have that right, but if it's conflicting with a fair

trial the press is ordered to reveal its sources even if it

won't. And in very famous case twenty years ago at Stanford

maybe it's almost 25 years ago now, the press the police

came into Stanford universities press with a search warrant

but didn't warn them ahead of time because they were afraid

of some of the documents they had on drug deals that they

were doing a story on would be lost. The Supreme Court

upheld the right of the police not to reveal to the press

that they're coming in with a search warrant if there's

going reason to believe that the evidence would be destroyed

or hidden. And that's the Stanford case which still upsets

the press because it feels that you should announce coming

in. Which of course police would do individually but will

not do and they are not going to knock on a door this is the

police they can actually go into somebody's house without

even warning if they believe that the drugs would be

destroyed, flushed down the toilet, or whatever without

having to let people know ahead of time. They don't have to

call and say we're coming over. But the press likes to

think they have this privilege. It doesn't. So forth

estate which is different than again from the fourth branch

of government.

The fourth branch of government refers to the executive

agencies. Every agencies generally known by its letters,

the IRA, the FDA, the FCC. We refer to them as the

bureaucracy, but also a term refers to them is the fourth

estate. I'm sorry the fourth branch of government, why?

Because they often act independently of the presidency.

They act independently of the legislature and they act

independently of the judicial system. Their job is to

interpret and carry out the law. When they're established

they're given tremendous leeway that allows them to

determine what the law says after it's been gone through

Congress after signed by the president and on after it's

been interpreted by the courts. On top of their ability to

interpret the law and the FDA is a good example of that

which drugs can be sold across the counter by prescription.

The FDA decides certain drugs -- such as Sudafed used to be

only a prescription drug. There have been a lot of drugs

that have been taken off the prescription list but they sell

in different dosages. You can't buy it in 60 milligram

tablets. You need a prescription for that. So you take

two. Same thing with Motrin. You can only by 200 milligram

pills across the counter, but if you get a prescription you

can get 800 milligrams. So you take four. That's all by FDA

internally. So it does that and there's the old story about

bureaucrats. Anyway we obey, but we do not comply.

What does that mean? How can they obey, but not

comply? Because they say they're carrying out the law and

then they stone wall saying they delay. So in reality they

don't comply. If they don't like something they just don't

do it. They're going to -- okay, we'll give the order to do

it and then paperwork gets lost and bureaucrats are

notorious for interpreting the law the way they want and

carrying it out when they think it's important. Okay? So

they a obey the law, but not necessarily really comply by

carrying it out. And they stay there, and they are

basically because they have what we call tenure. They have

civil service status which means it's impossible to get rid

of somebody working in the bureaucracy.

Now we've been talking with some of possibilities of

problems and some of the changes that go on in the

bureaucracy and some of words that we use. One of problems

we have with the bureaucracy is that once an agency is

considered, Mr. Rooney said, "It never goes out of

existence." it changes its letters. It changes its name,

but it stays on. Even when they were created for an

emergency and it has passed, it continues. Good example of

that was the department of energy. Created because of the

gas crises in the 1973 and '77 period. And at that point

they decided we better regulate it. Why? The question is

do we really need a department of energy in California?

It's not doing anything to keep our gas prices low or to

investigate it. Ronald Reagan ran on the platform said that

he was going to get rid of the department of energy and

education. Ronald Reagan came and went and we still have

the department of energy and the department of education.

So it's once they're established they're almost impossible.

So for that reason Mr. Rooney built in a termination date.

That is what we call sunset laws.

A sunset law is a law that has a built in termination

date. Meaning a date when it's finalized when it ends. If

it's necessary you recreate it. Usually, almost all sunset

laws set the determination date for five years but they

don't have to. So a sunset law is a law that sun sets. It

ends at a certain point of time, usually five years. We've

had a few laws not necessarily agencies that have been

established with five year deadlines. If you recall I

mentioned the voter rights act 1965. The voter rights bill

had a five year termination. They sent in people to

southern states, 12 southern states, to make sure blacks

could vote and -- but it ended after five years. It was

reestablished. I think it's gone through five times that

they've reestablished and voted it in. They decide to keep

it on a five year basis to see when it will be necessary.

Many people feel that a lot of laws should have built in

termination dates because they sit on the books with no

purpose after awhile and often the danger of having laws on

the books is that sometimes they can be used arbitrarily.

Especially by police officers who want to pick on somebody.

They find these strange laws and people get busted for


So, by the way, the term limits -- I'm not sorry -- the

line item vetoes that was given to president Clinton had a

five year termination. It was supposed to go out of effect

in 2003 and then they could decide whether they were going

to reissue it. However the Supreme Court declared it

unconstitutional. So at this juncture a line item veto

would have to be passed as a constitutional amendment to

make it effective again, but it was term limited so we do

have a few lawyers, but in agencies, the point was that they

should sunset them. That they should have a five years

limitation and then if they're needed they're recreated.

A number of other words on your list, one of them is the

Peter principle. It is the concept that people are promoted

to their level of inefficiency in government in

bureaucracies that if you do a good job at one level and

they move you up because they're making the same salary. So

you need to have some sort of status. The status is getting

a promotion. Finally they move you up to a place where you

can't do the job anymore. But because you're civil service,

they can't get rid of you. So what happens in government

who were basically inefficient. They're incompetent, better

said. So how do they do their job? They hire people who

can do the job for them or they get contracts or

consultants. Translation, they get more computers,

secretaries, and it cost the government probably ten times

as much because these people can't do the job efficiently.

And they expand their empires so that they don't basically

sit around doing nothing, that they should have been doing.

The Peter principle. People are promoted to their line of

inefficiently is incompetency. It happens in business too

but in business if they're not making a profit and it's

costing the company money generally you get rid of person

until they've got something on you. It happened in my dad's

business. They had a secretary who had been with them many

years and she kept getting promoted up to the place where

she couldn't really do the job because they couldn't get rid

of her because she knew too much about the inner workings of

the business. So they kept her in that position paid her

basically to shut her up. And that does happen in the

business world. Quite often in fact.

Also on the list is a Parkinson's law. Parkinson's

law. Again, it's probably more prevalent in bureaucracies

but it exits in the business world. It is work expands to

fill time. Work expands to fill time. Meaning, that if

you've got a good job, you're not doing anything. You want

to keep the job, so you find things to do. It's amazing

some of the crap I get in the mail around here. Some

administrator has to find work to do, you know? We don't

need this stuff. Most of it winds up in the -- file anyway

but somebody feels they're important enough to do it; why?

Because they want to keep their job and have people working

under them so that they have an empire building which is

true of bureaucracy. The more people you -- the more

important you are.

It was interesting, a number of years ago it wasn't that

long ago, maybe five years because the person in human

resources has only been here since about '91. Well '92,

maybe. Well maybe six, seven years ago. In human resources

we had this gentlemen who was working there for a few months

and he found the job very boring because he didn't have any

work to do and he was not one of these people who felt he

could work and make it look important. So he got a new job

and he wrote a letter to the head of human resources and put

a copy to the board of trustees saying and I saw a copy of

it because it got circulated saying that his job was

meaningless and was not necessary that it should be done

away with. Now that's unique. He was telling the board

that his job was not needed and they could save the $40,000

a year whatever by not filling his post when he left. Drove

the woman who heads human resources nuts. Because it made

it look like she was not doing her job by having a job where

people weren't and so she went to the board and conned them

into believing that this guy was a disgruntled employee,

which he wasn't. He just didn't feel the job was worthwhile

and not only did she convince him that he was a disgruntled

employee and the job was necessary, she even convinced them

to add another half time position. So to a job that was not

necessary that should have been eliminated they wound up

with a job and half of people that were not necessary and

that happens when you don't have efficient people doing the

job. And so again Parkinson's law; work expands to fill

time. Tied very closely at times to executive agencies are

the interest groups because the job of executive agencies is

regulatory. They are to regulate various parts of the

industry and business and of course even unions. And did

their job is regulation, then the interest groups certainly

want to be careful of what, you know, what's happening. And

as you know interest groups have political action committees

that spend money for campaigns and interest groups also

higher lobbyists. Their job is to oversee what legislation

to make sure that it is favorable to the interest groups or

to make sure that no legislation is passed that is not


Lobbyists are individuals whose job it is to oversee

legislation for the interest groups and in a sense to give

support to those legislatures either in Washington or the

state capital that is supportive of interest groups

interests in various ways. That means sometimes running

parties sometimes giving gifts sometimes giving them um,

free transportation. Sometimes taking them out in the golf

course taking them out to you know big places for lunch and

talking to them over lunch. To try and convince them that

they should vote one way or another. Lobbyists because they

were important to the interest groups the average salary for

a lobbyist is $400,000 a year. It is obviously a very

lucrative profession. Lobbyists for big companies like

General Motors make between a million and two million a year

in just salary. Their expense accounts are usually double

their income. They do have to register since 1946. Since

1946 lobbyists had to register who they're working for and

they do have to give their statement as to who they have

given gifts to and how much money they've spent and in

recent years the Senate and the House have actually placed

limitations on how much money or how large a gift a member

of house or Senate can get. One of the bits that caused the

speaker of house to resign was one of the things that

lobbyists continued to do is that they give you a speaking

engagement. Okay? And that meant that they hire you for 25

to fifty thousand dollars for an hour talk to the company

where all these people come to this convention. Well both

the Senate and the house is now limited the amount of money

you can take to about twenty to thirty thousand a year in

speaking engagements. Which means that they can no longer

make -- by the way the highest paid speaker of all times was

Robbert Dole. He was averaging about $200,000 a week in

speaking engagements. Before they put the limits on them

when he was in the Senate. That's a lot of extra money.

It's more than their salaries, obviously. With the

limitations on this this guy who was the speaker of the

house Jim Bright for a while since he was not allowed to

make that kind of money. What they did is he brought his

book with him Newt Gingrich pulled this bit too in part and

they would sell the book at the convention and it would seem

that the company was buying lots of additions to the book.

With Gingrich -- usually book companies give you ten percent

maybe fifteen percent at the most of the price that they

sell the book to the company for. Gingrich was getting

fifty percent of the cost of the sales. Nice little kick

back. He got fined ethical based on that one if you


Lobbyists not only work in Sacramento certainly some

major organizations not businesses necessarily, have

lobbyists who work in Hollywood. Their job is to convince

movie studios and TV studios to introduced material

pertaining to their interest in their film are TV shows. I

was listening to a speaker one time who was the vice

president for Norman Leader production, they did All In The

Family, Archie Bunker. More than the number of shows, Maud.

And she was telling us how the you know anti tobacco people

cancer prevention people who their lobbyists convince them

to do the show where got lung cancer from smoking and then

Edith Bunker got raped in one show because women against

violence. That they get more people to watch this and see

it and understand that rape is not a sexual crime based on

the show then they would if they did a full service kind of

what do you call it PBS special or any kind of special on it

because more people watch the sit coms and it -- but again,

lobbyists abound and independent film Mr. Rooney goes to

Washington you saw all of those companies and the last frame

there dealing with the companies different sounds you saw

Jesus Saves, saves but as many of the churches.

In fact speaking about lobbyists that was probably Bill

Gates' biggest mistake with Microsoft. He had only one

lobbyist in Washington and they were not giving money to

legislature for campaigns. He refused to. As you know,

Microsoft is being sued by the federal government for a

monopoly and the court says is still going on. Once the

court case had gone on for about a year Gates got smart and

he hired eleven lobbyists and has been giving money now for

political campaigns for legislatures. In the sense that if

you want to survive the federal government it means you got

to get the legislatures on your side and that means what we

often call the cozy triangle. It is sort of the like a

government menage a three. I think most of you heard the

word -- some of you don't know the meaning of it. It's

generally when three people are having sex together.

Usually two of one sex and one of the other. Sometimes they

bring in a third sex, I don't know.

Why were we getting thumbs up over there? Okay Alex are

you red? No? Couldn't have been too bad. The three people

in bed together in government are interest groups, who give

money to legislatures, so interest groups and Congress are

in bed together along with the executive agencies. Because

the heads of the agencies need the approval of the

Congress. And so the legislatures make sure that people who

were often favorable to the interest groups get appointed to

the executive agencies. So the three groups in bed together

again in government are interest groups, Congress, and the

executive agencies. The only difference being that instead

of screwing each other in a menage a trois, they're screwing

us. Cozy triangle.

I'm trying to think if there's anything else on the word

list dealing with executive agencies. More interest

groups. Or lobbyists. They have had to register but many

many people in government are not just lobbyists for

American concerned many people lobbyists for foreign

companies and foreign nations. Foreign countries often hire

people. For example the Japanese government was paying as a

lobbyists a guy name Ron Brown who later became Secretary of

Commerce in the Carter administration. He was killed in an

air plane crash in Peru a few years ago. But I think the

biggest scandal was Jimmy Carter was president. He had a

brother name Billy Carter and he became famous because he

decided to drink a beer because beer drinking and he became

Billy Beer and I think probably anybody owns a bottle of

collectors item.

Speaking about collectors item did you read about those

Star Wars figure and how much people are buying up waiting

in line all night long waiting to get into Toys R Us.

People spending eight hundred and fifty dollars on those

actions figures. God no so who's going to wait in line to

watch star wars. None of you are? That nuts, good. It

will be there for a while. Meanwhile, usually now a days

they're showing those things on six or seven screens anyway,

but you know the sound effects I can almost get with the

DVD. -- which with the computer generated graphics it

should have those parts are exciting. I'm sure the plot is

just worse than anything.

Meanwhile, back to our, um, lobbyists, our interest

groups and our executive agencies. Billy Beer Billy Carter

received a loan from the Libyan government so he could open

his business of a hundred thousand dollars. That's Kadofy

had loaned him the money? Why? Because he was the

president's brother which means that Kadofy knew that this

guy had access to the brother. The U.S. Government demanded

that Billy Carter register as a lobbyist for foreign

company. He had first refused but the courts rule that he

had to. Even though he said it was just a friendly loan.

Well there's know such thing especially coming from a

country that is not very friendly to the United States.

Well speaking about countries not friendly, it's very

fascinating to me that Jessie Jackson was able to pull off

what he did and that is to get the release with no condition

openly of the three American GIs. We haven't even released

the two Serbians we hold which is amazing.

(by student) It's not too surprising. It makes Clinton

look bad?

(by teacher) What do you mean because he's a Democrat? But

still surprising if I were -- I wouldn't release him.

(by student) But it's not really war.

(by teacher) well you know he's just trying to save face.

He's trying to keep his power. It makes sense!

(by teacher) you think so? I don't know. Maybe it does --

propaganda like crazy because I think partially what you're

saying has a little sense of validity is that Clinton is not

even getting support from Congress. So in making Clinton

look bad it may be a wise element if they're understanding

American politics. They may be reading it wrong but foreign

countries often do.

What I'm saying is last week Congress voted 213 to 213

which meant that the resolution to support Clinton's action

with NATO was defeated. Now it's a close vote but even with

his own democrats they did not support him in a NATO action.

The Congress also voted last week overwhelmingly and I may

have mentioned in this class to oppose any issuing of ground

troops. So basically order that if Clinton decides to use

ground troops they gets approval of the house and that's in

a sense where you may be right in the sense of

embarrassments where when the president of cypress went

there Congress hadn't taken a stand yet so it may be

something to say for it. Clinton is backing down in part he

appears to be willing to move towards a Russian solution so

there may be something. I said to my son when it first

started we'll declare victory and pull the hell out after

awhile even though it's not a victory. Well, this is why

one of legislatures and very interesting liven to this guy

in Congress argued that we must declare war because if we

don't ever declare war we have no backbone as a country. He

argued for example is that remember we lost in Vietnam and

certainly not go all the way in Desert Storm that we weren't

in war and if way had a war we would have gone all the way

because of the concept of winning is a war. I don't know

how valid that is to tell us the truth but interesting

argument. Again, backbone a strange word. Um, I'm not sure

it's exactly backbone. It's attitude sometimes in those

things. Politicians do see things differently. And every

time I hear that because it bothered me because that was of

course what brought Hitler to power in Germany was the argue

that the German politicians had no backbones and they sold

out world war one and the exploded during the 1920s and

early 30s because of whether it's true or not is another


Well okay, I think we need to move onto Congress. I

think I covered the material and the interfaces are due

today. So, if you want to take them out.

Q Explain -- can you -- I don't understand the question,

um, why all politics can be local. Is that what it says?

A Isn't that sort of the first part of that the question?

Q I don't understand what's going on in Yugoslavia is

local to us. Part two I think.

A Well remember Congress isn't involved in Yugoslavia so

we wouldn't be related to Congress being local I'm not sure

what you're asking.

Q It says explain why all politics can be thought of as

local. So I don't understand the question itself?

A Anybody.

Q I think you were referring to local congressional


A Well more for congressional but the statement that all

politics were local would bring in the national politics so

the translation is how is all politics local means basically

that we are concern for ourself on a local level more than

we are in a world or national level. So the question then

comes to the point how is Yugoslavia local and the answer is

it's probably not, but that is why there aren't many of us

who don't give a damn about what's going on there. If I

were to ask this class how many of you really care what's

going on in Yugoslavia, deeply? Be honest. Nobody.

Absolutely amazing it's less than I thought. Because it's

not impacting us as such. Okay? Of course obviously um, I

have relatives in my wife's parents live in Oklahoma now

that becomes local to us you know for most of us okay what

the hell is a twister? A half mile to a mile large? That's

impossible to think of in my mind.

But, um, so that becomes local in a sense that for me

Clinton sending aid and declaring it a disaster zone means

something but to you the fact that he declared it disaster

zone is also pretty much irrelevant but if a earthquake it's

like it did in '89 and at that particular point hey folks

this is a disaster zone and we're concerned. We have a

human sense granted of people dying. We have a human sense

of the destruction but it doesn't become vital to our

existence and so that's what we mean by politics being

local. Our human concern is there and that is also knowing

that is why our administration has attempted to constantly

show Melosovich is the devil. The Darth Vader the --

whatever it is. If we can show them as threatening to us

here in California by making look like we've got somebody

whose going to lead into a new world war if we don't stop it

then it becomes local to us here. And obviously that's the

kind of thing that the Clinton administration has attempted

to and not been extremely successful in making it appear

that Yugoslavia is a threat to me living here in

California. That's why it's so difficult to become involved

in warfare which is done for human reasons or for humane

reasons. Did that help at all, Karen?

But yeah I mean my chapter is based on Congress and

therefore what I am mainly emphasizing is Congress being

local. And you know there are a lot of ways I can describe

it and I don't think I particularly use this example in my

book I forget which examples I use but a number of years ago

there was a scandal in Washington. This was a good 25 years

ago. When ten congressmen were accused of having sexual

relations with their pages. Pages are usually young people

from high school who were running errands and all of the

pages were sixteen but it was not illegal because in

Washington sixteen was the age of consent. Somebody in my

class was saying that in Hawaii fourteen is the age of

consent. Those Polynesians must mature a lot faster. But

in any case, sixteen was the age of consent well nine was

made against male politicians. The tenth was with a male

against a male. It happened to be a guy from Connecticut

who was a congressmen by the name of representative Stud. I

like the name Stud. Who by the way just decided in the last

election not to run again. Now, his district is a fairly

conservative area when it comes to that kind of morality

from that perspective and he was highly condemned in the

local press for not just because he was not an announced gay

he never brought forth his homosexuality and if you would

think that at that juncture this guy would be voted out of

office because of the action and let's call it sexual

harassment and it is when you're involved with somebody

who's working for you. Within limitations on that kind of a

nature depends because what's sexual harassment? In any

case he was reelected. And has been continuously

reelected. Why? Because he was chairman of the fisheries

and hatchery committee. What does that mean? It means that

that committee was vital to the people in that area. And if

they voted him out of office and brought somebody else in,

bringing somebody else in that person could not become

chairman because to be chair of the committee it's seniority

the people who's been there longest they couldn't even be

sure that a new representative could serve on the hatchery

and fisheries committee and because he had been bringing

home a lot of what we call pork, fat, getting a lot stuff

for the district, which meant jobs it meant money, they

decided that morality was second in their minds or at least

their interpretation of reality was secondary in their minds

to what was interesting and important to them their pocket

book. And that is very interesting a point to be made.

We have had numerous cases where politicians in the

middle of a term have switched parties from the republican

to the Democrat. The next time they also win. Always by

the same vote. As a different party. Now you would think

people were voting party but the point I'm making is they're

not. What they're voting for is what that person is doing

for the district. When they get knocked down it was because

they're not doing the job the people don't know them in the

sense that they're not bringing home the bacon. They're not

introducing enough pork barrel legislation. It is

legislation specifically defined for a legislatures

district. Okay? So yes. Congress is very local in that

sense. But so is all politics.
Any other questions on any of the interface questions?

How would you go about getting your bill passed? Would you

want it to pass your legislation?

Q Have a petition, collection from individuals, and/or

maybe joining to a protest march to get that bill passed.

Well protested march is possible. You may be pushing it,

yeah, the petition is probably first getting a bunch of

people supporting you, yeah. Please remember that you're

not a legislature, you're you, and you want a bill passed.

So you need to get support so that the legislature believes

that there is a reason for getting that particular

legislation put through. Anybody else? Well after you will

get a whole bunch of groups or interesting in the same thing

as you then you go ahead and contact your local

legislature. Yeah that and not only your local legislature

who may introduce it we found that you need to contact a lot

of other legislatures in different districts so try and

convince them so that that will get out of committee while

your legislature may do it to make you are happy it sits

there because not enough support so often and we had it

happen here on a bill that we wanted through Washington what

it was about was irrelevant perhaps but we call to find out

and the woman who was the secretary said very bluntly it's

not going anywhere unless you convince a bunch of

legislatures too and told us to start contacting other

legislative offices which was interesting. And that's a lot

of work if you want to push something seriously through

unless the legislature him or herself feels that they're

going to get something that's going to benefit them out of

it but please remember the point I keep making is that

because that incumbent the person in office is the

incumbent. Because that incumbent wants to be re elected

that incumbent knows he or she that he has to get things

done and make a name for him and most do that is why in the

house of reps, for the last forty years the average rate of

re election those people running for re election not

everybody runs for re election every two years you run for

re election, the average rate of re election is 95 percent.

95 percent. For the incumbent.

The lowest in recently was 1980 when Ronald Reagan was

running for president with the republican revolution. In

1980 of those running for re election only ninety percent

got re elected. Now obviously part of the reason that you

are getting reelected is because they're getting re elect.

What the hell does that mean? It means that interest groups

are willing to give the money to the incumbent rather than

to a challenger. Why give money to a challenger when you

knew the odds are strongly against them of getting

reelected? So if you want something out of government the

person to go through is the person in government. Okay?

The only time and basically almost the only time money is

given to a challenger is if the person in government speaks
out against that particular.

For example Pete Stark who is affirm support for and --

and very much opposes the rip offs by medical what they

consider medical rates and companies and HMO. Pete stark is

constantly being challenged by medical companies the money

is going against him. It hasn't hurt him, because he keeps

getting re elected by 66 percent of the vote any case

because of other things he does. Because he gets money from

other interest groups. And if you're not sure because it's

an equal race because two new people are running for the

president at that point they give it to both candidates.

Just in case. But in vast majority of cases the legislature

in office the incumbent is going to get the money so they

got more to spend first of all, second of all, they've got

the name recognition. People know the name of the pen in

office most of the time you don't and never even heard of

the person whose the challenger and third, they have um

their picture out there the visual, and fourth, they've done

things for people in the district who were willing to work

for them even if they're not of that party. Many years ago,

um a guy that used to train in our gym he was a member got

an appointment to west point by Don Edwards he came from a

very strong republican family but in the next election he

actually went and walked precincts for Don Edwards a

Democrat because he felt obligated the power of obligation

he wanted to reward him for getting him an appointment to

West Point. Okay? Part in parcel of the reality of why the

incumbent has the kind of power. So every time we hear

somebody say we are going to get rid of that incumbent

forget it, just doesn't happen.

I made my point with that story about A B-C-D-E-the

bumper sticker war I'm assuming you read my chapter anybody

with congressman Don Edwards versus Americas best

congressmen Don Edwards that's the reality of the situation

it's not what you can do for America that gets somebody

elected to office, it's what you do for me. It's what you

do for your area. And legislatures know that they make sure

that their office staff is cognizant to the fact that they

better be nice to their constituents being anybody that they

represent and going out of their way to try and at least

give the image that they're doing something for the

constituent when they go there. And a good legislature does

tend to get things done and introduces legislation to

support constituents needs. It doesn't always get through

but at least they try to push it. I know one that

frustrated Don Edwards was a frustrating one this older

couple had adopted their daughter's son because -- and the

couple was getting social security and even though they had

adopted this child officially legally, they couldn't get

social security added on for it because he wasn't natural.

And Edwards did introduce legislation to try and get it

through and legislation was defeated. I still don't know

why. This was about twenty years ago. Last year they

finally passed legislation that allows somebody who adopts a

child to collect social security on that child as their own

child. Now why wouldn't -- it should be certainly the same

difference between natural born versus adopted, but it

wasn't under those whatever the laws distinctions were. But

he did I remember specifically because it was one of my

students who was giving that was telling me about the their


Again, noting how local legislation is, I use the

example in my book, of this individual I knew in Pensacola

Florida who was also a professor of political science who

had married a woman in Japan right at the end of world war

two. And at that point, it had become against the law for a

short period of time to bring war brides into the country.

A war bride was a term used for GIs who married women in

Japan in Germany even in the Philippines because they felt

that many of that's women were exploiting the GIs because of

their loneliness and their needs and then they were leaving

them or just trying to get in the country and it was a

reality and my family my second cousin my mothers cousin

married a woman in Germany. Right after that at the end of

world war two and she came to this country because this law

hadn't been passed yet and as soon as she got here she

disappear and you know stayed in the country and I remember

many years later when he want to remarry he had to go move

to Florida to get a divorce for desertions because in New

York I had a in Florida it was six months so is it happened

but he wanted to bring his wife into the country from Japan

and he therefore went he was living in Oregon. He went to

his legislature from Oregon who introduced into Congress

into the house of representative a bill whose only purpose

it was to bring his wife into this country. That bill for

him and his wife went to the house and through the Senate

and move on and the president sign it he showed me the bill

the president had sign this bill and he got a copy of it.

Only for him. It's amazing how many bills are personal

bills. I suspect that his bribery had taken place before.

Remember this was a political science professor. So bribery

is a different form and that is he's doing it because he's

paying back this guy for having work for him and that's also

very much the case legislature will definitely go out of

their way for people who have work for them. It's part of

the rewards that they tend to give if you will and it's

understandable so this if you're known -- I mean you know I

work for Don Edwards and he got to know me who was our

legislature and it's amazing -- I mean granted not just the

calendar for the new year or the Christmas card but he sent

me books from Congress and congressional books in 1976 was

the 200th anniversary of the declaration of independence. I

got the whole bound set of books that were printed by

Congress from him. Based on that. Because you know I had

worked for him and he -- and so you know they take care of

the people they know who were going to work or contribute

financially to their campaign. And so I probably would have

a better chance of getting legislation introduced than the

normal person because he would know me as someone who worked

for him but it doesn't mean that some people won't do it

just for the sake of it. Um, because think that's an

important issue. That happens all the time.

I remember we had a situation here in Fremont many years

ago; mace was illegal. Teargas was illegal in California.

Any usage ownership of it at all. And this woman was

attacked down on somewhere near the Sizzler. I guess down in

Centerville. But she pulled out an illegal can of mace and

protected herself. She was busted by the police. And our

local assemblyman specifically got on the ban wagon and

introduced legislation which now is in existence where if

you take a course on the use of mace you can carry it with

you. That was specific legislation that we're familiar with

now because of a case here in Fremont and an assembly person

who didn't know the person but felt it was stupid that she

was arrested for protecting herself. We don't have any

course that you need to take to carry pepper spray, right?

You can just buy that. Well, in any way, um, the point the

point is well made that that kind of legislation is the

major power of a lot of legislation. I don't know if I used

this as an example in the book about Ohlone college where

they want to have the election on even years and we

introduced the legislation for Ohlone college and when it

went through that state assembly and Senate it became a law

that allowed any community college district to do it. So

sometimes you put it in for a specific group and it expands

into something that covers that whole category of groups.

In other words, categorical. Well, once again the issue is

doing something for me. And that is why we have two terms

that we are on the word list. Pork barrel legislation and

log rolling. Pork barrel refers to I think I defined it

earlier to any legislation that is introduced for --

specifically to bring home the fat, the bacon. It's

beneficial to your district. Obviously a 19th century kind

of a term. Log rolling also a term refers to legislatures a

agrees to vote for each others bills. I'll scratch your back

if you scratch mine. I don't like the fact that you're

asking money for a dam and you don't like the fact that I'm

asking for a post office. So let's just vote for each

others bill because then I'll get my post office and you'll

get your dam. So we make a -- we are working together and I

guess log rolling comes from the term that people who rolled

the logs down the stream had to work together to make sure

the logs got to the lumber mill as they turned them. Way

before my time. Log rolling.

I'd like to now at this juncture talk about the

requirements for a legislature and then how a bill becomes a

law. So, we have two houses of Congress. The house of reps

and the Senate. Now you got to be careful. Because

sometimes you make the mistake of referring to Congress as

the house of reps. It includes both the house and the

Senate. And if you make that mistake on an exam you could

lose a point or so. Why then do we make the mistake this

because for some strange reason we refer to members of house

of reps as congressmen. And senators we don't call

Congressmen. So when we call members of house of reps we

think of house of reps as Congress. I think that -- they

are representatives and both members of the house and Senate

are Congress.

Don Edwards used to put down MC after his name. Member

of Congress. That's done more often in England where

members of parliment -- they always put down MP after their

names. What are the requirements to be a members of house of

reps? According to the Constitution? You have to be a

minimum of 25 years of age and what other one? You have to

live in the state for -- you have to be a resident for seven

years. You don't have to be born a citizen. You can be a

naturalized citizen. The representative from the Palo Alto

area has a very heavy accent. He was born in Hungary

previous to World War II. He couldn't serve as president,

but he can serve as a member of the house or Senate. What

are the requirements for a member of United States Senate?

You have to be thirty years old. And it's nine years as a

resident. How long do you serve as the member of house?

Two years. House is two years. However, obviously as we

pointed out, most people get re elected and there are no

term limits. So it becomes a full time job. How long in

the U.S. Senate? Six years. Senators serve for six;

members of the house serve for two. Ted Kennedy got elected

at the age of thirty. The youngest possible age and he's

still in the U.S. Senate and I believe he is pushing seventy

right now. So forty years full time job. The oldest member

of the Senate of course is Strom Thurman. Didn't we mention

him before in class? 95 years old talking about re running

again for re election. Well we know it's not even a

question that he'll be elected because he's brought so much

to his district in South Carolina. Will he survive another

six years? Who knows? George Burns made it to the hundreds

that he wanted to. He couldn't run his hundred birthday at

the Paladium as he wanted to.

Every two years every members of house is reelected as

we indicated or is up for re election. Members of Senate

stagger their term, so there's an overlap. Only one-third

of the Senate is up for re election. So it's 33, 33, 34.

Since there are one hundred members of Senate. By the way

how many members of house again? 435. 435 who were all up

for re election every two years. Because all 435 are up for

re election every two years, we number the Congress based on

the House of Representative elections. The first Congress

made met in 1789 who was the first Congress. This is the

106th Congress. So every two years there is a new number

given to the Congress.

We've talked about the requirements in the Constitution,

but there are some unwritten requirements at least not as

strong as the president. What are some of the things that

are unwritten? Well first of all, age. Very few have been

elected to the house at 25. Some have. Most are in their

30s. In the Senate very few are elected at the age of

thirty. I just mentioned Ted Kennedy was. However, most

are elected in their forties to the Senate. And we pointed

out earlier that most presidents are elected in their 50s.

What other factors do we see in the election like the

presidency? Most senators have been male, most members of

the house have been male in recent years, we've seen a few

more females elected. Up until a number of years ago we had

had one or two senators who were female. In the last Senate

in the last Congress, we had 19 women serving in the Senate

out of a hundred. With a little less than ten percent.

It's now eight. The woman senator from Illinois was

defeated. The woman senator from Illinois was defeated. In

the House of Reps, we have 43 and I've got the exact number

in the book. Women are again just under ten percent. Yet

women constitute 51 percent of the population. The vast

number are attorneys. Far more in than the average percent

in population in 1980 63 out of senators were attorney. In
the last Congress the number of attorneys was something like

56. I forget the exact but still the majority. In the

house of reps in 1980 it was 46 percent. In the last

Congress it was 41 percent. Why is it that attorneys are so

active in politics? A lot of legislation. Legislation

being able to read it. It's often written by attorneys

therefore they're active in creating legislation. Also

perhaps because they have schedules that they can set up to

work publicly and the more their name gets known the more

business it brings to their company. A lot of attorneys

tend to enter into the political arena even locally. Many

times they enter politics so they can be known to get an

appointment as a judge. This is many years who run for the

Ohlone college of attorneys. We at one time had five out of

seven board members of were attorney. But just recently one

of our board members who was an attorney became a municipal

judge now superior court judge. So it is not too uncommon

for many attorneys to get into their name recognition

basically because the active in political party. Now this

guy was a Democrat most of his life but when the republicans

took over in California he switched to get appointed despite

the fact that the governor at the time Dukemajin questioned

him for having been a Democrat even but he gave the

appointment to the his name is Dick Keller. So interesting

on that level. Um, most have been white. There are

something like 37 blacks in the house there are know blacks
to my knowledge in the Senate. Very few Hispanics about 19

in the house. Few Asians. The only group that ever

represented in numbers but not greatly but certainly has

more upon the population are Jews. In the house and

Senate. In fact California is unique that both senators are

women and Jewish. Why is there a greater percentage of Jews

in politics, anybody? Think of a reason?

I think because so many Jews were killed so maybe they

feel like they want to give back and do service and become a

senator. Maybe; maybe?

It's a nice thought. I'm not sure that's the reason. I

like the answer. You're not off base in the sense not so

much they were killed then we were talking a period of time

but historically bunch of the way Jews have been able to

preserve their survival is that they have been active in

political organizations be it in Holland or by actively

engaging in politics going back to Queen Estes times it was

part of survival. Also being part of that legal profession

many Jewish parents like the children to enter politics

specifically or I'm sorry like them to enter the profession

of law and since we have such a great percentage of lawyers

in politics both senators from California both women were

originally attorneys. So the combination of the law and the

ethics and the survival are factors why the Jews that make

up maybe less than one percent of the American population

probably make up about five percent of the members of the

house and Senate. Okay. We'll see you on Thursday.