Transcripts For CSPAN Washington Journal 20110102

fat for host: they begin with edward rogers. he writes -- host: what would be the biggest political surprise of 2011 themself there are several here in this opinion piece. this comes from the deputy press secretary of the clinton white house, speaking about health care. host: that is her prediction on the political surprise for this year. as for the appeal? host: one more opinion here from the communications director for john mccain's 2000 presidential campaign. in his opinion it would be -- host: we know that it was blocked in the lame-duck session that just ended. your opinion on the biggest political surprise of 2011? youngstown, ohio. you are out first. caller: the biggest surprise to me would be of the banned lobbyists in washington. i think we have the best government that money can buy. host: do you think that would ever happen? are you there? i think that he moved on. nashville, tennessee. good morning. reggie? go ahead. caller: if the republican controlled house worked with the president. on a corporate agenda. but the people first. host: how would they do that? what kind of actions would you expect? caller: concentrate more on the middle class and small business. host: catherine is on the line from california. what would surprise you the most politically this year? caller: it would be if politicians and the media would spend very little time talking about the election of 2012. can we just do what goes on in 2011 and leave out the election of 2012? host: does one of them even to the other? caller: we need to pass laws without relating it to who will get elected in 2012. host: what laws do you look forward to being past year? what are your priorities? caller: the ones that i wanted to be passed are already passed. what i would like to see is for us to get out of the war, which is scheduled, so i do not have to wish for it. i would like for the news to be explained. explain the new laws, do not explain how it affects the next person getting elected we always explain things as to who is going to benefit. this party, that party, but just explain it. host: as we move into the new year, what would be the biggest surprise of 2011? alabama, independent line. good morning. caller: the biggest surprise is that obama be impeached because the people are being and the country is going broke -- and he will be impeached this year, 2011. host: this is from "the washington post" this morning, but would surprise doug schon the most? host: bob chrum writes -- host: anthony, republican line, california. what would surprise you the most? caller: if the health care bill is up to held in the supreme court. host: what is it about the health care bill that you do not like? caller: i am opposed to the entire bill but i take issue with that the individual mandate the most. i do not see the government's place in forcing people the purchase from the private market. host: where do you see them later court's action on the market on this fella caller: i do look forward to that portion of it being overturned. but i would be surprised if it was a hold of -- of help given the conservative makeup of the court. host: mike, what would surprise you the most? caller: it would be the reemergence of any kind of initiative for a balanced budget amendment. i am a liberal but i think that we have to have some kind of framework with which to discuss the nation's finances and i do not hear anything from the right or the left on that. host: what would you be looking to happen in terms of a framework? what would work best for you? host: -- caller: a balanced budget amendment. if you have various political interest in this country working on their piece of apply -- piece of the pie, getting their needs met, we need to have a cage around which this discussion and these political fights can take place. the only thing i can envision for the good of the country would be something that restricts the politicians from spending so much money. host: i guess i should have asked you -- is that the path to the amendment in congress? the white house? kent limits be negotiated effectively? -- can the limits be negotiated effectively? caller: no, i think that all of them are political hacks. host: political -- albert? carl, berkeley, west virginia? are you there? caller: the biggest surprise to me would be if the mainstream media stops a bowling at the feet of obama. host: give us an example. what have you seen or read that makes you believe that? caller: every article you have read this morning has been disparaging to the gop. that is the way it goes, day after day. you pick up a newspaper and it is nothing but praise for obama. host: cameron is on the line from madison, connecticut. caller: i would be surprised if c-span would give us the channel to end channel 3 on 21 and 24, would sit empty here -- here in connecticut. it is advertised all of the time on c-span. i would think that the man sitting there shuffling his papers could speak up on trying to improve the c-span expansion. helping the minds of everyone worldwide to get more coverage. and yet these companies are forcing us not to watch c-span to and c-span 3. i miss it every day along with thousands of people. i hope that in the future they will be able to do something about giving people more expansion. host: we are asking folks what would surprise them the most in the coming year, 2011. politically speaking, of course. dick pullman writes in the current section of "the philadelphia host: you can read that in "the philadelphia inquirer" today. george, independent line. thoughts? caller: i would really be surprised, and i believe that this was a campaign promise but might be wrong, to have lobbyists taken out of politics in washington. host: how does that happen in your view? caller: they need to really not have lobbyists controlling so much of the voting and money flow within washington. there is so much special- interest. there is so much everything that is run by lobbyists. like other thought, tied to this one, would be to get the speculator is out of the commodities market in particular. i think that if they control the lobbyists and the speculator is, we could have a much more manageable budget and we would be much more aggressive as far as controlling the account -- economics of this country. host: pittsburgh, pa., on the line for democrats. good morning. what would surprise you the most, mary? caller: it would be of sarah palin and ran for president. host: why is that? caller: she is not intellectually prepared. she is enjoying making millions of dollars running around the country and this is it. also, republicans in congress right now are going to repeal everything that the democrats put in. they will waste a lot of time and money and i am sure that americans did not vote for these republicans to do what they plan on doing. it is a big joke. thank you. host: plenty more thoughts on big surprise is possible for 2010. here is a photograph of egyptian christians in front of coffins containing victims of a suicide bombing in alexandria. an attack targeted worshipers at a christian church. the headline says that christians 0.2 al qaeda after the attack in egypt. this story from "the hill," " president obama contemns attack." -- condemns the attack." host: this is from "of the hill" this morning. steve, republican line, arizona. what do you say? caller: it would surprise me if we had a big fund-raiser to get us out of national debt. a big political world wide here we are always bailing out other countries. the united states is always helping everyone else. host: thank you for calling. max, independent line. caller: it would be a big surprise if the news media started to report when those who are -- report on those who wore really behind the 9/11 attacks and why it was a pretext for going to war. if the viewers want to know more they can go to [unintelligible] thank you. host: there is a message from twitter -- host: national park, new jersey. edward, democratic caller. good morning. caller: it would be if fox news started to report the news accurately. a study was released one week ago from the university of maryland saying that fox viewers were three times more likely to be misled than any other news organization or television channel. i believe that president obama, if he could cure cancer some of the next day fox news woodworker the word socialism into the reporting period is just ridiculous. host: altamont springs, florida. caller: the man before me still live fire, but i completely agree with him. the news that people get from fox is unbelievable. surprise youuld the most this year? caller: revealing everything. they are just not going to try to repeal, they will start in a couple of days. all of the republicans and conservatives will agree. host: this would surprise you? caller: it would be renewed after the way that they ran things when bush took office anti-gay of the tax cuts to the richest americans. host: we appreciate the call. we want to let you know about our "newsmakers" program, running at 10:00 in the morning and again at 6:00 in the evening. here is a short piece from the interview with ann wagner. >> you talk so much about paying down at least $50 million in debt that we know of from chairman steele. am i accurate in describing your view as being a fund-raiser on steroids and leaving little time for anything else? >> fund raising is probably one of the most immediate needs. you have got to manage the buildings and we need more transparency and accountability. i called for the reinstatement of a comptroller. i called for some kind of electronic accounts payable and accounts receivable program out there where you have an actual check and sign off of individuals. be of the payment of expenses or any of our expenditures going forward. overhead needs to come down. people need to know that the investment they are making, cost is as low as it possibly can be. i think that vendor contracts need to be overhauled and completely reviewed. the first thing i would do from a financial standpoint when i become chairman of the republican national committee would be to do a full audit, looking at the account we have and things going forward that we need to do from a finance and budgeting standpoint. you have got to have great operatives in place to do your political plans. there is coalition building, communication. so many different areas. i want to reinstate finance directors in the field out there to help state parties help themselves raise money. there are a number of things that i want to do that are not simply solely focused on fund- raising. retooling and three management of the building will be important, as it will lend itself to donor public confidence out there in the republican national committee. host: ann wagner, a guest on newsmaker is. at 10:00 a.m. eastern on this show -- on this morning. tomorrow, chairmanship debates for the rnc. americans for tax reform will hold the debate. it will be at the national press club. the chairmanship debate for the republican national committee, live tomorrow. janet, republican live -- republican line. biggest political surprise of the year? caller: it would be if the powers that be would allow us to drill for oil. especially in alaska. we have been blessed with all of the natural resources that we need the but the government its involved and we become dependent on other countries for our resources. i would be very surprised if that happened. host: larry, texas, good morning. caller: murray. host: merrilee? caller: yes. host: sorry. go ahead. caller: my biggest surprise would be if the supreme court would repeal the decision on the united way. the second thing that would surprise me is if congress followed up on the repeal of that united way decision. run by the people, not by the government or corporations. host: twitter.com/c-spanwj is our twitter address. here is another twitter message this morning. what would surprise this viewer? we also got a couple of e-mails in. host: florida, independent line, good morning. caller: [unintelligible] host: said that again? caller: [unintelligible] host: chad, republican line, tennessee? caller: thank you for c-span. host: you bet. caller: it would be a close tie, perhaps democrats stopping winding about fox news' being great. number two, if obama could actually provide a long form birth certificate and proved he was an american, that would be pretty surprising. host: cliff, saginaw, michigan. caller: most surprising would be if the people elected to obvious -- elected to obvious keeping their promises -- elected to office keeping their promises. i wish the people calling in to c-span will show political guts and flowed out all incumbents. -- vote out all incumbents. host: gene, good morning. caller: things are cold, wintry here. reflecting the country. the biggest surprise would be that everything that is politically corrupt and indecisive -- a blood change at all. host: if it changes and get worse, what does it mean for the country? caller: thank you for asking. i just do not know. i look around where i live and i see so many people just barely making it. even though we are supposedly in an economic secure place and the president always talks about how wyoming is so much better off, but i do not see it on the streets. i see so many people just barely making it. what could replace it? that is the age-old question period will anarchy do it? i do not think so. i agree with throwing out the bums. the political corruption seems to be so deep. host: congress returns this coming wednesday, so look for more discussion on "washington journal." covering various events throughout the week. the tea party made its way into the conversation this morning in this e-mail. host: there is also a tea party story in "the new york times" of this morning. host: press got, ariz., anthony tehama republican, good morning. caller: happy new year. good morning. i would be surprised if the marijuana legalization started to spread across the u.s.. money seems like it would be enough to take a chunk out of our predicament. the post of chattanooga, tennessee, good morning. -- host: chattanooga, tennessee, good morning. caller: the rich getting tax shelters and stuff, squeezing the little -- middle class like a tourniquet -- turnip. when obama was getting his hair cut and working for the raising of prices, republicans were trying to get health care than they did not try to not create no jobs here in united states, paying americans no taxes with two wars and no taxes with jobs going overseas, squeezing the middle class like a turnip. invest back into america. host: the biggest political surprise of the coming year? what would surprise you the most? dave is calling from nv of the independent line. caller: my biggest surprise would be a political candidate running for the office of president, starting his campaign, coming up with some good campaign promises that he would actually keep. host: what would be most important to you? caller: i do not know if it would be the most important, but coming up with a campaign that sam l. -- -- some hell -- somehow run on a campaign where they keep promises. they are the strongest, most powerful person in the world, and the only way they can keep their campaign promises is to rascasse -- is to ask us, the people that voted for them, to make them happen. you voted for me to do this? of one promised to do this? of they have to who is making did not happen -- they have to spell out who is making it not happen. come down to talk to these people and somehow make it happen. get us energized to make sure that there presidency fulfills a campaign promise. and i kind of blame the media a little bit for not making that happen. host: a couple of new governors taking office yesterday on new year's day. governor snyder, rick snyder in michigan, becoming the 48th governor there. host: also, new york state, andrew cuomo is the new governor. challenge on day one. host: "the la times" talks this morning about the outgoing governor, arnold schwarzenegger. you can read that there today. john, republican. what would surprise you most? caller: if the republicans in office took the time to explain to federal and government workers that the people can no longer afford to pay them more money than they received. when you figure that the problem is government, everyone does not want to take a risk. the government lives well at our expense. 1/5 not because of the rich or these other things. if they take the time to explain to them that they have a choice, take a pay cut or take a hike. this will not be like greece, the other parts of europe falling apart because the government has run out of private sector money to pay these government sector employees so much money to live well at our expense. host: the caller mentioned pay cuts. from "the boston globe," this story -- host: you can also read a story in "the new york times" today about public workers and outrage over the union benefits issue. host: also, one more item from "the new york times" is a florida freshman congressman featured in the magazine section. host: we are going to idaho now. bob, are you there? on the line for democrats, bob? are you there? let's go to new rochelle, new york. is this joseph? caller: yes. host: good morning. caller: the biggest surprise would be the government turning into a government of the people, by the people, for the people. we have disappeared. host: how as that happened? caller: instead of a lame duck congress we have a lame brained congress. they did what they wanted to do no matter the results of the election. host: daniel, independent line. what would surprise you the most this year. caller: but i have to say as an answer to your question to your last caller, the biggest surprise across the board of voters politically getting supplies would be people learning what progressives are. that would solve the problem. host: our updated supreme court documentary will air this evening. -- it will air at 6:30 p.m. on this network, this evening. you can see places available only to the justices and their staff, hearing from all left most recent supreme court -- hearing from all of the most recent supreme court justices. a lot of, democratic line, susan, good morning. caller: one thing that surprised me, when i heard john boehner say that he would take a 5% decrease in pay. i knew that if you would say that it would be a big tax break for the wealthy. just watch. when he wanted to give the people unemployment checks that would help them through the holidays he said that there had to be tests -- tax breaks for the wealthy. he is amongst the wealthy. that 5% that he said he is taking as a decrease in pay, he will lead to it. look at how much he will make on taxes and savings. host: from "politico" they have questions as well. one of the first ones that they ask is -- what will barack obama say in the state of the union? host: one more question that they ask is -- when and where reelect start? we le the vice-president has already been s. asked. host: they also ask the question -- is sarah palin going to run? they have their top 10 questions. last couple of calls on what would surprise you most this year. bob, florida. caller: good morning. one of the greatest things that would surprise me would be an audit of the federal reserve. that is what i think. host: what do you want to know? caller: i want to know how they spend the money that the people of this country have never really authorized. and how they print the money. and why one person can have so much power over the people. host fl. the host self -- host: jimbo, final word. caller: is people in congress would stop being hypocrites. stop calling for less government dollarsutting billions o into sending all of our military overseas. kowtowing to the corporate americans while the rest of the regular americans suffer. host: lots more to talk about this morning as we look ahead to the restart of washington for 2011. coming up in 45 minutes we will have a discussion on the state of homeland security. next, a discussion on president obama and the political left. we will be back with linda feldmann of "the christian science monitor" with your calls. ♪ >> former journalist for the united nations, phyllis bennis is the author of eight books, including her latest on ending the war in afghanistan. that is the day at noon eastern on c-span 2. watch previous programs at booktv.org. >> this weekend on c-span 3 on american history television, the recent discovery and excavation of 200 year-old slave quarters. and they never before televised oral history on the work of a caucus for working women. then, richard and steven ford share their memories about the only man to be president and vice president of the united states without being elected. you can press the alert button to have the schedule be mailed to you. >> you are watching c-span. every morning it is "washington journal." connecting you with policymakers and journalists. during the week, watch the u.s. house. every week night, congressional hearings and policy forms. also, oral arguments. saturday and sunday, " communicators," "q&a," and it is all able to be searched for an hour c-span video library. a public service created by america's cable companies period. >> "washington journal" continues. host: our guest now is linda feldmann, who recently wrote about a rift between president obama and the left in congress. here is the headline. first, remind us of where the president has been since he was an elected -- since he was elected guest: there were very high expectations from the people of the left and in the middle. he has had a series of disappointments, beginning with health care reform in which he dealt the way the public option before a buzz on the table. the big complaint about him is that he concedes stuff that is very important to them and does not fight for that. it is as much process as content. fast-forward to recently, the extension of the bush tax cuts. one of his most repeated campaign comments was not allowing the tax cuts for the wealthy to continue. of course, he went along with that with the senate minority leader. that really caused a big blowup. host: headline writers are calling this a rift. will it hurt the president? caller: cuff i think it might have been -- caller: -- guest: i think it might have been one month ago, polls showing that liberals and progressives being happy with obama. 78% of democrats would like to see him reelected. that is very high. he is better off overall than bill clinton and ronald reagan were at this point in their presidencies. host: the numbers are pointed out here on the screen, this is a cnn research poll. 78% of democrats say that he should be nominated again. 19% wanted a different candidate. does he look safe? caller: he looks pretty good. but the blow up that took place last month over the bush tax cuts, it was an important moment. some people called it a sister soldier moment. referencing bill clinton in 1992, when he pushed back against comments made by a rapper, positioning himself in the center. obama attempting to position himself with the incoming house. the politics of this are tricky. , saying thathappy of you cannot take us for granted. we turn out for you 1/2. if they do not work hard for him in 2012, it will be difficult. host: here is a quote from your piece, -- guest: i doubt that obama read my article, but in his press conference he referred to lines in the sand. he got upset and agitated. it was interesting to see him not be so aloof, getting upset and agitated. the point is that he is facing a new political scene and the progressives know this. what they were talking about in the lame duck was continuing forward in the next congress, working with republicans and john boehner, mitch mcconnell, compromising allover. that they haves feel abandoned him and he is not bringing the hope and change that he promised, that they will feel unloved. host: what might be the first big test for the left as they look to see where president obama will position himself? guest: they will be looking closely at the state of the union address. there have been hints that he will really talk about the deficit. he has talked about the issuance of the report at the end of november, which he welcomed without endorsing, saying that he would incorporate the elements into his budget and policy going forward. this is something that republicans are obviously keen on. the tea party is very big on reining in the deficit. this is an area where obama might make crescent -- concessions. if but he is going to have to draw the line on programs that are important to him, liberals and democrats. host: the first call for linda feldmann comes from mike in california. good morning. caller: good morning. happy new year. host: same to you, sir. caller: i am struck at how sycophantic the left is. remember when there was the adoption of the neocon agenda? that was not a compromise, but it escalated the war in afghanistan and pakistan. they have covertly continued the war on constitutional rights at home, quietly reauthorize and the patriot act. it strikes me as well that the conservatives, also sycophantic during the george bush administration, quietly went along with his new entitlement program. his radical expansion of the federal government. his eviscerating of farm subsidy reforms. trading on steel tariffs. lots of other fiscally irresponsible measures that republicans basically put on. they enjoyed sycophantic support from the record -- from the conservatives. it understates the compliance of the left and how they are willing to go along with these foreign policy fiascos. these were not compromises with republicans. guest: afghanistan is a very important point. there is a lot of unhappiness there. supporters of obama for president would say that he campaigned on shifting the focus toward afghanistan and it is exactly what he has done. but the shift from beginning to withdraw in 2011 being on the table to release saying that we will be there for four more years is huge. democratic pollsters actually say that in terms of his support, afghanistan is the place to watch. there is great unhappiness over this and a continuation of many of the bush policies, like the patriot act in guantanamo. i am not sure that even that would be enough for obama to bring a pot -- primary challenge, but it is something he has to watch. host: you touched on the potential for a primary challenge. you wrote that "the ultimate hit from the left would be a primary challenge." host: a distinct possibility? guest: i do not think so. people that were talked about our mainstream progressives that are not way out of the left. the fact is that obama is largely popular among some liberals and addresses. you have to separate from the inside the beltway so-called professional left and the variety of people out in the country who are not happy with everything he has done, but they are happy with him. compromising, going ahead with done at the hotel -- don't act, don't tell at the end of the lame-duck to make his base happy. host: our guest also writes -- host: linda feldmann takes a call from william here in the district. caller: i consider myself a professional left, although i despise the deficit. the major flaw of obama is that he has never led anything in large in his life and i find myself hoping that he will give up his community organizer instinct and i would like a comment on that. but one question, people like general bradley that everyone likes -- people are afraid of leaders because they can be fired, her, various other things. far as i know, obama does not know he is a leader. no one in the entire world is truly afraid of him. because of that i want to know the degree of being aloof, as far as a community organizer were you want consensus -- host: let me jump in. what would the president need to do or say to become a strong leader? caller: there was the firing of general mcchrystal. but the military realizes that if they allowed their griping comments to be recorded, they would get fired anyways. but for instance has he ever done after a republican district to harm them, the way that old fashioned political leaders would have done? there have been no consequences for the party of no as far as i can see. host: -- guest: this is the big difference between obama and clinton in the primaries. she had more experience. what we have seen with obama as president is the real evolution on how to be president. he is or does, good that time management, but not so much at communication. i run a, called the great communicator during the campaign -- ironic, as he was called the great communicator during the campaign. i think that we will see more attempts to communicate more effectively. we saw that towards the end of the year, when he had two press conferences. one of them right before christmas. we are also seeing them getting better at using the power of government. we saw that during the effort to pass the extension of the tax cuts on unemployment benefits. they employed high-profile democrats from realm the country. in boxes were full. he has obviously learned how to reach across the aisle. the lame-duck session was an unusual time before the new reality coming on wednesday. he seemed pleased with himself on the bipartisanship that he was able to get. no one was really happy with everything in the tax cut extension, but they liked the way it was done here e.f. -- the way that it was done. host: we have about half of an hour left with our guest. spending some time on the news conference on the 22nd of december, the president talking about making those tough choices. >> can you explain the anger and outrage that democrats felt when the tax cut bill extended tax cuts not just for the middle class, but also for the wealthy? is that a divide the two are contributing to when you and the vice president talked about morally inappropriate tax cuts for the wealthy? >> look, the frustration that the people felt was frustration i shared. i said that before and i will probably say it again. i do not think that over the long run we can afford a series of tax breaks for people who are doing very well. and do not need it. we were doing well when bill clinton was in of this. they werethis is a point to be e will continue to have over the next couple of years. i guarantee you, as soon as the new congress is sworn in, we will have to have a conversation about how we have to balance our budget or get to a point that is sustainable when it comes to our deficit and our debt. it is going to require cutting programs that do not work. it also requires us to be honest about the things that we think are important. i want to repeat. compromise by definition means taking some things that you do not like. the overall package was the right one to ensure that the economy has the best possible chance to grow and create jobs. there is no better anti-economy program than an economy that is growing. if the economy started contracting then the choices we would have to make would be even tougher. host: what did you hear their there? guest: i think we will see conflict in gridlock m corporation. both the president and the republicans have something to prove. they have to show that they can govern and work together to get things done. there is the tea party contingent coming in. many are talking about how unhappy they already are. republicans may need to wait a little bit before they become critical. everyone is watching obama to see if he can pull a bill clinton. the world is different than it was several years ago. the previous caller talked about leadership. i think obama likes being where he is, to show another side of himself. >> here is the headline from the new york times. you can read more as the story is in today's edition. thanks for waiting. caller: like christian scientists [unintelligible] host: independent line, st. louis. caller: i am a simple man. i would like some clarity. when you say the left, do you mean communist? guest: i do not. thrown around terms and labels is unproductive. obama is not close to a socialist. host: sarasota, florida. a lot of troughs. let us try michigan. -- drop offs. let us try michigan. caller: do with talking about a challenge with a primary from the left. there is not pretty much going to be a substantial challenge from the left. i think a dark horse candidate could be if sarah palin does not run. i think the younger gop is caring for 2016. he is under 40. what are your thoughts on the gop contenders? guest: a lot of people are getting ready to run. it is hard to see how any of them is an obvious choice. they have the managerial group and then the populace such as sarah palin if she decides to run. paul was asking people for their predictions in 2011. mine is we cannot predict what is going to happen, especially for the race for the republican nomination. if the economy improves, it will be hard to defeat obama. the unemployment rate in particular. i do not think it will get too much walworth than 8% before the next election. without a strong republican that can take him on and make that case, the tea party is the moderate. host: explain the dynamic. democrats still run the senate, not the house. how does that affect the president's decision making and s?w he negotiates the the ta guest: people want to be listened to and heard. the democrats were unhappy because they were not consulted. they just wanted him to talk to them. they did not feel included. by not bringing them in until the latest moment in staging a debate on c-span and health care reform, that was too little too late. i think the challenge for obama is the community organizer, getting everybody talking about what needs to be done as opposed to working with just the republicans or just the democrats. host: mass., independent line. caller: i do not believe the white house is having a problem with the message they are attempting to deliver, but the policies that the american people do not like. before the last couple of years, republicans have been told to sit down and shut up. now they want to deal in a bipartisan way. my question is, why was he willing to do it before and now he is willing to deal in a bipartisan manner decks guest? guest: when obama was elected, he had huge democratic majorities. he had to take advantage of that or infuriate his base. washington is a very partisan place. obama was punished for clinton taking sides years ago. it is a new day. the republicans have some power but not a lot of pollen. -- power. obama will have to learn how to deal with this new reality. the republicans are facing big disappointments such as dealing with the health care reform. they will probably vote to repeal it, but obama will never sign that. it is somewhat symbolic and importance. there is the issue of the individual mandate in the courts. this issue is not dead. it will call into play more of obama as a leader. host: merrill lynch. -- maryland. caller: when i listen to the democrats, they talk about the rich republicans and how they are greedy. it is confusing. then only 1% of the people that are rich and to make over $250,000, and that leaves many that are like me that make far less than that and worst of republicans. we give to our church and our kids school. i have struggled my whole life to get my salary to where i make a good salary. but with property-tax and the state and local and federal income tax, i bring home less than 50% of what i earn. i have to start working on my retirement. i do not want to count on social security. i want to do for myself. 50%, i will take that amount of everything i have and give it over to other people so that people who do not have can live a better life. i am happy with that. if we are spending more than the money we are taking in, across the board, we need to prioritize and think about what we are spending of money on. guest: the debt is out of control. congress will have to raise the debt ceiling or we will go into default. cutting programs, cutting spending in line, we talk about what they can cut below eliminating earmarked. tea party movement, with tea standing for tax enough already. obama has talked about tax reform which would lower tax rates and eliminate deductions. we will have a lively conversation about taxes this year. host: tudjman bill clinton, the -- touching on bill clinton and how his time was different from obama. do you want to expand on that? guest: obama campaigned on a big sweeping seen, but he was not very specific about what he meant by that. many people were on board excited about who he was in moving us off of the eight years of george bush who was unpopular by the time he left office. the reality of who barack obama was as a leader and president was unclear. he has not been governing from the left. i have talked to my liberal friends about why they expected him to do what he said he would do and they said they wanted him to try. he cannot come in in institute government health care, but they want him to give it to the old college try. he has shown them that he can get a hold. -- rolled, and may become a moderate republican in the process. host: take a look at this. guest: exactly. a president is not a dictator. he cannot waive his want and say this is the way is going to be. [unintelligible] we look back on franklin roosevelt and these great liberal alliance, and he had to play politics. things were not quite as easy and set then as they look now. host: another point from one person. he says people cannot examine the precedents track record. pittsburgh, pa., a democrat. caller: good morning. i am astounded at the way in which the republican corporate lead in america has manipulated this president in surrendering all of the concepts that democrats elected him on. when you look at the recent polls for republicans, it is quite revealing about this is the real meat of their concerns. only 12% are concerned that the country will become financially conservative. put this in the context of what the president has done. the numbers are revealing. the tea party movement has been very quiet after the president handed out $900 billion to greedy, self-serving people who do not need the money. we need to correct the individual who talks about the country taking more and more. corporate welfare is over $500 billion a year. these are multi-billion corporations that do not need the money. guest: republicans have been bringing it up and have been very concerned. democrats as well. at the end of the congress, unfunded war/ote for an . the whole package was very expensive. it reveals something about both parties. when push comes to shove, had -- my question is when on both parties. to take this issue seriously? another issue -- when are both parties going to take this issue seriously? another issue is how obama will replace lawrence summers. if he brings in someone from wall street to replace him, there will be an outcry on the left. they think obama is already playing with wall street. geithner came from that word. in a way, he cannot win. he may have to do what works for him. host: independent caller from manchester. caller: i do not know where to start. with all due respect, you sound like a spokesperson to me. politics is one thing and labels mean thing to a lot of people. do not use the tea party label, because it is unproductive. the democrats know best and can manipulate the language. at some point, words have to mean things. people have to take responsibility for everything they do, including the president and democrats. everything has to start and stop. >> there is a new movement that started republicans and democrats are saying that at a certain point, you have to put the labels aside and come up with a situation -- a solution to deal with the problems. they have been useful and instructive. the real question for them will be when it comes time to make a deal, are they willing to go there or will they stick with the hard-line ideological point of view that people on the outside elected them to do certain things. there is room for great disappointment. in the world of predictions, i am not going to predict what will happen, but it will be tricky for those elected to keep their constituents have been while being players in congress. they can get marginalized if they do not play with the rules that they are supposed to. host: go to our website to watch several panels she has a master's from middlebury college. she was a political correspondent, a correspondent at the u. n. congress returns to session this wednesday. here is a speech from a former senator. here is what he says in the "new york times." guest: a senator from new mexico wants to fix that. fenty cannot start this until you get a certain votes in the senate. it was very frustrating for the democrats who had 60 votes for a while but failed to pass certain legislation. i read the column and the constitution says you cannot have a current congress governor by the rules of the previous congress. they should be able to vote on a new role with the majority in not two-thirds majority. people tend to think that will not happen. democrats are in favor of getting rid of the 60 vote requirement. they will see a day when the democrats are not in control of the senate and would have to deal with that threshold of 60 votes. host: next caller. caller: i read somewhere that the states will start passing laws for a person to be able to vote in their state, they have to prove eligibility. how would that affect the next collection? and mr. abercrombie in hawaii said he would promise that he long get president obama's form of birth certificate. guest: this is a longstanding issue on eligibility. from a historical perspective, it is a tricky thing. there were literacy tests which were struck down. i do not see it as being a big thing going forward. we will still air on the side of under checking people rather than over checking them. the new governor of hawaii, wants to put to better this issue of the birth certificate. he was a friend of the parents of president obama. it has made hawaii into a laughingstock that they cannot convince certain people that obama was born in hawaii. i am not sure that some will ever be convinced that obama is an american. i think he feels very strongly about this. host: democrat. caller: of a question about the origin of parties. makes these guys different from everybody else? who is backing these guys up? host: last call, independent line. caller: when teddy roosevelt took on the corporation's, when richard nixon signed the epa, was he a leftist? when lyndon johnson fought segregation, was he a leftist? we have examples in history of presidents who took on causes, and it seems to me using the word left is a major problem. using the word right is a major problem. what i see is a conservative, i do not know what conservatives are. can you please comment? guest: that is an excellent point, and it goes to labels. some say nixon was so little that he cannot win the republican nomination these days. some say that about ronald reagan. labels are. but the meaningless. when you are writing about politics, you have to use words. you want to come up with the best way to describe what people want. you are letting all kinds of things happen without regulation. now it comes in pro regulation. that is a long discussion. it is a good question. host: here is a recent piece about what we have been talking about. the white house correspondent. she works for the christian monitor. thanks. we will be speaking about the state of homeland security here in the united states. and we will have more of your calls when we come back. ♪ ♪ >> the original documentary on the supreme court has been updated on c-span. you will see places only available to the justices and their staff. learn about some of the recent developments. the supreme court, home to america's highest court. that is today at 6:30 p.m. eastern on c-span. >> the one thing we learned over the last 30 years is that many are not good at predicting what happens. >> robert sam wilson has written about politics, and social issues for over three decades. he will join us tonight on "q&a" on c-span. >> we provide coverage on politics, public affairs, american history. it is available on television, radio, online, and social networking site. we take c-span on the road with our digital bus and a local content vehicle, bringing resources to your community. washington your way, the c-span network. created by cable, provided as a public service. "washington journal" continues. host: a retired colonel in the air force and joins us now. this year it will be 10 years since 9/11. are we more secure than we were a decade ago? guest: in some areas we are, and in others, we are not. we have taken away their sanctuary in afghanistan and made it more difficult for them to transport money and travel, or do their training. we have made some successes. in other areas, i was the executive director that issued a report card several years ago. senator bob gramm and others and when it came to being prepared to respond to a biological attack, we gave america a failing grade. host: i want to put the phone numbers on the bottom of our screen as we talk about the state of homeland security. he studies at the center of weapons for mass destruction. as our guest pointed out, he is the director of an important commission. one of the headlines we wake up to this morning is officials pointed to al qaeda after an attack of christians in egypt. when you wake up and see headlines like this, what goes through your mind? guest: there has been an evolution of al qaeda in this decade. they have fractured into small, independent organizations. a lot of training is done over the internet. they provide some funds and inspiration to their writing. there is a monthly magazine out for al qaeda in english. some people say it is more difficult to prevent those. some say they cannot pull off a big attack like 9/11. in some cases, it would be difficult. on the other hand, we are concerned about the biological warfare. even these small cells do damage. host: what is the process of "?ving it to up toa an "a guest: this is going to take a commitment over a while. we think it is one of the greatest threats we will face. we have the areas where we need to focus efforts. one of the problems is a speaking to a senator from zero iowa and we were talking about the cleanup. the british-tested and rex weapons off an island in north in 43. it took them four decades to clean up that small island. that is why we are concerned. something very small could shut us down for a year as in the new york subway. the question i asked a senator is how much money did congress appropriate for the research of the epa in 2010? half of what they prayed for marine corps marching bands. is that the right priority that congress should have? priorities is one of the issues. any week leak and the chain can lead to failure. the good news about that -- i used to be a chairman and i understand we have to provide nuclear power to aircraft carriers, but when you buy one of those, that is all you get. we are talking about improvements in rapid diagnosis and disease. that is good for more america whether we have filed terrorism or not. this is small potatoes that could have a big impact on national security. host: here is a report that came out a year ago. our first call is from akron, ohio. caller: a want to ask about the powers of 9/11 seem to have been brought down by explosives. one tower that got hit by no lane -- who put the bombs in there? guest: many top engineers and scientists did a lot of research. i looked at these studies and talked to people that know a lot more than what i know. people like to talk about class. to enter your question, the commission did not include chemical weapons. that could be a real mess and the problem in a local area. it is not in the same class as a nuclear weapon or biological weapons. i have seen certain bonds used. they are very effective. when we talk about weapons of mass destruction, we talk about the things that can change the course of history. host: virginia. caller: my question is you are a professional warrior so can you explain what national security means? i hear some many descriptions of it. and where do i fall into the scheme of national security? what are you trying to do to protect me. what is your definition of national security? >> that is a wonderful question guest:. n. guest: it includes all of the elements that makes america safe and secure. i heard the former deputy secretary recently give a speech. he said our economy is the greatest threat we face because we are borrowing every day from china. how people view us from around the world. how strong a solitary. there are many elements to that. we cannot depend on the government to do everything for us. a hurricane hit florida in number of years ago. i was watching it on cable news. many tv crews went up to one of set woman. she had a couple of days of advance warning a hurricane was coming. why was she out of drinking water? a few days later, i spoke with a mayor of the city and she was embarrassed by the news report. she said walmart was down the road, 1 mile, and they had water. we cannot depend on the government to do everything. one of the biggest terms we talk about in all homeland security is resilience. whether we are talking about tornadoes or hurricanes or earthquakes for possible terrorism, we have a responsibility to have everything we need to have in our home as a citizen. host: our guest has a long military career. he is also author of a book. remind us of what your message is in your book. guest: chapter 9 is all about what you should do for your family and what they need. too many people asked the wrong questions. in the past couple of years, they asked the wrong questions. what do we need to do to prevent al qaeda from smuggling a nuclear weapon into the united states. that is the wrong question. that is why we waste a lot of money. if they had a nuclear weapon, our detectors will not seek it. if you had a nuclear weapon and you were a terrorist, would you risk it in a shipping container? you will charter an airplane can bring your own boat. if you set it off mid ocean or afghanistan, that is a game changer so that is the wrong question. the right question is how do we prevent al qaeda from becoming a nuclear power. this is simple, not easy. they cannot make plutonium. so we have to walk down that loose material out there. there is a threat reduction program. we want to get control of that loosed, nuclear material. if we do that, there'll be no nuclear terrorists. we need to ask the right questions. as i walked in the door of a building, there was a radiological detector outside of the door. iten a nuclear weapon close is too late to the tactics. host: maryland. caller: [unintelligible] building seven was a 47 story building with minor damage. it was a couple of hundreds of yards away from the twin towers. why was the mastermind of 9/11 at a sit-down dinner with bigwigs several months after 9/11? guest: we still have a group of people of their debt believe that the u.s. government was behind 9/11. i think that is tragic to the people that died that day. that is part of the result of the internet. i have taken the time to read the material to look at the website and movies that have been produced, and they are garbage. this bothers me, because there are people that listen to this garbage. it is not the truth. do the time to do the research. there is interesting speculation. there are all kinds of conspiracy theories about jfk. there should be no conspiracy theories about 9/11. i have seen all kinds of video tape and yet, there is still all of this stuff out there. 9/11 was not done by the u.s. government. host: next caller. caller: i think obama lost the election because of national security, but eric holder trying to soothe arizona. i think they were trying to put muslims that did the ninth session 11 stuff, they put them right down there. guest: let us address the issue of border security in maryland. i did my research and nothing much has changed since then. you cannot have a secure nation unless you have secure borders. part of the issue is that the american people cannot decide what they want. go to fast food restaurants in the d.c. area. america cannot seem to decide what they want. it is virtually impossible to enforce the border at the border. they said it would take more troops than we have had in iraq. we cannot afford to do that. people come from mexico and other countries because they want a better standard of living. if we had means to identify you when you tried to get a job for a welfare check or required some sort of identification, but we -- if we enforce the border, that would stop the flow, because if people could not hit a job or a welfare check, they would not come here. we have to deal with that at the place of them women. host: democrats line. are you there? let us try massachusetts. caller: i would like to ask why are we utilizing our army reservists and national guard to go to these other countries when we can have them for homeland security? we are paying the mining and dell and extra agency is involved and the country is going broke using and we are not utilizing our army like we should be. guest: i cannot agree with you more. i have complained about this for a long time. they sang one of the former chief of staff of the armor -- army is fine some. i think this has been a problem. we have abused our reserve component. that is more than a decade. we were calling on our national guard far too much. a lot of the louisiana national guard was deployed overseas for katrina. this is the perfect organization to have in response for disasters. we have abused them. we cannot continue with that. host: homeland security to add staff in afghanistan. some two-day visits. adding as many as 54 agents to the current contingent. what does that mean to you? guest: an interagency effort. it has the largest budget in town. the president's and members of congress have been trying to get other agencies involved. that border between afghanistan and pakistan is virtually and defensible. another was about these new air force vehicles. i have been following this story for a while. are we going to be using them for homeland security? there is one camera that is a very limited view. these new ones have nine cameras and use a different system where they can look at an entire city at once. they send the information down to all kinds of sensors and people looking at it. if we had a major disaster in america along a fault line for some market -- some large terrorist activity, widom 3 use these vehicles to provide the situational awareness that we need? the answer i received was that is for military stuff. homeland security is my first priority. technology should play a huge role in protecting america after disasters. host: republican line. caller: i have a comment about the previous callers regarding theories of 9/11. these people are morons. i wish they would just stop. having said that, i find it amazing about what has not happened about how the we liggett the borders. i have had different opinions on its. i think we can secure the border, and we should. i could be wrong, we need to do a better job. i find it amazing that the worst has not happened. i have been a hands on worker all my life. i do my normal job around a lot of different chemicals. my common knowledge of the things i could do if i were a crazy person makes me stop and wonder how has this not happened already? i find it amazing. there must be a lot more going on within the homeland security and the intelligence community that we just do not hear about. thanks. guest: are we more secure or less secure? in some areas, we are more secure. as i said in my opening answer is that we have done a lot of things. because we are a free and open society, we will remain vulnerable. you said, we can secure the border. you are right. we cannot afford it. the cost of securing it is more than what we can pay. the last time i flew on a specific helicopter, we have a route that went straight through the capital here. capitol here. the last time i was a passenger? clear, with your background. guest: i tell you, i understand the frustration. i have a problem with the pat downs. what what my daughters to go through that new procedure? on the other hand, i do not have a better answer. and i and have not heard anyone come up with one. there was a man in his underwear had enough explosives to bring down an airliner there was only 13 ounces of explosives to bringing down pan am 103. al qaeda seems to have a fascination with airlines. they have for decades, they understand how critical it is to our economy. it is very difficult. i am a frequent traveler. i think that the gsa does a pretty good job. i have spent a lot of time with the former administrator. i appreciate the job. i understand a compromise between convenience and security. when you fly airplanes around the world as a united states of america on the side, you start to understand security. taking off your shoes in your coat seems annoying, but if it was your responsibility to protect the airlines of america and the people flying on them every day, you would understand that it is not simply something for late night comedians to make jokes about. host: there was a headline from "the washington post" talking about the nation's biggest airports hiring private firms. orlando has approved the change and are looking for a contractor. the question, some say, this would be more efficient approach. should the government be in charge? guest: the government should be in charge of standards, but sometimes the private sector can do better than the government. in indiana they turned over the private -- turned over the department of motor vehicles to the private sector. but -- they haven't 8 minute wait time and are saving money. that is not the same in virginia. the government sets standards in some time as the private sector can operate more efficiently. host: the airways were shut down for a brief time yesterday in the capital, there was a 30 minute shutdown of the house and senate because there was not improper frequency used by the pilot secured you hear stories like that with the mindset and reaction here in tel. guest: absolutely. there are a lot of people on alert around here for things like that. this is not an area that a private pilot should be flying in unless they know exactly what they're doing. host: texas, carol, a democrat. good morning. caller: terms like national security, the government allowing passengers and people from other countries traveling back and forth, have they secured our nation with other countries? frequently flying in and out of the country. why can our government not do this? would that not secure our homeland? host: did you get that? guest: i had a hard time hearing, but one thing i did get, other countries trust you to leave the country on time. it is a serious problem and i know the folks at homeland security and looking at that. people come here and student visas and stay here forever. we have to have a better system. we have made improvements on screening who comes into the country, but we do not have a very good system for finding out how long they have overstayed their visit. host: alabama, diane, good morning. caller: i have a comment about the 9/11 conspiracy. i do not think that the government had anything to do with promoting or allowing that, but they stood by and knew that there was something. destruction comes in all forms. low manufacturing got -- jobs, lower manufacturing jobs. in the united states we cannot feed, clothe, or protect ourselves. now the government wants to put our troops on the mexican side of the border? financially that is a reason. if you are going to put our money and people on the border, they need to be on this side. promoting economic wealth. our military is over there supporting housing, food, clothing. we need our borders protected, gentlemen. we are an independent nation. people, from all over the world because we are an independent nation of laws. guest: you make some very good points. jobs are a very important part of national security. we cannot have a powerful military or be a nation that does good things around the world without having a strong economy here. you said that we knew about not -- that we knew about 9/11. george tenet said that all the lights were blinking red in the summer of 2001. we knew that something was going happen, but we did not know where or when. it is not like television or hollywood during if you do not know where or when something will happen, the borders -- i agree about the southern border. even though i say that we cannot afford to simply build a wall. but talking to the head of homeland security for the state of texas, it was very interesting. he was a retired agent. i cannot think of his name right now, but he said they did not worry very much about al qaeda, they worry more about the dumping -- the drug gangs. they have gunfights with fully automated weapons that outgunned local law enforcement. i am very worried about how this drug money along the borders is corrupting state and local officials. there is a term they use down there called silver or lead. you either take the bribe or you are killed. we are very concerned about that along the border. a critical homeland security issue. i do know anything about putting u.s. troops on the mexican side of the border. i have heard no talk of putting u.s. troops in mexico. host: republican line, pennsylvania. caller: good morning, colonel. i have spent some time waiting for a top-secret clearance to go to alaska. my question is a two-part question. the first is the second amendment and national security and how new governors fit into that. mr. cuomo tried to run the united states out of business. how will that tie together? guest: second amendment? that is a hot button issue this morning. i love talking about the constitution but i will not be getting into a debate about the second amendment. i will say that in chapter 9 of my book i have in their everything that she should have in your home to make your family ready and everything. one thing that you will not find in my book -- i have guns at home. i was raised around them. i also say that if you have not been trained in how to properly use a gun, you should not go out and buy one here you are more of a threat to your family. when you see how many guns -- in washington, d.c. it is illegal to own one and only criminals have them. we used to have the highest murder rate in town. a properly prepare home has a gun in my mind. host: many congressional leaders called for a 100% change in the initiative. your thoughts? guest: i am hoping that the new congress will fix the issue. . what we have to use his intelligence information to determine which containers we should be looking at. we know what country it is coming from. we know who has touched it. big countries sending to wal- mart. we know how they are all monitored. as opposed to something coming out of yemen on a small ship that we do not know anything about. it is supposed to be called risk-management. 100% inspection takes the risk management out of the. i hope that we move away from that. it will cause a problem with industry, slowing things delicate. others call it security theater, wasting money on things that could keep us safer. that scanner outside the building over there does nothing for you to. -- nothing for you. host: what is your take on wikileaks? guest: i hope somebody leaks the book that he is writing. but we saw on 9/11 and in the commission report there were all of these pillow fights. all of these different departments did not want to share. so, we miss things. men learning how to fly airplanes and flying -- paying only cash. we did not connect the dots. sometimes in government we overreact. put them in a big system. what we did not look out for was who could go in to look at it. there are private sector companies where if you went into one of their servers and started to download large volumes of information, it would set off a warning. maybe you would have a good reason to do with, but at least someone would be checking. now we have to find a happy medium. i hope we do not start to stovepipe everything again, but this information needs to be in a common database. we need to have a common thread available. there are systems in the private sector that will allow that. host: to the big picture, this question comes from twitter. guest: they spent about $400,000 pulling off 9/11. how many trillion have we spent since then democrats -- since then? if we overreact and do stupid things we will be no more secure and they will secure in their strategy. host: david, l.i.. caller: with all due respect, i have to challenge you on the 9/11 conspiracy theories. i think that if you follow the money, you will find the true for. i am not saying that the military had anything to do with destruction of towers, but i think that there were special interests behind the scene that did not want to see the demise of the military-industrial complex. there was supposed to be a peace dividend during the collapse of the soviet union. you have the recession of military spending or the need for such because there is no need for at. they needed a new enemy. look at the people who have profited. halliburton, lockheed martin. all of these defense contractors in the lurch because of the collapse of the soviet union. they needed a new enemy. this is what we allowed as american people. we allowed dick cheney, george bush, and all of the baggage that they carried into office to take over our government and the biggest military industrial complex and destroy an innocent society. i do not think that the investigation that took place -- the 9/11 commission, and regionally headed by henry kissinger. because of a conflict of interest he was taken off the commission. if you look at fred fielding and the white house counsel, he took the place of harry admirers, who was not appointed. he sat on the commission, as well as his law firm representing a gentleman that embezzled in my community here on long island. all of the records pertaining to the case were in building #7, which happened to be farther away from the twin towers. host: that is a lot to respond to. guest: as far as the 9/11 conspiracy, it is clear that 19 hijackers were the people behind it. he talked about eisenhower and the military-industrial complex, he was spot on when he talked about that in his speech. i have borrowed from that and referred to the homeland security industrial index. some of the crazy ideas that they come up with in that building, some of the people that work on k street are very profit motivated by an funding their projects. what happens is a lot of money gets wasted in your family is not any more secure because they wind up asking the wrong questions. it is definitely a problem since eisenhower talked about it. but 9/11 was done by al qaeda and 19 men that flew airplanes into those buildings and killed americans. host: joseph, welcome. caller: first of all, colonel, i would like to thank you for the service to the country. guest: thank you. it was an honor. caller: virgil -- earlier you mentioned the use uav's in the case of a natural disaster. do you think that would cause alarm in the public? d think that they would perhaps in the future be used for police work on a city to city basis? are we looking forward to them flying over the country? guest: that is a wonderful question. it is a serious issue. when we talk about homeland security there are many of issues of privacy that we are used to hearing about in the united states. what we created after 9/11, in states like california we had federal agents with state and local coming together to share that information. there are great stories about how that has worked. they prevented a serious attack in los angeles because the information came in to the fusion center. they talked about using the assets for gang violence. drugs. serious problems. deadbeat dads? where do you draw the line? it is the kind of thing that should be debated by believe, from my military background, not looking at the privacy issues and that kind of stuff, those new vehicles would be fabulous in providing such aware -- says a note -- situational awareness, saving lives and profit. but your question is very good, what will the american public think? where do we draw the line? it must be presented as a life- saving issue. host: richard, md., you get the last word. caller: good morning, general. guest: kernel. caller: sorry, colonel. thank you for your service, definitely. people talking about the government being to blame for 9/11, first of all it takes time to get the white house staff in there to do the job. clinton was warned many times about the plot. p said it was his job for five years during the clinton administration. the democrats stephanie want to holler that it is a conspiracy, yet they do not want a border patrol or minutemen on the border or anyone doing anything to protect this country. if we are invaded by china tomorrow, they are our enemy but any other time we do not need the military. guest: this is why homeland security is such a difficult challenge. it is one of the most difficult faced by the nation because of all of these issues. fighting wars overseas is different. now we have all these issues about privacy and civil liberties. if we caught osama bin laden, should he be read his rights? we have not solve that issue. the public health today is an important national security organization. the food and drug administration, today the fda is as important to national security as the u.s. army. there are many new challenges that we have and hopefully in the new year we will figure it out. host: remind us, when does the next one come out? guest: the third week of october of 2011, the 10th anniversary of when that building was closed because of anthrax contamination. we are going to look at those things here on this chart. we are not going to look all of the issues from the report. we are going to focus on america's preparedness to respond to attack from a biological weapon. we are going to have some very distinguished academics working on this and we will issue that report card and i am sure that the senators will be sitting here in the third week to tell the nation how it came out. host: our guest has been to colonel randall larsen, ceo for the center of the study of weapons of mass destruction. thank you for your insight this morning. we will take another short time out. we have 35 minutes left in this edition of "of washington journal." when we come back we will talk about temporary workers in the united states. those numbers are way out. we will talk about what that means -- what that means and ichter thoughts. -- get your thoughts . ♪ ♪ >> on "in depth" later today, phyllis bennis, talking about her latest book, "ending the war in afghanistan." today at noon eastern on c-span 2. what previous programs booktv.org, where you can find the entire weekend schedule. >> the original c-span documentary on the supreme court has been updated. today you will see the grand public places and those available only two justices and their staff, as well as how the court works. also, learn about some of the court's recent developments. the supreme court, home to america as highest court, airing for the first time in high- definition today at 6:30 eastern on c-span. >> maturity in a time of pettiness. leadership in a time of uncertainty. that is what the nation asks of the u.s. senate. that is what this office demands of each that serve. >> search for a farewell speeches in here from retiring senators on the c-span video library, with every c-span program since 1987. all of it all and free. washington, your way. >> "washington journal" continues. host: as we wrap up the program and start a new year we want to let you know about the statistically huge rise of temporary workers in this country. what got our attention was this piece from "the new york times." "weighing costs, companies favor temporary help." we will leave the phone numbers on the bottom of the screen. we want to start by giving you some detail here. they write -- host: some of the details that we wanted to point out, november of the past year temporary jobs accounted for 80% of these private sector jobs that were added. that is for all of last year, 2010. host: we wanted to focus on at 26.2% figure their. your reaction to these numbers, the rise in temporary workers. if you are a temporary worker, we certainly want to hear from you. here are the numbers. for democrats, 202-737-0002. for republicans, 202-737-0001. for independents, 202-628-0205. there is a separate line for temporary workers, 202-628-0184. we would appreciate hearing about your situation. another excerpt from the piece from "the new york times." host: texas, independent line. what do you make of this huge rise in temporary workers around the country? caller: is the result of globalization and multinational corporations. they want to bring down the standard of living in the united states to levels in other parts of the world. multinational corporations that pay for our elections and an elected officials will not stop until we are there. we have seen citizens from 10% of the citizenry in mexico living and trying to work in the united states simply because they are the aristocracy in mexico. they will not share to create a middle class with their folks, so they come here. it is very sad that we have the highest percentage of income equality in the industrial countries. when we set up japan after world war ii, they had the lowest discrepancy of income inequality. host: tennessee is on the line. democratic caller. the rise in temporary workers as opposed to permit workers, if you could call them that. what do you make of it? guest: it is -- caller: it is by design. remember the lines of food from the 1920's? that is the future of this country. the government is doing everything it can to regulate our food and our jobs. they are destroying our jobs and our way of life. fe decor -- there are taking our freedom away at every chance. we have body scanning machines in the air ford's stamping why not on the borders? the borders are wide open -- wide open. the previous show, they were talking about chemicals and anyone at any time could make a weapon, but average americans are not going to do that. the borders are open and crazy people are coming in. this is all done by design. host: republican caller, georgetown, roy? caller: i work in aviation. they would bring in people from africa, south america, all over the world. these people work for $8 per hour. getting about $25 per hour taxable. this is hurting the tax base in the state and federal government. the ones that are not here legally were able to draw unemployment, putting them at a lower rate than unemployment, paying these companies that bring them in. they are paying these people like $45 per hour. host: more information out there from the keys from "the new york times." host: south carolina, in the pan and line. -- independent line. caller: thank you so much for c- span. for those callers that never got in except at one time, keep trying. i get in every time i have a common. -- comment. as far as the temporary agency, i am not call a conspiracy theorist but i think they have affected our economy tremendously. now with the mortgage crisis and credit card crisis, it will be those people who have credit problems like myself, due to medical emergency, that will be affected. it will be placed in a chamber for jobs. i am an intelligent person that enjoys working with people and i have experience in many different fields. but these agencies are destroying this country. another point before you let me go. in this country we drug test. if people will find out how long marijuana should stay in the system, as well as harder drugs, we would question our sanity in this country. thank you very much and have a happy new year. host: u.s. well. tampa, florida. this rise of temporary workers. 26.2% of all jobs added by the private sector. caller: i think that small business is the backbone of this country. if you look at small businesses, statistically by assume they do not live day to day on credit loans. basically in 2008 they gave the banks a boatload of money so that they could ramp up commodities prices across the board. small businesses not being publicly traded if you were a small business, why would to borrow money? i guess the right now some people would say that credit is so cheap you might as well barrault and tried to get hard assets before that all cresses, but looking at the economic situation things do not look like they will get better. temporary workers seem very pertinent right now. host: jacksonville, bernard, you say you are a temporary worker? what kind of work are you doing and how temporary is it? caller: right now driving a truck and it is very temporary. overtime insurance, not even 30 hours, they will work me on holidays because they just pay me regular pay. no time and half. i work like that because i can get the work. no insurance, no overtime. no time in the half. when other people do not want to work, that is what i get work. host: what are the prospects of a permanent job? caller: a lot of people working, hispanics and foreign people, i do not know if they're working for less, but there is no overtime work time and half. no extra holiday. if you have time and a half or something like that, nothing like that for part-time workers. thank you, i will not hold you up. host: this is a response to the fees from "the new york times" that we found in "the atlantic." host: derek, republican color, -- caller, you are on the air. i do not think that we have him. let's try michelle from richmond, virginia. are you there? caller: i wanted to say that lawyers are being treated much in the same way as other temporary workers. in virginia there is no overtime. the hours are long and assignment are short. from where i am sitting this is becoming a structural part of the industry says that larger law firms hire a large number of attorneys at a time when there are many documents that need to be reviewed. hiring with the goal of firing at the first possible moment when they can reduce costs and move forward. host: did you work for a firm them of caller: i worked for the public interest -- the to work for a firm? caller: i worked for a public interest company for some time. my goal is to review these certifications and hopefully find a permanent job, but what i am doing, and what really bothers me is very young, extremely bright and competent lawyers on the front end of their careers. i think that there is something wrong with that. we are not working for small businesses. we are working for large and well-capitalized firms. host: we had a truck driver that called in that said there is no benefits or overtime. as an attorney, how is the money? how is your situation? caller: in virginia the rates are $22 per hour, up to $28 per hour. phil because the tenure is on certain -- i was asked to work a project the day after thanksgiving, saturday, sunday, and monday. i did not take it because of other plans, but what he is saying, what the truck driver said felt true to meet. you have to come in and the firm may not have other employees to work on that project, but you might have temporary workers with a trotta staff something quickly. the money is not great. i just feel that i think i am going to be ok. psychologically in tough and getting tougher. host: what does this mean structurally? some of the writing calls this a permanent condition. host: in terms of the legal field, large clients are putting a squeeze on a law firm. they are trying to adjust their structure to deliver the product at the lowest price point. meaning that they are not able to hire professionals at a professional race and it is a supply and demand issue. many law firms turn out large numbers of graduates and i do not think there is a market for them to find decent and professional career tracks. host: thank you for spending time with us. we want to get on to other viewers, but if you are a temporary employee we definitely want to hear your story. eric, baltimore. caller: i was born here in 1932. black american, a retired physician. i was born in the depression. i thought that i would not die in the depression but rather an economic upturn. but the way things are going i might die in a depression. this sort of thing, a temporary worker conditions have existed in baltimore city for years. i have seen our neighborhoods be outsourced, all of the jobs going to the counties and they smiled about it. the black population has not only been outsourced, but in sourced. if they talk about small businesses helping, they come in and take over the business. now even africans are coming in. i am not a racist. ibm equal opportunity and i do not think ted any racial group appreciates what they have in this world. you must solve this problem because otherwise we will deteriorated into a drug infested city like we have with single parents. i hope that you should develop a concept of citizens with guests on your program and we do not have enough time to tell you the history of everything going on. the young people are beginning to see what we have known for years and it is time to stop. host: 50 more minutes of this. if you miss the the numbers, we can put them on the screen again for you. "the new york times reported -- "the new york times" reported in november there were 15,000 private-sector jobs created, 80% for temporary jobs. 26% of all jobs last year. you can see that figure for the whole of last year there, considerably higher than recent decades. athens, alabama, jennifer, good morning. caller: many of the new hires in the postal service are coming in as temporary employees. becoming a full-time carrier will take me another eight years. everyone coming in is making half of the pay that i would make elf for probably the same work. it is not just affecting small businesses, but the big government is doing it as well. host: many folks are looking ahead to 2011. in the papers today, the chief economist at moody's called for the economy to gain traction in the new year. host: pennsylvania, dominick, hello. caller: we are seeing the future of america. with the increase in temporary jobs. this is the future of the united states because of the regulation, outsourcing, and both political parties selling out the middle class in this country. controlling large corporations, they do nothing for the people. really, that is all i have to say. host: north carolina with another temporary employee. thomas? caller: good morning. i wanted to make a comment, i am in my 40's and have been in the workforce since i was 16 years old or 17 years old. temporary services have been around almost the entire time. the thing i have noticed over the years, when they first started they were short term. i have noticed over the last several years that they have become longer and longer and longer. host: what kind of work do you do temporarily now? caller: assembly work. this is something that has been there and slowly got bigger and bigger. i do not think it is going to change in the future. host: jim, democratic line. what do you make of these numbers? color-coded is an increasing exploitation of the labor force in this country. i have a neighbor next door who has been told that his job is going to be done in six months. what they do, they just lay him off for a while after they cut off the inventory and once it starts to deplete again they hire another group of temporary workers so that the cycle starts all over again. basically unless you learn to build a profitable base, even there the view from the top looks good. that is all i have to say. host: public workers are also facing outrage in the budget crisis. the headline from "the new york times." bay started it this way from new jersey. host: republican, ore., good morning. caller: is interesting to me that we have labor laws and we cannot make ones that say from this point of that we will only allow temporary workers. try going into a bank to get an auto loan or home loan and explain your temporary position and have secure you feel. it really makes it tough for anyone looking for work to find work and to succeed when it is not set up for early, the system is not set out for you to succeed in be profitable. i cannot think of a bank that will loan money on any temporary position. government positions on the steps, those are all temporary as well. host: patrick, pennsylvania. caller: by just completed a temporary projects for a major corporation. the thing with this project was all i was to help to send jobs over to china. it was upsetting for me that i had to give up my integrity as a worker to help get rid of jobs in this country. host: we will take several more calls before we wrap things up. after this program we will go into "newsmakers." our guest will be the mystery candidate for chairman of republican national committee. >> i am committed to building the coalition is necessary to advance my chairmanship knowing that what is important is new leadership. i have made a commitment to that him will stand by that. it should be interesting. it is an interesting process and i would ask your viewers to watch. i am sure that c-span will be covering the election. it is an interesting political step shot that is a bit different. people can stay in for as long as they like in the balloting. the person with the fewest votes does not necessarily drop off but there is usually a natural progression. people in the race that realize when they hit their own high water mark. generally that support can be shifted to other candidates. it is a fascinating process that i have followed over the last few decades. coast of that is a candidate for the chairman of the republican national committee, -- host: that is ann wagner, candidate for chairman of the republican national committee. we will broadcast that debate tomorrow at 1:00 p.m. eastern time. national press club, tomorrow, 1:00. melissa, in the and the line, hello. hello? you are on the air. caller: i think that there is a long-term positive effect to this. i think that pain can give perspective. unfortunately, not having health insurance and benefits being managed is a horrible thing for anyone. worrying about putting food on the table, we have talked a lot about that. but i think people are becoming more aware of their independence. they have to manage their money better. they are more aware of their citizenry in the sense that they are paying more attention to politics. when we are fat, dumb, and happy, we tend to experience -- focus more on the television rather than our officials. perhaps it is time the people learned to trade in multiple skills and develop their own business. these are important things. there might be a few years of pain, but i hope that people learn to develop multiple skills and come up with their own businesses. host: ronald, michigan, republican line. good morning. caller: one of the things i came across in 1995 was an article from the human resource institute talking about the future of the labour market. what they were talking about was the decline of jobs in that all employment was going to move to being transportable. this temporary labor thing is really something that has been in the works for a long time. as your previous callers mentioned. at this point it is just becoming more apparent in hell people are treating the employment. but temporary workers, i have known people that were temporary for 20 years. this is not anything new. when you looked at with, most companies have human resource departments, not employee relations. so that people are just viewed as resources like commodities and not human beings. host: one more look at the headlines this morning. congress and the economy. "la times," the gop with its own agenda. sunday denver post," big divisions to test the new congress. "houston chronicle" talks about federal power and how it relates to the houston area. "here is -- here is "the boston globe" this morning. legislature may see their pay getting cut. scott brown, calling him a life of the republican party, winning the award from the paper. one last call from denver. hello. what is your situation? caller: the temporary worker thing is because of obama care, which was really hillary care. if democrats had really wanted that, we would have voted for hillary. the colonel said that he had not heard of anything that would be good for air ford takoma if everyone went through the line instead of being molested, why not show them the dutch cartoon of allah? host: that was our last call on the rise in temporary workers. you can read more about it in "the new york times." more than one-quarter of all private-sector jobs created were temporary jobs. we want to remind you about our supreme court documentary. alito will only two justices and their staff, you can hear from all of the current justices and recent talk from elena kagan. we will take another look at recent developments in the court. tomorrow on "the washington journal" we have several guests. glenn frosh will join us along with andr

Related Keywords

Louisiana ,United States ,Alabama ,Chad ,Alexandria ,Al Iskandariyah ,Egypt ,Alaska ,China ,California ,New Mexico ,Russia ,Washington ,District Of Columbia ,Richmond ,Virginia ,Connecticut ,West Virginia ,Mexico ,Arizona ,Netherlands ,South Carolina ,Massachusetts ,Wyoming ,Iowa ,Altamont ,Maryland ,Hollywood ,Tehama ,Greece ,New York ,Japan ,Tampa ,Florida ,North Carolina ,Texas ,Afghanistan ,Philadelphia ,Pennsylvania ,Boston ,Indiana ,Michigan ,Denver ,Colorado ,Pakistan ,New Rochelle ,Iraq ,Tennessee ,New Jersey ,Idaho ,Houston ,Ohio ,Orlando ,Yemen ,Hawaii ,Americans ,America ,Mexican ,Egyptian ,Soviet ,Dutch ,American ,Arnold Schwarzenegger ,Lyndon Johnson ,Henry Kissinger ,Scott Brown ,Linda Feldmann ,Ronald Reagan ,Dick Pullman ,Randal Larsen ,Ford Takoma ,Robert Sam Wilson ,Los Angeles ,George Bush ,Andrew Cuomo ,Carl Berkeley ,Edward Rogers ,Ann Wagner ,Randall Larsen ,Barack Obama ,Al Qaeda ,Phyllis Bennis ,Dick Cheney ,Steven Ford ,Sarah Palin ,John Boehner ,Mitch Mcconnell ,Bob Gramm ,Richard Nixon ,Rick Snyder ,Elena Kagan ,John Mccain ,Franklin Roosevelt ,