1 00:00:02,100 --> 00:00:04,000 JEFFREY GOLDBERG: I want to come to '94 in a second, but stay on something that you mentioned, 2 00:00:04,000 --> 00:00:07,266 and I want you to talk about this for the young people out there that there 3 00:00:07,266 --> 00:00:12,266 was this -- there were these creatures who used to roam Washington called conservative Democrats 4 00:00:14,533 --> 00:00:18,666 and liberal Republicans. And there were whole factions of them. And they might be responsible, 5 00:00:22,866 --> 00:00:27,866 in retrospect for functioning democracy in a way that now that they've disappeared, 6 00:00:30,066 --> 00:00:34,033 or largely disappeared, you know, now we understand how important they were 7 00:00:34,033 --> 00:00:38,900 to the functioning of Washington or like this creation of some kind of 8 00:00:38,900 --> 00:00:43,866 bipartisan consensus. Talk about them and that, and those extinct tribes. 9 00:00:46,133 --> 00:00:48,800 DAN BALZ: Well, you know, in the Republican Party, it was people like Jacob Javits from New York or 10 00:00:51,533 --> 00:00:56,500 Matthias from Maryland. On the Democratic side, it was largely southern Democrats, 11 00:00:58,366 --> 00:01:02,833 you know, Russell from Georgia and others. So, that was one element of it. 12 00:01:04,633 --> 00:01:09,633 I think there was more to it than that though, that there was, again, 13 00:01:11,700 --> 00:01:14,666 I go back to this sense that you played politics by a set of rules and Congress was supposed 14 00:01:16,700 --> 00:01:20,800 to work in a particular way and presidents worked with Congresses in a particular way. 15 00:01:20,800 --> 00:01:25,800 In those days, committee chairs were gigantic figures. We don't think of 16 00:01:27,833 --> 00:01:31,233 that today in the same way because so much has now been consolidated in the hands of 17 00:01:33,266 --> 00:01:36,733 the speaker and the leaders in Congress. But in those days, there was action taken 18 00:01:39,133 --> 00:01:43,866 at the subcommittee level that we had to cover. When I was doing economic policy, I would cover 19 00:01:46,300 --> 00:01:49,066 subcommittee meetings about taxes. I would cover committee meetings at the Agriculture Committee. 20 00:01:50,800 --> 00:01:55,500 That work is still being done, but it is not done in broad publication. 21 00:01:57,366 --> 00:02:00,100 So, that's been a massive shift in the way politics works, but I think 22 00:02:00,100 --> 00:02:05,000 that it has led to a dysfunctionality of -- certainly of the legislative branch. I mean, 23 00:02:06,866 --> 00:02:11,033 you can say, well, they have done some things, occasional bipartisan things, 24 00:02:11,033 --> 00:02:15,900 as they did during the Biden administration. But as a whole, you look at that institution and you 25 00:02:15,900 --> 00:02:20,900 say it is a broken institution. And that was not the way we thought about it in the 70s or 80s. 26 00:02:22,933 --> 00:02:26,300 Was it perfect? No. Were there problems? Yes. Were there scandals? Yes. But it was 27 00:02:26,300 --> 00:02:28,533 a different era of politics and a different ethic, 28 00:02:28,533 --> 00:02:31,500 I think, that people who were in politics brought to their positions. 29 00:02:31,500 --> 00:02:36,500 JEFFREY GOLDBERG: Right. Let's talk about the early 90s leading up to '94, the rise of Newt 30 00:02:38,766 --> 00:02:41,700 Gingrich, who presaged a lot of what we see today in Republican Parties. Now, that it's not to say 31 00:02:43,966 --> 00:02:47,633 that. Democratic hearts also didn't harden and become more confrontational. We saw that in the 32 00:02:47,633 --> 00:02:52,600 Robert Bork hearings. But talk about Gingrich because he's a, he's pretty singular figure of 33 00:02:55,533 --> 00:02:59,866 that period. And, you know, it's interesting reading some of your stories from the 90s, 34 00:02:59,866 --> 00:03:04,833 you quote Gingrich as saying of the Democrats, I clearly fascinate them. I'm much more intense, 35 00:03:07,233 --> 00:03:10,700 much more persistent, much more willing to take risks to get it done. Since they think it is their 36 00:03:10,700 --> 00:03:15,700 job to run the plantation, it shocks them that I'm actually willing to lead the slave rebellion. 37 00:03:17,900 --> 00:03:21,000 I'm surprised going back 30 years at the modern quality of that language back then. Those were 38 00:03:26,933 --> 00:03:31,933 kind of statements that people in Congress who were used to, accustomed to exercising 39 00:03:34,233 --> 00:03:37,133 self-restraint, rhetorical self-restraint, would never say. Was he, in your mind, a revolution? 40 00:03:39,000 --> 00:03:41,433 DAN BALZ: Yes, I think that's right. I think it's fair to say. I mean, 41 00:03:41,433 --> 00:03:46,300 when you look back on, you know, the whole arc of that period, 42 00:03:46,300 --> 00:03:51,300 Gingrich is a dominant figure and one of the most influential figures of the time. 43 00:03:53,333 --> 00:03:55,766 JEFFREY GOLDBERG: By the way, did he change politics more 44 00:03:55,766 --> 00:04:00,766 than the president he served with or in opposition to Bill Clinton, ultimately? 45 00:04:02,600 --> 00:04:05,033 DAN BALZ: Well, I think they both changed politics in different ways, 46 00:04:05,033 --> 00:04:06,800 but let's stick with Gingrich for a minute. 47 00:04:06,800 --> 00:04:08,833 JEFFREY GOLDBERG: Yes. 48 00:04:08,833 --> 00:04:12,433 DAN BALZ: Yes. Gingrich changed politics. Because what Gingrich did was he brought, 49 00:04:14,466 --> 00:04:19,466 as I say, a confrontational style and a flamboyance and a willingness to attack 50 00:04:21,533 --> 00:04:25,800 his opponents in ways that other politicians would've been hesitant to do. He went after, 51 00:04:27,566 --> 00:04:32,200 you know, Jim Wright, the speaker of the House, on ethics issues. He used, 52 00:04:34,266 --> 00:04:39,066 if you will, flagrant language to describe his opponents. It's the kind of thing that 53 00:04:41,300 --> 00:04:44,600 now seems ordinary. You know, we see it all the time on social media. But Gingrich was out there. 54 00:04:46,900 --> 00:04:50,200 And I think one of the things that happened was that the Republicans were so beaten down in the 55 00:04:52,500 --> 00:04:56,233 House throughout that long period. I mean, we have to remember the Democrats held the house for 56 00:04:56,233 --> 00:05:01,233 40 years until 1994. Republicans finally became convinced that the style of leadership typified 57 00:05:05,733 --> 00:05:10,733 by Bob Michael, who was the House Republican leader in that period, was not going to get them 58 00:05:12,800 --> 00:05:16,900 anything other than cooperation as a minority that would be stepped on by the Democrats. 59 00:05:19,000 --> 00:05:23,300 Gingrich, when there was an election for a new whip, and I believe it was 1990 or '89, 60 00:05:25,433 --> 00:05:29,666 was surprisingly elected the whip. And I think that signaled to, you know, 61 00:05:29,666 --> 00:05:33,500 the broader world, there is a sea change coming potentially. 62 00:05:33,500 --> 00:05:38,500 And Gingrich then consolidated his power and was the architect of the 1994 victory. 63 00:05:42,133 --> 00:05:47,133 JEFFREY GOLDBERG: Right. And talk about the relationship between Gingrich's rhetorical, 64 00:05:48,866 --> 00:05:52,600 stylistic innovations and the rise of social media, reality T.V., 65 00:05:54,433 --> 00:05:57,266 all of the things that have brought us to what politics are today. I mean, 66 00:05:57,266 --> 00:06:02,266 you could actually -- would Trump exist without Gingrich? 67 00:06:04,066 --> 00:06:08,466 DAN BALZ: Probably not. But I think there were other elements, you know, 68 00:06:08,466 --> 00:06:13,466 that contributed to Trump as well. So, I don't think it's simply a straight 69 00:06:15,566 --> 00:06:18,500 line from Gingrich to Trump. But there's no question that that had a lot to do with it. 70 00:06:21,500 --> 00:06:26,500 I don't know what's the best way to talk about it, but if you think about the changes in technology 71 00:06:29,266 --> 00:06:34,266 over time, Gingrich seized on a technology that had not existed prior to kind of his rise, 72 00:06:36,466 --> 00:06:41,466 which is television cameras in the House chamber on C-Span. And what the Gingrich 73 00:06:43,833 --> 00:06:48,533 team did was they used this thing called special orders, which allows a house member 74 00:06:48,533 --> 00:06:53,100 to get up and speak for a limited length of time about any topic that they want to do. 75 00:06:53,100 --> 00:06:58,100 And usually this is, you know, after or before regular order. And Gingrich and 76 00:07:00,133 --> 00:07:05,066 his small band of rebels used that to begin to spread a message of, you know, 77 00:07:07,433 --> 00:07:11,500 Democrats are corrupt, this institution is corrupt, et cetera, et cetera. They were 78 00:07:11,500 --> 00:07:14,866 speaking to an empty chamber. But if you were watching it, you didn't know that. 79 00:07:14,866 --> 00:07:19,833 Tip O'Neill finally forced C-Span to pan the chamber every now and then to show. 80 00:07:19,833 --> 00:07:24,833 So, he used a technology. You know, if you fast forward now to social media, 81 00:07:26,500 --> 00:07:31,133 it is a different way of targeting a message, aiming at people, 82 00:07:33,466 --> 00:07:36,900 doing it in a way that is designed to inflame the debate, not to, you know, ameliorate differences. 83 00:07:39,600 --> 00:07:44,600 So, you know, we've been going through that for a long time and watching the technology and so, 84 00:07:46,666 --> 00:07:50,000 you know, we go from, you know, cameras in the House chamber ultimately to the internet, 85 00:07:50,000 --> 00:07:55,000 disrupting everything and democratizing information to social media, which is, 86 00:07:56,200 --> 00:07:58,333 you know, in many ways, a toxic environment. 87 00:07:58,333 --> 00:08:02,066 JEFFREY GOLDBERG: Do you think democracy can survive this constant flood of very personal, 88 00:08:05,600 --> 00:08:10,066 unrestrained attack and this constant flood of information, 89 00:08:10,066 --> 00:08:15,066 true information and bad information, that comes to voters every hour of every day? 90 00:08:17,333 --> 00:08:20,566 DAN BALZ: Yes. I don't know, Jeff. I don't know whether it can survive in the way we think it has 91 00:08:22,966 --> 00:08:26,600 been and should be. I think it's under enormous stress. And I don't think that's just, you know, 92 00:08:29,000 --> 00:08:32,833 the current president that we have in the White House. I think it's a broader problem. You know, 93 00:08:34,933 --> 00:08:39,133 this democracy is pretty resilient, but as a lot of people have said, you know, it's not 94 00:08:41,400 --> 00:08:44,133 something that just happens, that people have to work at it and people have to believe in it. 95 00:08:44,133 --> 00:08:49,133 So, I think people, not just politicians, I think, the public at large is going to have to decide 96 00:08:51,666 --> 00:08:56,666 what kind of democracy we want in this country, and how do we assure that it is sustained. 97 00:08:58,600 --> 00:09:02,066 JEFFREY GOLDBERG: What were the downsides of the old way of doing things? 98 00:09:02,066 --> 00:09:07,066 DAN BALZ: probably that it was too clubby, that it was -- you know, that these differences weren't 99 00:09:09,666 --> 00:09:14,666 ironed out in the ways they necessarily needed to be, that the debate wasn't as robust sometimes as 100 00:09:16,833 --> 00:09:19,800 that it needed to be. But, you know, I think that was part of it. You know, it was insular, 101 00:09:22,233 --> 00:09:26,400 you know? But Washington I think has always been fairly insular. I mean, you know, 102 00:09:26,400 --> 00:09:31,400 we think of it as, you know, the grand capital, but it's a small community. It's a tribal city. 103 00:09:32,566 --> 00:09:34,100 JEFFREY GOLDBERG: Right. And it's a bunch 104 00:09:34,100 --> 00:09:34,766 of people who are doing the same work in a kind of way. 105 00:09:34,766 --> 00:09:36,533 DAN BALZ: Right. 106 00:09:36,533 --> 00:09:37,933 JEFFREY GOLDBERG: They become their own guild in a sort of way. 107 00:09:37,933 --> 00:09:39,800 DAN BALZ: Yes. 108 00:09:39,800 --> 00:09:41,933 JEFFREY GOLDBERG: Talk about a little bit -- I mean, you've met everyone, 109 00:09:41,933 --> 00:09:44,533 you've seen everything you've traveled. I don't know what your frequent flyer miles 110 00:09:44,533 --> 00:09:48,700 are. You've written millions of words and I'm sure you've accumulated millions of miles 111 00:09:50,633 --> 00:09:53,666 trying to understand politics across America. Talk about the people you were 112 00:09:53,666 --> 00:09:58,300 impressed with in American politics. I'm sure there's a long list, but -- 113 00:09:58,300 --> 00:10:01,633 DAN BALZ: There -- yes. Yes. 114 00:10:01,633 --> 00:10:04,400 JEFFREY GOLDBERG: People who fulfill their mission to be 115 00:10:04,400 --> 00:10:06,600 something larger than their own self-interest. 116 00:10:06,600 --> 00:10:11,300 DAN BALZ: Yes. Well, you know, I think I would start just in terms of sheer effectiveness at 117 00:10:12,633 --> 00:10:17,200 the exercise of power with Nancy Pelosi. You know, 118 00:10:17,200 --> 00:10:22,200 I think there's probably not been a more effective speaker of the House, certainly 119 00:10:24,466 --> 00:10:27,533 since I would say probably Sam Rayburn, many, many people, which predates my arrival here. So, 120 00:10:29,466 --> 00:10:34,100 that goes back quite a ways. But I think that I think that she was very effective. 121 00:10:36,433 --> 00:10:39,866 I think, you know, in a different way and a different party, Bob Dole, when he was a Senate 122 00:10:42,300 --> 00:10:45,700 leader, was also very effective at understanding the institution and knowing, you know, how to try 123 00:10:47,966 --> 00:10:50,833 to get things done, and an ability to legislate. I mean, it's a lost art, the ability to legislate, 124 00:10:52,966 --> 00:10:57,233 which today is really just, you know, can you hold your own party together if you have the 125 00:10:57,233 --> 00:11:01,266 majority to kind of push something through. That was a different era of legislating. 126 00:11:01,266 --> 00:11:06,266 But, you know, there are some other people that I think have been, I guess, I would say, 127 00:11:08,566 --> 00:11:11,933 laudable public servants. You know, one person I have covered for 40-plus years is Leon Panetta. 128 00:11:16,866 --> 00:11:21,866 I first started covering him when he was in the House. He was the House Budget Committee chairman. 129 00:11:24,033 --> 00:11:28,433 He was the director of OMB for Clinton. He was then Clinton's White House chief of staff. He 130 00:11:30,800 --> 00:11:35,633 left politics for a while, started an institute at the Cal State Monterey Bay, where he and his wife 131 00:11:37,733 --> 00:11:42,433 continued to run, came back to be the director of the CIA, then became the secretary of defense. 132 00:11:43,966 --> 00:11:48,566 He has, to me, been laudable for a couple of reasons. One, 133 00:11:48,566 --> 00:11:53,533 he is a very serious public servant. He takes his role seriously. At the same time, 134 00:11:55,333 --> 00:11:59,933 he has an ebullient personality, an ability to laugh, an ability to see 135 00:12:01,966 --> 00:12:05,533 the absurdity in moments both, you know, serious and not so serious. So, he's one. 136 00:12:08,133 --> 00:12:13,133 Dave Broder, who was my mentor at the Post, a great political reporter, instilled in me 137 00:12:17,433 --> 00:12:22,433 a recognition that you should pay attention to what's going on outside of Washington and you 138 00:12:24,600 --> 00:12:27,533 should pay attention to governors. And so there are some governors over the years that I came 139 00:12:29,833 --> 00:12:34,500 to think were very good. Roy Romer, the former governor of Colorado, who later went on after he 140 00:12:36,833 --> 00:12:40,600 left that to become the superintendent of schools in Los Angeles, for example. Janet Napolitano, 141 00:12:42,733 --> 00:12:47,066 who was the governor of Arizona, who came to Washington and was the director of the Secretary 142 00:12:49,400 --> 00:12:53,633 of Homeland Security. Tom Vilsack is another among the Democrats, two-term governor in Iowa, 143 00:12:57,766 --> 00:13:02,733 almost secretary of agriculture for life, but a person who was both a smart politician, I mean, 144 00:13:04,700 --> 00:13:08,333 and played the game of politics effectively, but also cared about public policy. 145 00:13:10,100 --> 00:13:13,266 On the Republican side, I'd I would be remiss in not naming John McCain. I 146 00:13:13,266 --> 00:13:18,266 think that's an obvious one. And I think Mitt Romney, when he became a senator, 147 00:13:20,200 --> 00:13:23,933 showed a kind of, you know, a moral compass that I think was needed at the time. 148 00:13:25,866 --> 00:13:29,766 JEFFREY GOLDBERG: Right. Stipulating that you're for your judiciousness and modeling 149 00:13:31,900 --> 00:13:35,700 self-restraint, who that you met in the course of these 50 years really disappointed you, 150 00:13:37,800 --> 00:13:42,333 you thought, well, this is a person who's not good for the American democratic experiment? 151 00:13:43,066 --> 00:13:45,333 DAN BALZ: Yes. I -- 152 00:13:45,333 --> 00:13:47,900 JEFFREY GOLDBERG: You're not going to be judicious now that I've said you're judicious. 153 00:13:47,900 --> 00:13:52,900 DAN BALZ: Yes. I may be judicious here. I don't want to go down that 154 00:13:54,833 --> 00:13:58,100 road. I will say that there are people who I saw coming up. And, you know, 155 00:14:01,433 --> 00:14:06,433 I've lived my life in four year cycles with, you know, the presidential campaign being, 156 00:14:08,166 --> 00:14:10,700 you know, the key year coming up, getting ready to run for president, 157 00:14:10,700 --> 00:14:15,700 who I thought this person is going to be very effective. Don't underestimate this person. 158 00:14:17,766 --> 00:14:21,633 I will name one person who I underestimated initially. Phil Graham, who I got to know 159 00:14:23,733 --> 00:14:28,266 when I was down in our Texas Bureau for a time, who, back in the Reagan administration, 160 00:14:30,233 --> 00:14:34,300 quit the Democratic Party and ran for his House seat and people thought, well, 161 00:14:34,300 --> 00:14:38,000 he'll not win as a Republican, and he did. And I thought, do not underestimate this guy. 162 00:14:38,000 --> 00:14:43,000 When he ran for president, he got nowhere. He was completely ill-equipped. I've seen that over time. 163 00:14:46,000 --> 00:14:50,933 Those are the people I would say -- I wouldn't necessarily say he's disappointed democracy, 164 00:14:52,900 --> 00:14:56,133 but that was the kind of thing where you think somebody has certain capabilities and 165 00:14:56,133 --> 00:15:01,133 talents when they get in that arena, which is a very tough arena. They're not there. 166 00:15:02,933 --> 00:15:05,666 JEFFREY GOLDBERG: Let's talk finally about where we are right now. This is a 167 00:15:05,666 --> 00:15:10,400 president we have who is unlike any other president, I think, in the modern era, 168 00:15:10,400 --> 00:15:15,033 certainly. Maybe you have to go back to Andrew Jackson to understand this. What 169 00:15:15,033 --> 00:15:20,033 is the threat of this president? But also is there any promise here of something? I mean, 170 00:15:22,200 --> 00:15:25,466 again, appealing to your judiciousness and logical analysis, what is the danger here 171 00:15:28,633 --> 00:15:33,633 and is there a chance that the Washington establishment is overestimating the danger? 172 00:15:35,400 --> 00:15:39,033 DAN BALZ: I think there's some danger of overestimating the danger, 173 00:15:39,033 --> 00:15:41,733 but I think the danger is there. 174 00:15:41,733 --> 00:15:44,166 JEFFREY GOLDBERG: What is the danger? 175 00:15:44,166 --> 00:15:47,533 DAN BALZ: I think the danger is a president who is solely focused on, A, the accumulation of power, 176 00:15:50,300 --> 00:15:55,300 at being at the center of everything that he wants to. He wants to be the impresario of all events. 177 00:15:58,300 --> 00:16:03,300 And that to achieve that goal, he is expanding and distorting the powers of the presidency in ways we 178 00:16:06,300 --> 00:16:11,300 have not seen certainly in our lifetimes. Nobody has tried to do what he's doing. 179 00:16:13,400 --> 00:16:16,433 But the second aspect of that is a kind of, you know, a hunger for retribution and a hunger to 180 00:16:18,866 --> 00:16:23,866 punish enemies. Look, you know, politics is a rough business. People go after people that they 181 00:16:26,166 --> 00:16:30,033 don't like. But we've never seen that I can recall the kinds of things that we are seeing with this 182 00:16:32,200 --> 00:16:35,866 administration. And they are, you know, coming from the top down. So, I think that's the danger. 183 00:16:37,933 --> 00:16:42,533 He wants to change the electoral system so. Has he done some things that I think are probably 184 00:16:42,533 --> 00:16:47,533 helpful in focusing people's attention on problems? Yes. But the danger is there. 185 00:16:49,200 --> 00:16:52,800 JEFFREY GOLDBERG: Well, we could go on all day. Unfortunately we can't. 186 00:16:52,800 --> 00:16:56,400 There's a lot to cover. And we'll continue to have Dan on our show, 187 00:16:56,400 --> 00:16:58,933 thank goodness. But we're going to have to leave it there. 188 00:16:58,933 --> 00:17:01,500 I want to thank Dan, obviously, for joining us in 189 00:17:01,500 --> 00:17:04,333 all of his great journalism. And I want to thank you at home for watching us.