House bill 60 will protect lawabiding systems. A bill was signed making it legal to have loaded weapons in barks churches, schools and some government buildings. A miami resident receiving a letter from the president about the arrest in venezuela much. Im excite that in the United States a person can rite to the president and write to a president and get an answer. Whats when you bring together two french dare devils. Two dare devils leap from the worlds tallest building in dubai. We begin with calls for federal fund to research causes and cures for gun violence in america. That research has been rejected. 70,000 attended the National Rifle associations meeting in indianapolis. On the agenda passing a law allow gun owners to pack their guns in states where concealed carry is burn. In georgia a new law was signed which would allow loaded guns to be brought into bars, churches, school zones, government buildings and airport buildings outside checkpoints. We believe in the rite of the people to defend themselves we believe in the second amendment. Today i will put into law a gun bill that heralds selfdefence, personnel liberties and public safety. Little wonder that georgia congressman Jack Kingston changed his tune. He rejects calls to fund the centres for Disease Control to research gun violence. In a statement, he said . For more we are joined by Congress Woman caroline maloney, pushing to allow the cda to conduct fir safety reach. And president and chief director of the task force of global health. As the former director of the trench he led research in 1990s before it was defunded. Great to have you both with us. After newtown, congressman pinkston was vocal about the fact that he felt more Research Needed to be done about gun violence, hes changed his tune, and hes talking about the president wanting gun grabbing initiatives. What do you say to him . What is threatening about doing research. We research everything. As researchers point out. Alone with gun safety research, there are initiatives to prohibit. I would say no area should be so walled off that we cant research and find cures and solutions. I thought after sandy hook that there would be a lot of progun safety, ta the background checks would pass. Research, we need it in order to build a case, and the amount of gun violence in the world is staggering. 33,000 people a year die from gun violence. 32 people a day die from gun violence, and 19 in 2012 91 children under the age of 12 were killed with gun violence. Why not Research Ways to prevent it and see if background checks work and safety locks work. Public policy is not set without research. You need data to pass anything. By stopping the data they stop progress in congress, and senator markey and i have a bill to allocate 10 mullion to the center of Disease Control. You are an n. R. A. Member, you like to shoot. We invited the n. R. A. To participate. And they did not respond. Gun violence is seen as a health issue. Tens of thousands are killed and costs tens of billions in medical costs. What can research on gun violence do for us. We have two tough problems to solve. One is, as you mentioned, that 30,000 a year are killed by guns. We want to prevent some of those deaths, especially suicide. And many, many of those deaths that are preventible. We have another problem at the same time. That is that our gun rights are threatened. Rights of gun owners are under threat. And what we have got to do is find a way both to reduce firearm injuries and deaths, and to protect the rights of legitimate gun owners. If we only wanted to do one of those, we wouldnt do research. If all you wanted to do was protect the rites of legitimate gun owners. Dont allow discussion, let alone laws about firearm injuries, and about guns. Dont allow that to do go on. If all you wanted to do was prevent firearm injuries and deaths, take guns away from civilians. We want to solve both problems at the same time. There are ways to do it. If you want to figure out what works to achieve both of these goals at the same time, you need to do research to find out the answer. And right now we dont know what works. We dont know that letting more people carry concealed weapons in public will save lives and promote security. We dont know that that will protect the rights of gun owners. We are asking politicians to sign bills when they have no idea what the impact of those bills would be. Its not fair for us to ask politicians to pass on bills when we dont give them the evidence about what works and what doesnt. We flying blind in an area that is critically important to health and safety. You are trying to address the issues on the website. You mention a bunch of different initiatives that you have, including making gun traffic illegal, allowing the c d. C. To conduct fire safety, requiring background checks for gun beers, limiting large capacity magazines, renew weapons bans and require checks for gun owners. Isnt it a foregone conclusion that in an Election Year none of that will move forward. We try. The point that you can do both is true. You can find common ground. Theres no reason why you cant Research Ways to prevent gun death and ensure that lawbiding rightful citizens can bear arms, its in the constitution. None of my bills take guns away from a lawabiding person, one that can own one. As we learnt in webster new york. Mentally ill people cabinet the illegal guns, and in this case after sandy hook, a man got a straw purchaser to get him illegal gun, set fire to his house and proceeded to kill fire officers and Police Officers that were coming to save him. Multifas faceted issue. We need to look at mental health, it should be like having a cup of war. Why in the world. Its not a felony to traffic and sell illegal guns. Its an outrage. Most n. R. A. Members tell me they support the deal. Why cant we pass it . The antigun Safety Movement in congress is so deep and strong commonsense measures, that the n. R. A. Supports we cant pass. Dr roans berg, the n. R. A. s chief lobbyist chris cox said that where c d. C. Research is concerned. That the concern is not with . Should the c d. C. Not be the place where research is conducted because of that association with disease trench . First you need to realise that when people dont like the results from scientific reach, they try to discredit the researchers and methods. The n. R. A. Did not like results that suggested having a firm in your home not only doesnt protect you but puts you at 300 more risk that someone in your family will be killed in a homicide and 500 risk that sun will be killed in a suicide. N. R. A. Didnt like the fact that legitimate, highquality Research Shows that having a gun in your home puts you at more risk. C d. C. Is the only agency with a background and epidemiology skills to look at the broader picture. N. R. A. Can look at Mental Illness and whats when the mentally ill, adjudicated mentally ill have firearms. The department of justice can look at what happens when convicted felons and criminals have firearms, but c d. C. Can look at what is the impact on the population as a whole. They have the tools to do it and do very high quality research. Do you agree Congress Woman . We trust them with our lives in other areas. Absolutely. Theres funding for other research at other agencies. Absolutely and the ban is unique to gun safety. I dont know of another area of research where urbaned from doing this type of research. The president did an executive order that said research could take place in this area. And our legislation supports the executive order and makes it clear that it didnt prohibit the Research Funding for gun safety. I want to conclude i want to bring up one thing with you dr rosenberg. The c d. C. Has not been funded to do anything on gun safety since the 1990s, but you wrote that we have spent billions since the 1970s on trench from auto on trench from auto accidents prevention from autoaccidents, do you think research in this field can do the same, saying thrives . It can. The congressman who opposed c d. C. And whose amendment took away the funding has, over the years, become a friend. We both influenced each other and agree that the research is so important. Its a matter of life and death. Jay dicky would say its a mistake and we need to do everything we can to get the Research Going again. An important discussion giving how many people are dying. Thank you. Thank you both, appreciate you both joining us on the show today. Mane venezuela immigrants many venezuelan immigrants in the u. S. Are dismayed by the lack of attention it has got in the u. S. 41 have been killed since protests against Nicolas Maduro, because of shortages in basic goods, high inflation, and one of the worlds worst Violent Crimes rate. U. S. Senator and congress men are calling for sanctions. Venezuelan americans are frustrated that the white house hasnt taken action, one started an online petition asking president obama to openly condemn the human rites violations. President obama responded in a handwritten letter saying . Joining us is congressman joe garcia representing the 26th distribute of florida and delivered the letter to ruth alcala. She was happy with the letter. What is the administration going behind the scenes. If i announce what they are doing, it wouldnt be behind the scenes. Lets be clear, the last thing on earth is we should be playing a goliath to their david. This is not a dade, a just causes. Venezuelans find themselves in these tough straits because of their incompetence, an inability to manage a rich economy. They are a natural resourcerich country and created such havoc and distribution. They have the most violent country in south america. It is because of these things that they find themselves in a crisis. What the Administration Must and is doing is supporting the civil dissent or the opposition to the government. That makes all the assistance in the world. Without acting as a colli ath, you can goliath, you can speak about it, and the letter called on president obama to take action. She said mentioning venezuela would be enough. It seems its something that has been ignored as people have been dying in a country that is important to the gates. Its important to me and have been giving floor speeches. This is important. You have to understand this has got to be thoughtful and do what we want, which is promote Civil Society, change and democracy. In south florida, as you know, there are a lot of people calling for an embargo. The embargo with cuba hasnt turned out too well. We have the longest lasting dictatorship. It makes sense to have sanctions that move it. Thats why we signed on, sanctions that trt the human waste. The white house hasnt signed tonne the sanctions. How signed tonne the actions. How does the president get involved. President Nicolas Maduro mocks the United States, blames them for unrest. A socialist ally, the president of bolivia accused the u. S. Of inciting civil war in venezuela for its oil. What should the president be doing, what should congress be doing . I know you have been moving towards sanctions but nothing has figized. Finalised. Lets be clear, we dont want to put ourselves into a position to respond to crazy rhetoric. Theres nothing more than Nicolas Maduro wants more than to put himself into a debate with the United States about his ipp competence. What is clear is his incompetence, thats why theres little foreign investment, why they have gone from half of oil production. So the inept attitude of the regime is clear. We shouldnt give them an outside excuse. We have been working with opposition leaders to move change, and have been working with the Civil Society and are backing a dialogue that is ocourting. The truth is the reason brazil and the Catholic Church and columbia are participating in the dialogue is they are worried about the investments, the region, and that is what makes sense, as opposed to give them a sounding board for the failed policies. The bishops in venezuela have accused the government of brutal repress. The former president of brazil has started speaking out against Nicolas Maduro. He was a longtime ally of Nicolas Maduro, and his predecessor chavez. Lets talk about Governor Scott. He accused president obama of not caring about venezuela. He said does Governor Scott have a point. Venezuelan is close to the United States. It is a far bigger partner with the United States than ukraine, its a bigger train partner than with italy or spain. Venezuelan is important. Its not been in the national conversation. I agree with you. I think they should be in the conversation. Lets be clear rick scott has no purview. He has ignored many problems, for him to find a souping board in the president of the United States. I dont want to equate him to Nicolas Maduro. The repress going on in venezuela is deplorable. I have spoken about it. The fact that leaders of the opposition are in gaol are unpardonable and unexcusable. That is why the administration has taken a strong position and the president of the United States spoke about it. Lets not try to find Foreign Policy creds in a governor that barely has credibility within his own state. He was able to find a good venezuela restaurant we are looking for a good one whenever we can find it. Its nice he found one. I want to touch on a topic immigration reform. What do you think will happen . It will pass. How soon. Its important to pass. Its in the Vital National interest. What we need to do is pressure the republicans to give us a vote. If they do give us a vote, it will pass. The leader of the republican party, john boehner, the highest elected republican basically mocked his own party for abb inability to get this down. 70 of americans support comprehensive immigration. Good to have you with us. Thanks. Always a pleasure. Consider this will be right back. Is it is america a democracy or do the wealth have so much influence that others are powerless. U. S. Has been declared to be an oligarchy saying there is a lot of influence or policy paying. We are joined by a Political Science professor. And the coauthor of an article. He is the author of . Martin, good of you to join us. You dont use the word oligarchy, you talk about economic elite domination and bias pluralism. The way you define economic leaders is broad. We are not talking about the top 1 . Thats right. We are looking at a larger group of people at the top of the Income Distribution. People at the 90th income per cent il. Within that group, theres a variation in how much power and influence he has. So we wouldnt dispute the notion that the very affluent oligarchs, if you will exist, but theres a wider group of people involved with and flun that will in american toll picks. You look at answers to service questions. Public policy issues, you broke them down and found a proposed change with high support among economic elites. It is adopted 45 of the time. Maybe the greater power is that they have almost a veto power over things they oppose. Thats right. When economic elites or powerful groups are strongly opposed to a policy change its unlikely to occur. We saw that in the data. Because we have a strong status quo bias, policies that have a great deal of support, in some cases unanimous support among power of the groups, among the eleels economic elites, they have only an even chance or so of being adopted. What about less wealthy americans, when a majority of citizens disagrees with economic elites or organised interest, they lose . As you said now. Dont they wield power at the ballot box and through Large Organizations from an aarp to the n. A. A. C. P. To the n. R. A. Even . Its true those organised groups, unions as well are important. We found some modest evidence of influence through those kinds of lets say massbased organizations. And, of course, its true that people do have a choice when they go to the poll, a choice of a few candidates, maybe two, in a general election, but those candidates have been vetted, if you will. By the money system, by people who have the resources. So for a candidate to gain office, its true they need a constituency among the voters, and among donors as well. That comes first. Has anything changed. If you go back to the beginning of the republic, george washington, Thomas Jefferson and adams, they were oligarchs. That held true throughout the history. The robber barons at the turn of the 20th century had the power the rich could only dream of. Yes, you are right about that. In some ways our system was designed to constrap the ability to shape policy making and restrict involvement and influence of public. Now, of course, over the centuries we have seen the franchise expand and a broadening of the political system. Research showed that despite the formal equality that we have achieved over time, and its certainly not complete, but that has been, of course, tremendous progress, despite that formal equality we have a situation where middle class americans get the policies they want only when they agree with the affluent or powerful interest groups. Is this just an issue of our system or is it a reality of power everywhere, because if you look worldwide, communist revolutions have been led by people who would have fallen within your definition of economic elites in those countries, and president s like bill clinton, and Ronald Reagan<