tv News and Public Affairs CSPAN July 29, 2012 10:00pm-11:00pm EDT
they do not quite know what to do. they do not quite know what their way forward is. they are fearful of the consequences of their association with the conservatives won the next election comes around. we have a curious situation of a party which you think ought to be the most independently critical of what's going on in government. >> the -- what do you think will be the big bumps in the road? >> the first one i can can say with certainty is that one of the bump is something that nobody has ever predicted. that always happeneds. the important are the events. but it may surprise people. i think we all expect this
electoral reform would be a major bump in the road for the coalition. but it's a bump that they manage to navigate it. defense policy might be one. relations with europe might be one. the economy which the current government is seeming even in the eyes of the impt m.f. is managing less and less successfully. where there are serious divisions within the coalition as well as between the coalition and the supporters in parliament. >> do join us when we return on september the 3rd. you can find our round-off on "bbc parliament" weeknights at 7:00. but for now, alicia mccartney, goodbye. >> tomorrow the state
department releases its annual report on international religious freedom. we'll have that live at noon eastern on c-span. then live at 2:00, hillary clinton gives a speech of international religious freedom. that's tomorrow on c-span. >> we did not begin as a city in kentucky. there is a vague knave american region and late ear county and another state called kentucky. so we began in 1778 as louisville, virginia. >> join book tv, american history tv and c-span's local content vehicles from louisville, kentucky. literally life on book tv c-span2. author jason gaines on
rebooting the internet politics. and on sunday on american history tv, three weeks at farmington plantation in 1841 would be key on shaping abraham lincoln's view. >> also the steamboat on the ohio river. take a look at the bell of louisville. c-span explores the history and literary life in cities across the american. next week on c-span2 and 3. >> republican presidential candidate mitt romney continued his three nation overseas tour with a stop in israel this prime minister, benjamin netanyahu and other officials. he also addressed a gathering to talk about the u.s. commitment to israel and the threats from its security from iran and its nick: -- nuclear program. this is about 20 minutes.
[cheers and applause] >> thank you. >> governor, mrs. romney, distinguished honored guests, friends of jerusalem, today is a ninth day of the jewish month of av. a day where we look back at history. as we conclude this day of fasting and prayer, we welcome you to renewed, united and thriving jerusalem, the heart and soul and theer terge capital of the je wish people in the state of israel. [applause]
>> since its reunification in 1967, and after 22,000 years jerusalem has become again a desired destination for over 3.5 million people, pilgrims and tourists. israel has ensured freedom of religion and freedom of movement as never before for all favorites and jerusalem has returned to the central role it played 2,000 years ago. we're grateful to you, governor romney for taking time out of your busy schedule in the final months before the election to bring a message of friendship and support from the american people to the people of israel. last, we met, we explored the common values and concern that unite america and israel. we discussed ways of making the world safer and better for our
children and the importance of defending peace-loving citizens of the world from those nations and ideaologists that would do us harm of we shared a common relief of the centrality of the actual economy to the valuization of our common goals. we look forward to hearing your thoughts and wish you a productive and meaningful visit to israel and to the holy city of jerusalem, the united capital of the state of israel. [applause] ladies and gentlemen, let us warmly greet governor mitt romney. [cheers and applause] >> thank you mayor. you're very kind. very generous. great city. congratulations. thank you. thank you. thank you.
[applause] thank you. thank you so much. thank you. and thank you for your kind introduction, mayor, and thank you for the warm welcome. it's -- it's a pleasure and a privilege to be in israel again and to see so many dear friends. to step foot into israel is to step foot into a nation that began with an ancient promise made in this land, the jewish people persisted through one of the most monstrous crime in history and now this nation has come to its place as one of the most impressive democracies of the world. these achievements are a tribute to the resilience of the israeli people. you've managed against all odds, time and again throughout your history to persevere, to rise up and to emerge stronger.
the historian paul johnson on the 50th anniversary on the creation of the jewish state said that over the course of its life said that 100 new independent states had come into existence. "israel's the only one who's creation can fairly be called a miracle." he wrote. it's a deeply moving experience to be in jerusalem tcap tall of israel. the capital of israel. [applause] >> our two nations are separated by more than 5,000 miles. but for an american abroad, you can't get much closer to the ideals and convictions of my
own country than you do in israel. we're part of the great fellowship of democracies. we speak the same language of freedom and justice and the right of every person to live in peace. we serve the same cause and we provoke the same hatreds in the same enemies of civilization. it is my firm conviction that the security of israel is in the vital, national security interest of the united states. [applause] ours is not an alliance based only on shared interests, but also on enduring shared values. in those shared values one of the strongest voices is that of your prime minister, my friend benjamin netanyahu. i met with him earlier this morning and i look forward to my family joining with his this evening as they close the fast
of this day. it's remarkable to consider how much adversity over so great a span of time is recalled by one day in the calendar. this is a day of remembrance and mourning. but like other such occasions, it also calls forth clarity and resolve. at this time, we also remember the 11 israeli athletes and coaches who were massacred at the munich olympics 40 year ago. [applause] and 10 years ago this week, nine valeie and american students were murdered in a terrorist attack at he brew university. tragedies like this are not reserved to the past, they're a constant reminder of the reality of hate and the will with which that hate is executed upon the innocent.
navbin said this -- we remembered, he said, and now have the responsibility to make sure that never again will our independence be destroyed and never again will the jew become homeless or defenseless. this, he added, the is crux of the problems facing us in the future. so it is today as israel faces enemies in past crimes against the jewish people and seek to begin new ones, when they speak about doing ill to this nation, only the naive would mistakeen it as rhetoric. make no mistake, the ayatollahs are testing our objective. they want to know who will object and who will look the other way. my message to the leaders of iran is one in the same. we will not look away, nor will
my country ever look away from our passion and commitment to israel. [applause] >> as prime minister bagin put it in vivid and haunting words, if an enemy of the jewish people says he seeks to destroy him, believe him. we've seen the horrors of history. we will not stand by. we will not watch them play out again. it would be foolish not to take iran's leaders at their word. they are, after all, the product of a thee ok si. over the year iran has amassed a bloody and brutal record. it has seized embassies and killed its own people. it supports the assad regime in syria. they provide weapons that have killed american soldiers in afghanistan and iraq.
it is plotted to assassinate diplomats on american soil. it is iran that's the leading state sponsor of terrorism and the most destabilizing nation in the world. we have a solemn duty and a moral imperative to deny iran's leaders the means to follow through on their malevolent intentions. [applause] we should stand with all who would join our effort to prevent a nuclear armed iran and that includes iranian dissidence. don't erase from your memorys the scenes from three years ago when that regime brought to death its own people as they rose up. the threat we face does not come from the iranian people but from the regime that oppresses them. five years ago at the conference, i state in my view that iran's pursuit of weapons camebility presents an
intolerable threat to israel, to america and to the world. that threat has only become worse. now as then the regime claims that it seeks to enrich nuclear material for peaceable purposes. now as then, the conduct of y irans leaders give us no reason to trust them. but today they're five years closer to develop nuclear capability. preventing that outcome must be our highest national security priority. i want to pause on that point. it's sometimes said that those who are committed to stopping the iranian regime are reckless and provocative. the opposite is true. we are the true peacemakers. history teaches with force and clarity that when the world's most dispotic regimes secure the world's most destructive
weapons peace often gives away to oppression, to violence or to a devastating war. we must not dilute ourselves thinking that containment is an option. we must lead the effort to prevent iran from possessing nuclear weapons capability. we should employ any and all measures to desuede the regime from its nuclear course and it is our fervent hope that diplomatic ways will do so. no options should be excluded. we recognize israel's right to defend itself and that it is right for america to stand with you. [applause] these are some of the principles i outlined two year ago at the conference. what was timely then has become urgent today. let me turn from iran to other nations in the middle east
where we've seen rising tumult and chaos. to the north, syria is on the brink of a civil war. the dictator in damascus, no friend to israel or america. slaughters his own people as he desperately clings to power. lebanon is under the growing and dangerous influence of hezbollah. after a year of upheaval and unrest, egypt now has an islamic president, chosen in a democratic election. hopefully this new government understands the one true measure of democracy is how elected by the majority respect the rights of those in the minority. the international community must use its considerable influence to insure that the new government honors the peace agreement that was signed by [applause]
as you know, only too well, since hamas took control of the gaza strip in 2007, thousands of rockets have reigned on homes an cities. i've walked on the streets of honored to resolve people. and now new attacked have been launched from the sinai peninsula. with new rockets aimed at the hamas rockets aimed of the with iran on nuclear arms, america's even critical. whenever the security of israel is most in doubt, america's israel must be most secure. was before
him in 1948, president harry truman decided without hesitation that the united states would be first country recognize the state of israel. natural of runs deeper than interests. of how america, a new to the the standards of this ancient reason, rose up to most hopeful in our nation's history. different as our paths have been, we see the same qualities in one another. israel an america in many reflections of one another. democracy, in the right of every people to select their leaders and choose their nation's course. we both believe in the rule of law knowing that in its arcs willful men may incline to week. we both believe that our rights
university granted not by government but by our creator. free enterprise because it is the only economic system that has lifted people from poverty, and enduring middle-class and that has achievements in human flourishing. with israel's cutting edge technology and thriving economy. the is all around us. embraced economic you export technology, not tyranny or terrorism. you're innovators and made the desert bloom and have made for a better world. our countries our economic freedom and in the creativity of our respective entrepreneurs. what you have built here with your hands is a tribute to your model for others
finally, we both believe in the freedom of expression because we are confident in our ideas and in the ability of our men and women to think for themselves. you want to hear some very sharp criticisms of israel and its policiesings you don't have to cross any borders. all you have to do is walk down the street, step into a cafe. there you'll hear people arguing or speaking their mind. orpik up an israeli newspaper. you'll find some of the toughest criticism of israel you'll read anywhere. your nation like ours is stronger for this energetic exchange of ideas and opinions. that's the way it is in a free society. there are many millions of people in the middle east who
would cherish the opportunity to do the same thing. these decent men and women desire nothing more than to live in peace an freedom and to have the -- and freedom and to have the government criticize it openly without fear of oppression or repercussion. i believe those who oppose these fundamental rights are on the wrong side of history. but history's march can can be painfully slow. we have a duty to speed and shape history by being unapologetic ambassadors for the values we share. the united states and israel have shown that we can build strong economies and strong militaries. but we must also build strong arguments that advance our values and promote peace. we must work together to change hearts and awaken minds through the power of freedom, free enterprise and human rights. i believe that the enduring alliance between the between the state of israel and the united states of america is more than a strategic alliance.
it's the force for good in the world. america's support of israel should make every american proud. we should not allow the inevitable complexities of modern geo politics to obscure fundamental touch stones. no country or organization or individual should ever doubt this basic truth of free, a free and strong america will always stand with a free and strong israel. [applause] and standing by israel does not mean with military and intelligence corporation alone. we cannot stand silent as those who seek to undermine israel, voice their criticisms. and we certainly should not join in that criticism. diplomatic distance in our public between our nations
emboldens israel's adversaries. [applause] by history, and by conviction, our two countries are bound together. no individual, no nation, no world organization will pry us apart. as long as we stay together and stand together, there is no threat we cannot overcome and very little that we cannot achieve. i love this country. i love america. i love the friendship and passion we have for the values which we share. thank you for your support today. may god bless my country of america and may he bless and protect the nation of israel. thank you so much.
>> republican presidential candidate mitt romney finishes his three-nation overseas trip in poland. he plans to visit the first sight of the first shots fired in world war ii after meeting with donald tusk and former polish president. tomorrow, the cato institute host as forum focusing on economic and political issues. it looks at the economic growth as well as the origins of state and federal policies. speakers include economics professor steven lanceburg and daniel griswold. live at 9:00 a.m. eastern on c-span2. >> we did not begin as a city in connecticut. there was only a vague native american region and later a county in another state called
kentucky. we began in 1778 as louisville, virginia. >> next weekend, join book tv, american history tv and c-span's local content vehicles from louisville, kentucky. literary life by john david dike on kentucky senior senator mitch mcconnell. sunday at 5:00 p.m. eastern on american history tv, three weeks at farmington plantation in 1841 would be key on shaping abraham lincoln's views on slavery. also the steamboat on the ohio river. take a look back on the bell of louisville. c-span sflorse the history and literal -- explores the history and literary life next week from louisville on c-span2 and 3. >> now a look at the latest
fundraising numbers from the presidential campaign and the superpacks. this is 30 minutes. changing campaign 2012. >> absolutely. this is a whole new ballgame. we are looking at a system that's brand-new for a presidential election cycle where the money can come directly from corporate treasuries, trade associations and folks like karl rove political operative who is have been strategists and fund racers for a long time are holding many of the cards this
time. they're behind the scenes but very powerful. among the -- harold simmons who's a billionaire from dallas. sam del who's a rea investor and daniel lowe who's a hedge fund manager in new york what do they get out of this? what are they looking for? >> in fact, i think they're getting -- they're hoping to get what they have gotten before and more. many of these are the same big donors that have played at the national and local level. there are some new faces but i think they hope to really change the course of the american politics and in a way that favors in some cases their
ideological and their economic interests. very there someone on that side? >> jeffery katzemburg and irwin jacobs. there are major donors including bill maher and morgan freeman. but they're not able to hold a canned to the amount of money that has been raised on the conservative side. >> if you could let's take a step back because people remember the case. he singled out members of the supreme court during his state of the union address in which he said it was the wrong decision. what did the court decide and what does that change what we have seen from post water gate to 2008? >> there is so much confusion about what citizen's united did and did not do. we need to single out what they said and the case that immediately fold the speech now which created superpacks. but the bottom line is that
many of the donations being made now could have been made all along. these are -- if they're large individual donations going to nonprofits to c-4 social welfare organizations or groups like the chamber. they would have made it all along. the difference is using corporate cash may or may not be part of the picture. those groups don't need to disclose who's giving them the money. much of the money particularly now i'm going into the election is by these more secretive nonprofits, not the superpacks which do disclose. >> on your sight, some of the romney bundlers and one of the names mentioned patrick dirkin. do you know who he is? and is he imapply matic when it comes to candidates? >> barkley? >> yes. >> so much money is coming from
financial organizations and individuals representing in particular again on the conservative side and of course barkley's is embroiled in a scandal and on other banking scandal. we've seen some uncomfortable connection relationship to those who have the money to give -- and also have are giving a good reason to want to develop a more coordral relationship with the candidate, that will most benefit their economic interest. >> give us a call or send us an e-mail. you can join the conversation online on our twitter page and facebook, twitter.com/c-spanwj or facebook.com/c-span. >> mitt romney with a series of fundraisers. everything legal? >> legal because they're
raising the money from ex-pats. from americans abroad. this has been done in prior cycles as well. it is unusual. it's a little bit uncomfortable to be raising funds for american elections on foreign soil. but each of these donations if they're more than $200 must be item miesed so we can scrutinize who these people are. mostly they're coming from executive abroad, folks in the military posted abroad. so legal but an interesting phenom northern, a big jump in those contribution this cycle. >> not at the same level in 2008, the president is raising money from some of the very people that he's going after, from new york investors, financial executives and even hedge fund managers. >> there are many folks from wall street among president obama's bundlers, those volunteer fundraisers who are working on his behalf. but he has taken a real hit
from perhaps based upon the financial reforms that he championed during his first term. and wall street is giving far more to mitt rock ni now, $25 million as compared to just $10 million for the entire sector financials, insurance rea. >> patrick is on the phone from seattle, washington. good morning to you from the seattle line. >> good morning. >> good morning, fred. >> yes, good morning. >> we can hear you. please go ahead. >> yes. i'm concerned about the fact that in the media in general and specifically with your guest there that the word "propaganda" is very rarely brought up. any comments? >> propaganda by the campaigns? by the outside interest groups? i'm not sure what you're -- >> ok. well, i'll try to keep this simple. i'm focusing on the word
propaganda. commuters will go through and analyze how often the words is used. now my -- i'm 7 years old and i was telling the screener that i've come to the conclusion that when both groups are talking about the special superpacks an large amount of money, they're really talking about the topic of propagandize and we're in a very difficult situation because the propaganda is a science now. >> and i think -- an earlier caller when the president said something when mitt romney said something and that one quote is translated into a series of negative ads. >> yes. >> they ads are fueled by tens of millions o dollars by groups with patriotic sounding vague sounding names that we're not familiar with. many of these groups are new because there are hundreds of
superpacks and many of them have a separate nonprofit arm. so we're suddenly being be sieged by ads and this will of course grow and continue through election day -- run by organizations that are spending millions of dollars. and the message they're sending are highly negative and deceptive. this is concerning because we need that information about who's bank rolling their effort, who's behind their americans for a better america today ads. we need that information in order to be able to consider the source and decide whether or not their message is credible. host: who are mitt romney's bundlers? who are some of the president's top bundlers? guest: we do have a full list for president obama's bundlers. if you go to our presidential section there's a page devoted to bundlers. take a look at that.
many of the same bundlers that have lined up on his side before and have been aggregated by industries. you can see that it's highly representative of very wealthy and elite set of americans. the concern for us is that we have no idea beyond a few lobbyists which due to earlier reforms must be disclosed. we have no idea who the bundlers are helping to race funds for mitt romney. we have a petition on opensecrets.org to ask the romney campaign to release that list because we think it's important to know because who may stand to benefit in the romney administration too. this is something that is in the best interest of all americans, democrat, republican, independent. we need information in order to make sound decisions for ourselves.
host: i think it shoulder be illegal for candidates to fund raise in foreign countries. guest: mitt romney is now in london and he's been holding fundraisers there in israel. president obama and his surrogates, michelle obama have in the past raised funds on his behalf abroad. so this is not unique or a novel but it is, i think, a growing trend as the campaigns are seeking to squeeze money out of every corner of the planet. they're looking for funds everywhere. they can -- and again i don't think this is an area of great concern in the sense that they'll be able to raise money illegally. i don't think that's the issue. but it does make for an interesting research on who is bank rolling these campaigns. they're ultimately giving
several million dollars but in a campaign that will potentially reach $2 billion, $1.5 billion each that may not be much money. when the head lines are written in this campaign, congressional gubernatorial superpacks how much will we have spent? can you put a final figure on this? >> we believe there may be a billion dollar in outside spending. $6 billion all told, there have been kind of wild -- wild suggestions about how much ultimately will be spent. but it will be more than last time and more importantly, more of it will be from spent by these outside interest groups that we have information about. >> a look at the numbers. this is from the "new york times" this past monday. but the democratic and republican side. the democrats raising just under $500 million and having spent $405 million.
the republicans raising $437 million and having spent about $315 million. so clearly the republicans have a lot more cash in hand than the democrats. guest: the presidential race, i think will not be won or lost based on insufficient resources. both candidates and partys will have ample resources just like the fact that it may not top the fundraising spent in the last cycle which is typically the case. it's always a pretty steep climb over time. the issue there is that the last cycle was so extraordinary, it was a wide open field of candidates. so this cycle with the republican primary getting off to a later start and with -- i think, you know, the effects of the economy and perhaps, other factors, the presidential cycle will not be as expensive, in
fact, as many people predicted it would be. the congressional races on the other hand are going to be much more expensive. >> our conversation with sheila kremholes is the director for responsive politics. the website is opensecrets.onl org. your funding comes from where? >> foundations primarily for open society institute, rockefeller brothers fund, also smaller foundations, family foundations and individuals. so we accept contributions from individuals, no contributions from corporation, labor unions or trade associations. host: and there's a list on their website. richard is on the phone. good morning. >> good morning. i was calling in -- i wanted to know, they said that the obama campaign, they announced that they were going to raise a
billion dollars. i never remember them announcing that. that was something that the republicans put out there. and i was wondering through all these superpacks, they say that romney he claims he don't know who they are and all the secrecy they have around it but i think they're all into it together. and something else. i remember -- i forget his name but i watched him on c-span. and he was talking about an oligarchy government where the rich are trying to buyout the government or something like that and that they think they allow these people that are contributing to these super pacs, i guess if you put a million dollars into a politician's pocks, they can make a lie the truth. guest: well, these high rollers, getting the superpacks
and political nonprofits cannot put a billion dollars into the candidate. but they can give reportedly independent groups that are sending out a message that is nearly indistinguishable from the campaign. and so -- and of course many of these organizations are run by the various top former will thes and senior advisors to the campaign. so to the degree that the relationships between the folks running the super pacs and the campaigns are so close, it comes down to kind of technically uncoordinated coordination. host: lee is asking how hot is it for the incumbent candidate? with congress at record low-level of popular among the
american people and yet the majority of congress gets re-elected. guest: it's true. although the last cycle we saw a huge spike on a number of challengers on election day. that was -- ultimately incumbents win -- the vast majority of incumbents will be re-elected on election day. but with the advent of citizen's unite and the ability for an organization to swoop in, drop $1 million, $2 million in the last days and week of the election cycle, it's -- it's -- i think a very nervous time for any candidate incumbent or challenger because they really don't control their message anymore to the degree that an organization might see a benefit to take out a candidate from the running. if they see this person has
jurisdiction over their issues and does not see their issues of the company of their issues in a fareable light, it may be a valuable investment to try to run -- overwhelm the campaign with messaging and a lot of money. host: our topic is money and politics. our guest is sheila. it is available on our website part of c-span's video library at c-span.org. richard is on the phone. good morning. >> hi. my name is richard from long island, new york. i've been a taxpayer union -- been a part of the union since i was 18. what aggravates me the most is the hypocrisy of the democratic party. i used to be a registered
republican. what bothers me the most is republicans don't tell me how to live my life. they don't tell me. listening to this lady, i see the same hypocrisy where mi hyun onhas been funding democrats for the 30 year that i've been in it. you don't hear nothing about the billions about billions of dollars that the democrats have been given to the presidentials like clinton and obama and so on. yeah, that doesn't -- that goes under the radar. but we hear about the owner of the las vegas casinos. host: let's hear about. that. guest: unquestionable, the unions are a powerful force in politics and can be in a long time. they give a lot of tax money to candidates and members of congress who are seen as being
supportive of union issues. more importantly, they control massive numbers of individual union members in a sense that they can assign them to phone banks and canvasing operations. these are the foot soldiers of the democratic party and progressive campaigns. so there is no question that unions are informsing millions upon millions of -- investing millions upon millions of dollars in union member dues. we know where it comes from. it comes from members dues which is a controversial issue. the distinction with these outside groups is that we don't know where the money is coming from oftentimes and we don't know if it's coming directly from the corporate treasury or if it's something say that may be making in secret in order to help sway the outcomes or policy in their favor.
my suggest if you cannot go, you cannot donate. corporation have the right to free speech that individuals do. therefore a corporation cannot be prevented from spending as much money as they wish on independent advocacy for or against a candidate as well as issue advocacy that may identify a candidate but is otherwise indistinguishable from the ads that say vote for this candidate. corporation unions and trade corporations can spend on behalf of a candidate, independently again, supposedly at least. but there is -- that is not happening as much as people fretted. they're not spending directly. i think there was a lesson for particularly for corporations
where target was seen as being burned by having funded an outside group which ran ads or supported a candidate that held anti-gay lease and that conflicted with the company's message. so they suffered a boycott and i think that was a lesson perhaps to many corporations to not get involved directly in politicking. host: in 1976 former governor carter, president ford accepting matching funds and that system stayed in place through the 1980's and 19 0's but we saw some changes most notably with barack obama not accepting matching funds in the general election. is that system dead? guest: it is dead. they need to revive it if it's going to used again in the future. this is a system that i think was allowed to wither on the vifpblete it did not get broad public support. i think at the highest level there was only about 30% public
support for the partial public financing system. that is over. there will no longer be public funds in the primary or general for the nominees. >> they still have to abide by the caps in material of the individual contributions for the party separate from super pacs? guest: there is a limit that how much an individual can contribute, $2,500 is the cap. of course, for many of the largest donors, giving, maxing out to campaign is a pit stop giving much higher levels to the super pacs or organizations that are friendly to those candidates. host: howard. you're calling on the republican line, goods morning. caller: good morning, steve.
i was going to ask about the president not going for the matching funds. can i ask steve a question about what i think would be an improvement to your broadcast and "the journal yts? host: certainly. caller: especially in this political season about the economy and i think all democrats an republicans would agree that the economy is number one on the list. it would be right above your c-span logo. use the clock that shows the debt that's being created. host: we've got a u.s. debt clock and i know it's approaching $16 trillion and we refer to it quite often. but go ahead, howard. you want it on 24/7? howard, are you still with us?
caller: that probably won't be practical. my issue is when we're talking about the -- the -- are you there, steve? host: i am. caller: when we're talking about the financial issue of the day and what we need to do about, oh, for example, medicare, medicaid, social security, the federal -- excuse me, the defense budget and so on and so forth, when a caller calls in and is looking at the screen, it will focus his thoughts on exactly what we're talking about. we seem to get down on the -- thank god the coke brothers an their ability to create an atmosphere to show what capitalism is in this country, of course on the left with the unions fighting in the wrong direction, i would just ask the lady how she felt about the
shall we say the inappropriate money that was brought in by the unions. -- in the battle in wrisk. -- wisconsin. host: i think this is the sight that you're refering to the u.s. debt clock that has now $15.9 trillion and growing. here in this country. a question about unions and what we saw in wisconsin and what we're going to see in the fall. guest: we don't track state level funding. but it was a clear display of union might. it wasn't ultimately enough to carry the day for them. but again, the ability to mobilize bodies to rally, to get the message out is one of the union's strengths. unions in terms of hard money going to candidates, political action committees and parties
do not give nearly as much corporate packs and crirkses from individuals, executives. those who are able to give the contribution of more than $200 represent a very tiny elite of american society, less than 1/2 of 1% gives to federal elections. and for many of these donors who are maxing out they give millions of dollars to these again quass eye dipt organizations. -- quasi organizations. host: priority u.s.a. has raised just over $20 million this is a democratic super pac.
the d.n.c. raising $200 million. on the republican side, restore our future, a super pac has raised about $81 million. and the romney campaign $154.3 million. looking at those figures as soon as you have accepted that money as free speech you've accepted a philosophy the hopes that some people have more free speech than others. guest: that is some of the complains levied against citizens united and knees court decisions that have prohibited limbs on contributions and spending that it will ultimately make certain speech louder an drown out the ability of those without resources to get their message out. we have heard stories about
company bhoss have been unable to buy our time because these outside groups that are weighing in with big money are buying out the time and of course able to offer much more lucrative opportunities to the networks to the radio and tv stations. but is it -- does it jeopardize one -- the principle and value we've held dear for a long time, one person, one vote? that is something for the american people to conclude and to make certain their the congress hears them because right now congress is stymied. there has been efforts but there will be no movement certainly in this cycle. host: let's talk to doug from st. louis. good morning with sheila of the center sfr responsive politics. good morning. guest: good morning, steve and sheila. i'll just let you know it's
raining here in st. charles. host: that's good news. you needed the rain. caller: it's the first time it's rained in forever. i've got a point. ian: going to run off two other clocks that i think should be up there. one that shows the accumulation of wealth by the upper 1% and the other one should be the loss of tax revenue due to the bush tax cuts. let's set those clocks beside it. host: ok. thanks for idea. one of our viewers is saying would you explain to the listeners that the party conventions are funded partially by taxpayers. guest: yes. it was put in place in the mid 1970's, both the democratic and republican convention committees, not the host committee but the party convention committees will receive about $1 million this year. and then the host committees will go on to raise enormous sums of money, millions upon
millions of dollars in private donations which caused them to question why there is public investment if that will no longer be the pot of money that the conventions use. on the other side of that argument, the cities tharg this is an economic benefit to promote the cities that host the convention. so there are two sides to the story. but there are clearly opportunities for corporations, unions, individual associations to invest in the festivities and to potentially create it with the party and candidates. host: sheila with the center of responsive politics. the website opensecrets.org. thank you very much for being with us. guest: thank you. >> tomorrow on "washington journal" washington post reporter paul cain looks at the week ahead for congress. phil galewitz shows
requirements of medicaid funding. "washington journal" live at 7:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. next, q&a with anthony scalia. after that, republican presidential candidate mitt romney in jerusalem. >> the internet sbrings radical transparency to almost everything it touches. privacy, it becomes a construct. it's an article construct, a very important one created by laws and institutions and enforcement. >> a few weeks ago ron beckstrom oversaw the internet domain names for i-can.
the internet corporation for names and numbers. monday night a look at the internet and cyber security on "the communicators" at 8:00 eastern on c-span2. >> we did not begin as a city in kentucky. there was only a vague native american region and later a county and another state called kentucky. but we began in 1778 as louisville, virginia. >> next-week, join book tv, american history tv and c-span's local content vehicles from louisville, kentucky, saturday at noon eastern. literary life on c-span2. biographer on mitch mcconnell. and jason gaines on rebooting the internet politics, the internet revolution. and on american history tv, three weeks at farmington