Transcripts For CSPAN Washington Journal 20141027 : comparem

sunday saying that it is working on new guidelines for healthcare workers returning. that decision coming as york nors in illinois,new and new jersey announced that they were instituting a quarantine. this morning r you is mandatory quarantine necessary? here are the numbers to join the conversation. 202-624-3881 for republicans. 202-624-3882 for independents. 202-624-3880 for democrats. you have heard about new york and new jersey, but also have a s and new jersey different kind -- in illinois a 21 day observation period. looking at the headlines, us on quarantine rules. and new , new york, jersey announced that they were implementing new quentin for returning healthcare workers, but administration officials have made clear to governors that with the concerns unintended consequences of policy is not grounded in science. an administration official who be identified describes the new process. this is reaction to -- here's a look at the out of new jersey. -- new adline says jersey nurse lashes out at the ebola policy. from the nurse here. how i ne keeps asking me am physically, and of course i am fine physically, but most what is is ot know like to be alone in a tent. we wanted to get a sense of working stance in terms of the ebola quarantine. dr. anthony fauci, he has been the show several times in and said this yesterday. >> as a scientist in the health person, if i were asked i would not have recommended that. >> does it put more pressure on the cdc to change these policies? cdc will continue to make their policy based on scientific data. that does not mean that they are cavalier about this. there are different levels of risk to a healthcare worker and there are different levels of monitoring. if you put everybody in one basket -- even people who are clearly no threat -- then we have a problem of a disincentive of the people that we need. the best way to stop this epidemic and to protect america stop it in africa. we can only stop it if our healthcare workers go there. question for you -- are the ebola quarantines necessary? such as they've implemented in several states. 202 585-3880 democrats 202 585-3881 republicans 202 585-3882 independents governor chris christie of new of why they spoke implemented the quarantine in new jersey. >> listen, i have great respect for dr. fauci, but what he was a voluntary system with folks who may or may not comply. as you know, the nbc news crew going into self quarantine, then two days later they were walking around the streets of princeton. the fact of the matter is that i don't believe that when you are dealing with something as serious as this, you can and fallen volunteerism. if anything else, the government's job is the health and safety of our citizens. we have taken this action and a absolute half of second thoughts about it. >> governor christie yesterday on fox news sunday. mandatory ebola quarantine necessary for healthcare workers returning from the countries in west africa? your thoughts. >> hi, i would like to say that i am an anti-semite and i do not like jewish people. what are you saying? >> i'm an anti-semite -- >> let's go to valerie. >> yes, i think we are panicking. we need to do is find out -- ebola patients, why they are being affected. it makes no sense for so many people to be affected at one time. we need to stop bullying our healthcare workers. and the other point i want to make is this. to use common sense and we need to go back to basics. advice on the side with our we need to do ebola people -- we need to give a strong dose of tea. it helps the intestinal part of it. >> go back to comment that you need to stop bullying healthcare workers. what you mean about that? >> if a healthcare worker has not been tested positive, she should be allowed to be at home. you cannot put a woman in a toilet here she uses a and a bed with body odor buildup. treat people with dignity. i am not trying to instill fear rest of the population because that is what we are doing. fight it in africa, we are going to have to in the united states because we're so close minded and narrowminded recently. it will not get any better and less rework together. nurse, kerry hickox, had an op-ed yesterday. she has several degrees and that i'm a nurse -- wrote that i'm a nurse and i have been quarantined in new jersey. this is not a situation i would wish on anyone. i am scared about those who follow me. i'm scared about how healthcare workers will be treated in airports. i'm scared that, like me, they a frenzy of see disorganization, fear, and quarantine. i arrived at the airport at 1:00 pm on friday after a grueling two-day journey. i walked up to immigration and smile eeted with a big and a hello. arrive from hat i sierra leone, and he said, no problem, we are going to ask you a few questions. a little piece from the nurse. here's matt. matt, your thoughts on the changes that are apparently happening in the unix system. of i think it is a system hysteria and self-centeredness that we americans are shortsighted. we have totally given up and given into a motions. duncan's family lived with him in his own y days, home while he was sick and already beginning to vomit. and none of them got sick. now everyone thinks they are to get ebola from sitting next to someone on a subway. that is not going to happen. to listen to doctors and tell these politicians that they need to observe. otherwise this country is just going to go down. on our 's fred independent line. that we are amazed not aware of the potential plague with ebola. chefs he knows that the illness can spread very rapidly. if we do not put some sort of quarantine to place, we will this to go untreated and out of control. it is now spreading to our country. she should be speaking on the procedures that would follow. develop a help to better policy. think it is fair? it sounded like from her op-ed was taken by surprise. a grueling unt, two-day journey. the quarantine was issued late in the week by new jersey. it fair for her to be a little taken by surprise? >> of course. because there are no procedures in place and this time. to the united w states. she should feel threatened -- >> is what they're doing to her a little bit extreme? >> no. either in llnesses this country? if she had rabies or they would s, quarantine her. from t's read a little bit this article -- ebola quarantines can be spent at home. a new york ains at hospital. they are facing fierce house ance from the white and medical expertsdistrict's new medical quarantine policy. the governor said on sunday night that healthcare workers contact with ebola africa and did t symptoms of the disease would be allowed to stay at home and receive compensation. also asked bama other governors and mayor to policies based on science. announcement by mr. cuomo draw a sharp contrast both in tone and it back to the implemented in new jersey, where a nurse was quarantined with a portable toilet and no shower. in icture of casey hickox that isolation tent at that university hospital in new jersey. you think , bob, what about this? >> it doesn't seem like it is a cessarily opposed what democrat would think, but, you know, i think it should be part of the deal. if you're going to be gracious your time volunteer and energy and health to go in -- you know -- work africa on ebola, you should be gracious enough to understand that when you come back there be some mandatory quarantine. enough uld be gracious to submit to the 3 to 4 week sure that you are -- that should be part of the process. you come back, you know that you are not going to be into your life -- you put your life on hold to go over there -- >> that sounds like medical workers, at least, coming from the united states are aware of that. it doesn't seem like the nurse was caught surprised by this. >> you know -- i don't really any sympathy for her an extra few t weeks to make sure that the us are safe here. the man who came back from the doctors in new york, i am really outraged by this. i'm feeling outraged by -- you you for your service, but -- should he have done? you're talking about dr. spencer, right? fan of not a big governor christie, but i do not think you can depend on people to self quarantine. this dr. -- his personal social to go out need and his fiancée -- superseded any knowledge that this mentor skin back from a hot spot of -- this man just came back from a hot spot of health danger. >> thank you for the call. a couple of tweets. the first one here -- this one hard one to call. and this one says -- these mandatory ebola quarantines for healthcare workers necessary? york, our states -- new new jersey, florida, and illinois. 202 585-3880 democrats 202 585-3881 republicans 202 585-3882 independents here's the republican line. kimberly, hello. >> good morning. have been a cna and i know that nurses are going about being in isolation. if she would take two seconds isolation ndma in mrsa, it doesn't make sense. they're not doing what is in interest of the country. it is too dangerous. >> do think there should be a unified, federal response? government federal mandate a quarantine? because now we have the four states taking some initiative here. >> good! they're supposed to protect the whole country. >> thank you for your call. look inside usa today, an opinion piece -- that sending doctors is a bigger evil a risk. in the ite that patients advanced stages are -- patients the sick and up in the hospital. in countries, such as liberia, most of us turn away from people that are sick. spencer didn't by helping to control the disease in africa. spencer helps protect americans. outbreak in bola africa gets, the greater the risk it spreads worldwide. if we pull a little wider, it the pentagon is doing in terms of its ability to move ebola patients. we're sending some 4000 military personnel to west africa. builds units to move west africa. it would move some 8 to 10 patients at a time. be aboard transport planes. the democrats line. welcome. >> good morning. >> good morning. >> i think -- i think they need rely on the science. the doctors were familiar with the virus. doctors on't trust the to tell you what is best for assigned to this ebola. hiv, everybody bola that is different. >> thank you. susan on the democrats line. >> i do think that we do need to quarantine some people. there are doctors and nurses are doing a great service for us over there. then there are our soldiers were going over there. hopefully we can get this i ntained over in africa, but do not agree. sticking someone and stand is ridiculous. >> again, some pressure from the white house is causing some governors to back off. governor cuomo saying that some of the quarantines will be spent at home. the washington post writes that the white house plans to for unce guidelines returning healthcare workers to imported cases of ebola, while encouraging volunteers to come back. adding that the white house would consult with new federal policies on sunday. president obama convened his health and security advisers and directing them to create policies that would help mitigate the risk of ebola in the united states. chuck hagel, john sylvia matthews burwell -- who guides the president on considerations for new measures for returning healthcare workers. joey is an florida, where there is some limited monitoring of returning workers. joey, what you think of this mandatory quarantine? >> i am kind of divided. like it is ng but in reality -- you have to be in contact with blood, i get it -- so they were hazmat and other protection. and still they got sick. here in dallas -- am beginning to wonder if a person that died from west i'm beginning to wonder what care he had. the hospital sent him home, should m pills like you walk it off. you do not have obama care, who cares? on the independents line. snow absolutely agree, the should be quarantined. the united states is about making sure that individuals safety is protected. this young lady understands the risk associated with being in the country. in fact, coming home and being quarantined to not be a problem for her. understanding, again, that we a lot of facing issues with this disease that we have not yet fully come beheaded. with that in mind, this could be something else. we do not know for sure what it exactly to do. they quarantined for 21 days or 25 days, you know, when you compare that to a lifetime, that is a short amount of time. coupled with the fact that so life to be 's changed just by keeping her in isolation. should that they actually be quarantining the nurses and doctors that are short period or a of time -- >> let me ask you, is that a state or federal role? >> i think from a federal level. is going to be just torn with politics. obviously, there is a lot of here for the line different politicians and everyone has an agenda, but from the state level, each state should be able to make its own decision regarding the welfare of the people. end of the day, i still think there should be a quarantine for these individuals. now, there could be some type of incentive given to them if and come back as be e, then you will quarantined, and, obviously, all the costs associated with that would be picked up at the government. if the federal government chooses the policy, then they would do it. more thing i want to mention -- if the airlines are still planning to fight these individuals from these countries to the us, then the airline should be responsible picking up any cost with delivering any people back to have d states who may potentially become exposed to ebola. all those cost should be on the airlines. >> thank you for your opinion. a couple tweets, this one refers back to a previous caller. think that voluntary quarantine for anyone returning from the area would be sufficient. making a political is not. to maryland, this is willie. go ahead. >> hello. face patients with mrsa under quarantine, but that is with a positive result. if this woman tested negative, it is the same f protection -- >> she tested positive. what do you mean? did she indicate -- did she elevated temperature, for example? >> in elevated temperature, but she did not test positive. >> right. an absence of a positive test, i don't know her in quarantine. york easing up again, saying that some of the quarantine can be spent at home. in versaille, kentucky. >> to answer your question, quarantine ory should be absolutely required. people ors and the accompanying them -- if you hold the ball in your hand and you let go of it, it will fall to the floor. this has been here for 30 years. >> okay. as a federal or state issue? >> the federal government has done nothing. >> thank you, mark, for the call. donna is on our democrats line. good morning. >> hello. good morning. i just want to say that this is more dumbing down of america. if we do not have these doctors to go over there, that is really going to make this thing much, much worse. it will come here and it will spread like crazy. you know, what more do we expect from these people. they go over there and they are helping. then they come home and they are treated like this? this is just -- it is just ridiculous. you know, science, people! you cannot get it if the person does not have symptoms. the front page -- pit science versus politics. the article says that the state leaders and congressional lawmakers faced fearful public insist that they have to take cautions that go beyond symptoms. some of them face reelection tighter after some governors establish quarantine orders. new york lessened its restrictions on sunday night. florida ordered a 21 day for anyone who returns caller: i worked in public health for 15 years in idaho. we had three outbreaks up here. i contracted whooping cough. actually had me quarantined for five days. i was on medication. there are guidelines for this. when we were doing travel immunizations, if you refused certain immunizations flying countries, you were not allowed to fly back until they got their vaccines in that country. they might have to wait three or four weeks. at theed to take a look guidelines. i can't wait to hear what the cdc has come up with. ebola is something we have never seen in the united states. we need to look at each infectious disease and come up with a proto-call -- protocol. >> you are in quarantine for five days. what do you think of the reaction of this nurse who is quarantined which he came off the plane in new jersey over the weekend? me, i would agree with being quarantined. i don't want to put the public at risk. >> thanks for your call. a 14.o campaign it is eight days until the election. candaceke a look at the -- kansas senate race. us.e, thank you for joining gregok at the race between orman and pat roberts did where do things stand? race. it is a very close the latest polls that we are looking at suggest that orman might have a lead of a point or two. that is within the margin of error in these polls. this is a very tight race. there is no question about it. robertsst week, the campaign brought in the big guns. they brought in mitt romney. who else has come in to campaign for the center? guest: about half of the u.s. senate has been out here to campaign for pat roberts. john mccain has been here. rand paul, ted cruz. .ne senator after another tom coburn from oklahoma has been here. you mentioned mitt romney, he the kansas city area suburb on the kansas side. i think he will draw a pretty good crowd of. he is a big name in american politics. that is why send the roberts is bringing him out here. it will be fun to see what happens. host: that will be a get out the vote effort. .rman is an independent who does he rely on? . the democratic party is not there for him. guest: that is one of the big questions that surrounds this campaign. who does he count on to get the vote out? he doesn't have very much get out the vote effort in the traditional sense that we judge these things by. he is an independent. are wanting to help him. they don't want to be caught and tie him orman to the democratic party. that has been one of the big arguments throughout the campaign from the roberts side. has beenays that orman hiding behind the cloak of an independent candidate. they want to avoid that kind of association. tell is from what we can on his own when it comes to getting the vote out. you wonder how that will affect him. of at says the advantage long established republican machine behind him. its get outnown for the vote apparatus that helped sam brownback so much for years ago. roberts will be able to bank on that kind of support. orman it doesn't have that kind of machine behind him. you wonder how that will affect the final vote on election day. host: i mean this in the most serious way. withere any interference the world series being in kansas city? does it interfere with getting airtime? you are seeing lots of ads for warman and roberts during the world series games. i don't think there has been any impact. we have noticed research that suggests that if you have a successful home team in any sport, it tends to five or -- favor incumbents. of a boost that is, we don't know. there is research out there. host: we will find out this week. ke is with the "kansas city star." thank you for joining us this morning. back to your calls on the issue of quarantines for health care workers that have been implemented in states like new jersey. there are moderate quarantines in florida and illinois. are they necessary? richard is in florida, a state that has a monitoring program. caller: they are not necessary. to quarantine,g that is against god's will. if god wants ebola all over the country, it is going to be there. that the united states is going to do to be able to isolate a disease such as ebola in one area. this is pam in virginia. welcome. i would just like to suggest that is not god that is in control. it is the nra. they are holding up the nomination of our surgeon general. we don't even have a policy. host: do you think the surgeon general would have been the official to take the lead on this? i sure do.: host: to the los angeles times. patientsf former caring for children orphaned by the disease. they write: that is from the "l.a. times." this is nina in seattle, washington. she is on the independent line. caller: i do understand how these people in the medical come from of just treating these people and seeing how bad it is have any objection at all to being quarantined in order to keep us safe here. host: a couple of political stories. in brazil, this is the front page of the "wall street journal." this is the newly reelected resident of brazil. andgoing to pull that off take a look at another political story. this is from the "atlanta journal-constitution." they write about the debate last night. ground.ke little new just a reminder, we will have that georgia senate debate from last night coming up tonight at 9:00 eastern. this is hammond, louisiana. what about these quarantines? what you think? think theyon't should be praised for going out there. they are getting paid to go out there. area werefrom that bringing monkeys home to sell and barbecue and laughing at the reporters. they were saying that ebola is not in these monkeys that they were eating barbecued. this is about making money. people will come back from their -- shouldell should damn well be quarantines. host: they are writing about the way the disease is fought on the ground. this is a look into how they are addressing the disease. woman posed a mortal threat to the woman who were helping her. weapon in thew fight against ebola. a look at more broadly across the world from "the new york times." this is a worker in china making the protective suits. this is at a factory in china. they conducted drills for possibly handling ebola. our question for you this ebola necessary to be quarantines for health care workers? this is thomas in new jersey. go ahead. caller: i have been listening to this coverage for over a month. the first thing that amazes me is how wrong people are regarding this. you -- term ebola is not even accurate. healthy bodies don't get sick. if you are healthy you can't get sick. these people live in squalor. the land is polluted. this is why people get sick. it is the environment and not the disease. host: we appreciate your call. we have more coming up. next up, 39 states require judges to run for elected office. phant will be with us to talk about this. later on, we will talk about some of the biggest whoppers of the campaign. this is a bit from last wednesday's illinois senate debate. here's a look. and believe very strongly support immigrants and legal immigration. i don't believe it is fair to give advantages or move people to the head of the line ahead of those who have followed the laws and filed properly. i understand that people are looking for the american dream. our country was formed by immigrants. they are generally risktakers who are entrepreneur types. i identify with those types of people. it is important that we do it in a way that follows our law. are very smooth. they had total control of congress for two years and did not pass immigration reform. washington,nd me to i have a much better chance to pass real immigration reform. i can bring the two sides together. you were critical in passing the dream act. it does not grant a path to citizenship. what would you do differently this time around? how would you make it happen? >> the dream act did have a path to citizenship. it had a better path and what is available to those who are undocumented. opponent now supports the dream act. when he says that this copper hence of immigration reform puts these new people, he hasn't read the bill. they have to wait 10 years before they can get a green card and then go to the back of the line. the earliest possible time is 13 years before citizenship. > host: you can see that debate on c-span. jordan -- joined --the white house corp. correspondent of "national journal." into the races in north carolina for the high court judges. more broadly, the issue of judges running for reelection, particularly in the high appellate level. guest: this is the next real front in american politics. we are seeing judicial races congressionalthe counterparts. money is flowing into races in places like a small county in missouri or states like north carolina. these races are increasingly partisan. money is in play. a groups are getting involved. we are seeing the same types of forces that are shaping our politics. one judge inered north carolina. tell us her story in terms of what she is facing this year as opposed to previous years running. guest: she has been accorded couple of years. vanwas appointed by a democratic governor. she is facing a well-funded republican. the races in north carolina are nonpartisan. on the ground, nobody believes that to be the case. both the democratic slate of judicial candidates and republicans aren't endorsed by their respective parties. nobody is fooled by what's going on. these are races where voters have very little information. her name recognition is almost zero. she is underfunded. now is tonge right get out and reach as many voters as possible. she wants to avoid -- a ford adds to get on television. she is doing it on her own. i drove her car. so is just me and her could interview her. she had no staff. put 40,000 miles on her car this summer driving to events. band trying ton hold onto a supreme court seat. how much is in her campaign bank? she was in the six figures. her opponent was much higher -- wasn't much higher. ofy are all being funded out the same pot. they are running ads together. he is a business lawyer. the nyuis is from report in terms of figures. they report that $56 million was spent in 2012. those outside groups include the republican state leadership committee, americans for prosperity, the nra, america votes. what is happened since then in terms of these special-interest groups? aest: they try to unseat sitting judge. it almost worked. she beat back the challenge. one of the reasons that there was an ad run by this outside group called justice for all. it accused her of being soft on child molesters an. that actually backfired. it increased her name recognition. it helped her through the primary. now she is facing a challenge in the election as well. we are seeing these groups in races across the country. $200,000 into a county race in missouri. there still time for them to do that. of electingea judges is as old as the country. what has changed? why is there so much money devoted to it? the citizens united decision which opened the door for unlimited corporate spending. this is a natural outgrowth. thing has been the slow loosening over time of standards for how judges should operate as canids. the supreme court about a decade said they have free speech rights like any other candidate. to localizeowed certain positions. to say ifllowed they'd agree or disagree with a supreme court decision. that is another factor. ae third one i think is realization by groups that it is important to have a certain amount of influence in the judicial branch as the legislative. a judicial fairness initiative. they are trying to guarantee outcomes. they want to align conservative justices with conservative legislatures. wisconsin. in they upheld the controversy a labor reforms that the governor passed. host: we are here to talk about the states of electing judges, especially the higher-level justices. the supreme court's in states. you can join the conversation. you can join us on twitter or facebook. in the pieceture beasley. eas of mentioned the support publicans. she is supported by democrats? guest: when she ran for the appeals court, she took advantage of a program that ofled for public financing judicial candidates. it takes the fund-raising pressure off candidates like her. that started as a public defender. clinicalot create contacts the would give her a helpers. host: remind us when she was first elected. thet: she was elected to appeals court in 2008. she was appointed to the supreme court in 2012. comedy justices on the court in north carolina? guest: there are seven. host: we are looking at the importance of electing judges and justices. let's go to your calls. this is lawrence in san francisco. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. say major influence and major results have occurred from judgments political or otherwise affecting the elections and the status of the economy. suit of bille simons who was a gubernatorial graydate running against davis in california. he was the governor at the time. about won a judgment of $305 million. nobody has heard of him cents. -- nobody's heard of them since then. you don't care of him doing anything anymore. effect of that large of a judgment and then the election of arnold schwarzenegger in the state of , it was very significant. we have all of the history in the world about what can be done in every state from a standpoint the decisions of judges properly placed in properly used. we will get a reaction. guest: you're talking about the impact it a state supreme court can have. that gets lost a little bit. emphasis on the federal system. serve asa judiciary to a check or a rubberstamp on a legislature. there is a study by the american constitution society that shows that sitting at a justices who received half their contributions from a business tended to side with those interests two thirds of the time. seeing a relationship between donations and outcomes. host: this may be the piece that you are referring to. campaign ads may influence elected judges. the two examined involving 470 2 states. not only, you mentioned favorable rulings, unfavorable closer to election time for criminal defendants. mentioned, she had these soft on crime ads run against her. i think there is great concern showsf a judge or justice independence or goes against the grain or supports the constitutional right of a defendant, that material is going to be used against them in a campaign ad. of adse do have a couple in that north carolina justice race. let's take a list. >> we want judges to protect us , alongild molesters sued law that lettuce track child robin hudson sided with the predators. she took the side of a convicted molester. robin hudson, not tough on child molesters. that is one you referring to. how did she fight back against that? she had to raise a lot of money for one thing. a lot of newspapers editorialized against the ad and thought that it was unfair. ex postes involved facto laws. applies a punishment retroactively to a defendant who art he served their time. there was a real constitutional point at play. she felt thee, entire affair boosted her name recognition. it had the reverse result. name recognition is the name of the game and most of these races. even telling voters who you are and you are on the ballot, we see a phenomenon where people will vote at the top of the ticket and leave the spaces for judicial candidates blank because they have no idea who they are. money plays a role in influence. host: let's hear from maryland. welcome. c-span.thank you for thank you for your writing. i want us to just ask if you are familiar with justice o'connor's position on justices running for election. i wondered if alec is involved in any of these. isst: as far as i know, alec not involved. they concern themselves basically working with state legislators in terms of developing legislation. to your question about justice o'connor, she was part of the majority in a case out of minnesota that candidates have free-speech rights. she later regretted that decision. opened door to a lot of stomping and politics she finds distasteful. as long as we have the current majority in the u.s. supreme court, we will see a trend. quested any of the current supreme court justices ever have to run for a state election to your knowledge? >> on the top of my head, i cannot think of anyone. justice o'connor was an elected official. on the current supreme court, and don't only me to this, i think they come from federal appeals courts and things like that. >> that call was from maryland. looking at the ballot in maryland, you get a judge from the circuit court and the judicial court. among the highest courts, the appeals court, it is a little different. you vote for continuance in office. there is a judge but whether or not that justice stays on the bench. >> this is an alternative system to stray elections. what people call retention elections. on the front end, the judicial candidate is screened by a bipartisan board in terms of qualifications. those candidates referred to the governor or the legislature. they are reported to the bench and eventually they stand for election. they take a little money out of the front of this. is pouring into that race. there is no opponent. that has not stopped her party group from running ads. north carolina, don, welcome. caller: thank you for taking my call. when you started the call come it was all about money. and who back to. as opposed to, what were some of the rulings that got people upset. when we talk about politics, it is all about money. the majority of states voted for marriage between a man and a woman. the judicial system all of a sudden says now it is ok to have two men marry. that is not what the people wanted. you can understand why they get upset. a lot of it stems back to justice supreme court candidates. i think all three of them lost their seats. i think that was successful. but what we're getting to is the idea, and this disturbs a lot of advocates, outcome based judging, basically that money will put a proxy on the court for a specific interest or a specific point of view and you will basically guarantee an outcome if you have the right majority on the court. against the court finding a case as it comes to it here it is a great concern to people who watch these things. one in the citizens united case said, there is no perfect system. -- what is he getting at there? the idea that courts should be accountable. as the caller noted, if voters are upset with a certain ruin, they should have the right to see a supreme court justice. a lot of people would not necessarily disagree with that era do not think anybody is talking about taking the vote completely away from people. how much do you want it to resemble the rest? >> the supreme court justices in north carolina, they run for the seat? guest: they run for the seat. 90% run on some level. in fact,carolina, judicial candidates can openly solicit for money. that is only true in a handful of states. they're on the phone 20 times a week. it is the people who are going to before these courts that are giving donations to the candidates. it has sessions when they are off for a long time. host: the caseload is consistently have a. guest: it is not huge but a lot of it involves turning down appeals from the lower court. they have a big impact on policies. host: we have a caller from north carolina. caller: good morning. behind these judges. most people just look at it, there is nothing there. we do not want to waste our vote. that is what i feel like i would do. i do not know about anyone else. if i do not know what the offers are. i am wondering if you have got an answer to that. the thank you very much. make a greatk you point. the fantasy that these elections are nonpartisan, and the reality. north carolina ideally is the place they should not have agendas. they should be there to apply the laws. have a reality is, you group of candidates on one side backed by the republican party and another group backed by democrats. it may not be so bad for voters looking to find some sort of ideological identification with a candidate, to actually just go out and declare i am a republican or a democrat. there is so little information about who the candidates are and where they come from. houston, texas, robert is on the line, democrats. caller: good morning. i listened to your program and what i am concerned about is that the whole judicial system, beginning with the supreme court, has gotten so political that there is too much influence by people on judges opinions. you are talking about justice o'connor. do not ever forget justice to allow thed state of florida to shut down the recount. she wanted to make sure there was a republican president who would nominate a republican to replace her when she retired to take care of her husband. this whole business about nonpolitical justice system is so much hot air, and i do not know what you can do about it, but supposedly, the justice system was not supposed to be political. i do not know where you go from here. something needs to be done about it. most of the paperwork involved selecting judges. judges do you get to vote on their and your election area? filled out a paper ballot and mailed it in. involved. two pages most of the first page was judges, left and right. did you feel like you knew what you were doing? caller: no. when it comes to that kind of thing, i will vote democratic. i will not vote republican. host: thank you for the call. his experience there. guest: i think he brings up a great point. we talk about the federal system which is all appointment based. it can be as rife with politics as anything else. when you look at the supreme yout or the federal court, can almost predict an outcome based on a panel or group on which side appointed the judge and justice. you can generally see how they're going to line up. the conservative majority, we see that in the appeals courts all the time. presidents will always say they want to keep politics out of the process, but the truth is, it is impossible. the next time we have a supreme court, we will see it all over again. this goes down to the state level. governor has the power to door,t, that is a closed backroom process. it involves connections and .aybe donations there is no way to sterilize the process. an organization has been critical of some of the spending. he says -- this has to be judged on a state issue. it will be up to individual state legislatures to pass the state form, there are balance -- ballot measures. the reform will have to be state-by-state. it will have to be the public at some point that gets concerned about the flow of money to the racist. our guest is the white house correspondent for the national journal. in states like north carolina, supreme court candidates have had to become more like pollock them -- politicians. back to calls, teri, indiana, hello there. caller: good morning. i want to talk about a race we are having a. indiana. gentleman's name, one he he saidked two jobs and he would keep this other job, but more jobs on the elected jobs. he works at the boys and girls club. i went in there and i was talking to the person at the desk there, talking to them i said,e drug war and just like the drug wars, before werepassed the law, there no murderous alcohol gangs. they passed that law -- host: is he running for a justice position? law andrepealed the when they passed it, murderous alcohol gangs -- host: we are focusing on judicial races in states. pennsylvania, democrats line. caller: thank you for taking my call. i am not so sure exactly what we should do about judiciaries. the federal system has problems, just look at the u.s. supreme court in the way they rule. then you have an election law where you have judges in states that run and then they have to campaign. we have a traffic court judge which accepted gifts, which is illegal. then, a judge goes through these that are paid by people who come before him. then you have supreme court justices like clarence thomas as well. maybe what we should do is have judgesfinancing, where are not allowed to accept gifts, where the campaigns are publicly funded. that way, when they get on the bench, they will not be beholden to anybody and they have to run on the record as a loyal whatever. that is my comment. thank you. publicthere was a financing regime in place in north carolina. this happened also in wisconsin. there are legal problems with that because the supreme court financinga public regime saying it gave an unfair advantage. there is probably a way to do it , but it is a challenge. conservatives will tell you they do not like public finance because they feel like it is dollars to fund candidates. you do not have a choice as a taxpayer. if you are republican, your money goes to the justice and you never would have given a donation to her as debt on your own, they see that is unfair. it -- and a distortion of the tax system. to their point, public financing may be something where the time is already past. host: a picture in your national , this isiece online of saman, the grandson urban. why is he in the piece? guest: he has run for the court before. this is second time. he comes from a well-known political family. he has his name known in the state. groups throughde a lot of third-party ads against him, and a very famous advertisement against him for his opponent, and adware -- an advertisement where the guys chased by dogs while he played a banjo and talked about how this guy was tougher in crime. those ads started running, he was ahead in the polls. when they took the airways, he was behind and lost. advantage of the public financing program and that limits your ability to raise my privately. he did not have enough money to fight that. he is running now and he has dedicated much of his time to fundraising. he said he spends probably 15 hours a week dialing people, the dreaded call time. he does not like it, but that is what he has got to do. you write about that. their personalities are not outage in personalities. these people are lawyers. they went to law school. they did for a reason and that was not to go to fundraisers and back flap and call people for money. they did it he could as they love the idea of studying cases in writing and applying the law. 10, these out of people are not national politicians. judge ervin told me i am an introvert, i do not like doing this. but he wants to be on the court. that is the price he has got to pay. host: north carolina. caller: the 2008 john grisham title deals exactly with this. host: explain how it applies. caller: cover notes, and i am really cutting this down, headline, politics have always been a dirty game. now, justice is as well. , a jurywded room returns a shocking verdict that gives a chemical company accused of dumping toxic waste into a small town water supply. the company appeals to the mississippi supreme court, whose nine justices will one day either approve the verdict or reserve it. i am condensing. the chemical company is owned by a wall street predator. judicial elections looming, he decides to purchase himself a seat on the court or the cost is a few million dollars a drop in the bucket to finish. if you really want an illustration of how this could work itself out in practice, on the statewide and individual liabilityh a simple claim, john grisham, "the appeal." money in races, any worse in any region, the south and the midwest? i do not think so. it depends on the system and how open it is. north carolina is a place where judges can directly ask for money and that is not the case in those places. it might be worse there. i would point out it is important to mention when i was in north carolina and i attended a couple of these that tea does a person, these candidates said, i am not for sale, cannot be bought, it will not be $1000 into my campaign. they're pushing back on the notion that campaign donations will guide their decision-making . i would point to studies that showed a correlation between these donations and interest and outcomes. host: florida, republican caller. caller: i practice in the federal system and the state system. in a southern state at great length. i just want to complement the federal judges. i thought they were incredible. i was in front of quite a few of them. fantastically honest and talented. the state system, you have good judges. with the young man is talking about concerning the effect of , that is all true. primarily, their ethical and honest and very talented. not quite up to the standards of the federal system. >> all right. we showed you earlier a look from the hudson campaign. we wanted to show you one of the advertisements. one of the justices running hudson ine justice that race. let's take a look at judge levinsohn's advertisement. >> tough but fair, that is judge eric levinsohn. he started as a felony prosecutor, putting murderers, drug dealers, and sex criminals in jail. he served on the court of appeals, where he made sure judicial rulings were fair. the judge went to iraq and helped establish courts to prosecute terrorist. whether it is putting criminals behind bars or fighting terrorism, eric levinsohn -- tough but fair, for north carolina supreme court. let's get a couple more calls in. we go to louise in lexington, will -- lexington, nebraska. mostly, i have a question. on my ballot, it shows eight different judges from county to district to district to county and workers comp. shouldll a question of, the judge be retained. filedhat mean no one has for any of those seats, other than the person already there, or, if they are there and they keep getting endorsement, does that mean they essentially have these positions for as long as they wish to hold them? you're describing the retention system. i am not completely familiar with the system in nebraska. how they typically work is the voters have the opportunity to retain the justice or the judge, and if they do not, the system starts over again. it is not like they can hold the seat as long as they want. it is as long as the justices let them. the 2011 and at 2012 years in terms of spending. this book down to a number of states. you referred to 39 states that had elected judges? in north carolina, the candidate fundraising in north carolina was 170 $3000. this was 2011 in 2012, as opposed to the expenditures by interest groups, which was at $3.89. far out weighing with the individual candidates raised. they absolutely relied on outside groups for spending. absolutely. the dynamic now, the more money the -- there is for these party groups, the more pressure is put on candidates to raise money. it will keep going up on both sides. i honestly think this is the beginning of the process. as more and more outside groups theyillionaires realize can play in the selection and have an impact, i think in the next couple of cycles, we will see more and more of this. some to give you perspective, the headline, 4 billion, 2014 is the most expensive midterm ever. to indiana, good morning to andrew on the democrats line. you are on the air. caller: thank you. i have two comments. the decisions seem to chase each other like a job -- like a dog chasing his tail. used forion fund being outside money. somehow against the local for the statee legislature, that is -- that what you have separation between the legislature and the judicial so one cap affects the other. anyone who has to go to court rule often stretch whether they be a defendant. their attorney will have permission to have a vigorous defense. , would suggest every case everybody has to go underneath likeath of office, just the witnesses of the crime. thank you very much. are other states relying on that? guest: i am not aware of any news you james -- news regimes that are currently inoperable. the trend is to move away from them, along with the complete deregulation of campaign finances across the board. host: north carolina, fayetteville. jeff. caller: is this guy supposed to be nonpartisan? reason i am asking is the judges he is advocating for in north carolina, it is destroying the republican judges. the people that go to the polls and do not know who to vote for because they do not have "r" or "i" next of inamed, they need to be educated. balance -- does the ballot have that next to the name? caller: not the judges. these people need to do their research before they vote. that is all i have it i appreciate it. host: a houston caller said he did not know what he was doing choosing judges. guest: there is a point to be made here about another way to use photo money, and that is a guide. any information that could be put into a public marketplace about who the judges are and , i think thatnd is exceptionally helpful. part of this as well, not to get to a soap box, but we see local journalism declining and local news coverage getting smaller and smaller. there is less public information about races like this. advertisements, whether they are fair or distort, can have a disproportionate effect on the race. , ihink it is this idea of come from a legal affairs there is money, and influence into a sector, we have not seen this. to be fair, it has been going on for years. i do not want to suggest this is a new phenomenon. it is not just a conservative issue. trial lawyers and unions also pour money into the races. citizens united and a lot of other factors have completely transformed the landscape. now, there is no check on the amount of money that can go into these. with a lawuest degree from ohio state. this is joe. it morning on our democrats line. caller: they give for having me. i had a couple of comments and i want to get your guest's impression about the following thought. the thought is, to some degree, it really does not matter, in this one area, it does not really matter what justices you get, with all the mandatory really kind of ties the judges hands from saying, ok, i want to weigh the evidence and i'm looking at the case, and i think it's a be the most appropriate punishment. would like your thoughts on that. as to a couple of comments, one, because i watched so much of the debating on c-span regarding the election cycle, i have watched hundreds of debates, over and they tie the democratic candidates to obama. i want to remind everyone on the other side, the trickle-down republicans following george bush all the way, here is my last appeal, be patient with me because it is very short, it is a suggestion for c-span. if you will make an announcement instill a you will lie detector on the show, there will not be another republican show up. thank you. host: final thoughts? oppose the lie detector. no, the caller is right. getting into constitutional rights and things like that. but he does make a good point. at the trial court level, yes, there is not a lot of discretion. when we start talking about state supreme court races and questions of policy and the constitution, matters we are all familiar with like health care and gay marriage, they could have a great impact. .ost: james oliphant thank you for being with us this morning. factg up, a political .ditor, angie drobnic holan then, big-ticket defense legislation on the agenda. we will talk to molly o'toole for the latest on that. we will be back with more. ♪ [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] >> tonight, on the communicators, the president and ceo of the wireless association. >> i was in the congress department and this was repurchasing spectrum from the department of defense. this process, the lesson learned, had really been learned. it is going wonderfully. paired, internationally megahertz, so excited, and we were going to turn around and have the broadcast. i think that discussion is really going well. report, which values the spectrum, those numbers have really turned the discussion from a policy discussion to a business decision, which is where that discussion needed to turn to. we are excited about those options. i am certain the carriers will come to them with big check mark senate will be a win-win situation for everyone. >> tonight at 8:00 eastern on communicators on c-span2 . . >> the student cam competition. the list of roles and how to get started, student cam.org. washington journal continues. host: statements and issues in the campaign, judge their truthfulness, she joins us this morning to talk about politics in campaign 2014 and the big whoppers told on the campaign trail, as judged by political -- politicized. politifact.zed -- if you are to look at one big issue that he's popping up, what would that be? guest: we have seen diversity in different states, but if we had to pick one, the claim from help -- from republican challengers against democrat incumbents that they voted for president barack obama. they will cut political ad that say, so-and-so voted with obama 99% of the time, 95% of the time . a lot of these advertisements are somewhat accurate. we have given some true to mostly trues.. but that comment has been repeated on the campaign trail. where are you based in how are you sure that what you are researching is nonpartisan and how do you decide what to fact check? fact --politifact is a team of journalists. we have expanded and it is a network of news organizations. so we are journalists and what we do is politics fact checking. every story on our website is about politics fact checking. we started back in 2007 because we felt there was not enough fact checking in political journalism. then, we have been doing our best to match up the rhetoric with the reality. our reports go online. it is a database so people can go to our website and look up different topics and different races. because it is online, we also get to print our sources. we explain our reasoning. we say who we interviewed and what documents we looked at, we link to documents whenever possible, and then we have our rating at the end with our true the meter and they go from true to mostly true. we have half true, mostly false, false, and when something is false and ridiculous, we rate it "pants on fire. oh " we knew we wanted to do ratings because it is a helpful service and you help know where reporters are coming from. how do you decide on a day-to-day basis what you will research? we use our news judgment and think about what our readers want to read about. the main goal is to give people the information they need to govern themselves in a democracy. we think about what the important issues of the day are. we tried to mix in a few fun ones and we do not try to take ourselves too seriously. we try to check across the political spectrum and make sure we're looking at all sides of the debate. your calls and comments on what you have seen. -- do you ever go back and say, we were wrong on this and we misjudged it? guest: every now and then. i have to say does not happen very often. we are human beings and we do have to make corrections, but for the most part, we have a really good process. we try to look at everything we could find in research, we interview experts, we have a process where three editors read every fact check, and then we have a meeting and we actually vote on the ratings. that is how we set the ratings. host: you are in florida, based in tampa. issue that came up was the issue at the florida governor's debate a couple of weeks ago, the issue of the fan under former governor chris's podium. i want to take a look at that. plenty of people were befuddled and it seems even the people moderating the debate in terms of what the rules were like. let's take a look and find out what cliff --politifact thought. >> we have an extremely peculiar situation right now. we have governor charlie crist. [applause] florida governor rick scott, our -- recumbent governor and the republican candidate for governor, is also in the building. governor rick scott, we have been told that governor scott will not be participating in this debate. now, let me explain what this is all about. governor crist has asked to have a small fan placed underneath his podium. the rules of the debate that i was shown by the scott campaign say that there should be no fan. somehow, there is a fan here and for that reason, ladies and gentlemen, i am being told that will not join us for this debate. [laughter] >> boo! >> ladies and gentlemen, this is a debate. say?ary, what can we [applause] >> allow. wow. >> we are not asking you a question. i am asking rosemary about the situation we find ourselves in. >> governor, do the rules say that there should be no fan? >> not that i'm aware of. re: really going to debate about the fan or are we going to talk about education and the environment and the future of our state? i mean, really. [applause] floridaople outside of may have known what happened. what was the ruling having a fan there in the debate? thing. is the funniest i was watching this on the tv. in florida, we fact check in partnership with the miami herald. the reporter was down there in the debate. we had never seen an opening like this. we were just as surprised as everyone else. we looked into the rules of the debate. notou noticed, he said, that i'm aware of. what we found was debate organizers had put out these rules ahead of time. had to signpaigns off on. one of the elements of the rules said no electronic devices, including fans. amusingly, after we published our report, some say, a fan is not an electronic device. we could talk about that, but the crist campaign, when they sent in their rules, handwritten aserix that said, as long including a fan is needed. covering charlie crist, he is known for being a fan with him wherever he goes. he apparently likes to be cool. it is learned. it is very warm down there. that there was a fan was not such a surprise to those of us who have been following him for many years. the opening of the debate, him did comeg out, but he out, and they talked about jobs and education, and we fact checked it. but it did started -- they did start pretty funny. , we will lookct at some of the big whoppers in this campaign. more than one who should we covered in the camping 2014 season available on our website or let's get to your calls first before we get to him of the whoppers. in florida is jim. go ahead. caller: good morning. the first thing i would like to just say is you always oppose republicans. you always say, the coke brothers. let's get something straight .bout politifact it is far left as an organization. my question, basically, when was the last time that her paper endorsed a republican president? it points to the fact she is very far left and you cannot trust them. the news organization of the tampa bay times. from time to time, we get questions like this. we are independent journalist. we come out of the newspaper journalism tradition. our reports are all online. anyone can see them. they can see our reasoning. they can see are evidence. their ownome to conclusion. maybe they agree with our rating or maybe they do not care we fact checked republicans and democrats. and we have scorecards for all the candidates so people can look up and go for a website and see president barack obama's scorecards and all the falses we have given him. we try to call it as we see it. do not balance our ratings and tried to say, we had a false for the yankees and now we will try to get a false for the red sox. we just call it like it is. we do our journalism and we feel like people who are open-minded and interested in the facts will like what we are doing here it -- doing. host: the nine biggest whoppers in the 2014 campaign, we will go through all of these through the segment. number 10, isis fighters were -- not caught at the border. guest: this is a statement from a congressman who said 10 were caught at the mexican border. we looked into this. we could find no evidence to support this. they contacted the congressman's office. we always can't -- contact the person we are fact checking. news articles that were anonymous. concrete 2.2. in texas, it was said there was nothing to this. host: new york,. is on our democrat line. caller: i just don't seem to understand how you guys come up with these different percentages on how the president is doing and how the governor is doing. i as a democrat believe the president is doing a great job. i do not seem to understand how you will get to these facts that he is not doing this right and he is not doing that right. you're not explaining anything to me to show this man that he is not doing the job he is supposed to do. when you call me and asked me how the president is doing, i believe he is doing a great job. fact --politifact is not a polling organization. do notit is not and we make endorsements barely look at what was said. we do not check everything we -- that was set. are not a size organization. our scorecards show that when someone says something we found newsworthy and interesting and retract mints to statements that were found wrong. he wants to correct the record. someone says 10 things and nothing is -- and one thing is not right, the fact checkers will focus on the things that are wrong. what is your reliable source in checking a fact? guest: an interesting question. onlook a lot -- we do a lot what laws say, people say this law will do this or that. of the lawe text itself and we go to report from the nonpartisan congressional budget office. that is a source we like a lot. there is a group, the congressional research service, a nonpartisan report for congress on a lot of the issues of the day. we also talked to a lot of experts and we try to talk to experts across the political spectrum on the toughest issues. so that we can see where there is consensus and where there isn't. -- inis a lot of room for politics. but what we are trying to focus on are the fact. and let me know and what can be proved. here is john in georgia. independent line. do you think this thing about co2 is real? six of these five machines, and none of them show a problem. of the issues you address is you say, no, global warming is not a hoax. what is i met and what do you find out? a statement made from a common in louisiana, where i am from. she said that global warming is a hoax. we looked at the global warming issue many times and it is not a hoax. .here is firm science there the scientific consensus is brought. i know, because we fact checked it for my candidate for congress, some people are saying global warming is not real but every time we look at it, the evidence is more and more broad and concrete. one of the common today's we have covered on c-span is mitch mcconnell in his campaign and he referenced fact checking in a segment of that debate. here's what he had to say regarding alison grimes's claims on mitch mcconnell. >> the outrageous issue that somehow my wife and i profit from anti-coal activists, it was , the only pinocchio's person i can think of who has been given for pinocchio's is the president, who said if you have -- if you like your policy, you can keep it. host: have we heard many candidates referencing fact checked by political -- by politicized? he mentioned a column in the washington post. it happens from time to time. i thought it was interesting you mentioned that. all kind of watch each other and we often fact checked the same things. most often, we reach the same conclusions. we looked at the question of mitch mcconnell's wealth. it cametisement implied from fighting against coal, but that did not seem to be the case all. it did seem to be inherited money. we seek candidates referencing times,t checks at sometimes in the base. sometimes they say things we did not say and sometimes their correct. we often see our fact checks referenced in political advertising. most political advertisements, if you look, you can see fine print at the bottom and sometimes they will reference as evidence.cts host: have you ever had a fact check you have rated something it comes out completely opposite of what you found? >> not completely opposite. i do not think that is ever happened here sometimes, we fact checked different aspects of the same topic. some political statements are complicated and have different parts of it. one of it -- sometimes one of us will focus on parts that are more accurate and some on parts that are less accurate. campaign's,y, the who do not like us fact checking them, they say, the fact checkers do not always agree. we usually agree, and we especially agree on the most important topics. we are all looking for evidence, we are all looking for logical arguments. we are following the same method of verification. go back to calls. walter on the independent line. question onve got a what governor scott is saying on the debate. he said governor chris, he lost it hundred 7000 jobs. from what i understand, all of -- theseovernor bush president bush by his policies, and also, we blame the high insurance rates -- that governor cap -- governor scott peopleying, causing the in state of florida medical policies to go up higher, losing his notlicies, based on excepting the aca. am i correct? governor rick scott has said as many times, that there were 832,000 jobs lost under governor charlie crist. crist was the governor before scott and he served one term. we believe this is half true. the rating means it is partially accurate. time, that many jobs were lost in florida because of the recession. the blame forerve that? it is a much more complicated question. we talked with economists for the fact check and financial advisors. hard to pin is those job losses on charlie aist because it is part of national banking crisis and a housing prices. the flipside is they also tell us it is hard to credit governors with job gains. if you are in a state where the jobs doing really well, a lot of times, that is because of the national forces as well. for a governor to have done that, youto impact have to point to a specific policy. job losses under crist, it was jim and more by these national economic forces. host: referring to the fan incident in that early debate, a tweet -- richard nixon probably wishes he had a fan at that debate. judy is next on the republican line in florida. make sure you mute your television or radio and go ahead with your comment. republican, but i am an american. i wish america would stop arguing and fighting with each other and get back to loving each other instead of fighting and feuding. no month -- no wonder the people do not want to vote anymore. they do not know who is telling a lie and who isn't. we need to get back to the bible. i get back to where we are supposed to be. that is why the country has fallen. do not do right, he ain't going to help us. i do not know what number this is -- seven or nine. 3000 murderers have not resulted from lacks border security. one of the candidates for governor said this. when you pull it apart, they were looking at not murders but homicide charges against people who are being detained for immigration. evidence for those who came across the mexico border. there could have been legal noncitizens or they could have come in on airlines. a number of fact checks where we look at how many will come into tourist visa and overstay their visa. that is not a border issue. was one of the biggest whoppers of 2014. host: next up in south carolina, walter. caller: how are you doing? are you there? go ahead. of the biggest whoppers i've heard since the republicans come out, they're all about the trickle-down effect. they want to send everything to the top 2%. out, there wasme 317 amendments added to it by the republicans. only one republican voted for it. when this republican asked why -- was asked why he voted for it, he said it felt like a great deal for the american people. you didn't dowhy this and he said, we were stupid. people have to understand that having insurance is a great thing. it is not something democrats should run from. those that are in there are just pushing it to the point where, you know, people think is a bad thing and it is not. host: you must have done a lot obamacare.cking on do you continue to do so? guest: we have been fact checking health care since basically the campaign proposal in 2008. it is our most fact checked topic, health care. one thing we have been fact checking lately is that fromcare cut $700 billion medicare to pay for obamacare. we usually rate that a half truth here at some people and up the rhetoric and it gets a lower rating. that is a case where complicated public policy is not so easy to explain. what the federal law was trying to do was make medicare more efficient. they were trying to make hospitals reduce readmissions and trying to do cost controls on medicare advantage. medicare budget was still increasing every year into the future, but they were using some of the cost savings to count against spending they were doing in the health-care law. i also want to go back, because this caller and the earlier caller talking about it is an extremely partisan time. we mentioned at the top of the hour fact checks about the democrats who vote so often with the president's position. our reporters have been showing that that has increased. democrats and republicans are really going to separate corners often fun votes come on policy see a lot you do not of crossing party lines the way you did in earlier decades. for the viewers who feel like the partisanship is on increase, i think they're absolutely right. many of our fact checks show that on the numbers. letters to the editor or comments on article you may post. guest: we have a mailbag feature. we run it when we get enough feedback. it is not scheduled. but we certainly run reader e-mails. the e-mails we get. we cannot respond to all of them but we read them all. host: we have been focusing some on florida. ofk to the biggest whoppers 2014. no, governor rick scott did not close 30 women's health centers in florida. i do not know if you addressed that earlier or not. guest: no, that was a guest: this was a fact check on a democratic congressman who signed off on a fundraising e-mail. that was something that i got in my e-mail box. i just thought, "i hadn't heard of him closing 30 women's health centers. that doesn't sound right. i think that would have been in the news." we looked into it. we contacted the congresswoman's office and the crist campaign, and it was totally wrong, so we rated that "pants on fire," and it made our top whoppers list. next call, dave, hello. let me kick off a few facts to you -- ronald reagan was the one who gave amnesty. wass a republican, and it 10 million. ronald reagan tripled the deficit. these are facts. ronald reagan sold missiles to iran. why is ronald reagan considered such a great president? and that's not only -- let me tell you the reason why. it's because so many white people voted for him back during the day. president obama won the election with twice the votes that ronald reagan -- he got over 51%. two times. no president since eisenhower has done this. did me about the facts -- ronald reagan grant amnesty, a republican? dave has put out some historical issues. do you ever do that, look at historical statements made? guest: we have fact checked several statements about ronald reagan. he is kind of invoked from time to time for people to make their political point. on the question of amnesty, there was the landmark immigration legislation that did gived sign that legal status to a lot of people who had been in the united .tates illegally at that time today, a lot of people, you know, look act at that time, you know, it has become a point of contention among republicans. they point to that as something that failed, failed legislation. piece published over the weekend in "the washington post," then bradley, the late -- theye editor republished a post he had written in his own words, and he writes about telling the truth or getting the story right. he says that newspapers do not tell the truth under many different and occasionally innocent scenarios, mostly when they do not know the truth or when they quote someone who does not know the true. more and more, when they quote someone who is spinning the truth, shaping it to a preconceived version of the story that is supposed to be somehow better than the truth, omitting details that could be embarrassing. finally, when they quote someone who is flat out lying. there is a lot of spinning and lying in our times and politics, government, sports, and everywhere. it has gotten to the point where if you are like me, you no longer believe the first version of anything. it was not always that way," writes then bradley -- ben bradley. in some ways, you're getting a chance to get the facts right, i guess. >> at that that was really interesting, too. there is a lot of speed -- spin. one of the things i like about our ratings as there is a spectrum because not everything is completely accurate or completely false because there's a lot of gray area, especially in politics and the most important issues of the day. i think that fact check in journalism as a movement has come out in recent years to really address what he is talking about, that there has not been enough journalism that really looks at what we know and what we do not know, and i think that is the role of politifact and other fact-checking organizations, to try to highlight more. up, madeline from california. welcome. republican line. caller: good morning. i am an old l.a. newspaper reporter, so i am looking at things a little bit different way, and what i am seeing is basically the easter network side of things. i do not see california being looked at. i know we are a little different out here, a little more relaxed, and a little more independent, different,are quite and what was said in "the washington post" i think is very true, bradley's remark. things are very different. so much went on that change people from being republicans and turned them into democrats, but what do you find as far as california is concerned? i'd like to think california brought up -- we have water needs. we have electrical needs. very important disaster needs. the east coast gets help. the west coast does not get help. what do you say on that? guest: we have more fact checking in the states where we have politifact partners. we do not have a partner right now for 2014 in california, but i am hopeful. we are not fact checking everything -- we cannot, but i do think there's a lot of interesting things in california politics that should be fact checked, certainly the issues the droughts, around wildfires, the environmental regulations, and, plus, it is one of our largest states. host: thanks for your call. we do have a piece here about the alaska senate. candidate dannate sullivan did not approve a shorter sentence for a sex offender who was then charged with murder." guest: this was an ad that surprised me in that there was nothing to this. it was an attack on dan sullivan -- host: he is the republican in that race he acted guest: he is the republican. said that sullivan was involved when this lighter sentence for someone who went out and then was charged with murder. a very serious charge. there was a mistake that happened that let this person get a lighter sentence. sullivan was not even the attorney general when that decision was made, so it was just -- to suggest he approved it was totally wrong. that got a "pants on fire." what we have been focusing on are these tossup senate races. our national staff have been fact checking, particularly in alaska, arkansas, iowa, these states where there is a tossup race. there is not a tossup race in california. if there were, we would be giving it more attention. a tweet fromt: bob, who asks why groups will not say who they are truthfully instead of trying to spin their true thoughts. andsume he means pac's other political groups. >> that's an interesting question. as we have gotten closer to election day, we see more ads from the official campaigns, but earlier in the year, we were fact checking a lot of ads that ran quite early -- january, february, march -- from these outside spending groups, and it can be very difficult to track who is behind these ads, although having said that, i will say you can often get a general idea. some of the traditional doneical journalists have great work uncovering how some of this spending works and how these groups work together, but with the campaign finance laws, they do not always have to disclose who their donors are or who is really pulling the string. next call from boston. we say hello to maggie on our democrats line. hello. i'm calling because i would like angie to elaborate on why politicians are saying that democrat politicians are voting ,or president obama's agenda and they all have the same constituents, the democrats. why are they saying that? they should not follow the president's agenda? >> we had an interesting story where we looked at these ads and why it is happening. we talked with some political scientists, and they say they are hoping to influence who are maybeters not really happy with the president right now, but maybe even more than that, they want to motivate their own base. some of these ads are aimed at trying to get their own republicans to the polls. watch politics just like anybody else. i am interested to see how these campaigns do with turnout on election day and with early voting. that is when we will see a lot of thipolitical messaging and whether their core supporters turn out or not. host: you started the segment talking about one of the issues you have seen coming up on running with the president's record or voting with the president 99% of the time. this is a headline from "usa today" -- mcconnell relying on obama's unpopularity. on the when a president's approval rating falls below 43%, it becomes difficult for the president's party to win in senate battleground states and hold the majority, and he looks at a number of the states. you can find more to it at usatoday.com. tom, good morning, independent line. caller: yes, i've got a couple of comments and a question. first of all, george h.w. bush in 1991 overturned [inaudible] kidnap, i suppose, is the best word, and then well noriega -- menu well noriega -- manuel noriega. noriega has set imprisoned for 23 years now, and he cannot be .harged with anything the second comment i have is george w. bush blatantly lied to the congress to get us to go in .nd destroy baghdad again, not the first time we have done that, but why has never been called up on charges when we bring professional athletes out there constantly who lied to congress? any thoughts? first, i would say we have not fact checked noriega, so i cannot say anything there. on george w. bush, we're often asked if we can go back and fact check the bush administration, and we generally say no, we will put our resources and what is happening today. i do think that those issues around what weapons iraq had would be very difficult to fact .heck foreign policy is always , what foreign governments are doing is very difficult to independently verify. of your facte bulk checking happens domestically, looking at issues happening in the campaign. ofst: we fact check a lot domestic issues, but we do publish some foreign policy fact checks were people say things that are just demonstrably wrong. you do not have to figure out what a foreign government is behind the scenes. you can just look and know and say this is inaccurate. >> that caller mentioned george w. bush, front page of "the new york times" -- whether tosh decides run for president, there will be no family meeting, no gathering at kennebunkport to go over the pros and cons. "i do not think it will be a big internal straw poll," said his son, but if there were, the results of the polar pretty much in. as mr. bush -- talking about jeb bush -- there's a decision to become the third member of his storied family to seek the presidency, the extended bush clan and its attendant network, albeit with one prominent exception, are largely rallying behind the prospect and pulling the old machine out of the closet. you can find more at nytimes.com . morning.ont page this let's get one more call from brett in arkansas. go ahead. >> i want to talk about jobs, but before i get there, i think it's pretty pathetic we live in a country where so many people make a good living off of telling us who lies and who does not. that ought to tell you a lot about the character of american people these days. we have a new ceo in charge of general motors, and she has been grilled in front of congress over and over and over about the problems they have had. if you notice, we have never heard the words uttered out of her mouth, "i inherited a mess." she has taken responsibility, never blamed anyone else, and she is a true leader. can we say that about our president? presidents do not create a lot of jobs. they can create conditions, but they do not create jobs. i just started my own business, and i'm new to arkansas. it is the individual american people that create the jobs, you know? on the health care situation, i was told my health insurance would go down $2500 a month. it has not. my brother owns a business in louisiana. he lost his coverage and had to get on the obamacare exchange because of this. itsident obama said if were not for obamacare, our insurance would be $1800 a year higher than now. we looked at that campaign promise and rated that promise broken. we had a whole other part of our website we did not get to talk about where we rate campaign promises. er, and it the obamet do remember that when getting a "promise broken." host: angie drobnic holan is an editor at politifact. you can go to politifact.com for the latest and the biggest whoppers of 2014. more "washington journal" ahead. we will speak to molly o'toole, a writer for "defense one," a publication talking about the work that still needs to be done by congress in terms of defense spending, defense authorization issues like fighting ebola and also isis. all of that ahead on "washington journal." first, though, an update from c-span radio. in other news sources reporting that a five euro old boy is being observed at a new york city hospital for possible ebola symptoms after developing a fever after returning from west africa. meanwhile, the u.s. ambassador to the united nations is visiting the region of west africa hardest hit i the virus. the ambassador met sunday with religious leaders in guinea, telling them, "we're in this with you for the long haul." today, she is visiting sierra leone. she wrote that the "scale of need" is staggering. lack of ambulances, fuel, basic suppliesst that will save lives. reacting to her comments is former obama white house official kenneth baer, who asks, "upon her return from west africa to new york city, will ambassador power be quarantine in her residence for the new cuomo policy?" jersey,er new york, new and florida announcing 21-day quarantines for some returning from west africa. washington,e day in president obama is set to take executive actions today in manufacturing. the white house says the action will direct federal money toward new technologies, apprenticeship programs, and competitions all designed to help small manufacturers. administration officials consider manufacturing one of the bright spots of the economy. those are some of the latest headlines on c-span radio. communitiesn "the -- "the communicators," the president of the wireless association. >> i was at the commerce ws1, and thisring a was reproducing spectrum from the department of defense, and this lesson has been learned. it's going wonderful. spectrum is harmonized. 65 megahertz. we're so excited. we're going to turn around and have the broadcast incentive option. i think that discussion is really going well. we have the report which the sec put out, which values the spectrum. those numbers have turned the discussion from a policy discussion to a business discussion, which is where that discussion needed to turn to, so we are excited about both options. i'm certain our carriers are going to come to them with big checkbooks, and it's going to be a win-win situation for everyone. tonight at 8:00 eastern on "the communicators," on c-span2. "washington journal" continues. host: joining us for this last segment of "washington journal" is molly o'toole, policy editor for "defense one." we're going to look at the work ahead on capitol hill once the election is over that congress has to get open in terms of the defense arena, the jobs that the weight. tell us about "defense one." atlantat is part of the media group, focused on national security, foreign policy, but really looking at the future of the way we are going to protect this country, the future of the way we fight war and the policies and politics that all intersect to go into those ideas. host: your job specifically is to cover what goes on behind us at capitol hill and at the white house in washington in terms of the policy and spending for the military. guest: right, yeah, the intersection of politics and national security, so it's a pretty big week. host: let's look at what is ahead for congress when they come back. the election is next tuesday, and congress will not be back until five days -- excuse me, eight days after. they have a trillion-dollar-plus omnibus spending bill. they have to get done the national -- the defense authorization bill, they have to authorize the programs for training the best training and --ipping the syrian rebels programs for training and equipping the syrian rebels. all this has to be done by wind? back novembert 12, and they have until the end of the session to get that done, session ise duck also intercepted by the holidays. on the hill, the idea is that they would like to get everything done by december 12 so that they can then go home for the holidays is kind of what has been swirling around, so it does not leave them much time to slate of mustle do legislation. they have to do the authorization act. all of the appropriations bills have been left until after the election. i believe that's 12 appropriation bills that will likely be wrapped up into a giant omnibus bill. congressman mccarthy over the weekend indicated that's what he would like to do, and that would run the government through the not fiscal year so we do constantly have these continuing resolutions that only continue previous funding for a set short period of time. host: we will open up our phone lines for your comments. you can also send us a tweet @cspanwj. congress went out -- when did they gavel out? end of september/early october. since then, a number of things have happened. we have ramped up our response in the middle east to isis, the president ordering airstrikes. since then, we have ordered their to 900 or more troops to west africa for ebola. how are these things covered under current legislation? how are they going to be paid for? the continuing resolution did this -- it locked things and at the prior fiscal year spending levels, so that is about -- i think it is about -- that puts the overseas contingency operations funding, which is the war fund -- host: so it is a catch-all? of a: it is kind catch-all. some members of congress have criticized it as a slush fund. it has funded some of the operations as we have ramped up against the islamic state, so for now, the previous year past -- the preview see her's defense bill has been covering that, but the secretary and joint chiefs of staff to see have suggested they will need to take another look at that, possibly need to make a supplemental request in order to cover these operations as we are talking about the fiscal climate looking forward because those funds may not be sufficient. host: what are you hearing? do you think the chances are good they will ask for more money for isis spending or the ebola response? as early as october, congress's at recess, but they have already redirected funding towards the ebola effort, and they are in discussions with the appropriate committees now. they have indicated they are talking about asking for more, so it has not really been clear. members of congress have said they are waiting on the pentagon a little bit to have an idea what that number looks like. the pentagon is already in touch with the appropriate committees on the hill to determine how that funding would he asked for, and it's likely that would be part of the overseas contingency operations request. of get think we all kind what a spending bill is. can we talk about the authorization bill -- what does that do? guest: right. that distention is hard to parse out sometimes. the appropriations bill determines the funding. they can give a ballpark for what the funding might look like, but the appropriations bill is the funding bill. the ndaa is the authorization. host: last year, among the debate in authorization, one of the issues in terms of policy was sexual harassment in the military. that was certainly a contentious and contested issue in debate on the authorization bill. right. interestingly, i think that played a little bit larger role last year than it will this year. there are certainly several measures that do address sexual assault in the military. i believe it is ramping up counsel services for victims. there are also some things they looked at with the v.a., ways to make it easier for victims. additionally, i think that was a last yearnent role than this one. i thing a lot of focus has been on these kind of unexpected conflicts -- host: including the fight against isis. as we talk about defense spending, we want to make sure we talk about a milestone -- the u.s. lowers its flag at afghan windss combat mission down, sprawling home for american british forces becomes a ghost town. the u.s.-led military coalition inicially ended combat afghanistan sunday in an event marked with the ceremonial handover of a sprawling desert base to the afghan army. u.s. and british troops played their national anthems and lowered their flags sunday, leaving the tricolor afghan flag to fly on its own over the joint base. the base is the largest installation the coalition has transferred to afghan forces as it winds down the current combat .ission back to reality in terms of defense spending. our members counting on some savings from afghanistan in their next budget? guest: that's what was interesting. the debate that has now emerged because it was expected that that fund -- that's the overseas contingency -- guest: the expectation was that that would come down as we withdrew from the iraq war, withdraw from afghanistan, and the formal end of combat operations is in december. the expectation was that that fund would come down, and that was kind of the pledge from the pentagon as well, but now that fund, the likelihood is that it will at least stay the same and probably expand to address not only possibly a little bit longer of a timeline in afghanistan, which is what some members of congress have pushed for, given concerns that, hopefully -- members of congress who are critical, saying we withdrew too quickly from iraq suggest we could perhaps reconsider the timeline for the withdrawal in afghanistan, in which case, the overseas contingency operation request bit moree a little funding for afghanistan, and also, it needs to address the fight against ebola, the fight against the islamic state, potentially shoring up or supporting nato forces in europe . instead of a drawing down, as was expected, now we are considering a kind of new era of defense spending. issues tot of consider. let's go to calls. this is michael on the phone from imperial beach, california, on our independent line. go ahead. caller: how y'all doing this morning? host: fine, thank you. caller: i was wondering how much are we spending on defense to fight isis, with our allies saudi arabia who hit people on a monthly basis in soccer stadiums areront of crowds -- we spending money for saudi arabia to fight isis? how much does that work out to? thank you. thus far, i think it was estimated -- i hope of not getting these numbers wrong, but i believe it was $7 million to $10 million a day. if you do the math, that adds up to a pretty significant amount even thus far, and the pentagon -- the obama administration, even members of congress have readily acknowledged that this could be a years-long operation. we are definitely talking about significant cost. in terms of what our allies have committed to that effort, we know that saudi arabia and other countries have made financial commitments as well as participated in some of the as for what that financial commitment looks like, it is not exactly clear, and as the defense department recently kind of adjusted its policy giving out notifications about airstrikes to say that the allied countries are going to be kind of giving out their own information from now on, which is perhaps an indication that some of the members of this coalition want to perhaps distance themselves or at least not be entirely transparent about what the extent of their partnership looks like, so it's not clear what our allies are committing relative to our commitment, but it is certainly clear that our commitment is significant. host: your thoughts on the issues that face congress when they come back after the elections. and reached us on twitter @cspanwj. the "new york times" writing about the closedown of the base in afghanistan yesterday reflecting some concerns about withdrawing to quickly. they write that the district in particular where the base is located has become a weathervane of a changing war. reports of hundreds of taliban police checkpoints surfaced earlier -- how event attacking police checkpoints surfaced early in the district. so, in terms of the members who are concerned about the is under way and ongoing. we budgeted for that. there is no consideration now that we are going to slow down and reconsider our position in afghanistan? pentagon officials have been on the hill recently talking about these issues and asse concerns, particularly the islamic state rather unexpectedly expanded so rapidly. they have been very clear that while the obama administration had emphasized that the timeline is constantly being reassessed based on the information on the ground. they have been adamant that they will be re-advising the president to the best of their ability reflecting the situation on the ground. if need be, that timeline could be adjusted, but i would not expect any significant differences from what we have already set out, which is a much smaller force moving forward, but it is not as if every american troop is going to be out by december, but that drawdown will continue. here is marry in carnegie, pennsylvania, on our independent line. yes, that's me. good morning, and thank you for taking my call. i would like to ask molly, or somebody tell me why we are over there to begin with. the muslims have been with us for centuries and getting along, the dullesnot until brothers went into iran and took they were a democracy at that time, and i guess with our their leader and put in the shaw of iran, which i suppose made them despise us. why are we in all of these countries? to me, it seems that -- i just read lately that we were in -- we have been in and are in 14 different countries over there at one time or another, and it also happens to be all oil. let me boil then the question little bit to current day and the president being adamant that there will not be boots on the ground. what are you hearing from defense committees on capitol hill? there are certainly two schools of thought. more hawkish members of congress have been adamant from the beginning that we should not take any options off the table including boots on the ground. i do not think anyone is calling for a full-scale invasion like we saw in 2003, but they pentagon that -- even officials have also suggested that airstrikes will not be sufficient, which then, the logic follows that you will need a ground force. the question is -- whose boots if not our boots? that's a key question when we are talking about the program to train and equip moderate syrian opposition. will that be sufficient? that certainly stands to be , so the more hawkish members of congress have been calling for at least that option to be cut on the table should it ,e necessary in the future which pentagon officials have said they will update their recommendations, should that be necessary, which it may be, but again, where talking about advisers in forward operating positions. we're not talking about a boots onnt number of the ground kind of on the frontlines of the fight, and there is an important distinction there. but the obama administration and other members of congress are hesitant to go too far down that the concerns, as our college just expressed, and some of the residual feelings i think from the previous war. host: congress comes back november 12. they have to do done the authorization bill for the next fiscal year, which we are currently in, for this fiscal year. they're deadline is december 11 because the current continuing resolution ends then. can we expect that these issues will be addressed as soon as they get back? they have to., you call it the lame duck, but it will not be so lame this time around because they pushed off all of these things until after the elections. last year, the defense authorization bill was done very late, but if anything, we can expect a lot more political pressure on some of this legislation, even though the elections will be over. potentially, we could have a change in the majority in the senate, so i think we can expect a pretty contentious and a pretty busy couple of weeks when they return. host: here is alex in riverdale, molly o'toole. caller: a couple of comments. i don't think congress should be leaving work until they finish their work. i don't know anyone in the u.s. that goes to work, does not do their work, and then goes on vacation except congress. there needs to be a constitutional amendment. second, i would ask ms. molly specialist -- could they spell out the acronym? a may know what it means, so it's very irritating when they spell out these acronyms and we have no idea what they are, and the moderators have to explain what it is. that, alex.eciate sometimes the moderator is guilty of that as well. thanks for your call. clayton, georgia, is next up. this is charles on the independent line. caller: good morning. i was just wondering -- considering the threats of isis coming through from our southern borders, is any of this legislation that's coming up in the lame-duck session had anything to do with securing the borders or tightening up on our southern border to keep these kind of terrorists out? it seems to be that should be -- it seems to me that should be part of our national security thinking at this time. interestingly, this question has played a fairly significant role in the midterm thus far in the elections that are coming up next week that will be determined, questions and the security of our border have certainly come up, but it is important to note that the department of homeland security have been very adamant that there is no evidence whatsoever of islamic state fighters attempting considering to cross the united eights border, so i think we should note that. it can become a point that gets bandied about in campaign almost but our border is as secure as it has ever been. the spending we have given to border security -- actually, president obama has supported more undocumented -- deported more undocumented immigrants than any other president. by a lot of measures, our border is as secure as it has ever been. certainly, the concerns about the islamic state are valid. we saw the attacks in canada recently. the islamic state and some of its propaganda has encouraged people to do these "lone wolf" attacks where it is an individual or small group terms of whether or not border security is part moreis legislation, it is of a conversation that has been happening around immigration reform, which by all indications has been pretty much tabled until likely deep into the next session. host: i would direct our caller, two, -- we have talked a little bit about the issue of reports of price is coming across the border with our previous guest, angie drobnic holan with politifact. they have talked about that and written about that at politifact .org. from jean -- tion in the second one, james says -- any thoughts on either of those? guest: in terms of private contracting, i do not know the exact proportion of kind of how much our government defense spending goes into contracts with private contractors, but it is interesting because a lot of the biggest defense contractors have been ramping down in ,nticipation of budget cuts like we discussed with the wars -- a drawing down, in reflection of that. to some respect, they have kind of taken a hit. unfortunately, when things are bad, they can be good for defense contractors, so there has been an interesting change in mood around the islamic state that perhaps we could be kind of of defenseother era spending, which could be good for contractors, but the obama administration and pentagon have been pretty clear that there are cuts that need to be made, reform to some acquisition programs, so it is interesting. it's not clear yet what this will mean for defense contractors. if the senate swings to the republicans and the armed services chair is a republican, that changes the scenario altogether terms of defense priorities. i think it does, and there's two ways to kind of answer this. i think that, particularly in an election season, the parties like to present themselves as much greater differences in viewpoint on national security than perhaps they do. obviously, lawmakers' first priority is to the national security, so we might see more of a divergence in viewpoints than there is in practicality because of the campaign season, but, certainly, republicans -- it is mostly kind of a republican viewpoint that the cuts we have been making to defense are dangerous, particularly in light of the recent conflicts, so this indication that their priority would be, for example, getting rid of sequestration and those budget caps come back into effect in 2016, fiscal year 2016, so that is a conversation they will actually have to have very quickly as well, not in the lame-duck, but soon after. there's an indication that if republicans are to take control of the senate, that may be removing restrictions on defense spending would be a priority for them. news on defense spending from "the washington post." the headline -- let's get back to calls. anthony is in lyndhurst, new jersey. welcome. i'm sorry, this is robert in baltimore. go ahead. caller: good morning to both of you. i would like to address the fact we're talking about -- the lame-duck congress. i would like to speak very quickly to the lame-duck senate 300 billsrry reid has sitting on his desk that have been there for quite some time that were approved by congress, and he refuses to bring them to the floor for a vote. i think that is absolutely asinine, and it should be illegal. mind what i think about it, but i will end there and take your answer off-line. thank you very much. host: i will add onto that a tweet from jim, who says -- guest: creating budget on time? probably -- i would not know year to year, but a lot of failures. safety say that. we certainly have gotten in the habit of funding the government by continuing resolution, you know, like you noted. we are in the current fiscal year and still discussing passing a budget for the fiscal year that we are actually in. which would in september 30 of next year. toot: like i said, it's not long until we have to start having a conversation about the next fiscal year. but i think that both sides have -- to get to the other caller's point, both sides have suggested this is not how the government should be run. this is not how they want to do things. what it or not that means this will change has yet to be determined, but republicans suggest that majority leader has resisted bringing bills to the perhaps because of concern about votes taken by vulnerable democrats win the senate majority, the question of who be veryld it would close. on the other side, harry reid others have suggested that it is republican obstruction that has from passing significant legislation. both sides take on that argument, but certainly, there's a lot of work left to be done. we have anthony. go ahead. republican line. caller: hello. thank you guys for being real and good people. , inuestion for the guest is her opinion, why is it so difficult for the forces of good tobally around the world kind of bring their arms on subjects, for instance, with respect to isis that are clearly beneficial to the betterment of good people on and, clearly, you know, everybody? that's the question. >> that's the best eternal question, and i think we probably do not have enough time to answer it here, but the administration has certainly touted their coalition against the islamic state. countries are involved in some way, shape, or form, although it's not clear what that involvement looks like, and a lot of that cooperation has been brought together around the idea of a common enemy, trying to convince people that the islamic state is not just a threat to iraq, not just a threat to syria, but a threat to the region, destabilizing the region would have broad ramifications across the globe, and then you also you createthe -- if a haven for the islamic state where they can operate with impunity, then you have the possibility of them launching attacks against the west, against other countries, but then we see the difficulty of that. the allies we have brought together around islamic state with the coalition have very, very different priorities. in the past, they have not exactly been friendly with each other, so self-interest will always tend to get in the way of even a common enemy, so i think those are some of the challenges they are dealing with. >> let's turn to the military role against fighting ebola in west africa. this is from the "washington post." a quick chart, and part of what they write about that is -- i'll pull this off and show a little bit of what the "usa today" is writing about, more military efforts. this is a unit the air force is building to transport our people, our health care workers, military personnel back from the region. the pentagon transportation system will allow the air force transports.or c-130 guest: so far -- what they did do right before they left in september is when they passed the continuing resolution, also because the government was going to shut down, but part of that was about $90 billion to fight ebola. part of that money is also allowed for in the overseas contingency operation for contingency request, and we are also considering a supplemental a lott to that again, but of those developments have taken place, so those are certainly the questions they will have to address. i was just that a hearing on friday, a house oversight committee where they were asking some of these key questions about how significant the u.s. involvement will be. several military officials testifying there. they talked, and about the details of what their operation thus far is looking like, and they made an interesting point. some members brought up the question about if this is a role for the u.s. military, is humanitarian assistance part of their role? should the u.s. be taking on so much with the burden of this fight, and i thought what the defense officials had to say was interesting. it's worth noting that the u.s. military has very unique capabilities that really no other institution in the world has, when it comes to coordinating the kind of logistics that are necessary for the fight. let's get back to calls here. northampton, massachusetts, welcome. i would first like to say i commend the president for the work he is doing with the ebola and all the other people, .urses and doctors we pray that they stay healthy. the other thing i would like to ask you is how much of the private budget is to contractors? could you tell us that? a questionad regarding this earlier, and i'm of moneythe amount that goes to private contractors each year. i mean, they are very large contracts, certainly. were talking about a lot of money, but the extent of those contracts, the number figure -- give the caller a number figure, the overall includes 550 billion dollars for defense appropriations, 60 billion dollars for the overseas contingency operation. i believe you said it was 90, so when congress comes back -- i believe you said it was $90 billion, so when congress comes back, they have to pass the authorization bill and the spending bill, which will be talked into that overall omnibus bill. guest: right, the version of the budget that was passed out of committee and awaiting floor time was that $550 billion, and then the $60 billion for overseas contingency operations, but because we passed a continuing resolution, that runs things at the private fiscal year's levels, which would put at $90 billion, so when they come back, they will have to address things at whether they want to pass things at the level they talked about earlier, the version of the bill that was waiting to get floor time, or perhaps if they do want , maybeease that amount bring it more in line with the previous fiscal year. host: has the authorization bill passed the house? their version has passed and the senate version has passed, but it is waiting to get , and then it would go back to the house to resolve any differences. senator carl levin, the chair of the armed services committee and ranking member jim in half -- inhoffe have both been adamant that they do not want this to come down to the wire. it hast couple of years, come down to the wire, so they have been very adamant that they want to get this done in enough time ahead of december 11 to give the house sufficient notice to clear up any of the differences. let's get back to our calls. south carolina, mary, cohead -- go ahead. make sure that you mute your television or radio. caller: i was trying to mute the phone. host: not the phone, the television or radio so we can hear you. go ahead with your comment. i take umbrage with what this lady said about our borders being more secure that they have ever been. as borders are wide open. all those hispanic people that came into the country because they expected them to become citizens, and they will vote democrat so we will have democrats in the white house until -- i guess the cow comes home, i don't know, but i do know this -- those borders are not secure, and that man in the white house wants to do something good with this country, why doesn't he have our marine gotten out of that mexican prison? if i was president, that marine would have been out the first week, and there would be to sheriff's deputies allied today that were killed friday by an illegal alien that has been deported twice -- host: we will let you go there. just a reminder, congress did hold a hearing on the marine who has been arrested and imprisoned in mexico. we covered that just a couple of weeks ago. i think they held it during the recess, and you can find that at www.c-span.org. michael is next in milford, massachusetts. good morning. caller: good morning. i think it's hilarious -- that previous caller was hilarious. the question i have to you is i find it so ironic that you are relying on -- this congress has been so lame-duck. you had two callers now blaming the president about what is going on with this and that. as far as i feel as a citizen, you have to blame congress. there is no other way around it. they had been lame-duck. they have written nothing but junk bills -- we've got nothing to work with, you know? i don't blame them for having the feeling and the position he has. as far as defense, i find it very ironic that you have no is beingmuch money spent to private contractors. i would think that is something you as a professional in defense one would know right off the bat . i find that crazy. i would hope you could answer that. guest: it's difficult to put your finger on a very convenient a massivehow much number of contracts, a lot of them, are very large, but it's difficult to know an exact total and kind of just have that at the ready in terms of private contractors. peter is in aurora, colorado, on our democrats line. welcome. caller: thank you, and good morning to the both of you. what i find surprising is the amount of agreement, not so much gridlock, in washington, d.c. i used to live in washington, worked at the triangle building for the fda. the two major issues most people when they are poll will be voting on, especially in purple states or states up for grabs are not the issues that many people talk about. mainly the gridlock and the economy. the main problem in this country is actually a structural problem. host: you are beginning to break up a little bit. he talked quickly on mandatory based oncuts and caps the sequester. is defense spending still being affected by the sequester? >> pentagon officials, when they start to talk about the budget, even when they talk about potentially adjusting the budget to deal with some of these kind ,f unforeseen contingencies they are very adamant in their concern about the sequester, so while they were offered some caps, from those budget they still at the outset had to , to across-the-board cuts which they say they could not be strategic about where they found that spending. they're concerned, potentially, if this capital back in a place is that it would be just the worst timing that they are having to deal with these unexpected contingencies. they want to be able to have the flexibility to find those savings in areas where they feel they can find those savings, and that is something that is kind of being discussed at the as well,onal level perhaps giving the defense department the flexibility to find those savings where they would like to find those savings, rather than these uniform, across the board -- last comments of from viewers on twitter, @cspanwj. is an interesting question. we have, over the last couple of weeks -- for example, with the attacks in canada, there was discussion of whether u.s. service members as well in those theirshould change uniform even. we're talking about basic security questions, fundamental security for u.s. forces. in turkey as well, that was something that was discussed after the islamic state made a pretty brazen attempt at a kidnapping in daylight. whether or not service members are being targeted, whether they should change kind of how they , but our bases are some of the most secure in the world. i think a spokesman for the pentagon said you cannot build an kind of new climate in terms of the funding being directed to that. i think it's more of a reconsidering protocol at this point than it is a significant ramp up in directing more funding the security of our bases. host: and a look at defenseone.com with a picture of the u.s. military intensifying the fight against ebola, we talked about it. ou can follow her on twitter mollmotoole and read more at

Related Keywords

Arkansas , United States , Louisiana , Boca Raton , Florida , Alaska , Brazil , Turkey , Minnesota , China , California , Syria , Kansas City , Kansas , Washington , District Of Columbia , San Francisco , Mexico , South Carolina , Massachusetts , Guinea , New York Hospital , New York , Miami , Canada , Tampa Bay , Tampa , North Carolina , Missouri , Texas , Iran , Afghanistan , Atlanta , Georgia , Kentucky , Boston , Illinois , Indiana , Virginia , Liberia , Wisconsin , Mississippi , Jordan , United Kingdom , Fayetteville , Oklahoma , Iraq , Baghdad , New Jersey , Idaho , Nebraska , Colorado , Saudi Arabia , Maryland , Pennsylvania , Houston , Ohio , Dallas , Capitol Hill , University Hospital , Sierra Leone , Americans , America , Mexican , Afghan , British , American , Syrian , Sam Brownback , Sylvia Matthews Burwell , Bradley Ben , Anthony Fauci , Alison Grimes , Pat Roberts , Ronald Reagan , Kenneth Baer , Los Angeles , Dan Sullivan , George Bush , Jeb Bush , Charlie Crist , Greg Orman , Chuck Hagel , Tom Coburn , John Kerry , Harry Reid , John Grisham , Carl Levin , Chris Christie , Barack Obama , George W Bush , Robin Hudson , James Oliphant , Mitch Mcconnell , Richard Nixon , Rick Scott , Noriega Manuel , John Mccain , Ted Cruz ,