republicans 202-737-0001, our independent line is 202-628- 0205. a good friday morning to you. for a quick review of some of the big stories coming out of this town, here are some of the headlines we have been watching here at c-span. for to vall, three days of oral arguments on the health care challenge. on capitol hill, the house gop passed its 2013 budget along party lines. also, a standstill over the transportation bill with the 90- day extension of it. president obama came back from south korea where he made headlines. yet today, he spoke about oil subsidies. on the campaign trail, mitt romney getting closer to the nomination. he secured the endorsement. we will talk about those later. mr. gingrich reorganized his campaign and made headlines over his comments about janitors and the work they do in washington, d.c. we are going to ask you which story you are following. help us out by not running through all of them. pick something that is of particular interest to you. give us a call or send us an e- mail. we will put all those addresses on the screen. let's take a quick look at how they are reporting on things. below that is a story from capitol hill -- highway funding outlook still cloudy. the stopgap measure that extends transportation funding for 90 days, averting an expiration of highway programs and setting up three more months of debate on the issue. below that, the ryan budget plan. we will look a little more at that. from the white house and the campaign for the presidency, all? campaign speech, romney tax returns. above that story, a story from mitt romney. that is our first 45 minutes. we'll show you more from each of these and take your phone calls. let's begin with capitol hill, where yet today the house after two days of contentious debate passed its bill, which is the budget blueprint plan for the gop. also, the big story out of capitol hill with the stalemate over the transportation bill. let's start listening to paul ryan, the head of the budget committee talking about his budget blueprint. >> i have been pretty candid. we, like anybody else, are looking at this and know that a debt crisis is in our future. we have to do something about that. that is what we are elected to do. this is what we are doing -- we are passing a budget to fix the problems. the president gave us for budget that ignored our fiscal problems. the senate is not even bothering to try. that is wrong. what we have done for the second year in a row is so americans explicitly how we plan to save this country from a future of debt and decline. how we are going to clean up our economic policy and get us back to work, how we will repair our safety net, and how we will make good on the promises that the government has made to seniors, which could become broken promises if we have a debt crisis. we want to get the debt and deficit under control. that is what we have done. people sent us here to lead. they do not send a steer to point fingers or duck responsibility. they send us here to make choices. we made a choice and we have shown how we will fix the problem. host: paul ryan talking about the budget blueprint. let's look at some of the reporting and then we will get your phone calls. more reporting on the budget. this is the "baltimore sun." some phone calls. then you will have comment on this story. we will like to hear what you are following this week. first up is a call from oklahoma, city. good morning. >> good morning. i have been following the supreme court oral arguments on the health care bill. i think it is a really fascinating time in america because what is happening is we are facing a fundamental shift in the relationship between people to the government. i think a lot of it is being demonstrated in these oral arguments in the health care debate. my point is this -- if the whole health care bill is struck down by the supreme court, i think the supreme court may have the opportunity to roll back a lot of the decisions that have allowed for the increased centralization of government over the past 70 years that has really done so much terrible damage to this country. host: our final segment is on the upcoming release by the census department of the 1940 census. we are going to show you an advance look but that and the portrait of a pint of america before world war ii and contrast that with some snapshots of how the country lost today. next is a call from west virginia. dan is an independent there. dan, you are on. i would like to make a few comments. obama has really really divided the people. al sharpton and some of those people on tv have tried every way in the world they can to get a race war started. it is going to happen. everyone i know is stockpiling ammo and weapons. they are getting ready for it. on this health care bill, george bush and that outfit passed a bill that gave at elderly people prescription drugs. that is the only benefit i know that 81 has got out of it so far. that is all i have to say. i wanted my answer off air. host: gop budget equals path to poverty. here is politicos' coverage of the budget story. ryan budget launces new battle. our next telephone call is from houston. this is a democrat there. good morning. caller: congratulations. i know exactly where the health care mandate is in the constitution. it is right next to where scalia -- right where there is death -- indefinite detention, torture -- nobody is being prosecuted for iraq by a reporter. george bush and thousands of people -- some were tortured and some were burned alive. host: next is a viewer in georgia. a republican. good morning. caller: congratulations on being named a had a c-span. you are terrific. i think the big news this week is marker rubio endorsing mitt romney. i think the republican ticket will be mitt romney. i think the republicans will take of the senate. the stock market will hit the all-time high. romney will be the greatest president. i am fired up, as you know. host: thank you for your call this morning. a couple of more house stories before we leave. here is the new york times on the extension of road funds -- the highway bill. let's listen to nancy pelosi as she comments about the transportation debate in the house of representatives. [video clip] >> what is happening here today is this initiative is a kick the can down the road -- my way or no way a bill -- this attitude is costing jobs. i am sure they have been reviewed. 41,000 in north carolina. 4500 in illinois. the list goes on and on. just because of the delay and the uncertainty injected into the system. guest: that is the democrat -- host: that is the democratic leader on the floor. of course, the debate will continue mr. ramirez sends us this tweet -- maria is an independent in new jersey. caller: my brother-in-law bought madison -- medicine. it has been customary far doctor to take the hit the cravaack oath. -- theocratic of. but the people ought to be very cautious. also, entitlements includes those to illegal aliens and giving automatic citizenship to anybody born here -- we are never going to have the money to insure the general welfare persistence of this country. i think we ought to look at all of those first. host: let's move on to our second big story of the week. that the supreme court. everyone watching this network knows the historic three days of oral arguments over when mark health care legislation -- 5.5 hours of argument before the court monday, today, and wednesday of this week. we are going to listen to a closing market -- closing argument made by the u.s. solicitor general arguing a point for the administration. [video clip] >> congress struggled with this for many years. they made a judgment. it's a judgment is one that is in conformity with what lots of experts fought the best complex of auctions -- options do have this problem. maybe they're right. maybe they were not. but this is something about which the people of the united states can deliberate and then vote. if they think it needs to be changed, they can change it. with profound respect for the court's obligation to ensure the federal government remains a government in balance -- this is not the case in any of its aspects to call that into question. this is a judgment of policy with the democratically accountable practice of this country host. host: this morning the justices will gather in conference. that is a justices-only section. no one else except the justices allowed in that room. they will begin the process of hammering out and voting on their opinions. they will all know which direction this will go in today. the rest of us will not know until their opinions are filed. we expect to hear the outcome somewhere around june. here is some of the coverage. this is an editorial from the top of the washington post this morning they call it "a civics lesson." whatis a cartoonist's i on happened in the supreme court this week. this is from the usa today. it depicts -- this with our week in review. open phones. we are talking about the store's most interested to you. >> good morning. it brought you for taking my call. everybody has been talking about what our founding fathers did this and they did that, but nobody talked about why. what did the king of great britain do but they even had to do it. my copy of the declaration says the history of the king of great britain says most also and necessary for the public good. conflict of interest laws? insider-trading laws? monopoly laws? extortion laws? embezzlement laws? i think everybody need to get a copy of the declaration of independence and the constitution and read what great britain did that our founding fathers even had to do what they did. thank you very much. host: this is a comment on twitter about the debate over the budget -- next, a phone call from recalls, wisconsin. kelly is an independent. caller: i used to save my money call for friday morning to talk to brian, and you are certainly a great substitute. i think you are doing a wonderful job. a couple of things -- as far as the newspapers that you read, i am interested in wondering if you would consider including the capital times from madison considering we have a recall going on in wisconsin and maybe read some articles from their people as well. i really wanted to talk about gas prices. i read in the wall street journal and the st. paul pioneer press that gas prices would be approaching $5 a gallon by easter and the reason was because of huge exports we were making to central america and south america, diesel fuel and gasoline shipments to china. in fact, the oil companies exporting our gas caused the prices to go up according to the journal and according to the pioneer press. i took a elected missteps and bought myself a couple of battery power bicycles and a toyota corolla. i was forewarned about this. i am wondering when nobody else picked up on these articles. our oil companies are exported to much to china and south america. host: why did you decide on a parole instead of a prius? caller: the difference in gas mileage was not that great. i spent a lot of money on the bicycles. i save a lot of money buying a used car. host: we get pages from all of around the country. we will add the wisconsin newspaper so we can keep an eye on the interesting budget debate i in your state. it is days before wisconsin's gop primaries. are you watching that at all? caller: rick santorum will be right next door to me today. i am hobbled by recent foot surgery, so i will not be able to go see him. i will listen to what anybody have to say. i will not agree with a lot, but i am a friend of people like bernie sanders and dennis kucinich. i will listen to what any of the candidates say and if i had a chance, i would ask them a question. he could buy it -- he could be my potential leader. i want to know where he is coming from. host: next is from arizona. jim is a republican. caller: good morning. i am not really in doubt on obamacare, but if they start taking our freedom to choose from us, what will it lead to? everybody should have insurance. but the government was to give us an option more than what we have now, that is great. if you do not force it on us? -- if you do not force it on us, even better. host: from twitter, gary tweaks -- justice kennedy is the subject of a new york -- new york times news analysis today. appealing to a justice is a notion of liberty. later on he writes -- the goes on to talk about what the writer states about liberty and other arguments. let's listen to justice kennedy on tuesday at the talk about the individual mandate and the fundamental change between the relationship between the federal government. [video clip] our law has been at you do not have the duty to rescue someone if they are in danger. if a blind man walked in front of a car, you do not have to stop him. severe -- there evidence of their moral criticism of that role, but that is bitterly the role. here the government is saying that the federal government had the duty to tell an individual citizen that it must act. that is different from what we have had in previous cases. it changes the relationship of the federal government to the individual in a very fundamental way. host: that was justice anthony kennedy from day to. we are doing and we can review with open phones. next up is chicago. bob is a democrat there. good morning, bob. host: good morning, c-span. i just what the republicans to tell the supreme court and the gas company to have a fun time. i predicted that joe biden would be vice president. -- i mean, would be president. he is vice-president. i predict now that the republicans will be pretty much wiped out -- governorships and all -- in november. have your fun, but you cannot fool the american people. thank you, c-span, for allowing me to say this. host: on the washington post, a piece of about politics. the headline was where the gop be ready for a health care when here is a local look at the health care ruling. the alabama journal constitution makes it its lead story today. the georgia ankle -- >> up, a st. petersburg. this is shot, an independent. caller: my comment is the health care law and the issue is going on with it and how easily we pay for every man, woman, and child to have a health care. we have a so much and nation- building. how rich is iraq now? they have all of the oil revenues. it is at least half a trillion .ollars we pay for iraq, health care, the roads, the bridges. when does it stop? if this is not nation-building what we give away in foreign aid -- glossy it. host: monte writes on twitter about the supreme court judges ought -- nec is a phone call. this is oklahoma. it is jim, republican. caller: i have a few comments. ron paul is the only one with the true answer to solve every problem we have now. the obama administration is horrible for our country. we do not want socialism. the whole law will be out ruled because it is not constitutional. the government cannot mandate that we by one single thing. to do so would cut change this country forever. i am pretty sure it will be overturned. host: next up is from chicago. this is kathleen, a democrat. caller: good morning. the caller before you step the government cannot mandate that you buy one thing. we pay into medicare, but i do not want to get off of my subject. host: we are listening, kathleen. caller: i was under the pressure that these government officials make lost and passed them. what is the purpose of us electing senators, congressmen, and eighth president and when they do their job, if one party does not like what the but the sign into law, they take it to the supreme court. we do not select the supreme court to pass our laws. clarence thomas is getting thousands of dollars to lobby against the bill. scalia and thomas are going to dinner with the koch brothers. why are we tolerating this from the supreme court? they are not supposed to do this .ecause host caller: before i start out with our combat, i would like to say one thing to the recent caller from chicago. first of all, this was pushed through with democrats. one republican side it, so there were no checks and balances on it. someone out said in seven years the predicted joe biden. where was he in 2010 republicans swept through? i want to agree with justice kennedy. this whole health care thing is based on liberty and freedom, not about what someone feels. i think they will take the mandate out of there, but i want to emphasize -- it is just one battle. we have nullification coming and other things coming against obamacare. it will not succeed. thank you. host: birmingham, alabama up next. this is larry. he is a republican. caller: i perceive this administration as opposed to the lamp that you want more open .all in and shows host i was receiving maybe you had gained from degree of control. host: we have a producer and we decide what the questions will be on friday morning. we thought this would be the best way to go. you like open phones. caller: supreme court -- we have to get retirement in there. there are people out of control. they would not allow your cameras in there. u.s. pilots have to retire when they get older. even bishops in the roman catholic church have to tender their retirement at age 70. these people are hanging on. it is embarrassing. but can not release their power. we have to have a retirement age of four judges in general around the country. it is just not fair. host: our next stories come from the white house. the president began the week at a nuclear security summit in korea. he made some headlines out of that some comments that were caught off-microphone with the russian leader. the other story from the white house this week was late in the week when an event was held only in the rose garden to help set the stage for a senate vote on oil and gas prices. we are going to begin with the open-mic story. let's listen to us, it's been a global headlines. [video clip] >> this is my last election. after this election, i have more flexibility. host: the comment i heard all around the world. still resonating of the nation of the opinion pages this week. here is the wall street journal with the headline -- his take on this -- that is his opinion on this. this talk about farm policy. he concludes by saying i would not count on a second term. and it may not be one new thing after another -- the same damn thing over and over again -- what to do about iran. but the to some phone calls in this open phone review of the week. next up, green bay wisconsin. this is marshall, an independent. caller: good morning, c-span. i think the biggest story out of the week with diana lam's retirement. it -- we would not be listening to oral arguments from the supreme court or watching senate hearings or learning about hundreds of other topics or taking field trips from new england to portland, ore. thanks to history tv. i say congratulations to you and mr. kennedy. i hope ryan and his wife did to take that trip to west virginia and look at all the sites named after senator byrd. thank you for c-span. host: thank you very much on behalf of us who helped put the network together. let's take our next phone call from milwaukee. this is robert who is a democrat there. caller: hello, susan. i am an african-american. in reference to the constitution everybody is speaking of, i believe they said that african- americans or blacks were 3/5 human beings. now if we are going to go strictly by the constitution, that puts me in a very unwelcome atmosphere. also, ought we are going to have an election in the state of wisconsin for governor. i think he may lose his governorship. i am almost sure he is one to lose his governorship. host: the other story this week was the president's rose garden meeting of an to influence a senate vote on oil and gas subsidies. this twi says -- here is a washington post story about that. you look -- you are looking at pictures from that event yet today. in a fiery remarks delivered from the growth garden, obama told lawmakers he could stand with big oil companies or stand with the american people. senate democrats forced a vote to end tax breaks for the five latest oil companies, which republicans resoundingly defeated. don is a republican in scranton, pennsylvania. caller: good morning. i am calling about the tax cuts. i have been a republican all my life. i am not proud of being a republican at this time with the way they are running the house. as far as the i am concerned, that vote yet today will be the downfall of a lot of republicans in the senate and the house. that is my comment. thank you. host: the reference to the oil reserves and that was to attend both storage is picked up in the wall street journal today. global agreement said to be near. here is a piece from france. next up is baltimore. good morning, welcome to our conversation. caller: is scenes like this whole health care issue has become a partisan issue. individual mandate itself was initially a republican idea. the basis for health care itself came from mitt romney, who was a republican governor. the president and his administration went back on their single-payer plan to try to compromise, but it seemed like the nobama or anybody but obama idea is what was carrying on the debate. the states that have dissented, all of them have republican governors. rather than getting things done and working for the people, washington just begins are working on reelecting their party or getting their people in. meanwhile, the people suffer. thank you for c-span. have a good day. host: the front page of the wall street journal has a story about the credit and his views on executive power. later on she writes this -- as you can see, it goes on to suggest that other presidents have found new ways to use executive authority. if you are interrupted, there is a time line attached to the peace. it is a full half page in the friday edition. presidents from george washington on to barack obama have used executive authority. next is a call from hollywood, florida. a democrat there. caller: i want to congratulate bryant on his retirement. host: he is still working upstairs, so thanks for the good words. caller: here is one question i want to put out -- the constitution was a good document for the people. of what to clarify it -- there may be something i am missing. i want them to tell me what individuals the constitution did not cover. it did not cover the indians, the blacks, the women, or the indentured servants. it covered the white men who had money and wealth. who was covered? it did not cover anyone other than wealthy men. rossi is. host: from twitter -- >> if a call from fayetteville, north carolina. this is james, an independent there. good morning, james. caller: the main thing is one, the health care law -- how can you vote on a mandate that has not gone into effect until 2014? that does not make any sense. we talk about the out their lot compromising with the republicans. democrat won a single-payer system. if you go back and stay in the status quo where we were, a lot of people would be left out. the whole thing is that if it is unconstitutional for the country, it is unconstitutional for massachusetts. host: our fourth set of stories come from the campaign trail. for to vall, mitt romney it secured a number of key endorsements. some of our callers talked about marker rubio. also, from the former president george h. w. bush. newt gingrich announced he is restructuring his campaign and focusing on a prevention strategy. at the same time, there was press coverage about the discussion about work and the dignity of the janitors. let's start with the mitt romney endorsement by former president george h. w. bush. [video clip] >> barbara and i enthusiastically endorse and support our old friend of mitt romney. he is a good friend and they will make a great president. we wish him well. >> in mitt romney, he has also been successful in the private sector and is a very clear alternative to the direction the president will take our country. all of the candidates in this race have offered a lot to the debate, but i cannot buy into this idea that they are saying the only way they can win this race is by having a floor fight in tampa in august. host: the second clip from fox news with market rubio. the chicago tribune reminds us about the wisconsin primary coming up on tuesday, which we spoke with a few of our callers. rivals to your right. also in maryland, contest coming up there is a full discussion of all of the candidates on -- on the commentary page of the baltimore sun. next up is holbrook, new york. this is a call from a democrat there. caller: good morning. the one thing wrong about what they are doing, they really need to evaluate things. two things are important. why people do not have a medical insurance. the setup think, why is it so high. just one treatment a half hour a week, up $3,000. this is the reason why madison cost so much. they need to go after the hospital and find out when they know you are sick or have a bad disease, they are ripping you off. insurance companies, we have to pay for this. of course, people cannot afford it. for me and my wife, we want to get insurance to we do not have to worry about the hospital. me and my wife bought seven of the $50 a month. that did not include a visit or dental. everything you want is actor. nothing is ever one of the present time cover. it cost us $1,100 a month. that is more the my mortgage every month. they want to force people to pay medical insurance -- how can you possibly afford? do i the somewhere or do i start to pay my medical insurance? they need to go after these doctors. i think it's a rip-off. they take advantage when they know you are really sick or you are going to die. we can save your life, but it will cost to treat thousand dollars because. it is not the problem with insurance being so high, at the doctors and hospitals taking advantage of people. that is what they should be going after and reevaluating. maybe if they got them to lower their prices where it is readable, people might be able to afford to own insurance. that is with the mistake is. host: next is chester down, maryland. a republican there. caller: i have really gotten to enjoy the "washington journal" in the morning. i smile when i listen to some of the callers calling in and commenting. it is interesting to hear all sides of their story. i am calling in about the health care blocks -- health care law. i would like to remind the american people if you are not giving our hard earned dollars to the american government villa and contact is, we would have a lot more money in our communities where we can focus on the issues germane to those who actually live in that community. we do not have a one-size-fits- all solution that will work because we do not have a one- size-fits-all issue. issues of very state to state, county by county, city by city, so on and so on that is it. host: you are going to be left on our open phones review of the week. we will get in one more presidential campaign trail story. you heard about the law's biggest billionaire -- the loss vegas billionaire backing the new gingrich campaign. he was apparently interviewed and said for the jewish journal -- gingrich is at the end of the line. but like the headline on the new york times this morning. it's as regis it says -- as we close out here, we want to show you one story on the front page of the los angeles times. this is edward j. demarco, the interim head of the federal agency that oversees a fannie and freddie. the suggestion that he is considered by a growing number of people to be the single biggest obstacle to the housing market recovery -- in a segment coming up, we will be talking to a new york times business columnists who wrote about demarco in the new york times this week. we will learn more about who he is and why there is so much criticism of him and what intersection he has with health and recovery. we told you earlier that today the supreme court justices were going behind closed doors in a process called "conference." justices only. they will hash out the arguments they heard this week and come to their vote on the case is being reviewed. anthony kennedy is widely look at at a swing vote in this process. c-span interview him for a supreme court documentary a couple of years ago. here is a clip from that which justice kennedy described what it is like in the conference room. [video clip] >> justice breyer gets nervous before he goes into the conference, and so do i.. i have eight colleagues who studied very hard on the case who may have very fixed views and may be tentative depending on how they felt the case through. i have to give my point of view and hopefully persuade them. i felt a sense of anticipation -- an adrenaline rush or whatever they call it. this is a big day for us. we sometimes have as many as six cases and i have to present the argument in four cases and i have to be professional and accurate and fair. each of my colleague feels the same way. there is a little tension and excitement in the room, but we love it. the job is no good if you cannot argue. this is the first time in which we give our tentative views on the case. when we are on the bench, we are beginning to make up our minds. when we are in the conference room, we try to make up our mind tentatively. as we go around the table, it can be quite fascinating to see how cases unfold. it is not just win or lose, reverse or affirm, it is what rationale we used -- what principle we used to teach something. with the case is close -- 5-4 -- and you are on the side that prevails, there are not a lot of hi-fi's or backslaps. there is a lot of respect, maybe even sometimes all at the process. we realize that one of us have to write out a decision which peaches and gives reasons for what we do. >> washington journal continues. host: meet michael greene. he served as senior director for asian affairs at the national security council. he is senior adviser at the center for strategic and international studies. our focus with him is going to be on north korea. i am pointed at the most basic question -- which americans care about north korea? guest: it is a country without whom we are still technically at war. there are 27,000 american troops in south korea. the demilitarized zone is the most heavily fortified region in the world. it has rockets aimed at seoul. of the last 15 years, they have been developing nuclear weapons. later on, they developed a nuclear weapon capability. north korea is now also developing missiles to deliver them -- to fire them at the u.s. eventually. host: what do we know of the new administration there? guest: kim jong un is the son of kim jong-il, who died in december. people think he is about 28 or 29. he went to boarding school in switzerland. he has been rolled out at the great successor and the great general to replace his father and grandfather. they have given him what looks like plastic surgery, haircuts, and make up so that he looked like his grandfather, who led north korea until 1995. few people have met him. one japanese sushi chef met him and described him as having cruel and evil eyes. people who went to boarding school with him really did not get to know him. oddly, his parents never showed up our parents' weekend. it appears that he is very much being presented in the mold of his father and grandfather as the great successor, the great general, and trying to show a very forceful attitude toward the outside world pricks -- outside world. host: the president was at a nuclear facilities summit that was held in seoul, south korea. that puts the focus on the relationship between the north and south. we would like to open up our phone lines and invite you to participate in the discussion. let's spend a little more time on what is known of the nuclear threat. guest: the north has declared that in 2012, the 100th anniversary of the birth of the first leader of north korea, that they will become a full-the clear weapons state. it is pretty clear what that means. they have plutonium that they have harvested from facilities. probably in the far 6-12 nuclear weapons. they have tested by blowing up the challenge for them will be to turn them into weapons they can put on missiles. they also have, in complete violation of agreements with the international committee, have been working hard on a clandestine program for enriching highly enriched uranium, another way to make nuclear weapons. it is not clear how far they are. most estimates say they are years away from having capabilities. then there are the missiles. the missile they threatened to launch in april will be three- stage. it does not working. they have had problems with it. it is aimed at the west coast -- hawaii, alaska, or australia -- but they have two-stage missiles that can range to japan. we have bases in south korea and possibly guam. host: april is significant because of the war anniversary? >> the 25th average -- 55th anniversary of the korean war and the anniversary of the birth of the great leader. they are like gods. they are worshipped like gods. it is a stalinist system with a cult-like worship of the leader. this is a very auspicious and important anniversary for them. host: wednesday, the general responsible for un-u.s. combined forces of the korean peninsula to -- peninsula testified on capitol hill about security threats there. these are a couple of clips from his testimony. this talked-about the ballistic missile launched by north korea and the international response. [video clip] >> is it a general perception that if they launched a ballistic missile towards our shores that we would respond in kind? is that not a general perception? >> i would just say to you, i do not know what our response is would be on that. >> i was not asking you that. i asked you what the general perception was of this process between our two countries? is there a general perception that they blocked a nuclear weapon towards our shores that we would most likely respond in kind? >> my sense congressman, that is what fuels the anxiety and the concern over the north koreans are having the capability and it has to be dealt with in some manner. host: pick up this game a bit more. it is a concept between two states have both have the technology, it produces a standoff. guest: the north koreans have not got much. their economy as basically collapsed. most of the conflict -- most of the population is near starvation level. meanwhile, the south koreans, their cousins they have been promising to liberate, is one of the richest countries are in the world. north korea does not have much to. 2. nuclear-weapons are pretty much indispensable part them. they also, i think, view nuclear-weapons as they wait to do something. if they can get in a position where at ahead we have a mutually assured destruction, they can make a lot of demands of us. for a country that does not want to open up, there are things they want -- money, food, things like that. they can use the capabilities to show how small -- how strong they are. with a start a war with a nuclear weapon? it would mean the destruction of their country. it is a hypothetical question, but that is clear. i do not think they want to fight a war, i. they want to use it of legitimacy. host: this is milton in philadelphia. caller: with all the problems and north korea is facing, would you ever envision a day that maybe the two koreas will ever unite and become one korea again? guest: that is an interesting question. the south korean government under the current president has started talking more openly about unification. a lot of south korean looked at in germany and how complicated that was and how expensive it was. they look north and realize a larger gap between north and south korea. they got pretty nervous about unification. the general review is the south put it off. the current president started saying we need to think about reunification. it may not be something they choose. it is possible the regime because their economy has collapsed, because their leaders of resistance -- could itself fall apart. if the collapse, the board -- the presumption is the become unified with south korea. it is possible. i think the u.s. and south korea have been preparing as much as we can for that to happen, happ. host: the next question comes from new jersey. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you. i am interested in the same question, about the people there starving to death. wouldn't it be better that we do not give anything to the government because they do not give anything to the people? the other question is how strong is china. are they really interested in resolving problems with north korea versus the americas? or do they have their own interest? guest: your questions hit on two of the hardest problems managing north korea. the north koreans do try to take food aid and any kind of aid and try to channel it. we try to come up with food for children or supplement for old people but it is hard to monitor kit. the tough question is should we be giving food to the north korean people who are starving. they are afraid and easy to intimidate. should we be punishing those people by withholding food? i think it is a moral principle, that we should give food to people when they need it. china probably now provides somewhere around 80% of north korea's food and fuel, so the chinese could pull the plug on this country. they will not do it because they fear chaos. they do not want millions of north koreans pouring across the river into china. they do not want north korea and south korea unifying to become one country. so the chinese play a diplomatic role trying to encourage diplomacy but there is a limit how much pressure they are willing to put on the north because they do not want north korea to collapse. host: when the president was at the nuclear summit, one of the most widely published photographs that came out of it was this one. the president looking through binoculars at the north. this question from twitter asks -- guest: this is a question that students often debate about a country like north korea. is the problem that they are too scared? maybe if we were gentle or less threatening, they would feel more comfortable. the problem with that argument is that north koreans fear ultimately their own people more than they fear us. the threat to the regime is they have no legitimacy, and people rise up against them. so that means they are going to want nuclear weapons and the way. they fear china, south korea, japan. we have tried over the years to try and reach out to the north. and reach some kind of understanding that we are not a threat to them. it pretty much goes know where. the north koreans have made their own decision that they need these nuclear weapons. they want them to blackmail us and others to get more aid. host: next up is tampa bay, fla., good morning. caller: good morning. i have travelled extensively worldwide. one of the things i am curious about is the fact that maybe the cold war never died and we still have the war of words that we have. i was listening to a lecture on china. i could appropriately to this philosophically with florida and cuba. how much do you feel that travel and commerce will open up in north korea since south korean engineers are being trained? how much do you feel travel, education, and more openness will ever occur with the west? i will leave it there and let you respond. guest: my own view is some exchange of peoples, academics, and so forth is probably a good idea. why? because i do not think this regime is going to exist forever. in the next decade or two, we could see the north koreans collapse. then we will see them unified. so i think it makes sense to help north korea understand the world and so forth. the effort will be very limited because the north koreans do not want their society opened up. they do not want their own people to understand that the south koreans live in much better life. they will very narrowly control and the exchanges like this. -- any exchanges like this. they need to keep this control and propaganda to convince their people that their system is the only alternative. yes, we should try these things. we should not give technology that the regime would used to strengthen its control. in the long run, it is a good move. the problem will be the government will constrain that so they do not understand the world to maintain control. host: this question on twitter asks -- guest: not quite actually. one of the many cracks in the north korean system is coming from the army. they have over 1 million soldiers. over 100,000 commandos trained in special missions. but they cannot feed themselves. when the north koreans do military maneuvers, even the commando unit -- when someone is at rappelling down a cliff and they fall and break their leg, they are immediately discharged because the north koreans do not want to take care of their injured. some of the army units have been ordered to forage to extract food from the people. so they cannot really feed the army except for the most elite units. the chinese, by not asking where their food aid is going, it is making it easier for the north koreans. the rank and file soldier is undernourished. the average soldier is very short due to malnutrition. up another pull clip from wednesday this week. this is about cyber security. [video clip] >> working hand-in-hand with the military on the protection of our networks and particularly looking at interoperability. i have come to realize that cyber is a key domain and is important as our air, maritime, and ground operations. so, yes, we have raised the awareness on that and is something that we are looking at on a daily basis with iraq military. host: what do your studies and what is the common thinking about their cyber capabilities? guest: i think the south koreans, the japanese, and the u.s. have been surprised about how quickly the north koreans have developed this cyber capability. as far as i know, hardened and protected cyber systems. you can do a lot of damage to a country by attacking their cyber infrastructure. north korea has maintained criminal syndicates throughout asia. they export drugs, counterfeit money, and are involved in all sorts of criminal activities. it would not have been too hard for them to get the expertise from criminal syndicates on how to do hacking and cyber warfare. the north koreans have used and the advantage to try to-- any advantage to try to throw the west off their guard. host: there is a number of skeptics among our twitter community. here is an example of one who writes -- guest: well, they have not all been starving to death. millions of north koreans have been capped at the starvation level because that makes them easy to rule. they have been developing nuclear weapons, missiles, and opting criminal syndicates around asia to keep their cash flowing in. in some ways, it is a cult or a criminal gang bang bang that is a serious threat. the north koreans in 2003 threatened to -- in 2007, they bombed a reactor in syria built by the north koreans. the north koreans were helping the syrians build nuclear reactors. gas, they are a threat. -- yes, they are a threat. the fact that much of the country is at a starvation level does not stop the elite from developing nuclear weapons. that is why it is such a moral dilemma. it is a tough moral problem. host: we are talking with asia specialist michael green. our next call comes from texas. good morning. caller: good morning. study ofreen, in that i am sure you have gone back to the time of the armistice. we admitted we never left korea and kept our eye on them all of these years. can you give me the year in which the military and the military intelligence became so alarmed over the development of -- that they set up that chain of command to the commander in chief? who occupied that office at that time who was so incompetent that he did not take them out because they are not developed to the point where if a war breaks out, the entire city of seoul would be destroyed? guest: you have to go back to 1953 when the armistice took effect. it is hard to believe in retrospect, but in 1953 the americans were tired and wanted out. we reached an armistice, a cease-fire. and the soviets and the chinese kept north korea in check for the most part during the cold war. we settled for maintaining the forces in korea and japan so the north koreans would not think of attacking. from that point on, the north koreans have been digging tunnels, lots and lots of tunnels. there have been putting artillery and missiles -- there is no one year that this happened. this has been since 1953 that they have puttibeen putting weas into seoul. we could not take them out without starting a war. for the past 10 years, we have dramatically improved the ability to quickly detect where these missiles or shots are coming from and take them out. in terms of neutralizing them quickly, their capability really has been built up. to take out their artillery and missiles would certainly provoke a war with massive damage to the region. host: this is another associated press photograph from the president and took a trip to seoul. -- from the president's trip to seoul. c-span junkie asks -- is this figure right? give us more background. guest: it is about right. we had a large base, our headquarters, in downtown seoul. imagine a large army base in the middle of cleveland or willing, west virginia, or d.c. it was not popular. we reached an agreement to move our forces to a new base. could we use that money at home? absolutely. bought at what risk? i think we learned several times that when we pulled back and pull inward, we invite others to expand and increase the possibility of war which cost much more in the long run. we learned it before the korean war. right before the korean war, our defensive line, our interests in asia run on this red line. we did not want to have to spend money maintaining forces in korea. it was an open invitation to attack the south and we ended up losing 50,000 people. you have to weigh the risks and ask how much insurance you want to buy down the road. i think the troops that we have in south korea have been a very good investment. it is a really dynamic democracy not only in asia but bring in foreign aid to the world and helping us maintain a better world. host: a question on twitter asks -- guest: our basic policy was to provide food to the north korean people even if our political relationship was bad. what we demanded was we have monitoring. people with self phones -- with cell phones who could make sure the food was getting to people. we stopped at one point because the north koreans refused to do that. it was because we could not do what we had to do to ensure they were not taking the food and giving it to the army. on the fuel, in 2003, the administration and the japanese and koreans stopped providing heavuy fuel. we had an agreement in 1995 that we would give them feel. it was basically a bribe, in exchange for them freezing a nuclear complex they were building and not doing any nuclear weapon development of any time. we discovered a secret uranium enrichment program. we told them we knew this. they said you were going to have to pay more. it was a violation of the agreement so we stopped providing the fuel. some people think we should have not stopped bribing them. if they are cheating on the deal and developing nuclear weapons, we are not going to keep paying these subsidies. host: the next call is from steve, an independent from new york. caller: good morning. my question should take about a minute. influences upon kim jong. i understand he has an influential on goal and an older brother who was passed over in succession, but my question will be focusing on his sister who is some sort of a four-star general or something. if my information is true, u.s. intelligence really does not know much about her. thank you. guest: the kim family would make an intriguing, humorous, and a somewhat terrifying said, in the u.s. it is pretty dysfunctional. -- and somewhat terrifying sitcom in the u.s. he was arrested in tokyo about six years ago traveling with some girlfriends to go to disney world in japan with a peruvian or a brazilian passport. he talks to the press and tells them what is going on in north korea. he has been caught gambling and party in. even though he is the oldest son, he cannot be the guy to take over. the uncle is basically running the country, people think, because the great successor, the great general, is it to young. his aunt has been made a four- star general and we do not know that much about her at all. we do not have a summit meetings with the north koreans. weekend these things together from defectors and from some propaganda and from other leaders who have met them. we do not know a lot. host: two questions about influence. we are going to start with this tweet. guest: i am not an expert on unification church. i do know that initially they were hard line on north korea. the unification of the two koreas under south korea was its goal. years ago, the family started to engage in do more things with the north koreans. there was a unification church there on various activities. they have a presence in the u.s., japan, and korea and elsewhere. at one point, the hope was they could be a bridge between the north and south. because there have been attacks, there is very much a standoff between the two. host: this e-mail -- guest: so this is another bizarre subplot in the story. someone will make an action movie. because the north koreans operate these criminal syndicates and need cash to pay for their nuclear weapon materials, to keep senior generals happy, they have been looking for ways to get it. the north koreans reached out to a terrorist from the ira from northern ireland. there was this network that involved as the law, the -- involved hezbollah and the ira. they began changing their own currency so the colors would be the same as what they needed to counterfeit the u.s. $100 super note. there are parts of asia where people would not take the super note because it was hard to prove that it was counterfeit. there were real worries in the treasury department that this would underline the credibility of the super note. countries have been successful in catching these criminal syndicates and limiting the circulation of the counterfeit have beene and much better at detecting it. we had a meeting in 2006 when we told them they had to stop doing this. they offered to help. they said if you give us your best counterfeit currency detection technology, we will use it to help you find who was doing this. this is a part of their criminal syndicate empire which brings in hundreds of millions of dollars in cash. no one knows for sure. for a regime like north korea, it is a lot of money to pay for chemical precursors and technologies needed to keep working on the nuclear program. to feed the people? no. that is not their priority. caller: good morning. two questions. i do not understand. we have 20,000 troops in south korea. is that really going to be a deterrent to an irrational north korea? on the other side, china -- who has more to fear from this country? again, an irrational north korea. china or the united states? thank you. guest: the north koreans have over 1 million soldiers. the south koreans have about half of that size. we have 20,000, very capable, but obviously limited military capability. would it deterred them? yes. it has for 60 years. it deters north korea because they know that if they attack south korea, they will be attacking american troops. and we will respond appropriately. so, the point of having troops fully deployed in places like south korea is not that the 20,000 will singlehandedly defeat the north korean army, but we are guaranteed -- but they have the guarantee that we will have skin in the game. the u.s. is committing to stop them. it has worked. it has been backed by a lot of air and naval power and other assets in the region. we are all threatened by north korea in different ways. the japanese had their citizens kidnapped. there are well over 200 missiles now in japan. if you are japanese, you think you have the biggest threat. the south korean capital, a thriving city, is close to the zone as downtown manhattan or jfk to dulles. china has a border with north korea. if north korea collapses, they fear the refugees will be pouring into china. these will be soldiers, criminals. the chinese -- i do not think they want to see a unified korea. so we all have something to fear from north korea. our approaches are all different. the chinese approach is to try to help north korea economically in the hope that they will calm down and be quiet and some time down the road they will open up. for now, the chinese are not willing to put serious pressure on the north because they have enough internal problems in china and they do not want to create more homework for themselves in the neighborhood. host: people reacting on twitter. here is an example from someone who writes -- a quick response? guest: the answer is because it is not easy. the north koreans got lucky. there was a documentary that goes into this. they got a plate, the only one that was out there that was counterfeit. they found that so they got lucky. on like a criminal syndicate -- the reason most nation states do not do it because counterfeiting currency is an act of war. the nazis it did us in world war ii. it is an act of war. we never signed a peace treaty. we are in a cease-fire. most states would not do it because it is an act of war. i think the u.s. and other countries have successfully limited the damage and found ways to roll off these counterfeiting significant it. the north koreans will do anything they can get away with to get cash and to create tensions and problems for us so we take them seriously. host: the last call comes from annapolis from a democrat. caller: good morning. i was there for two years back in 1988. in the last couple of years, i read a book written by hailey lee. she talked about how she helped her family members escape from north korea. i do not really think the american people understand that north korea and south korea are such distant cultures. like you said earlier, they will do anything. it was not unusual for me to come up to my car and there be leaflets. propaganda on my car. the south koreans would create money to go back. some of these ideas when we hear stuff -- it is like out of a movie. the bad thing is if it is not a movie. it is a reality. is a government that has power and people. they truly think that folks in the south are worse off than they are. that is one of the reasons why they do not rise up. i understood it after i read the book. it was a really good wake-up call. they did not understand how to make the adjustment. water we doing to help to get them to be more educated? -- what are we doing to help them get more educated? guest: thank you for your service. i think that experience is one that a lot of americans have who have served in the army or the air force in korea. you get a full dose of this on the front lines. the north koreans had this enormous dam that was falling apart. they said they could fall apart and flood seoul, so give us money. it was not uncommon. there are more defectors coming out of the north. it is still in the thousands each year. when they come out, most of them tried to get to south korea. they get help from the south korean government but most of them suffered severe culture shock. they do not know enough about the outside world. they are not used to basic things like going out and shopping to buy lunch. difficult.is is one of the reasons why it is such a vexing problem. we try to broadcast messages in north korea and they've jam them. a lot of church groups work in china. the chinese tolerate this up to a point but one of the things the chinese are doing is they are often forcing refugees back in north korea which violates international laws. so, there are groups that do try if you are interested that help refugees assimilate and help people who are helping refugees get funds and support. host: michael green is an asia specialist and teaches here at georgetown university and also is a specialist on asia at the center for strategic and international studies. thank you for coming back to the table this morning. for those of you who have been around for a while, it has been 31 years ago today that john hinckley shot ronald reagan here in washington d.c. and three others in an attempted assassination attempt. you are watching "washington journal." we will be looking at the 1940 census which is just coming out, giving us a snapshot of what america was like. in our next segment, you will be meeting gretchen morgenson who writes about the oversight of fannie mae and freddie mac. we are going to tell you about our weekend promotion about little rock, arkansas. here is more. ♪ >> rushing water, thundering water carrying destruction through the peaceful valley of the ohio. today, a flood. the swollen river throws its might against man and it works. >> it started in northeast arkansas right around new year's. we had a lot of heavy rain in the north-south flowing rivers that go into the mississippi. this is sharecropper country where people are living on less than $200 by year. they carried lucky bones in their pockets. red flannel next to their skin to ward off rheumatism. these are the people getting hit first. all of that rainfall is going to track up the ohio river all the way to pittsburgh. by about the 24th of january, the ohio river is in street. then all that water is going to come back and hit northeast arkansas again. the flood really turned into an absolute crisis about the 24th of so. they called it blacks and. it was when louisville was evacuate it. -- they called it black sunday. about four weeks of rain. our weather bureau was not able to predict the weather very well. essentially, they could predict about 24 hours in advance but we did not have satellite technology or as many weather stations or as many river gauges. they are almost going on instinct. they had very little information. the flood forecast would change every day. or many times i day. it was like walking up a staircase. every day, the flood forecast gets higher and higher and higher. there were some places where the people were completely caught off guard. so, in the cities, it was hard to tell what was coming. there was a lot of complacency and many cities. because they thought that they had already seen a record flood. the flood of 1913 or 1884 was the highest that the river could ever get. in 1937, it went about 9 feet higher than the existing records. we were not as good as predicting floods then as we are now. >> "washington journal" continues. host: if you picked up the los angeles times today, on the front page, there is this story. it is a story about edward demarco. last sunday in "the new york times," gretchen morgenson was also interested in edward demarco. her first sentence as she joins us this morning -- gretchen morgenson, who is edward demarco? why all the interest? why is he a marked man? guest: he has the misfortune of being the acting director of the federal housing finance agency which is the oversight regulator of fannie mae and freddie mac which makes him the conserve the terror of both companies because as you know they are taxpayer-owned. so he has a tight rope to walk. on the one hand, he has a duty to make sure the tax payer losses associated with both companies are not escalating. we are already at about $183 billion in losses at those companies. he has a duty to the taxpayers to minimize those losses. to make sure they are operating so they do not balloon further. on the other hand, he has people interested in him, and the company is helping out the housing market. those two things do not jive. that is the problem that he has. host: let me share with our audience a quote from two influential members about barney frank. this is the quote. he is acting as if he was head of two private companies and not taking into account the impact he has on the economy. frank said -- a leisure cummings of maryland cummings -- -- elijiaah of maryland said this -- guest: we have been through a five-year, epic housing crisis. it is showing some signs of stability but we are still experiencing enormous numbers of foreclosures. housing prices continue to fall. really what is happening is people are trying to urge fannie mae and freddie mac to allow those homeowners who carry mortgages that they have financed to take the mortgage value down to reduce the amount of the principal outstanding so as to make it easier for them to pay off the loan. now, this is a kind of loan modification. this is called a principal write-down or principal forgiveness. there are other modifications that work very well that fannie mae and freddie mac have been doing. you have these two sides, one side saying do the principal forgiveness, and on the other side you have people saying what about the taxpayer losses that will be associated with this principle write-downs? so that is the battle going on here. you obviously have people -- everyone is interested in the housing market coming back, but you have to balance that and consider the taxpayer losses that would be associated with this program. host: i am going to stay with barney frank for a minute because i have an exchange on videotape between congressman frank and mr. edward demarco that helps to set the disagreement between the two. let's listen to that. [video clip] >> one of the questions was to stop the bleeding and preserve some function in the housing market without the losses that have preceded it. has that worked? you do not want to be sentenced to a lifetime as the conservatitor. has that worked out? >> i believe it has. we have brought stability to the marketplace so mortgage finances continue to operate fairly and effectively. host: gretchen morgenson, you described barney frank as the democrat who supported fannie mae almost to its collapse. tell us more about where he is coming from. guest: susan, what is interesting about these criticisms of mr. edward demarco, they are very similar to the criticisms that were lodged at the same regulator, a different name at that time, when fannie mae and freddie mac were in full bloom and operating as private companies with shareholders to satisfy. the criticism lodged back then was any time it would try to rein in at the company's come at any time would try to investigate, these critics would come out and say castigate the regulator. to me, it is an interesting return to the same tactic of really trying to criticize a person -- an entity who is trying to do their job and live up to their duty similarly to the way these critics went after the regulator when it was trying to rein in the company's. the regulator during that time was effectively neutralized by these critics and the companies themselves. that is one of the reasons why we are looking at $183 billion in losses because that regulator was neutralized. i find that back to the old way of doing things. very interesting. host: we are going to open up our phone lines. our discussion is on fannie mae and freddie mac and their role in the housing recovery. some groups in washington want them to write down some of the bad loans. and mr. edward demarco's stand against that. let me ask you -- you specifically say in your reporting on this that if this thatmr. edward demarco does what his critics want, that would be a taxpayer gift to the banks. to explain how that would work. guest: this is an interesting piece of the puzzle that you do not hear from the critics. it is a little bit complicated. many of the loans that were financed or guaranteed had second liens on top of the first. fannie mae and freddie mac had the first, somebody else has the second. typically a major bank. these were the loans that allowed borrowers to get to 100% -- 0% down payment. if you write down the principal on the first and leave the second intact, that is a gift to whomever owns the second because their loan will be more likely to be paid off. if you did a principal reduction program where both loans were written down, that is another matter. that is equality and fairness. when these people talk about writing down the first, they are not talking about making the banks write down the second. that is where it becomes a gift for whoever owns the second. host: this tweet from someone who aksks -- guest: boy, that is the 67 trillion dollar question, susan. my colleague and i at the time have written extensively about this. there has been very little in the way of accountability for this mess. certainly very few criminal prosecutions. i can think of just one of a major mortgage lender whose ceo went to jail. they were not a major participant in the crisis. the ceo was sentenced to 30 years in prison. it was by no means central to the mess. everyone is wondering why there have been so few successful criminal prosecutions. a couple weeks ago, eric holder was up at columbia university saying a lot of the behavior was improper and wrong but it might not have been a legal. i think people -- illegal. i think a lot of people bring skepticism to the idea that a crisis this large that hurt so many people come at billions of dollars in losses, there was no criminal activity involved. i am not a criminal prosecutor so i cannot give a definitive answer asto why. but i do understand the suspicion and frustration. if no one is held accountable, this kind of an episode is very likely to happen again. host: our guest has been writing about financial markets for "the ew york times" since may 1988. you also reference your reporting on the housing market. we are taking your questions for her. let's go to battleground, washington, sean is an independent there. caller: thank you for the very thoughtful interviews that you have given over the past couple of years. i wanted to take a step back and look at the overall situation. we have an economic catastrophe, a foreign policy catastrophe, and an ecological catastrophe. it has been called a financial coup day top. i would like to know why is this not considered a threat to national security. there is a clear and present danger to the national security of the united states. i recently read a book by michael lewis and he was there at the very beginning of the mortgage products. what he captures in that book is a culture on wall street that is extremely predatory. i do not think people grasp the predatory nature. now we have high-frequency trading with colocating supercomputers. so just an overall grand view of this thing, it seems like we need to go to some kind of world war ii style command economy to remove this plutocracy. richard wolf has been very in phatic about the whole notion that we cannot re-regulate the economy. it will accomplish nothing. they will undermine all the regulations in the future. host: thank you for your call. guest: i think one of the worries about so-called nationalizing which means you are asking the government to handle all of these very complex institutions is that the government's role was very central to this crisis. the fact that the regulators were asleep at the switch or worse, that they were co opted by the institutions that they were supposed to be policing, has led me to believe that you cannot rely on these kinds of institutions to necessarily do their jobs. we had rules on the books going into this crisis that could have reined in these institutions, could that stopped some of the predatory lending that was going on as you describe it. and nothing was done. when certain regulators tried, like the fdic, when they tried to raise capital requirements or put in place things that might protect the taxpayer from these problems, they were brought back and battled back by other regulators. it was very difficult. so i do not have a lot of confidence coming out of this mess that the regulatory framework in washington is able to really take on these very powerful institutions. if anything after this mess with dodd-frank, the law proposed to protect us from this episode, if anything, it seems to me the institutions have become more powerful. the banks are larger for the most part. they are still too big to fail which means they will be bailed out if there are problems. so i just feel like we'd have to have a complete re-thinking of our financial system. a first move would be to cut these banks down to a more manageable size. very few people are willing to talk about that in washington. host: let's go to a tweet. jim at the lake asks about the concern on the gift to the banks, askingg -- guest: that is the problem with any kind of printable write-down program. if it does encourage people -- any kind of principle right down program. there is this program out there that allows a principal reduction. this is a big concern. it is a major concern for people like edward demarco and for people in the administration. you do not want people who cannot afford to pay their mortgages strategically default so the burden the taxpayer. here is a very interesting fact that i think speaks a lot to this point of whether fannie mae and freddie mac need to do a full-scale principal reduction program. when i was reporting the column from last sunday, i learned that 75% of the underwater loans that fannie mae and freddie mac hold, meaning the mortgage is higher in value than the home underlying it, 115% or greater loan to value, 75% of those people are still paying on their mortgages. they are current on their mortgages. that tells me they are willing to pay, able to pay, even though they are under water. i think that is a very interesting statistic that indicates that perhaps this writedown program is not as necessary as some of the people are saying. 75% of people under water are correct on their loans. host: talking about the fallout for banks, moody's has announced -- here is one headline in the economic times. they will be releasing a new structure for 17 global financial firms including morgan stanley, bank of america, and citigroup. here is a headline related to that, that they are preparing for a possible credit downgrade coming up this spring. next is a call from pennsylvania. you are on the air. welcome to the conversation. caller: i am obviously not as intelligent or educated in finances as the previous callers. i have a problem with barney frank. dodd him and chris responsible for the crisis. i do not want to be punished because -- i have day say to keep my house. i cannot see why anyone else -- without having to put an application in or having a job to pay for it. i think barney frank and chris dodd and a few others have taken it too far. where is the concept of working and waiting until you have money to buy a house? thank you for taking my call. host: gretchen morgenson. guest: i think there are a lot of people who agree with that consensus. mr. frank truly believe that housing for as many people as possible was a noble goal but it was perverted along the way from the predatory lending that really was so prevalent in the boom of the 2000's. so it may be was a goal that was worthwhile but it went awry in a very large way and now the taxpayers are footing the bill for those bad loans. again back to the accountability issue, no one is held accountable including regulators and members of congress and members of the business community who made these loans. so, i understand the frustration. i certainly sympathize with the frustration. mr. barney frank has announced his retirement so he will be leaving congress. it is an interesting moment and an interesting question. if it goes back to this issue of the people and -- it goes back to this issue of the people in congress who were supporters of fannie mae and freddie mac and the home ownership push that was launched in the mid-1990s. they were so integral to that porsche. now they are trying to push for the write-down of principal on these mortgages which would very likely increase the cost to the taxpayer. there have been no indication that it would not increase the cost to the taxpayers. it could encourage people to strategically default. i think that is one of the more interesting paradoxes. the same people who helped to neutralize the regulators are now attacking the regulators when they are trying to do their job. host: a tweet from someone who writes -- guest: unfortunately, the vast majority of loans that were made to first-time home