Transcripts For CSPAN Washington Journal 20110629

expected to face questions about stall negotiations. as well as talk about a tax on a luxury hotel in afghanistan. and the president got a vote of support on libya. good morning on this wednesday, june 29. we begin with getting your take on the latest proposal to cut medicare spending. bywill divide the online's aides this morning. -- divide up the telephone lines bypa age. we will also take your e-mails and tweets. senator lieberman of connecticut plan wouldurns's increase eligibility to 67 over 12 years. but the americans would pay 100% of premium costs for part b and part d. it would limit medigap coverage, for people to make wiser decision about their health care. and increased premiums from 25% to 35% of program costs. the two senators say that it would save approximately $600 billion over 10 years. transfers to under $50 billion in savings to medicare part a trust fund, doubling its size and iimproving its solvency. it would offer catastrophic medical coverage to protect against bankruptcy or massive debt due to help care. and it contains a three-year doc fix that is the reimbursement rate doctors get. they have a fix to that so the the reimbursement rate does not go down. that is paid for under their proposal. we want to get your take on that this morning. the phone lines are provided a little differently. we go to connecticut, lee. caller: they keep calling this an entitlement. i am 67. i pay social security and medicare taxes since i was 16. the problem is that ever since the carter administration any foreigner coming into this foreigner coming into this country lands and is over 65, they automatically get social security and medicare. host: get the stick to medicare and ask you this. let's show you what senator joseph lieberman had to say about medicare. its current structure right now. just listen through the phone. >> 50 million americans depend on medicare now. about 20 million more people will go on medicare during the next 10 years, mostly because of retiring baby boomers. each medicare beneficiary, each medicare enrollee will on the average stay, almost three times more out in medicare benefits than they contribute in payroll taxes and premiums. the number varies based on income and family structure, but that is basically what it is. about three times more out then you put in. that is why we say there's a status quo on medicare that is unsustainable. host: what is your reaction? you paid, but you're getting three times out more than what you paid. caller: supposedly, that money was supposed to go in the trust fund. if they would investigate properly, there would be more money. there's no money because congress keeps spending. there should be more money there, but there's not because in the 1990's after the fall of russia, tens of thousands of russians, landed at laguardia, they stepped off the airplane and got social security and medicare and never put a dime in. that is what is wrong with the system. you keep giving money away of the people who put it in there. congress has rated the money every year. it was supposed to be a trust fund. host: lawmakers say it is due to the amount of people that are in the system. caller: how come they have people put their money in 401k's? if they would have invested the money instead of robbing a, it would be there. host: what is the alternative? people say medicare is not sustainable on its current path. caller: the alternative is to with what the guy ryan suggested. host: john, age 70, on the line. caller: lawyers get on tv every day and say to sign up for your disability, social security, and medicare. these illegal aliens, there are over 1 million of them on social security disability and medicare. host: stick to what the word from the two senators. what you think about the plan? caller: like the other guy said, they stole all our money, the social security money and everything else. now they're going to work on medicare. my wife just turned 64. obamacare raised premium from $440 a year ago to $590 on the account of -- on account of obamacare. they need to get all these people off of it better not entitled to it and send them back to the doctor again. everytime you turn on the tv, there is a lawyer saying we will get your social security and medicare for you. host: you heard some of the sentiment toward medicare in the first two phone calls. here is a headline about the plan that top democrats rejected. host: don is 49 years old in spring, texas. caller: you look at what's going on in greece , the college austerity measures, whatever you want to do. this all started with the banks cooking the books. cooking the books. goldman sachs did that increas greece. now they're trying to privatize everything. just like the republicans and some democrats, like obama. i made 100 phone calls for obama. i felt like he was going to be all right. but he turned out to know better than the republicans. host: a little bit more from the washington post. host: bob is 70 years old , and joining us from massachusetts. caller: good morning. coburn was on charlie rose last night and he brought up the fact night and he brought up the fact that so much money goes into medicare and so much money comes out. a lot more money comes out and goes in. where does that money go? it does not disappear. that money, the doctors get paid, the hospitals get paid, medical supply places get paid. the money stays in the economy. where does that money go? it states in the economy. i don't have the money. i go to the doctor and have to pay a bill to medicare. i don't know where the money goes. host: you would like to see for doctors to not be as much? you want tampa to have more skin in the game -- you want them to have more skin in the game? caller: i had a doctor who performed surgery very well with lots of nice people working there. seems like medicare is supporting dole industry. what's wrong with that? host: because there's a large demand there, they would have to respect that -- doctors? caller: i do and the government should, because it's a big part of the economy. host: do you have difficulty finding a doctor because you are on medicare? caller: no, i live and an area where there are a lot of older people and we are a big part of the economy in this community. host: we are talking about a new proposal, the latest to cut medicare spending, set for yesterday senator lieberman and senator cockburn. -- coburn. .ere's a front-page story gunmen stormed a luxury hotel in afghanistan. what happened? guest: it looks like it was nine insurgents from the taliban, several of them wearing suicide bus, who attacked the hotel -- suicide veests. roof.of them or on the grow they were indiscriminately killing hotel desks. they only were able to find one foreigner to appeal. it took the police over five force to subdue them. host: who has taken responsibility for the attack? guest: the taliban spokesman has taken response ability. but the attack caras' a hallmarks of something carried out by the all connie network -- al qani network. host: why is this so tell significant? is the biggest old hotel in kabul. it was the only place foreigners could stay. there are newer hotels now. it is owned by the government and is extremely heavily guarded. it is on an ill -- on a hill. it is a place that appears to be in very well secured. host: how were they able to get in and? guest: they are still sorting out the details. the accounts we're getting so far, almost everybody is commented on what a poor job afghan police did. in some cases and really several cases they have fled when the first attack broke out. there's always been a problem with adequate training for the afghan police. they are very poorly paid. although and underpay has improved very much in the last year or two, they still earned on the order of $200 per month. they did not do a very credible job. host: what are the implications of that, given the debate in washington over withdrawing troops and handing over security to afghan soldiers? guest: today was the beginning of a two-day conference on transitioning of security -- of control of security from nato to the afghan government. they are beginning with seven places around the country which will be completely under afghan control. one of those places is kabul, the capital. not only did they equip themselves very poorly in this test, which will clearly timed by the taliban to embarrass them again beginning of transition, but in the end they had to call on nato to help kill last of the terrorists on the roof. host: the two-day conference discussing this very fact, what did you hear in response from the pope karzai government -- the karzai government? guest: he says this will not affect the transition. they are saying that their forces handled the crisis very quickly and effectively. quickly and effectively. the standoff lasting 5.5 hours is nothing anybody can brag about. who will you be hearing from and looking for in the always going forward? always going forward? guest: we will talk to witnesses and talk to people involved in the transition process to see if there's any feeling that this is something that maybe should be delayed. a lot of people are saying that, although the officials involved in this are very committed to it. that's on the afghan government side and on the nato side. host: who says this should be delayed? guest: many prominent individuals. people like provincial council members and members of parliament and so on. host: rod nordland joining us in afghanistan to talk about this deadline. gunman storm and a luxury motel. thanks for your time. andy is 55. we're talking about the latest proposal from two bipartisan members of congress to cut medicare spending. caller: good morning. thanks for c-span. it is pretty obvious that medicare has to be changed. i pick a lot of the things in are going to be necessary -- i think. the change from 65 to 67 over 12 years, i am 55 and i know my number of health issues is increasing. as an employer who will not be providing me medical benefits of an age 65. a lot of americans will be put into a position if they make that change to not have held insurance when they need it. i'm very concerned with that particular provision. it's not fair. and that is a nonstarter for me. host: listening to you, some people might say it's only two years and its overall 12 years that they are raising import. -- raising it? caller: i bargain contracts. it says when we retire, our employer will provide us some formal medical benefits up to age 65. i am sure there are thousands and maybe tens of thousands of contracts out there right now in america that are written in such a way that this provision is there. every single one of those contracts would be changed or people would have to work longer. the cost would be transferred to those workers or to the employers providing gap coverage. frankly, you are young. you don't really think about what it feels like to wake up at 55, because you are not there. what it feels like to wake up at 60. it's a lot harder to get up and work and a lot of the things. the older you get, the more challenging its debts. asking people to work a lot longer at that age is something that is unreasonable. i have plenty of money. idea i upset by the should contribute more to medicare. host: i am still listening. caller: i'm not upset by the idea that will be people should have to pay more clear that i would have to contribute more to my own medical coverage later in life. but being pushed up to age 67 will cause a lot of americans a lot of issues and cause a lot of problems for our country. i think that part is something they should not do. host: are you a union worker? caller: i am president of the teachers association. i am a teacher. host: scott is 45 in wisconsin. caller: good morning. has so farnk anyone -- host: a lot of people say something has to be done about medicare although they are opposed to this particular plan. caller: it was a bad idea in the beginning. the entitlement part, i don't understand how they consider its entitlement when we all paid into it. i wish i could do the math of how many people before they receive their benefit and the amount of money that they get. host: were you listening at the this discussionning of where joseph lieberman said it was unsustainable because almost all the enrollees' take almost three times more out in benefits than they have contributed in payroll taxes and premiums? caller: that is not going to help if you raise gauge -- ra ise the age. it will give them more money. a piece by john goodman. it was on townhall.com. host: jim is 79 minutes south carolina. caller: good morning. keeping a person my age on the phone so long. what i want to say is i live in a rather poor senior housing area. i would not expect those over 65 or 70 who are retired to be affected by whatever legislation is put into place. that is my only comment. host: here is a tweet. host: you can send us a tweet or send us an e-mail. here's one by dolores. host: bob is 53, from new york. caller: thank you for c-span. this caller has stolen my thunder. there's a counter argument that is not being made. we heard repeatedly that people take three times more out of medicare than they pay in premiums. the counter argument is that medicare should be opened up to consumers. i know that it is a pipe dream and that it is politically probably more unseasonable than anything you can think of. these members of congress don't have the courage to do the right thing or even really talk about what is the right thing. the right thing -- let me use myself as an example. i pay $500 a month to my employer. $6,000 per year for my health insurance. i use under $500 per year. i take out of my concern that. 80% of americans with health concerns like myself do not really use it. think of the amount, the enormous sums of money, medicare could raise. i don't hear this as part of the argument by these senators. host: so, a single payer system? caller: maybe you could call it that. i don't want to free people out. -- freak people out. a friend of mine put her father on medicare and he loves it. health concerns operates at 17%. the amount of money that could be raised by people like myself if i could buy into medicare tax instead of my employer, those sums of money would be enormous. i don't know why it's not part of the debate. i wish you would ask future people on your program that know more about these things, put it to them, make these people respond instead of just letting it fall to the wayside. opening up medicare, raising funds, people like me will gladly pay intuit. host: that's the beauty of this program, that people like you get to call in and challenge our guests directly. president obama will now the news conference at 11:30 a.m., live coverage on c-span. he is likely to be asked about the stalled gatt negotiations, medicare could be part of that discussion. he will also likely be asked about and possibly the attack in kabul, afghanistan last night. this is what the senator tom coburns had to say. >> medicare is the biggest cost long term. if we don't go after the biggest first and try to make sensible reforms, if nobody is going to like this plan. we understand that. but nobody wants the present medicare and those absolutely dependent on it not to have anything. a trust fundt part bellies up in 2016, what's going to happen? are we going to fix it then? how much more painful would it be done if we don't make small adjustments now? host: talking about the new proposal by, the two senators to cut medicare spending. i want to show you some other deadlines. there's this story. $8.5 billion deal. host: and this story. host: and a side story about tim pawlenty. he gave a speech and he said america already has one party devoted to decline, retrenchment, and withdraw. that was in new york. now to massachusetts, millie is 77. you are on the air. caller: this is actually tony from tampa, florida, 44 years old. i don't feel medicare is truly transparent. we want companies and other industries to be transparent. and clearly show and say what they mean, whatever their business rules are. i just don't feel this medicare is really transparent. all the control is taken from the doctors, given to the insurance companies. some say a lot of people did not contributed to the medicare because of their type of employment, what they're getting out of it, it's ludicrous. what they receive is -- to say now that they receive more than what they put in, i don't agree. just as the last caller said, i contributed a lot more into my medical coverage with my employer, much more than i received, because i was not at a time in my life that i needed constant care. so when i get at that age, does that mean i should be in the same boats when i have to have medicare take over, after contribute so much because i need that system, if i did not already contributed money, would they be dead to me like that? there are too many rules with the medicare system and not being transparent. a lot of our seniors are not receiving the care they should. they're living check to check. they are paying so much money for medication. pay don't have the funds to for this stuff. so should they not receive the care? host: if you want to go to the news conference with the two senators that recovered yesterday, go to our web site, c-span.org. the senators were asked about the proposal, not including anything that would allow medicare to negotiates with pharmaceutical companies for lower drug prices. they responded by saying that it's a nonstarter because they need bipartisan support for something like this and there's too much objection to having that type of proposal in there. now to millie in massachusetts, age 77. caller: medicare part d, the republicans or refuse to let medicare brought in for drug prices. they get too much money from the pharmaceuticals. that would save billions of dollars alone. the president ought to bring this up in his bully pulpit. this is ridiculous that they have to take whatever price the pharmaceuticals say. they sell the same drugs in canada and overseas much cheaper than they do to americans. these are the same companies. they have no leverage. that would put in -- and the only way this was an all- republican votes when they passed medicare part d, that was put in with a stipulation that they cannot bargain for prices, which is ridiculous. host: back to libya for a moment. host: and in international news -- host: then you have heard the news of a new imf chief. this is a full-page ad put out in "the washington post." congratulations to christine lagarde, it says. michigan, terry, 46 years old. caller: thank you for c-span. i listen all the time. it's very educational. i have started the paul ryan plan and it is ridiculous. plan and it is ridiculous. it puts about $270,000 in profits in paul ryan's pockets, if you really look at the plant. now there's this plan by a joseph lieberman and tom coburn, raising age limits, it's ridiculous. i'm asking our president, please keep the republicans away from my medicare and my social security. host: you don't think there should be any cuts to medicare? caller: no, there should not be. if you look at where the current money is going, you look at all the profits of stimulating on wall street, these guys making $500 million a year, they don't want to be taxed, they don't want anything to do whips getting us on the right road. we have models in france and italy and canada. they cost half as much as what we are talking about in medicare. half as much and better care. host: the baby boomer line is 847-65. you are 46 years old. -- the baby boomer line is 47- 65. with baby boomers beginning to retire now, they say it's not sustainable. caller: that's not true. a lot of us die before we get to the age they are talking about. so what are we talking about? we are talking about what is best for america. look at wall street. all the schemes. i would ask the president, keep these republicans and joseph lieberman away from my medicare and my social security. i trust this president because he cares about people. host: now, a 67, north carolina. caller: the caller has it down pat but he forgot to add something. if you are a senior and you go to the hospital and you have private insurance and you are working, your bill is maybe $50,000 or $40,000, your private insurance will not pay one dime until you qualify for medicare. or medicaid. and then medicare or medicaid pays the big part. host: your phone is breaking up, alberts, my apologies. bafta gone to amy-- we have to go onto amy in michigan. caller: i was thinking that i'm going to be 55 next week and i was thinking about all the studies that show people who continue to work and are more productive actually live longer and healthier lives. if maybe we should try and approach and say to ourselves how grateful we are that there's an enticement to continue to be active and productive into the second half of our lives. i am really stunned at how many people are unaware of the actual math. social security and medicare are giant ponzi schemes that we know eventually, those type of schemes where the first people put in the money and keep the benefits and others, fewer and fewer put into money later, eventually the system collapses. we have to prepare for that. host: in politics, here's a piece -- back on the debt talks. here's a piece -- is what richard wolff writes in today's "usa today." host: the sun is 32 in alabama. what do you think about this latest proposal to cut medicare spending? caller: i don't think they ought to cut medicare or medicaid or social security. social security. moving in the aged to 67, we need to take care of our older generation. we will need those programs when we get older. i have been a taxpayer all my life spans and i'm pretty sure all americans agree with me that there are other things we can cut besides these programs. i am one of the workers that will need the programs as we get older. host: john, you are 32. there was an analysis that shows 25-year-olds will get less than $1 in benefits for every $1 they put in. by the time you get to receive medicare, and you will be getting less than what you have put in over time. caller: i understand that. the government needs to figure a way to cut some other things instead of cutting those programs. i know i will need those programs when i get older. that is a simple fact. we need to realize that. that is why we are getting taxed for now. host: i want to show you two editorials before we go. editorials before we go. this is in "the washington post" this morning. talking about reducing deductions for wealthy americans. host: and then "the new york on it.ways in getting rid of tax breaks for corporate jets and making hedge fund managers pay more as well. host: detroit, pam is 62. one of our last caller is on the program today. the new proposal to cut medicare spending. caller: the guy from michigan was right on. is there some kind of way that all can try that yo-- that you all can explain about the 500 billion that is supposed to come out of medicare. from the insurance companies, not from medicare. they have taken that back and are putting it back into medicare. fox news keeps telling people that obama is taking that money from medicare. he is not. he is taking it from the insurance companies. a lot of the medicare is not even taking effect at --they are blaming obama for their premiums going up. premiums or already going up and they will keep going up until 2014, until the exchanges can be set up so people can buy insurance and get the program they would like. so we need someone to explain to people better what's going on. but if everybody would pay into it --it would be better if everybody could by medicare, but they don't want that because insurance companies would lose. host: 1 last deadline i want to show. host: 1 last phone call on this latest medical proposal. george is 77 in texas. caller: thanks for taking my call. i feel for the people back to make all the decisions. they have a tough job. we get all types of information over here. from your station. the senator from vermont filibustered five weeks ago and gave us all types of good information. he said that medicare and social security were solvent. all of a sudden it's coming up that we are in trouble again. senator coburn has said that part a is solvent until 2014 and part b until 2016. host: senator sanders will be joining us tomorrow morning on the journal at 8:30 a.m. eastern time. he will follow senator chuck grassley, the iowa republican and joining us spent 7:45 eastern time. we switched our focus to the mission in libya and a afghanistan. we will be right back. >> after 4.5 years and two president, secretary gates will retire this week. you'll be replaced by leon panetta. you can watch the defense secretary's retirement ceremony later this week on c-span. because well as c-span.org and online in the c-span video library. you can also look back at both men's careers. it's washington, your way. >> every saturday in july, historic supreme court arguments on c-span radio. 14th amendment cases on equal protection, including sexual orientation and gender and race discrimination. this saturday, single-sex admission policy in a 1982 case, mississippi university for women. c-span radio. and online at c-span.radio.org. >> corporations undermining the original intent of the internet by personalizing information to each user, says this all. and there's a heritage foundation party for ann coulter. and linda hogan writes about the native american experience and the responsibility she believes people have to the environment and other species. look for the entire three-day schedule on a web site and sign up for the "book tv alert. weekend schedules in your in box. >> c-span has launched a new easy to navigate web site for for politics on the 2012 presidential race. it includes twitter feeds the candidates and political reporters and links to c-span media partners in the early primary and caucus states and more. d>> ""washington journal" continues. host: former congressman pete hoekstra and now a senior adviser at a public policy and law practice. he also is doing education worked at heritage. welcome back. guest: good to be here. thank you. host: let me begin with afghanistan. here is "the washington post." this was guarded primarily by afghan security. what you make of this going forward and implications of it for the transition? guest: if you look at any single event and say now this is going to redefine our strategy for the next six months or 12 months. afghanistan was a broken state when we went in there. when we went in there. kabul was governing the capitol and appear there was no unified police force that maintain order and stability throughout the country. it is still that way. that will probably be the conditions in afghanistan when we pull out. this is just an indication that in that type of environment you will find gaps where the taliban or al qaeda can pull off these spectacular attacks. host: what did you make of the president's strategy that he announced recently? guest: i don't get all the details i used to get, but i thought it was unsettling yesterday when you heard that the military commander, general allan, saying that the president chose an option that was not presented to him by the military. this means president obama is going a different direction where the military believes they need to go. taking a look at afghanistan and seeing that the president will be pulling troops out during what is called the fighting season in afghanistan, that really does not appear to be to make a lot of sense. either you keep them there during the fighting season and start pulling them out during the winter of this year or you make the decision they are going to stakes through the fighting season this year and the fighting season all of next year, but pulling them out during that, i'm not sure why the president would want to do that. host: some of your own colleagues say that we are nation-building and we should not be doing that. guest: i am sympathetic to that view. there's only so much we are going to be able to get done in afghanistan. it is a failed broken state before we got there and it still is. when we leave we are not going to leave afghanistan increases -- that embraces democracy. i don't think we will have established a government in kabul that will have control over the rest of the country. if hopefully, we will have provided the capability for this government? to have some ability to fight the taliban and that we will be able to maintain a presence that enables us to continue a counterterrorism strategy. we need to have the resources and capabilities for the long- term to go after the taliban, go after al qaeda to make sure that they don't have the capability to plan, prepare attacks against the united states or the west. host: as the former intelligence chairman in the house, what do you know that make you believe strongly that we have to stay there? guest: what i know is that the taliban and al qaeda, they go to areas that are not governed. they have freedom to operate is what that means. that's why they went to a chemist and and why they are in pakistan right now. that is where they feel safest. that's why they are in yemen, because yemen has large areas of on government territory. it's why they are in northern africa. -- ungovernmened territory. we need a strategy to go after these radical jihadist elements so we can stay safe. the threats will continue. they will go to these areas. we need the ability to reach reach in and attack them and keep them on the defensive. if they have a safe haven, it provides them with the opportunity to prepare to attack the west against. host: where is the safe-haven? afghanistan and pakistan? host: it is in both areas. it's all, in yemen and it is also the northern tier of africa. the northern tier of africa, but the southern parts of algeria, libya, that whole area where they have created safe havens where they want to establish themselves. host: your reaction to former minnesota governor tim pawlenty in his speech yesterday in new york to the council on foreign relations where he spoke about his potential gop rivals and some in the republican party saying that there are isolation sentiments. he said this, "america has one party partly devoted to retrenchment and decline and withdrawal and does not need a second one." guest: i did not see his speech and i not seen exactly what his strategy is. for individuals in either party to be questioning the our strategy in libya and throughout the middle east is very appropriate. to be questioning the long-term strategy in afghanistan and pakistan is perfectly appropriate. it does not make you isolationist. the president has not laid out a clear case of what are u.s. national interest is in libya. at the same time he has not laid out a strategy that enables him to say we are going into libya, but we are not going to go to syria. gadhafi, as much as capitol hill want to write off the last 10 years, for the last nine years, gaddafi was an ally. the bush administration reopened relationship with gaddafi. he turned over its nuclear program. he participated in helping us fight radicals in northern africa. i have been over there every times at the request of the executive branch. he understood the threat from radical jihadist. he is a bad guy. the bush administration and for the first part of the obama administration, they embraced him because he was going to fight radical jihadists with us. but we have not forgotten that. for few months we were saying ashir assad would have reforms in syria, but give me a break. this man has done nothing for forms. for capitol hill and others to question the strategy does not mean we are isolationist, it means we are taking a look at what we would like to see as strategy in the middle east and we're not seeing a strategy -- a long-term strategy to fight radical jihadist s. to ask the president to be clearer on articulating our long-term strategy for defeating the radical derides, for bringing about reform change in the middle east, that is not isolationist. it is appropriate. host: should gaddafi be removed? guest: i think you have no option at this point in time but to remove him. host: we have not gone in there, but we should remove tampa? guest: i think the president has to make a more compelling case for why we did go in. now that you have wounded gaddafi, the worst thing for europe and the libya and america is that he would stay in power. host: how does nato do that? guest: it is very embarrassing. we are 100 days or more in this campaign and you are in a small country fighting gaddafi and he is still holding on. if you are going to go into something like this, you cannot do it halfheartedly, which is what nato and the u.s. has done. host: we mentioned at the top that spew our senior adviser to a law practice. do you represent clients who have a stake in the fight? guest: i work with a client very interested in the humanitarian efforts and bringing forward humanitarian efforts in to libya. he believes that is essential khaddafi be removed and a new government be put into place. host: is the part of the opposition? guest: he is not. host: let's go to stephanie, democratic call in riverside, california. caller:good morning, c-span. i wanted to say when congress was asking the american people to accept medicare and social security, we need to get out of these wars. we do not need to be over in iraq. we need to remove everyone from iraq and afghanistan. i also have a question. we have been in afghanistan over 10 years now. if they are not ready to ticker the government now, they will never be ready. we need to get out of these wars. we cannot afford them. the republicans have all kinds of suggestions for the commander in chief oand say he should listen to his military top official leaders when president bush did what he wanted to do, and it is like asking -- the tail wagging the dog. you have to listen to the leader pierre did the president is the commander in chief. >> the first thing i point out is we have to try to get the genie back in the bottle. by that i mean foreign policy is very hard. defeating al qaeda it is very difficult. managing through the change in the middle east is very difficult. it would be very nice if we could set aside the partisan posturing on these issues and move to a bipartisan foreign policy. it used to be that the partisanship stopped at the shoreline, and once we started going overseas we would do it in a bipartisan way so that we could show a unified front. we did that a number of times when i was in the house. democrats and republicans. the bush administration asking us to meet with arafat, to go to muammar gaddafi to meet with these individuals. as a group republicans and democrats we would listen to the administration, we would understand what the message was, and if we agreed with it, we would make sure we would go in and present a single message to the leaders we were working with. over the last member of years we have really seen foreign policy become a political dogfight. that hurts all of us. >> there seems to be bipartisan opposition to help guinness ban. that is coming from both parties . there seems to be bipartisan opposition to afghanistan. >> i slightly disagree with the calller. -- guest: i slightly disagree with the calller. we cannot do this based on the cost. you have to lay out the national strategic interest for the united states to be involved in each of these wars. the betting is that if we start a national strategic interest, it is cheaper to confront the threats overseas than to let the threat consolidate and grow and attack us here at home. if we cannot make that type, that we have to reassess why we're at a certain location overseas. host: a tweet from a viewer -- guest: the reason is we bombed him, we bombed his house. we have sent in troops, and if we allow this individual to read consolidate and have control over libya and have a safe haven, we have seen what he is done in the past. he is about person. this is the guy that orchestrated the takedown of pan am 103. this is the guy that orchestrated the bombing of the sites in germany that were targeted at americans. if he gets the safe haven, this guy will be bent on revenge, so now that we have started this fight, you need to see it through and finish it. host: when the senate foreign relations committee voted yesterday to allow limited engagement in libya, and by the with the full senate is set to take that up after the fourth of july recess. there were other amendments that were approved. this is in "the new york times" -- let's go to virginia. james on the republican pline. caller: i want to comment on the new york president from afghanistan. afghanistan. they're not going to protect their own country with that kind of money. guest: i am not sure it is $200 per month is the appropriate salary. if i were in afghanistan, i 2000 peress 200,000 - month is a pretty good salary. are these individuals committed to the government and the organizations and structures that they put in place? if what is accurate, and these individuals are not willing to stand and fight, it means they are not committed to the organizations and government. host: the next calller is on the democratic line. caller: it seems you were on the intelligence committee when you were in the house. you spent 10 years and did not get osama bin laden. what is killing you is president obama said he would get him before he got elected into office and he did. is it true you were a lobbyist for libya? guest: no, i am not a lobbyist for libya. for libya. and it does not kill me at all. i and grilled. m thrilled. i made the decision to leave congress, and then i made the decision to run for governor. i lost in the primary. host: republican line from texas. caller: i am retired military. when did the military's functions mean stop fighting wars and become nation building? also, how long will we be on the hook for paying these guys salaries over there? we are paying the whole country in afghanistan. it is time to get out of there. i have been a republican for 46 years, and i did not believe anything you are saying. guest: that is an interesting comment. i appreciate that. i do not think the military's i do not think the military's job has ever been nation building. i think we have seen that in a number of the wars we have been involved with. when you get involved with -- when you ask the military to get involved with nation-building and ask them to fight a war with one hand tied behind their back, those of the things that create problems for the military. they were not trained to do that. we have the best trained military in the world. when we ask them to do things they're not trained and prepared to do is when they have severe problems. host: lee independent calller. you are on the air. caller: i just wanted to comment that i think it is very despicable that we are more concerned about every citizen and every other country more than the american citizens. our economy right now is tanking. we are over fighting wars in libya concerned about the citizens over there. i think that is very unacceptable. host: what do you think about that? we hear that a lot. guest: i think it is a very legitimate argument, and i think this is why the president needs to lay out a case for why we are in libya or why we may potentially be and other areas throughout the middle east. people are hurting throughout the country. take a look at the young people. there are only one-quarter of teenagers this summer that will have the opportunity to get jobs. i think it is a real legitimate sentiment. sentiment. host: let's go to another tweet. guest: the original rationale was the government impact on afghanistan, the taliban, they were the ones that created the environment and safe haven for al qaeda prior to 9/11. they are the ones that provide a safe haven for a osama bin laden and his organization as they prepared and ultimately executed the attacks on 9/11. to annapolis. steve, republican. caller: i think back to all the different things that have happened -- anyway, what five. is half the things that have happened seem to be against the constitution. host: what are you referring to? caller: let's talk about the libya thing. that's talk about manufacturing going overseas. they come in and go, and they continue to harm our country. that is my point. it is the politicians. we need to get back to the constitution. anyone not supported the constitution needs to be eliminated. anyone who has done things such as the bank bailout and such need to be held accountable. guest: the opportunities are every two years to hold people accountable. the emergence of the tea party and other organizations i think will enhance the ability and the effectiveness of the electorate to hold politicians accountable. host: what do you think about the strict adherence that some have called for? guest: i am speaking to a tea party group on the fourth of july. i'm going back and reading the federalist paper. i am reading them in a transcribed version in the days language. it is very and lightning to go back and read these and read their interpretation of how the constitution would work and how america governed and following the constitution would work. it is very refreshing to see how they expected it to work. how then taking a look at h it is working, i think there is a strong and valid argument to get back to constitutional principles more thoroughly as the founding fathers envisioned it to be here did you would see quite a different america and quite a more robust america. host: you are in a group for the fourth of july. which group? guest: my local two-party group is doing a rally celebrating america's heritage, would you talk about the roots and what the founding fathers envisioned? i said absolutely. the best way to do that is read -- reread the federalist paper. ,hen i lost the governor's race my wife and i thoroughly enjoyed the process and public life. you never like losing, but we did not leave the race better or public life better. sometimes you say i will never do, but we did not say that. if the door sometime in the future is opened again to serve in public office in one form or another, we would very much consider it. it is not like we need to get back into it. host: would you run for your old seat? guest: no. you cannot go back. was a great 15 years in the private sector. it was a great 18 years. it was an honor to serve in congress, but going back to the house is an option i would not consider. senate or the executive branch. host: district heights, md.. the measure -- deborah, a democratic calller. caller: i know the wars, we are protecting the countries and that is part of the american process to protect our interests, but what concerns me is it is a war against middle- class and low-income when you talk about unemployment ant. unemployment is at an all-time high. middle-class americans, and it appears to be republicans and the congress attacking the programs for social needs. this is the america that i believe in. this is the america that i have worked for 40 years -s. host: any thoughts on this? guest: america it is a land of opportunity and where government gets out of the way. and the best social program is creating an environment where someone gets a job. i graduated from michigan during the carter years. it was amazing. the economy was tough, but we never really thought about not having the on fortunately of getting a job. that is very different than it is for my kids and other kids today. and a lot of these kids that are now brad trading with good skills, good colleges and universities and they're not finding jobs. finding jobs. the war in the middle class is creating an environment of over regulation and over taxation. creating an environment where businesses will move jobs overseas because we have made it a hostile environment here in the u.s. to create those jobs, and other countries have made it more inviting to create those jobs in their countries rather than in the united states. but give back to creating an environment where we will have an engine of job creation in the united states. -- let's get back to creating an environment where we will have an engine of job creation in the united states. and for each of these strategies you have to take a look at what the outcome will be in thtwo, four, or six years. if we go to total war in afghanistan today and killed the vast majority of al qaeda and taliban, that mean to go across the border into pakistan, which is safe haven. let's say we are successful there and then you pull out. at that point in time will you have a strong central government that will govern the country and have a strong military? my answer to that is no, you will not. host: we're talking to people extra. -- pete hoekstra. doing some work for heritage foundation as well. we will go to fill, a republican in connecticut. caller: two quick points. the united states is the most profitable nation in the world. it is like anything else, when you are used to something, you want it your way, and that will continue, but what i am saying is this is reflecting to the reef -- to the political process. we need to take a deep breath as americans and be grateful for what we have and not be so reactionary to other political situations because we have the power -- and the great country wants what they want when they want it, but we need to take a deep breath and look at getting into the conflict. the fact that congress is now complaining about what obama did as far as going into libya, and to see them sit back and crgrip. obama wrote them a letter to voice their justice or do something. it is so contradictory -- host: let's take that point. that was made up by the chairman. he made the except point about the letter and congress' that 60 days to do something, and they did not do it. guest: whether the present has complied with the war powers act or whatever, i looked at the votes of the house cast. one were there refuse to authorize and support what the president was doing in libya, but then it is the washington game. if you do not approve of what the president is doing, and that boat won overwhelmingly, but then, then do not fund it. the house refused to cut off funding. they are debating the essence of the war powers act were really what they should be deciding is do we or do not support what the president is doing of libya. if we do not support it, then cut off funding. cut off funding. host: brought up by your colleague, john boehner. guest: i give him a tremendous amount of credit for allowing these boats to go into the house and to come up. -- votes to go into the house and to come up. he determines the freezing of them. you can go whether you are in favor of the strategy or not. the individual members of the ones that really should be taking a look at their boats are the ones that said i do not support the president, i do not support the strategy in libya, but i will continue to vote and support the funding for what is going on in libya. those are the ones were a lot of people would look and say i wonder how they reached that conclusion? why would they support the funding if they do not support the effort? host: supporting limited engagement in libya means the two changes appear headed for a stalemate. which would have the effect of giving president obama a free hand to support the conflict. next calller. caller: i called about a comment that this gentleman made about the cost of the war, and how we should not think about the cost, because we are trying to terrorist from coming here, and that is why we go there and tried to stop them. and that is the same argument that george bush made for iraq, that we were going to go there to fight terrorism to keep it from coming here. the terrorists were not even in iraq, and when he said that i thought about that, he is expecting the iraqi people to welcome us with open arms after he said he was going to draw out terrorist fighting to iraq. the things people say do not make sense about the outcome they are wanting, because all it does is foster more. guest: number one, i think this is where we have an opportunity to change the rhetoric a little bit if president bush said we need to fight them where they are and go after them. it is not only president bush. it is the same rationale that president obama has used to go and triple the number of troops in afghanistan. this should not be a partisan issue. if you disagree with the rationale that says fight them where they are, then that is a strategy that both president bush and president obama and race. do not just part republicans, but target people that are moving the strategy for work. -- forward. republicans and democrats have embraced many of the same strategy, and i think president obama has found that out. many of the things he condemned what he was in the senate and during his presidential campaign that were being used by president bush are tools that he has now embraced and he is using to fight the war on terror to fight al qaeda and those types of things. the lesson that i think we can all learn is this is really hard, turned on the partisan a deepc, and let's have breath, have a serious discussion and debate, and hopefully reach a bipartisan approach of how we're going to move forward. host: do you think we need troops on the ground in libya to get rid of muammar gaddafi? guest: i am not sure. the rebels appear to be making progress. the evolution of this changes on a daily, if not weekly basis. i think a ultimately as they get additional support and more training, i think muammar gaddafi can be defeated. it will just take quite a while. this would facilitate and hasten the process coming to an end. host: who would take over for muammar gaddafi? do you know opposition leaders? guest: wave -- they have said we do not have a good understanding of who the rebel leaders are. the other thing is these are the rebel leaders today. we do not know what the outcome will be once they start negotiating as to what a government will look like. we do not know what the government will look like after mubarak. host: let me show you a headline on this -- on this -- guest: i think you went through it very clearly. and in hindsight disbanding the police and military appear to be very bad decisions, because we did not have a troops -- have enough troops to maintain law and order, and the bottom line is we would have been in much better shape in the police force and army could have been a stabilizing force, and we would have kept all of the people employed, and now is we go into libya, you have to look at the police force and army to see whether they can be a constructive force, because they are very different. they have different capabilities. muammar gaddafi have a different view of the military than what saddam hussein did. the military in iraq was better trained and more professional. they fought a war against iran. they had a certain level of capability. in libya, muammar gaddafi have a very close-knit group of military supporters, and the rest of the military was starved for resources and training. the rest of the military would not made the same kind of capability standards that you would have seen in iraq. host: independent calller on the line. caller: this is tanya. when you were talking earlier about doing away with -- [inaudible] host: you have to turn the television down. that is what causes the confusion. caller: good morning. thank you for everything you're done for our country. hopefully i can get a couple of the stock across. one of the things that really bothers me, especially living -- listening to the callers this morning is everyone wants to complain about what george bush did. both sides, everybody in the beginning said let's go to iraq. everybody was on board with it, so we went. then we have others jump up and support everything he did. now the anti-war president is on office. the one that said afghanistan was wrong -- iraq was run and afghanistan was right. he does not have any kind of approval on either side to it. meanwhile, george bush said that he would stop playing golf until the troops come home. this president plays golf more than bush ever did in eight years. he spends all this money and is ramping up more and more wars. guest: i think the calller raises a point i am very sympathetic to. i think anti-war movement have demonstrated what they were. there were not anti-war, there were anti-republican and anti george bush. they are nowhere to be found out. even though this president has continued many of the same policies, they took an opportunity on some major foreign policy issues, they took all war and used it for political purposes, because many of those same policies are being advocated by this administration and being carried forward and expanded by this administration by what we're doing and libya and other places to do in afghanistan. the anti-war movement is quiet. they have gone away. they have gone underground. to me it represents a lack of consistency to principal, but more of one of expediency as to who and what party may beat in the white house. -- maybe in the white house. host: one last week before we tweet before we go -- guest: the counter-terrorism, and i think this is what it will evolve to, you will see less of nation building. you will see the capability of building a nation forces and police below -- building and these places. then the ability and the approval from these countries to work with them with targeted attacks by the u.s. with special forces and these types of things, and that is the strategy. you will not go -- charm into afghanistan and build the economy. or tried to build a strong central government that will govern the rest of it and get away with the tribal systems. that would be nation-building. host: thank you for coming back and talking to be worse. about 45 minutes we will talk to the u.s. surgeon general about a new proposal to spur a healthier lifestyles. coming up next, we will be joined by senator former, byron dorgan. he served 1992 to 2011. >> here are some of the headlines. potentially faulty wiring on computer boards is to has given for the recall on hybrid vehicles. this includes some of the suv's. seven day and lesbians new jersey couple's are going to court in trenton to try to force the state to recognize gay marriage. the family say that in their legal complaint that the state's civil union law designed to give gay couples the same legal protection as gay couples has not been built across the bridge a promise. meanwhile in sacramento state republicans and democrats have found something to dislike and the new spending plan with past -- which passed with only democratic votes. democratic lawmakers say there were forced to use new bond majority vote to pursue the $9.6 billion budget deficit without the tax renewal they saw all here. overseas protesters are gathered outside greece parliament building in athens. deputies will prepare to vote on the austerity measures that have to be passed for the of financially troubled country to get the next installment of bailout funds to avoid default on the debt. in cairo egyptian security forces clashed with hundreds of young people for a second day. nearly 200 people have been injured in the worst rioting since the uprising that toppled mubarak earlier this year. those are some of the latest headlines on c-span radio. >> but there users can access our program in a time. -- our program any time. you can also listen to our signature interview programs each week. it is all available round-the- clock where you are. the supreme court is now available of the standard and enhanced ebook. it tells the story of the court through the justices themselves. this new edition includes an interview with the new supreme court justice, elena kagan. enhance your experience by watching multimedia clips. c-span, available now or ever books are sold. -- the supreme court, available now wherever books are sold. >> contact information, including twitter addresses, district maps and concern -- committee assignments and information on the white house. order online at c-span.org/shop. host: we are back with former democratic senator, byron dorgan, who served in north dakota for 30 years. 1992 to 2011 in the senate. and now you are part-time policy adviser at a law firm here in d.c.. let's talk about that. tell us what your doing. guest: i am doing a lot of things. i have created a new organization. organization. i have donated $1 million of excess campaign funds, and we're doing suicide prevention, substance abuse with indian children in this country. i work on a lot of different issues. we're going to save lives and improve lives working with indian tribes in parents around the country. -- and parents around the country. i am writing two or books. i am doing a lot of things. host: as part of the leadership when you serve in the senate for 16 years and a member of the appropriations committee, i want to talk about the debt talks. here is the question put forth in "the washington post" today -- guest: i think there has been an environment developing throughout the country and in congress that suggests that you have two approaches in public life. one is to stand by your principal or compromise. compromise is the way people make decisions. if i feel very differently than someone else, we sit down and try to reconcile that and be somewhere in the middle. more recently compromise has been seen as caving in on your principles and be willing to abandon your principles. it makes it very hard for them to come together in my opinion. >> democratic colleagues have said you will not touch medicare. do you think that was a mistake? guest: at the end of the day, i do not think there will be anything untouchable, because we need to fix a lot of things. this country has a lot of serious problems. this is not like ordinary things i have seen in the past couple of years. we have very serious problems that could have the potential to damage the country for decades. we have to solve this. let me just say that those who say it would be a great consequence if we default. that is nuts in my judgment. it is irresponsible. we have to fix what is wrong in the country for sure, but it you do not do that by saying let steve falk on august 2. it would have significant impacts for years to come. in i think everything will be on the table. there will be cuts to medicare spending. there have been proposals on both sides. host: the latest put out yesterday by senators. i want to show viewers what they said. they want to increase eligibility. will the americans pay 100% of premium costs. unified deductible cost of $500 to replace the current cost share requirement. limit medigap coverage. increase premium from 25% to 35% of the program cost. good idea? guest: the problems facing medicare are the problems facing families, businesses and all governments that tried to pay for the cost of health care. that is an exploding health-care costs. it is not just medicare. let me also see if i can start at the bottom here. we have this huge problem, because 10 years ago we dramatically cut the revenue to federal government, a very big tax cut. it was anticipation of heavy surpluses, which did not exist. bush tax cuts. second, we went to war halfway around the world. we did not pay a cent of that war. charged at all. everyone understands you cannot do that, dramatically reduce revenue and go to war and not pay for it. the third issue and big issue is the decision, which adamantly opposed, which is taking apart last legal and the protections put into place and allow the financial industry to have a field day and begin wholesale gambling. this meant costs go up in the federal government and revenues go down. those are the biggest issues. the fourth issue is the escalating cost of health care. there are a lot of people who want us to look over here. we have to address this issue of too little revenue. we have to cut spending in virtually every area. we have to begin to decide that if you're born to go to war, you must pay for it. we need to do all of those things. host: on the lieberman proposal, do you see this reducing the cost of health care over time? guest: it would reduce the cost of health care. this will be part of a much larger discussion on entitlements. we have to deal with the question of how you reconcile the entitlement spending. first, let's reconcile these missteps that have been made in the past 10 years. dramatic cut in the revenue for the federal government and the escalation in spending. then going to war in not paying for it. you cannot continue to keep doing that. host: immediately after the proposal was put out their proposal, and its people close to call the unacceptable. harry reid called it a bad idea. -- nancy pelosi called it unacceptable. guest: they have proposed cuts and some existed in the health care plan last year. interesting let's address these other issues first. they will have to have spending restraint in virtually every area. i had 22 hearings that i chaired on defense spending, a project really the issue of contracts and waste, fraud, and abuse in afghanistan. the american people can go to the internet and see the results of the hearing. it is unbelievable the amount of waste, fraud, and abuse. let's cut some of them out of the defense budget as an example. host: we mentioned part-time senior and bridge a policy adviser. do you have any clients that are involved in the debt talks? -- we mentioned part-time senior policy adviser. guest: i am working on a wide range of things, including business consulting and other things here and other parts of the world, but i do not have any clients dealing with these issues. host: what issues are you dealing with? guest: a lot of issues we are working with. we're working with businesses in china. a wide range of issues. host: we will go to steven, a democratic calller in texas. caller: this is an honor. thank you for everything you have done. i have to comments and questions build in there. i am an independent insurance agent in texas, and i have been for 20 years. about seven years ago i quit selling group health insurance and individual medical. it was a big portion of my business, but my conscience would not allow me to do it anymore. the cost to my clients went up so much every year, and i spent at least 20% of my working hours fighting claims that the customers paid their premiums for that the insurance customers denied or only paid a portion of. i just had to quit doing it. i do not understand myself white and asian as great as the united states of america cannot get some type of single payer health care, because for might employ years -- for my employees, this was the third biggest expense. after a while, i cannot do it anymore. one of the largest expenditures they had was workers' compensation. that was in some cases the third largest expense they had. if you paid health care for single payer health care system was involved, it would not matter if you got hurt at home or if you got hurt on the job, which many times there was fraud. people got hurt at home and they turned it in on workers compensation. compensation. guest: steven is talking about health care issue that is so significant. we passed a major health care bill last year in the congress, but more needs to be done. i mentioned the exploding cost of health care, which is the case. too often health care has become a profit and loss. when you build brick buildings to create an orthopedic center, a cancer center, all of these new centers, then it will drive utilization through the center. there was a great piece written about that in comparing cities in texas. we pay far more for health care costs than any other country in the world by far, and we rank somewhere in the 40's in life expectancy. we're not getting the results. we do need to find a way to put some restraint on these exploding health-care costs. it is breaking the bank. not just of medicare, but of business costs and individual family cost. host: president obama will be talking probably about the debt talks in a news conference that he is holding this morning. live coverage here on c-span in c-span radio. channel 119. likely to face questions about that. senator ron johnson threatened tuesday that he would await further some action unless the talks are conducted more openly as senate democrats laid out a budget plan. and safety harbor, florida. greg, you are next. caller: thank you for taking my call. i am 50-years-old. i am a veteran. i get social security, and the veterans department charge me money for my medicine, so it is paying for one government agency to the other. then what i did is when the obama stimulus plan hit, i took the amount of the population in the united states and the money they gave to corporations to bail them out, it worked out to be $287,000 for every man, woman, and child in the united states. they could have paid off their homes, they could have paid college tuition. they could have got tvs, and could have spent the much more money much more wisely. i know we are our our brother's keeper and have to police the world, i understand that, but thaat what cost? guest: first of all, the last thing i put in the senate record as a u.s. senator was a statement we need to withdraw from afghanistan. if we're going to fight terrorist, let's buy them where they are and not where they were. -- let's fight them were they are and not were they were. the intelligence committee acknowledges -- i think the official estimate was there are fewer than 100 al qaeda in afghanistan. are nownistan wherwe nation-building. it is time for us after nine long years to decide that we need to withdraw troops. we cannot afford to do this. we have been there nine, 10 years. i wake up every morning and read in the paper that may be the security forces will be ready in five years. what has been happening for nine years that they do not have security forces ready now? they have a largely corrupt government in afghanistan. in this time for us to begin to withdraw. -- it is time for us to begin to withdraw. let me also mention, he talked about the financial scandal. i am not here to sell books, but i wrote a book called "reckless." that book i wrote because of the financial -- i wrote it before the financial scandal occurred and was published during the financial scandal, but i very much opposed and fought against repealing the protections that were put in place, glass- stegall and others. they said it is old fashioned and take the protections down, and i warned them within a decade we would see massive taxpayer bailout. i think what happened was so unbelievable. wholesale the ambling with naked credit people swaps. credit people swaps. -- wholesale gambling with naked credit people swaps. it is not nearly enough. againstno restriction being too big to fail. we have financial institution still treating them on their own proprietary accounts. we have much more to do to bring to bear the financial service industry to say you have an important role in this economy, but let's perform it the way it should be performed. and host: you are writing two more books. what will they be about? guest: my publisher wanted me to be involved in the co-authorship of two books, fiction, dealing with energy. it is loosely called "ego thrilleeco thrillers." host: the president is meeting with democratic leaders from the senate. "politico" has this story -- what do you think? what do you think? guest: i think simpson-boels commission has to be dealt with. i think we should be quick to say social security is not causing today's deficits. it just is not. there is enough money coming in. there is enough interest on the accounts to cover the cost. in the long-term, social security and the exploding cost of medicare have to be dealt with. the rest of the government, we have to tighten the belt and restore revenue that was lost in the bush tax cuts and start paying for wars. how about asking the american people to pay the cost? host: there is a tweet -- guest: i think every -- you go through everything the federal government is doing and try to determine which of these programs might have been wise yesterday but no longer justifiable. there are some of those. we have to root out the waste in government, there is plenty. can i give you an anecdote that comes from hearings i held that talk about waste, fraud, and abuse? if you want to know about waste in the defense department, go talk to [inaudible] he is in a prison now. he was a 22-year-old that had a corporate shell corporation and hired his best friend, a massage therapist, a 22-year-old and 26- year-old who were behind an unmarked door in miami, florida who began giving contracts for the betterment. they got a $300 million contract with the department of defense. it was awarded to these two to provide weapons and ammunition to the afghan fighters. they did not have the experience in should not have been given the contract. they very quickly defrauded the federal government paria. i call the three-star general to my office and said how on earth could this have happened? he said knowing what i know, i still would have issued the contract. when he left i was so furious, because we had a pretty awful meeting, but those kinds of things really fleece the american taxpayer. and there is a lot of it at the department of defense per andse. -- defesne. -- defense. host: vick, a republican and florida. caller: hello. i had a question, i heard you talking about the waste in medicare. i can attest that there is a great amount of waste. i would ask the question, would repeal of theea medicare modernization act that privatize medicare? i have noticed it has become very popular among the older folks. part d as well as part a. it is the medicare advantage. guest: medicare advantage was deemed by those who supported it as something that would bring down costs. in fact, it costs much more than medicare. much more is spent in support of it than traditional medicare. it is part of the privatization issue, but it ends up costing the taxpayer less. i think it should be repealed. host: st. charles, missouri. democrats. caller: good morning. i am a regular for c-span regarding the program now, and i listened to a lot of the house and senate proceedings. first of all, let me say that i am so sorry that senators like byron dorgan, jeff bingaman, and others have quit us, but to make my point, sending -- several years ago senator dorgan gave a speech complete with charts showing the amount of money that taxpayers are spending on one project and the tigris and euphrates river in iraq. i am thinking now of north dakota and the problems here at home. i wish he would send that out for the listeners and discuss that. guest: let me just say that when you use the word quit that is incorrect. i served in statewide elective office in north dakota starting at age 26. almost no one serbs in statewide elective office at that age. -- serves in statewide elected office at that age. i wanted to do other things. i thought it was one of the great privileges of my life, but i wanted to move on to do other things. plus, i have seen people stay too long, and i did not want to be one of them. it was a great privilege to be there. host: there is a tweet from someone who wants to know, very glad to see you. wants to know if you will ever return to public service. guest: a sweet old lady grab me by the elbow as i got off the plane in bismarck, north dakota, a couple of months ago and said i am so sorry that you expired. i said i had not expired. i did retire from the congress. i doubt i will return to public life, but one never knows those things. i wanted to do other things. i am teaching, writing, a consulting. i still have great reverence for the congress. i want the congress to receive -- succeed and the president to succeed. i held a couple of hearings on the issues of contracts that would provide water to was very installations in -- to military installations in iraq. halliburton corp. received a contract to provide water to the bases. what i discovered is they were providing non-political water for showering and shaving that was more contaminated than water from the river. we had an internal e-mail to say this could have caused mass sickness or death. we had complaints from army surgeons and others that soldiers were getting sick. the pentagon and also halliburton denied it ever happened. they did not tell the truth. he asked the question about whether it be nice if that money rather than wasting been available for water projects in this country? the answer is yes. my hearts go out to the people in north dakota. the people in that region are suffering an unbelievable flood. it is somewhere around 4000 homes that are in the flood, and it is a devastating circumstance, and my heart goes out to them. caller: good morning, everyone. i have an observation i would like to share. it makes no sense to me what ever to go after medicaid -- rather medicare until we have rectify the situation with rectify the situation with i know from personal observation here in texas that virtually every illegal alien in the country is on medicaid things in large part to efforts of organizations like catholic charities that provides three -- free paralegal services to illegal aliens to sign them up for virtually every benefit this country has to offer knowing full well that these people are illegal aliens. what do you think about that? guest: i understand the great concern about that. we don't want to create circumstances where we say to someone if you sneak into this country or come in illegally, the full range of benefits will be available to you. the other side of that discussion, though, is one i expect you will feel the same as i do -- let's talk about a six- year-old child desperately ill presented to an emergency room coming from parents who came across illegally. should that six-year-old child be able to avail themselves or should the parents be able -- should be -- should they be able to get health care, or do the circumstances mean we will not give you medical treatment. it just seems to me it is unfathomable we would say, no, that is a child we will turn away. so, we have to think through and work through this to get a solution. but i don't think we ever say to people who are very, very ill, we will deny medical treatment. host: that is go to steve from albuquerque, new mexico. caller: to buy -- thank you for your comments. although i respect you i think you are a major part of the problem. just a few minutes ago you said you were in public service since you were 26. i guess that was 30 or 40 years ago. i think that is a big part of the problem. we have people in government service for way too many years. you talk about -- and both parties do this -- they want to short-term fixes. they can blame president bush for the last eight years, blamed obama for this two-three-year period he has been here, the credit clinton for what he did with the finances. this stuff goes back 30, 40 years. talking about paying for two wars -- what about the war on poverty? we spend what -- much more on the war on poverty and what have we gotten for that? guest: i served with a lot of talented people, republicans and democrats, and i think some of the best honestly were those who had been there for a long while and had unbelievable experience. he didn't mention storm -- term limits, but the implication is term limits. when i think of people like bob dole, for example, hubert humphrey, barry goldwater, lyndon johnson, who served for many, many years. some whom i have served with who has been there 10 or 20 or 30 years to have an of -- unbelievable experience and judgment. i just disagree that you would in any other circumstance go to a mechanic and say i would like to select the one with the least experience, or select a doctor with the least experience. the same is true in public service. i indicated -- you may not have heard me -- i decided to leave at retire and do other things because i didn't want to be there too long. i did see people stay too long. but many of those there for a long period -- i could mention some on capitol hill who have been there a long time who i think did an extraordinary job. there are others who have been there a long time who should probably do other things. host: he served in the senate from 1992-2011 and now senior policy adviser for a law firm and doing other things in d.c. let's go to ed, republican caller from dearborn, michigan. caller: thank you for taking my call. i just wanted to mention, i think what they are saying in regards to social security and medicare and medicaid, they should do away with it. and because of the fact that they know so much about what we need, we should get the insurance that they have after such a short period of time after being in office. host: let's talk about that point. guest: first of all, i would not support getting rid of social security and medicare. those are two programs that make this a remarkable country. we created social security when people lived on average to be 63. i grew up in a small town, a high-school class of nine, but i understand that if you have a program that pays benefits until you are 65 and you only live to 63, it will not be hard to finance. 60 or 70 years later people live until they are 78. that is a success and it puts a strain on it. we can make adjustments. but i would not suggest we get rid of the programs. i think they are programs to are very important for people who work through their work years and reach their retirement years and in the old days could not find health care. do you know of an insurance company that says my business model is to provide a six -- 680-year-old? they want to find a strapping, held a 21-year-old because they will never need health care. i disagree with the suggestion we should abolish medicare and social security. let's make adjustments to recognize times have changed. host: what do you think will happen with the debt talks? what type of proposal? guest: what must happen is october 2, republicans -- october 2, republicans -- excuse me, august 2. republicans and democrats must reach an agreement to extend the debt limit. they have to do that. there ought to be a result with that and to have a long term fix for the range of things that ails us at this point. if we can't continue to spend money we don't have. we just can't. so you have to reconcile that which what you want the country to do -- good roads, schools you are proud of, all of these things. we need to reconcile what we want with how much revenue we are able to bring in. that includes a wide range of things -- law enforcement, fire protection, defense department, the teachers, and so on. we have to come to grips because what has happened last 10 years, and longer than that, actually, we just spend money and put it on the debt. that is not going to work much longer. >> on the tax revenue side, "wall street journal" editorial calls it a stealth tax hike. a discussion weather and not to include elimination of tax deduction -- whether or not to include elimination of tax deduction for wealthy americans. they are scheduled to return when the george w. bush tax rates expire in 2012. while the statutory top rate will then rise to 39.6 million, millions of taxpayers will pay a top rate closer to 41% as they lose their deductions. is that fair? guest: those were the tax rates at -- that were paid in the 1990's. at the end of the 1990's we have a budget surplus. alan greenspan and others said they could hardly sleep at night because they were worried we will pay down the debt to rapidly. the president, greenspan and others supported large tax cuts to give back the surpluses. fact is, the surplus and did not exist, not beyond those two years. we went to war, were attacked by terrorists. it seems to me tax cuts that were established to give back to surpluses that did not exist ought to be allowed to expire as one part to fix the fiscal issues in the country. but doing the real hard work saying we will cut spending as well. you've got to do both. host: "the wall street journal" goes on to criticize republicans who might be tempting to go along with this idea of eliminating tax deductions, saying they will deserve only scorn if they do. guest: this is a house organ for the u.s. chamber of commerce. i know it sounds potter -- partisan but it is not what i mean it. when you have the biggest companies making billions of dollars and paying zero in taxes, less than you pay, then it raises the question of, isn't there a need to close some of the loopholes? if "the wall street journal" and the chamber of commerce says if you close loopholes and ask everybody to pay their costs, if you are then charged with increasing taxes, shame on those who make the charge. that is not the case. host: pat, democratic caller from st. louis, missouri. caller: senator, it is so good to hear from you. i worked and voted for president obama and i am just so disappointed with the income been since the icy. i can't take a vacation this year and i know my family can take a vacation but i see his wife michelle over in spain living it up, she is an africa with her whole family -- family. i have made sacrifices. when the president said we all had to share in sacrifices, my family did it. and i see him flying around going to one city or another. why isn't he staying in washington, d.c., and getting the job done? i see him playing golf. it is not good pr to see the president and wife living like a king and queen and the rest of us can't get jobs, and when he does talk about jobs it is like, let's spend more money. host: let's get a response from the center. guest: the points she makes is important. i like the president. i confess i like him. he inherited a tough situation. the law -- the month he came into office we lost 675,000 jobs. that tells you how tough things were. he is trying very hard. i understand the points she makes about what she sees and i understand that. it is the case that 20 million or more people will of this morning in this country really wanting to go to work -- woke up this morning in this country really wanting to go to work. it causes great misery. there is no social program in the country as important as a good job that pays well because it makes everything possible. i really think that this president and the congress needs to work together. i really hope when all the dust settles and all the shouting is done at the end of july, i hope august 2 will have come and gone and we would have made the right decision about the debt limit and then serious people will roll up the sleeves and look at how to put the country back on track to do the right things for the country prosecutor. host: we have about nine minutes left with a former senator byron dorgan. ruth, a republican from new jersey. caller: thank you for taking my call. i am wondering if the north american free trade agreement has anything to do with the economy today, and china owning our debts and bush and cheney raping the country on a daily basis? do you think that has anything to do with it? host: i will take nafta. guest: naphtha certainly -- nafta certainly does. i wrote a book titled "take this job and ship it." it was about the circumstances that allowed this country to be in a position to say it is ok to export jobs elsewhere. it is not ok with me. the johnny paycheck song, i ripped off his title. we actually reward companies who say we will lock up our plant in the youth of desk and move into china and produce our product -- lot of our plant in the u.s. and move into china. host: you say you are working with chinese companies -- guest: i should not have said chinese. working with business issues around the world with the u.s. around the world with the u.s. companies and foreign companies but i am not lobbying for anybody. it is an international economy but it should not be an economy in which we lose and they win. we will probably talk a little bit about the trade agreements. korea is a good example. it sends up generally 800,000 cars a year and we are able to sell about 6000 or 8000 in south korea. why is that? because 98% or 99% of the cars and south korea driven on their streets are made in south korea because that is the way they wanted. they want to ship their cars here. i think that is an unfair way for our country to allow competition to exist. host: "the los angeles times" reports on the trade deal the senator referring -- is referring to it. it says white house and senate democratic leaders reached a breakthrough, but key republicans immediately threaten to torpedo the plan tuesday because it would extend an existing program to retrain american workers who lose jobs to foreign competition. the heritage foundation, a conservative think tank, labeled the program as ineffective, with overly generous benefits for a small faction of laid off workers at a time of -- went out of control spending of public debt is threatening our nation's ability. guest: trade adjustment assistance -- most people don't understand, but it is an acknowledgment that people will lose their jobs. it gives help to people whose jobs are affected by the trade agreement. so you get assistance. let's do trade agreements that stand up for this country's interest. i am not suggesting isolationist -- isolationism. but when we negotiate, maybe we can at least act a little bit like all libyans, at least they can wear jerseys -- acted alike olympians, and wear jerseys that say i negotiate for the united states. so, we want to trade to be fair between china and the u.s., europe and the u.s., korea and u.s. that is why i wrote the book. we have simply gotten stiffed, and that is why we have the manufacturing plants moving wholesale overseas. not one pair of levis in this country, the little red wagon. and in know these people on the television commercials with the grapes, with fruit of the loom shorts and t-shirts -- they left. i could go on forever. but the lady who asked the who askednafta is right. we lost them -- the lady asked about nafta is right. caller: good morning to you and your guest. we appreciate what c-span is doing for us. the transparency and the open window to all three branches of our government. but i would like to say about president obama. about three years ago he promised accountability and transparency. unfortunately i don't think he will use that again when he comes back up in 2012, because he failed at that. in any case, i appreciate what this senator is saying today because he is making full confessions about what is going on in america today. there is so much greed and corruption, moral and ethics has been thrown out of the window, and every time a problem has been passed on to american season -- citizens have come from leaders. leaders are not showing any form of repentance of what evil is going on in america. host: we are running out of time. let us move to john, a democrat from florida. caller: good morning, senator. thank you for your service. i basically agree with you. i don't think america can possibly solve its economic woes on the backs of the poor and middle-class. it doesn't take much intelligence to recognize that. but i think democrats have a problem with their dialogue, in the fact that they talk about all of the entitlements on the table. of course, they talk about medicare and social security. but democrats, on the other hand, talk about raising revenues whereas a they should be referring to but bush tax cuts and subsidies for corporations and tax loopholes as entitlements for the rich. i have never heard of one democrat referred to that. when republicans talk about putting all entitlements on the table they would have to include those. i appreciate your comments. guest: whenever that language is used it is called class warfare but warren buffett said if it is class warfare, my class, meaning his, is winning. it is important for us to point it out. he did a study in his organization in omaha and discovered that the recession -- receptionists at his office paid a higher effective tax rate bonds -- than warren buffett. i think that is what he is saying. the discussion of today who pays their fair share for this great country. host: tennessee. judy, republican. caller: i first comment is, i am a republican but i did vote for obama this time. the simple reason is of the economy. it when they took a manufacturing out and let it go to other countries, then you can say what happened to detroit. we live almost in a third-world country now. i believe that we could have fixed new orleans by now, and at least got unemployed people off of unemployment and back into taxes. at the subsidies for the rich is absolutely crazy. host: we are running out of time. guest: the other point, the extension of what she is saying in my judgment is we need to continue to invest in our country even as we tighten our belts. research and development, to continue to keep our country in leadership. investing in roads and infrastructure. we have to continue those things as well. i have always supported and infrastructure investment bank that would help modernize and invest in america's infrastructure. host: former senator byron dorgan served 30 years overall. thank you for being here. coming up next we will talk to the u.s. surgeon general, but first, a news update. >> here are some of the headlines. today's reading on the housing market from a realtor trade group will give a fresh snap stop -- snapshot. the national association of realtors will release the home sales index for may, and analysts are expecting a decline. bank of america's countrywide unit reached an $8.5 billion agreement with investors to settle claims investors sold poor quality mortgage-backed securities that went sour during the housing collapse. the bank says the settlements is still subject to court approval. greece's lawmakers just approved a key austerity bill, paving the way for that country to get its next of vital bailout loans. the unpopular five-year package of spending cuts and tax hikes were backed by a majority of the 300-member parliament. britain that a foreign secretary says libya's cash strapped opposition received donor funds to pay salaries to public-sector workers in rebel-held areas. he told lawmakers that a first payment of $100 million and international aid money has been made to libya's main opposition group. group. secretary of state clinton has begun a four-day trip to europe to support international human- rights and democracy. right now she is on her way to hungary where she will on of grade a human rights center named for a former california representative. he found it converts's human- rights caucus. the rest of the itinerary includes lithuania and finally spain. those are some of the latest headlines on c-span radio. >> sunday on book tv's "in- depth," author and activist and chickasaw activist linda hogan. her books include a "vote woman who watches over the world," and heard latest, "rounding the human corners." sunday at noon eastern on c- span2. the c-span networks, we provide coverage of politics, public affairs, nonfiction books and american history. all available on television, radio, on line, and social media networking sites. find our content any time through c-span's video library. and we take c-span on the road with our digital bus, bringing resources to your community. washington your way. now available in more than 100 million homes. created by cable and provided as a public service. a public service. >> "washington journal " continues. host: dr. regina benjamin, the nation's surgeon general, here to talk about a new initiative, national prevention strategy. what is it and what you trying to accomplish? guest: trying to make america more healthy and fit. we want to move our focus from sickness and disease to wellness and prevention. so, we want to increase the number of americans who are healthy at every age and stage of life. host: what sort of budget do you have for this? guest: we don't have a budget for this per se, this is something we as a nation needs to do it ourselves. the affordable care act established the strategy coucil actually -- council made up of the 17 high level members. and the affordable care act assigned me as the chair. our whole idea is to have all of government look at prevention. what we are doing at various agencies -- health and human services, department of labor, department of justice, usda, federal trade commission -- 17 different agencies focusing on prevention. host: how will you implement the strategy and what areas are you focusing on? guest: first, we had to by law produce a national prevention strategy, or -- and we released it just two weeks ago. the strategy is based on the things i just mentioned -- trying to increase the number of matt jeter of americans who are healthy at all stages of life. we have an advisory council appointed by the president who will help us implement. but the implementation is what will happen between you and i. we need to start making our communities healthier. everything from transportation, clean air, healthy foods in our communities, exercise, everything to look at health in every type of approach. to look at health differently, to look at it into everything we do. host: how much of your time as surgeon general and your office's time will be consumed by this project? is this your largest initiative? guest: this is the biggest initiative i think for me. public health is what we are all about and if it's right into prevention. in conferences -- looking at health, rather than disease and illness. the question is how do you prevent you from getting a heart attack? how do you make your community healthier? how do you make yourself healthier so you don't have a heart attack 10 years down the line? host: healthier lifestyle in general. you can't be healthy if you are worried about how you are going to get a job. you can't be a help the community if your error is not clean and your water is not clean -- you can't be a healthy community host: why is it the government's policy responsibility or roll to spur healthier lifestyles and why specifically the surgeon general's office? guest: government is the place where we can show the leadership. but it is not our role -- that is to provide the leadership and the tools -- but it is really your role to be healthy and ultimately the community's responsibility and that is why we can't do it alone. but we do have the responsibility to show that leadership. for example, a couple of weeks ago we released my plate, usda possible replacement for the food pyramid. it makes it easier for you and families to know how to have a healthier meal. you take the plate -- half should be free to and vegetables. that is easy. those are tools the government can give you but ultimately it will be your decision and your family's decision. host: why does the government had a surgeon general's office? yuko the surgeon general started in the 1700's. -- guest: the surgeon general started in the 1700's. in philadelphia we had an outbreak of yellow fever. the yellow fever was inadvertently brought to the city of philadelphia by a merchant marines. then president john adams and signed into law the public health service to treat those merchant marines who had the yellow fever. it is an example of the president responding to the health needs of the country. that is what we are trying to do right now. so, the surgeon general serves as the nation that a doctor, america's dr., but also the public health service with 6500 officers who protect public health. just like the air force protect your skies, the navy protects our seas and oceans, public health protect your help. host: are you and those 6500 workers military? guest: we are a uniformed service or branches. we do not carry guns. but we are part of military, so we are active duty. they are all officers. they all have degrees in some sort of health and science. they are doing everything from medicine, nursing, administrative medicine. host: who are they doing the services for? guest: there are agents throughout the country and throughout the world. when cdc response to an outbreak, many of those are our officers working at cdc, fda, or hhs. host: all medical degrees? guest: health degrees. some veterinarians, dentists, administrative, lab techs. host: what is the average salary? guest: comparable to civilian salary in that area. whatever a physician makes -- and it is actually the very same salary as any other military. we have the same salary and benefits as other military, so we are one of the uniformed services. host: we were talking about the nation's debt and the talks going on. how can this country afford to pay 6500 people the salary that they might make in the private sector -- physicians, veterinarians -- pay them to not only be and our country but all across the world? guest: again, we are the military. technically it is not called military because we don't carry guns. there are two branches of the armed forces that don't carry guns -- united states public health service and noaa. otherwise everything else is like military. our officers are on active duty. we pay just like we do for anything else it if our whole goal is to protect the nation's help. host: this is a piece written in "the los angeles times." he says this -- guest: the whole idea of the office of surgeon general is to communicate to the american people about difficult health issues so we can translate them and to help people understand. they are right -- i don't have any authority to make any laws or enforce any laws. host: what about a budget? guest: it is within hhs, so i am a member of health and human services. host: how much does your office get? guest: is within the assistant secretary of health. we don't have a separate budget. host: can you give us a ballpark? what you spend on annual basis? guest: because our officers are not in different agencies they are not in my office, per se. for example, i have several hundred that worked at the cdc, they are within that budget. i have over 1000 at the indian health service. so, it is hard to come up with one figure of all of our officers. host: you are saying the point of the surgeon general is to communicate to americans about health, and one is through warning labors. the warning labels. -- warning labels. can you tell us how you decide and how the decision is made about the language? guest: that decision is made by congress. congress will be clear about what labels go on cigarette packages. tobacco labels, last week released the new fda labels, the graphic warning labels. that is determined by congress in the law and a spell out exactly what goes on it. it started out actually almost 50 years ago with the event surgeon general, he put the warning on the labels. that was again by law that congress determines. host: we would get to phone calls. pat is a democrat from michigan. waiting to talk to dr. regina benjamin. caller: hi, dr. benjamin. hello? i am thankful there is still an organization like the surgeon general in the united states government'. it is a pretty comprehensive job. listening to you describe the various people you pull together in the various departments, it is overwhelming. i am, however, concerned and wonder if you could address the warning labels -- there are so many areas i could discuss. but the warning labels on our food. i am very concerned about standards that have been put into place by usda and fda that it will not list products that are actually in products that we are concerning -- consuming, such as milk and growth hormones. do you have anything to do with that, and it's not, could you suggest who i could contact? host: we lost audio for a little bit. you are refering to fda labels, warnings that are put on food? caller: i there usda or the fda, i am not sure who is the branch involved. but when you were discussing food labels, i am concerned with milk and food that we need not having the proper labels to tell us, for instance, it has growth hormones. i know the milk industry has fought to that. host: you want to know who is in charge. caller: if that is something she would be in charge of. would be in charge of. guest: i am not in charge of that but the fda is in charge and they are working very hard to reformulate the labels on food so they are easier to understand, that you can read them and know exactly what they are and you don't have to have a medical degree to know what is in your food. i know the fda and usda are working on food labeling right now. but the milk you are talking about is the fda. host: here is a tweet that wants to know about-but those corn syrup -- h high -- high fructose corn syrup -- guest: any kind of sugar would do that. the labeling -- fda and usda will put out comment periods as they are starting to develop the labels and there is an opportunity. but in increase of any sugar, if you increase sugar intake you will increase your insulin -- i mean, you will have a chance of causing insulin resistant. host: a republican from new jersey. you are on the air what dr. regina benjamin. the surgeon general. guest: i agree in principle but i do believe a lot of this is just a public relations move. i have grown children and years ago one of the first things our country did was to eliminate daily physical education in our schools. that has encouraged a sedentary lifestyle. when you go through any grocery store you will see that our economy is built on unhealthy foods and snacks. and the affordable health care has caused me double sense it was instituted back in march a couple of years ago. i think this is a public relations move. host: dr. benjamin? guest: karen, i think you are right about the fact that we don't have enough of physical education and our kids are not getting enough exercise. that is what we are talking about. we have to take part -- charge of our lives ourselves. on this prevention council we have, the department of education is a part of that as well as usda, and they are committed to increasing the amount of exercise in the schools, in addition to the amount of exercise -- and in addition to the amount of exercise the department of trepidation has something called a walking school boards -- department of education has something called a walking school bus where the parents walked into school and drop them off instead of getting on the school bus. this is something we all have to do. i wouldn't call it a pr campaign. i would just call it something as we as a community, we as a nation and society have to take control of our own health care and increase our health and well-being ourselves. we in the government are here to give you as many opportunities to use the tools to help you do it better. host: maps with -- matt smith tweets in -- -- that is what we are doing with the labeling jean guest: that is what we are doing with the labeling. there is a process and place where we have a comment period republic can have input. i certainly have input and we said at the table and we talk about it quite a bit. we want to make sure you know what is in the food you are taking in. host: you don't have specific authority? guest: that is the authority congress has given to the fda. host: what is the name of your town, mark? go ahead. caller: i calling regarding malpractice insurance and their rates they charge. -- the rates they charge. the insurance companies are getting more than the dr.'s salary. it would seem the country would be better served if they ran malpractice through the surgeon general's office or some kind of government insurance program, because the insurance companies tripled it. they hit the doctors without practice insurance and they hit consumers through health insurance -- they hit the doctors with malpractice insurance and they had the consumers through health insurance. host: do you have any thoughts about that? guest: i am family physician and prior to this job i was in practice and a small town in alabama for 23 years and malpractice insurance premium was one of the biggest expenses. but insurance premiums are controlled by the states. one of the things we are doing one of the things we are doing in the affordable care act is trying to make sure that those premiums that the insurance companies are now charging not for malpractice but for your health insurance, that most of that money is to provide you health insurance. that in itself is a major step forward. as far as malpractice insurance, it is a state level thing that continues to go on. the medical societies, congress is still working on how to bring that under control. host: dr. regina benjamin got her bachelor of science from eggs a beer, m.d. from university of alabama, and b.a. from tulane and 11 on every doctorates -- she got her bachelor of science from xavier. independent caller. caller: how are you doing? how are you doing. i would like to commend you on the job that you are doing. at first i did agree with the lady saying it was just a pr campaign, but then i kind of realize you do have such a wide range of things that you have to cover. because i look at the people that do what to the bus stop, then i look at actually the bus drivers themselves. they have to be educated also on they have to be educated also on different things, how they can be healthy. do you work with the food? because i think things that are put in the food are addictive and not good for you. so it is hard to make that transfer to the healthier foods. such as sugar. host: you did talk about that you have a seat at the table. guest: but you are absolutely right. lifestyle changes are so hard to make. we get so used to what we are doing so it is one of the most difficult things. we are talking about changing the things we do every day. we know there are five leading causes of death, that can be reduced or eliminated by changing our lifestyles. if you stop smoking, if you don't smoke. don't smoke. if we had a smoke free society we could cut out heart disease, lung cancer, and stroke. we could decrease them. so, we target of those five leading causes of that and try to get ideas and ways that we can prevent those five leading causes of death. tobacco is the number one. we need a smoke-free society. we need healthy eating, healthy living. in addition to the exercise, as surgeon general i have to talk to you about not smoking and the tobacco use and how we still have one out of five people who are smoking, one out of five adolescents the start to smoke and become addicted to cigarettes. host: how do you measure success on that front? guest: we have a program called healthy people 2020. within that help the people 2020 there are a number of goals we are trying to reach. we are trying to reach those goals. there are specific benchmarks. so if you look at the strategy, you can go to our website and find the national prevention strategy, and you can also find the healthy people 2020. but those benchmarks are there. we want to decrease the number of people who smoke. we want to decrease the number of adolescents this month. those are specifically written in there. we have measurable goals throughout. but the overall arching goal is to increase the number of people who are healthy at every stage of life. host: is that the reasoning behind the new smoking labels? guest: one other reasons. we have been working on tobacco and stopping smoking since 1964. so, we know that smoking causes death. it causes lung cancer, it causes a number of medical things that we know it causes. so, in addition to that, this is one of the things we know can improve the health of our nation if we were to stop smoking. host: a republican from burbank, california. caller: good morning. i would like to make a question, please? host: you are on the air. caller: thank you. host: you have to turn the television down. we will go to toms river, new jersey. more rain, independent caller. we will go back to salvador, if we can. caller: i want to tell you i am a vegetarian. i am 73 years old. i stand 5 feet 6 inches, 130 pounds and have the energy of two. i get no credit for being a vegetarian. they charge me the same thing they would charge anybody. i am very disappointed we don't get credit. you are touting get healthy. what are you going to offer me for being healthy? guest: you will have a longer and healthier life. and healthier life. you are up and doing things and you are not having a heart attacks and the diseases that people who are not healthy have. those benefits are yours and you know that. what we are trying to do is get more people to be like you, that more of our communities become like you. we are trying to get the entire community to be interactive and become a healthier community and society. everyone will benefit. everyone will improve as we become a healthier nation. what you describe is a great example. i wish everyone was like you. s this --kie tweeted st. louis, missouri. you are next. lost that phone call. va, randy, republican caller. caller: dr. benjamin, good morning. my name is randy o'neal and i am a presidential fitness partner and winner of the 2007 inaugural community health leadership award. i received that award because of my mobile fitness business, which has traveled to over 1000 schools and a state of virginia. i have 30 stationary bicycles that fit children as young as three years old and i entertain them with video and music while we on average burned 300 to 400 calories, 3-5 miles. what i am shocked at is how little care or how little money is invested in the preventive programs in the lower schools, when so much money, $700 to $1,000, is spent on an athlete in middle and high school. so, it seems totally unreasonable when you had a $2 million for the budget and you have less than $100,000 in a division with 10,000 students and to be spent on preventive health care. host: your response? guest: i think you are absolutely right. we have to give kids things that are fun, make exercise fun and enjoyable -- enjoyable, part of what we do every day. as we are talking about this, part of what we're saying -- we don't want exercise to be a drag and tell them what you can do and can't have. it is what you can do and can enjoy. the dollar amounts, that as a society, we have to change the way we look at what is important. what is important is we get all of our kids healthy and active. what you described with the bicycles, they are having fun. they are not dreading working out saying i have to do 30 minutes of aerobic. they are having a good time. we have to bring the fun back into our classrooms, back into our exercise and make it part of our lives. that is what i am trying to get americans to take ownership of and say i can be healthy, i can do this. i can also have my family do this. it is my choice, my decision to be active and healthy. host: individualsovereign tweets in -- is this something your office studies? guest: we constantly tried to give you the best scientific information available and we have scientists constantly trying to find that out. it changes over time. as we learn new science, we are obligated to share that science with you so you can make good, healthy choices and decisions. it is constantly moving. it is constantly changing. we are constantly trying to find what this science is. host: moses is a democrat from north carolina. caller: good morning, ladies. how was it going? i have one question, or probably broken up into three parts. i am in martial artist and i love exercising, but i cannot stand even with a high price of tobacco everybody still smokes no matter of the laws in place. why do you not oversee the fda? and i have no train or practice but in my house -- how do i go about getting government grants to teach inner-city communities to have a healthier lifestyle? guest: the first question about why my office does not oversee it, that is of the with the government structure is, the way congress decided that is the way the government structure is -- that is the way the government structure is, the way congress decided its. of what you can do what the tobacco part, you are right, we have something called -- communities putting prevention to work grants. they were based on obesity pills and smoking habit that -- they were based on obesity and smoking. some were using that to make smoking cessation programs more available. in los angeles, for example, one thing they used their grant for was to make their parks, that outdoor parks, smoke free. so, you can go to your parts, exercise and bring your kids and be in a smoke-free environment. many of the grants were there. the new were grants coming through in this prevention fund through in this prevention fund -- newer grants coming through this prevention fund will be coming through your states. you can look into those and see how you can team up with your state and health department to be a part of those, because they are doing prevention as well. host: we are talking to u.s. surgeon general dr. regina benjamin for about 10 more minutes. some are probably wondering why you are wearing the uniform did you said earlier the surgeon general is part of the military. you are an admiral. you have that military experience? guest: you do not have to have military experience, but medical and science. . i go through basic training just like any other military person. i am actually a three-star admiral. and the basic training is there. you do the physical fitness just like any -- but you don't have to be in the military or in the public health service before this job. this is a presidential appointed job. host: john as a republican from florida. caller: what i see, from the government is a lot of hypocrisy. on the one hand a woman telling us what we need to do to make us more healthy and then you have the fda and the department of agriculture, prescription drugs and genetically modified resisted food that has not been properly tested for safety. then we send armed government agents to arrest amish dairy owners for selling raw milk, which has been proven to be more healthy. guest: one of the roles of government is to make sure the food supply is safe. so, that role is given by congress and we have to follow that. one of the things we released yesterday was the usda has a campaign about food safety. one of the things -- the government will keep the food supply safe. what happens once it gets into your hands? campaign is to help you try to keep your food is safe. we want you to make sure you clean the food, and then you separate the food, you want to make sure you cook it and shell it. that it is clean, you wash your hands and keep surface is clean and you want to separate the meat from the fresh fruits and vegetables. you want to make sure you cook it to the right temperature using a thermometer and you want to refrigerate it if you are not using it right away. keeping the flute -- food supply say is the government's role but we want to give you the tools to keep it safe once it is in your home. host: kentucky. caller: good morning. what i wanted to say was, we can't take care of the population we have now, the government can't, so how do we care how much light stand -- like span goes on? guest: i am a doctor and i care about people. this is more of a personal answer. i lost three of my immediate family -- mother, father, brother, to preventable diseases. my mother died of lung cancer because she smoked as a teenager. my father died of a stroke and my brother died of hiv. i don't want other families to suffer losses from diseases and killed as we can prevent. host: dearborn, michigan. john, republican caller. are you with us? caller: i am a liberal democrat from detroit and i am disabled with bipolar disorder, bipolar illness and schizophrenia, and i am on disability, medicare, medicaid, and food stamps. i would like to know how i have a healthier lifestyle with a $200 in food stamp money that i get a month when i am not able to afford for its and vegetables very much. guest: we are trying to get more fruits and vegetables and healthy foods into communities, particularly communities that do not have them. we are also trying to bring down the prices. it should be easy for you to have healthy foods. it should be just as cheap and easy to get something healthy that it is to get something that is not healthy. that is one of the things we are working on. you bring up something else i want to mention, and that is mental health issues. that is important that the mental health of a community is also addressed because we tend to forget about that. in the prevention strategy, that is important. anything from minor depression to major illnesses to bipolar, that we make sure that we don't lose the support for our mental health services. h., this is a tweet from freelancer -- guest: a couple of causes, but right now we are seeing is the increased amount of calories that we take and, which converts to sugar. as your sugar goes up, your insulin goes up and as one of the earlier callers mentioned, there is something called insulin resistance. as we see it going up we see more and more diabetes. we are seeing it in younger and younger people. our kids are getting diabetes and that is why the first leader has the "let's move" campaign to decrease and eliminate this childhood the b.c. -- obesity problem. the diabetes has so many consequences later in life. you can lose your vision, lose your legs, lose your kidney. those things are preventable just by being healthy and improving our lifestyle. host: alice from connecticut. democratic caller. caller: am i on the air? thank you. i just wanted to say, i am up older person -- an older person and a year-and-a-half ago i was borderline diabetes ii and had high blood -- high blood pressure. i would -- was overweight and i decided i would redesign my diet and i went to lagoons and whole grains and vegetables and fruits, especially colorful vegetables and fruits, and i lost 61 pounds and the space of a year, i went down 6.1 pounds a month and i maintained that a diet and have gone down -- now i am where i want to be. i no longer the problem of possibility of diabetes ii. and it also spurred something else. i live in a suburban lot, it is not very big. everybody has the perfect little lawns. i don't like lawns, i want and metal. the children in the neighborhood -- and there are a lot under 5 -- didn't know what food comes from. one of the grandmother explained about milk and they said i will never eat that stuff again. so, we started a little project for the little kids -- container gardens. they come over day -- every day and they ask, do you have tomatoes for my mommy? guest: exactly what we are talking about. taking a community and building upon it yourself. this is not something the government should do. if you are doing what we are trying to get everyone else to do. bring the community in and help them understand what being healthy is about and how much fun it can be. it sounds like you are having fun doing that. host: curtis is a democrat from virginia. caller: hello? hello? i have a question. my question is, if they can put warning on tobacco and cigarettes, why not on liquor bottles and everything else that can kill you when you are driving? guest: some states have warnings on alcohol and in many states and there are warnings there. host: dr. regina

Related Keywords

Alabama ,United States ,Vermont ,Minnesota ,China ,California ,Syria ,New Mexico ,Russia ,Washington ,District Of Columbia ,Kabul ,Kabol ,Afghanistan ,Connecticut ,Egypt ,Tigris ,Missouri ,South Carolina ,Massachusetts ,Iowa ,Trenton ,New Jersey ,Sacramento ,El Salvador ,Libya ,South Korea ,Spain ,Greece ,Miami ,Florida ,New York , ,Canada ,Tampa ,North Carolina ,Germany ,Texas ,Iran ,Algeria ,Philadelphia ,Pennsylvania ,Kentucky ,Toms River ,Virginia ,Wisconsin ,Michigan ,Mississippi ,Pakistan ,United Kingdom ,Athens ,Attikír ,Dearborn ,Tennessee ,Iraq ,Albuquerque ,Hungary ,Euphrates River ,Al Anbar ,Detroit ,Yemen ,Lithuania ,Capitol Hill ,North Dakota ,France ,Italy ,Americans ,America ,Salvador ,Afghan ,Iraqi ,Russians ,American ,Chinese ,Libyans ,Egyptian ,Britain ,Serbs ,Barry Goldwater Lyndon Johnson ,Nancy Pelosi ,George Bush ,Hubert Humphrey ,Ron Johnson ,Richard Wolff ,Ann Coulter ,Pete Hoekstra ,Alan Greenspan ,Regina Benjamin ,Chuck Grassley ,Al Qaeda ,John Boehner ,Tim Pawlenty ,John Adams ,Peter Hoekstra ,Byron Dorgan ,Paul Ryan ,Jeff Bingaman ,Joseph Lieberman ,Warren Buffett ,Randy Oneal ,Linda Hogan ,Matt Jeter ,Los Angeles ,Bob Dole ,Tom Coburn ,Harry Reid ,Matt Smith ,George W Bush ,John Goodman ,Christine Lagarde ,Elena Kagan ,