tv Third Rail Al Jazeera January 25, 2016 2:30am-3:01am EST
some senior citizens to fight depression and maintain a healthy body as well as a healthy mind do checkout our website if you have a spare couple of minutes. aljazeera.com. you can talk to me at twitter. you can talk to everyone on the team here in doha. there is a facebook page as well. to protect your property from drones that might be flying over head. students that go hungry every day in third world countries in the world. i'm adam may and this is third rail. the g.o.p. is in turmoil with establishment candidates for president running well behind insurgent billionaire donald trump.
>> i'm very angry because our country is being run horribly and i will gladly accept the mantle of appear anger for many establishment republicans, a ted cruz candidacy would be even worse for their party. >> we've got a republican house, we've got a republican senate and we don't have leaders who honor their commitments. i will always tell the truth and do what i said i would do joining me now is tom davis, a former chair of the national republican congressional committee and co-author of the partison divide. congress in crisis. first question, if donald trump wins the nomination, what does that say about the current state of the g.o.p.? >> well i think it says something about the state of the country. i think it shows a great alienation of the non-college whites and people who have kind of been left out of the economic
successes of this country. donald trump speaks to them. he expresses the frustration of a lot of americans who don't see themselves moving up the ladder and see the culture changing all around them. the reality is hillary clinton's numbers are also very bad on the democratic side. so donald trump-hillary clinton race will be one to watch. it's not a slam dunk for hillary clinton what do you make that ted cruz is polling in second in most polls and he is seen someone quite frankly someone difficult to get along w doesn't have many allies there on the hill. what does that say about the g.o.p.? >> it says a lot and the country in general. if you look at what bernie sanders is doing against hillary clinton on the democratic side, this is basically an anti establishment revolt, but it's more pronounced on the republican side what do you make of the guy that you're
supporting right now, john kasich? does someone like john kasich have a chance in this current atmosphere within the g.o.p. of pulling ahead and winning the g.o.p. nomination? isn't he part of the establishment? >> john kasich left washington undefeated and unindicted as we like to say and went into the private sector and came back as governor of ohio so he hasn't been in washington for 15 years. when he was in congress he wasn't the establishment until he became chairman of the budget committee at which point he worked with president clinton to balance the budget for four years you basically helped build in modern republican party. you ran the national republican congressional committee for four years from 98 to 2002. did you ever predict that this is what the party would look like in 2016? >> i was hopeful it would go in a different direction because i'm not into social issues. i represented the majority minority district where we had a
lot of immigrants who were voting republican at the time because they're economically conservative. they don't like the government regulation and taxes holding them down. we will see where this ee involves. maybe one thing that happens is that they nominate someone who is so out of the mainstream they take a good licking and come back to be a more economically conservative and a less culturally conserve party do you think that's what the licking? >> i don't think that's what they need, but i think it would wake them up if they run somebody out of the mainstream. what you see traditionally is the parties have been centering forces. the public will let them know if they're too far out to the right or the left in the case of democrats you have worked over the last decade after getting out of office trying to build a stronger coalition of republicans. where have mainstream republicans failed? >> i think what has happened is
the emphasis on social issues. as the country is prosperous in particular people move to other issues and so guns, abortion, gay rights, these issues have taken a primeacy. it has moved states into the republican column but they paid a price for it in some of the states, some of the more after fluent suburbs-- affluent suburbs. they've accepted gender equality and gone a different direction on climate change. i think they're still sorting it out comments made by rich lowrie is saying that he is leading this effort to have well-known conservatives denounce donald trump calling him a fake conservative a men ace to the conservative movement. is he a conservative? >> he is certainly more
conservative than any other ones running is his success right now a threat to the conservative movement in this country? >> they seem to feel that way what do you make about sarah palin? >> i think he endorsed donald trump but i don't think she is significant outside of iowa at this point she has a lot of money behind her and she has helped candidates. don't you think her voice in this could change things? >> i think she works both ways what do you think it is going to take for both parties to return to governing style that emphasiss a compromise as opposed to confrontation. it seems like the confrontation is so successful at turning up the bases we're seeing now >> i think it takes the voters to make them do that. the voters are angry right now. they're in a very honoree mood, but we will have to see which way they go. they're upset of the fact that
nobody is governing, but they're anger. that's what this debate is about right now and so far donald trump has captured it, but we still have a few weeks to go before the first ballot is counted thank you very much for your time >> my pleasure. thank you the third rail panel is coming up next. >> it has been very reticent to take on the privacy issue around drones but they need to step up this is a perfect example of the government trying to catch up >> that is not going to stop somebody from flying a drone my backyard. >> the only live national news show at 11:00 eastern. >> we start with breaking news. >> let's take a closer look.
welcome back to third rail. the water crisis in flint, michigan, has increasingly become politicsised. the smaller government the better. >> reporter: tempers flaring over the water crisis >> it is a reminder you can't short change basic services that we provide to our people >> what we've been doing is asking the governors of the state to be accountable. >> why is it the republicans talk about the glory of small government? this is what it looks like this is affecting lots of people. i we have chief correspondent and editor in charge, another in charge of a program at the
center for justice, senior contributor to the daily signal and a senior fellow with the heritage foundation. thanks for joining us. rick snyder campaigned for less regulation, less government services when he ran for office. does this prove that less destructive? >> well, in this particular case i don't think that's a problem. i am all for investigating this. i think it's terrible what happened there. i think whoever is responsible should absolutely be held accountable, whether it's the state level or local level or all the way down. you find the state environmental agency is the first place to be looked at for blame. we know that many federal regulations simply were not enforced. even if we had more federal regulations, they're not being put into play and not being enforced, you will have a problem. it is making sure government officials know if you cause a
problem, you should be punished the exact same way a private industry would be if they had caused the problem the fact are clear on that, that the governor and his office and staff, they were alerted about this and he did campaign on smaller government and they were able to save money by running the water system this way. doesn't he bear responsibility? >> absolutely. the city of flint decided to go there. once the governor's office was notified, the agency got involved. there is responsibility all the way up the chain. i think if it's proven that the governor or anybody on his staff knew at the very beginning and did nothing they should be held accountable appointees. >> it feels there should be a higher standard for basic human needs, for water. there is always a push to save money. they saved, what, five million dollars or something like that. that makes them look like a hero, but they made this choice and put the money saving above all other issues
let's talk about michigan. it is a state that is broke. when you have 51 different u.s. moneyise pallet-- municipalitys that filed bankruptcy, shouldn't we expect this >> there are a couple of things. when you talk about small government it doesn't mean less regulation. it means not enforcing regulations that are already in place. one of the things that you see throughout the story is that regulators didn't take the issue seriously enough. that's also part of the small government philosophy. i think the other piece is you've also got to look at which communities bear the brunt of small government. over here you're looking at a community that is poor, that is mainly minority. people have said this before. if this had been a rich white community would we have seen the same response from the environmental protection folks? i don't think so govern snyder didn't fly
into office on some magic carpet. he was elected by people, detroi detro detroit supported him. interests. >> here is why i think small government has the issue. i think bad things happened here. it is a lack of enforcement and accountability. you have that small government that we have in washington where there is plenty of big governments. look at what happened in summer in august in colorado, organizations are responsible for, on the case of water, having this huge toxic flow into the river that thousands of people and neighboring states pull drinking water from situation? >> no. here is the difference. is the epa being held accountable? no. they should have had done different things, had a double-check on things that caused the spill.
if that had been a private industry, the government would be suing them and making them pay penalties. the same thing may be happening in michigan. again the state is responsible. sometimes people have to do their jobs and they have to be held accountable for doing so. i think that's a problem in government generally, not just a small factor, but take a look at what happened in washington on a day by day basis the u.s. government recently announced a $4 billion investment to race toward a future of self-driving cars. should the government be getting involved? >> reporter: four billion dollars, that's the amount of obama administration is willing to spend in the sector. >> he is looking to giants who lead the charges on this and partner with these auto makers who seem to struggle keeping up. >>' question about what is
legal, what is not legal. ultimately this will help to make things clearer you're a tech guy on this panel if we could call you that. we've got 61,000 bridges in this country right now that are with deficient. we need 740 billion dollars just to fix our existing roads. why is this a wise investment of government money? >> if you have more self-driving cars on the road, you are going to lower the incidence of traffic accidents, distracted driving, lower the cost on fuel. you're going to transform how people get around. but in order to make that happen, you have to spend the money. for example, trying to imagine that in the transition period from the way we drive now to self-driving cars being introduced to the long island expressway. i'm not sure we want that to happen where there's a mix. you have to find an infrastructure way to handle the self-driving cars.
maybe there's an hov lane and a lane for self-driving dars and then all the idiots on the road who are still going to do the usual stuff they say it will cost between five an ten thousand dollars more for people who can afford these cars. is that the right thing to do? are we creating infrastructure for the wealthy? >> i don't think we know yet. the point of we're heading in this direction. every car manufacturer, and google and that are investing in this world. we should be looking at this which will save lives and that is a good thing. in terms of energy it is a good thing. what i hope the government is going to do is saying we will give lump sums of money to companies or investors that we think are doing the best job with this because i think the free market is already well into this area why not fund it to make this? >> i think america is going to be a leader already. we have other things that we're not leaders for and we ought to be worried about. they should look at it and not get ahead of it
>> they're not getting ahead of it. they're way behind on the regulatory side because honestly when you go from state to state, there are i believe two states that are okaying autonomous driving and the rest of them have no idea how to figure this out. they're not ready for it. >> not only is our physical infrastructure not ready for driverless cars but our legal frins isn't. they're are really difficult issues about liability. if a driverless car gets into an accident, who's fault is it? what if it's two driverless cars? when you compare how government is dealing with our issues that have proceed lif rated in our lives-- proliferated into our lives, whether we're talking about drones or you're talking about email, our laws are outdated. i think this is a great move on the part of the administration
why not let the sector invest. we're talking about funding something that could ultimately benefit apple here >> they don't need the money. i don't think that's where the money is going. most of them are working with smaller third party companies that are oftentimes are universities, that may need the funding to take it to the next level. as good as this technology is, they're by no means done. there are a lot of questions that has to be questioned, technical questions, and they won't always be answered by the companies with very deep pockets >> i'm not saying there's no role for government, but the administration hasn't been clear on how this four billion dollars would be used. i think they're going to dance around congress to get it through, but i think they need to be specific so it goes to where it should go but not in a slush fund the massive increase in drone use among americans has
led to some complicated questions about privacy and property rights. one man's explosive way of dealing with it has now triggered an important debate. >> the man in kentucky who shot down a drone over his house will not face charges >> the owner of that drone is demanding damages >> it is an invasion of privacy. we were in our own yard. technology. >> farmers to find thirsty crops. surveillance flights who owns the airspace. what stops a neighbor from using their drone to look into your garden or your window. the short answer in most cases is very little the charges were dropped against this guy, but he is being sued by the drone operator. this is a complicated mess and when we see the number of drones that just sold in the last holiday season, this is a big issue. what is the privacy rights over your own home? >> i think the legal landscape
is relatively complicated because we haven't really faced this issue with autonomous aircraft that have this kind of precision should you be able to shoot it down? >> i think it relies on whether you can in the first place. the privacy issue really is whether or not the drone operator should be allowed to fly over private property that belongs to other people. i think that's the critical issue >> we have laws against peeping toms. people can't stand at your window an observe what you're doing. a drone is a new electronic version of that. i think we have basic things in place. the bill of rights, search and seizure. the police could have the right to. we have some basic comments and laws in place that i think can be applied in many of these areas would you be happy then, you're laying in your pool, you're expecting privacy, the
drone flies over ahead. do you want to use the existing laws? do you think there should be specific laws on the books that layout some ground rules? >> i think there are existing laws in place that will take care of a lot of problems, but i think there is something that should be done more at the local level than the federal rule that says nobody can do this we're talking about the fda airspace >> we're not over my back year. it's not air owe space there. it is a guy flying it over my pool is different than a commercial problem or people flying drones. that's not a privacy issue. that's a safety issue >> the sky is the sky. once you lift off the ground, you're flying in the sky. model aircraft fly with drones. they do not fly over private airspace. that is specific. what is interesting if you ever take a drone over to an air owe
droem, they tell you not to do that you can fire at the drone and disable it. >> this is a perfect example of the government trying to catch up with the situation that has already gotten well out of hand. we know that over the past couple of months there's finally now a registration program for drones that weigh between half a pound and 55 pounds. that covers pretty much the world of private drones. these are ones that can fly two miles away. they have hd cameras. the and if they fly over you're yard they will get a good picture. there there is nothing about flying a drone over a private home the supreme court hasn't taken up airspace in 70 years. it did seem to side with property owners then >> i don't think a state by state approach makes sense. when you're looking at drones you have two sets of issues. one set of issue relates to safety which is primarily what the faa is responsible for,
ensuring that they're drying in a way that's-- flying in a way that's safe. it has been very reticent to take on the privacy issues around drones, but i think that they need to step up to the plate over here. >> we're going to make people have to register their drones, that is not going to stop somebody flying a drone over the backyard. me being able to shoot it out of the sky with my bb gun is. after the fact it is done. this is the other problem. things are registered. i don't think a registry ends up stopping people before they engage in this what's the dangerous of registering a drone? >> forget the danger. what's the effect? that doesn't stop again my neighborhood teenage boy from sending over the drone. >> it has a chilling effect in that. if you know that you can be held accountable because when this thing falls out of the sky,
there's the number, they go to the registry and then the police show up at your house amazon will use drones to deliver packages in the future. should they be able to fly over your property or should they stick to public roads? >> we have very view regulations for the commercial industry. they have been way behind in dealing with this. that's holding up jobs and the economy. that's what the government ought to be focused on and get their hands off the private drones, if you will. they ought to focus on things that the companies can open up do you let them go over the roads? >> here is the problem with going over the homes. your neighbors, who are not going to be happy. if you've heard a drone, it is loud you have to deal with the leaf blowers. that's enough >> everyone will know when you're getting your whatever thank you all for being with us.
welcome back. before we go it's time for the final thought. no-one should have to go to school hungry. that relates to all children and it should include the millions of adults, young and old, that are working to build better lives for themselves. attending more than 1600 community colleges across the country. according to a recent study that looked at 4,000 students at ten different community colleges, more than half of those students suffered at times from what
academics call marginal to very low food security, or to put it simply, hunger. you might ask yourself why. for close to half of that group the answer was simple. they could not afford regular meals and it clues many enrolled in classes knowing they couldn't buy three meals a day but they still needed that two-year degree for a better shot at a job. none you this should come as a surprise. around half of the high school students already qualified for meals. when they go to college they still need to eat. government food programs should close the gap but there are work requirements for getting food stamps. students could mount a legal challenge and there is a lot of red tape be and it shouldn't be necessary. there are studies showing a student needs a full belly to function at their best. this should not be an issue for the wealthiest country in the world, making sure students have to stip meals as they struggled