tv Washington Journal CSPAN October 29, 2013 7:00am-10:01am EDT
and means committee to discuss their implementation of the affordable care act. he will take your questions about recovery from hurricane sandy. "washington journal" is next. host: welcome to washington journal on this october 29. it is a day on capitol hill today. the house ways and means committee holds a hearing with marilyn tavener on the health care website. ate coverage on c-span three 10 a.m.. we'll hear from top national security officials about the nsa surveillance program, including questions about spying on u.s. allies. span 3 and c-on c- span.org at 1:30 p.m. eastern time.
ban -- willt may stay on the nsa story and get your thoughts, should congress endorse or stop using intelligence efforts? the phone lines -- send us a tweet as well or post your comments on facebook.com/c- span. you can also e-mail us, firstname.lastname@example.org. the may begin with the front page of "the financial times" this morning. this is their headline --
we turn to you, should congress endorse or stop these programs? caller. is democratic i think the congress should take some kind of action to tighten the reins on the nsa since 9/11 and the passing of the patriot act. it has grown exponentially. it's out of control. i am hoping the congress will tighten the reins on the nsa, cut their budget. while i am on the phone, with
all the controversy about spying on allies and the like, i would like to see president obama pardon jonathan thomas. host: alexander from maryland, a republican caller. feel like theyy should not endorse spying and other countries and even our allies. i feel like it's important we knwo ow what's going on. --etimes our allies can be sometimes we need to know these things. host: yunnan chancellor merkel of germany? -- we should continue this, even on chancellor merkel of germany? caller: yes.
it can be done more professionally and carefully on how we go about doing it, instead of doing it haphazardly and -- i'm looking for the word. in a professional manner. that's what i think. host: by that do you mean without being caught? caller: well not necessarily by being caught. if there is some type of issue that arises or flags that pop up, go aheaed and spy. if they do get caught spying and a case is brought about it the us can turn around and say, this is the reason we spied on
you. host: james is next from minneapolis, a republican caller. caller: i love this, and this is hilarious. the nsa was made to spy on foreign countries. we get mad when we spy on ourselves, which we should. we should not get mad when we spy on foreign countries. that is what the nsa is for. host: a little bit more about the legislation that will be introduced today --
introduce legislation to rein in the surveillance program. senator patrick leahy and kim dems and brenner write this in -- jim sensenbrenner wrote this in politico -- what do you think? should congress endorse the surveillance programs, or should they be stopped? tom in, republican caller. hello. caller: good morning.
i don't think the u.s. should spy on friends. we have no security, no private situation in our home. some security day personnel listens to our phone. danny in westfield, virginia. good morning. caller: i am definitely against the nsa but the only way you'll ever stop them is to shut them down completely. he may say they have stopped but they will not stop. they have done this over and over for the last 15 years. they were told to stop doing things and continue doing them anyway. it amazes me that republicans
who supposedly wants smaller government and less government in our lives are absolutely in favor of continuing to have the nsa spying, even on american citizens. senator dianne feinstein, the top democrat in the senate intelligence committee, called for a total review. should there be a church committee 2.0 as "the new york times" calls it? an overhaul of the nsa? caller: absolutely but dianne feinstein is not the person to do it. her biggest negotiation comes in from the defense contractors. a need to replace her with someone else like henry waxman or bernie sanders. jonathan strong who covers congress for national review magazine tweeted this about feinstein cause reaction -- -- feinstein's reaction --
thomason maryland, and republican caller. alexander had it right on the money. we are going through a lot of politics. obviously it is unpopular. associate nominee good things with the word "espionage." many goodciate not things with the word "s cannot show." -- "espionage." going back to it alexander said, made ace s valtem and we usually have to justify things with probable cause. we are not willy-nilly spying on angela merkel. that is a good strategy to half.
there is some intelligence -- if there is some intelligence we are doing legitimately, we can always fall back on it and that is pretty much what i want to say. the story in "the washington post" has the headline -- group thatbipartisan wants to rein in the nsa spying program and stop this dragnet collection of american phone calls. on the other hand you have senator dianne feinstein who heads the senate intelligence committee with mike rogers, republican who heads the house intelligence committee. here's what they would do according to "the washington post" --
is that enough? caller: absolutely. that validate the point that i was making. you have people pushing to the extreme and don't have interest in the intelligence and defense community. they are pushing to ease the public pressure in people are trying to be more realistic and modern about it. host: what do you make of jim sensenbrenner, who was integral in crafting the patriot act, now saying we have to rein it in? caller: they are feeling the
political pressure. everybody wants to feel good and the public is looking back on what they did. it's "let's spy on everyone but make sure everyone is a little bit happy about it, to." that is the gist of how i stand on this issue. little bit more from "the washington post" about the legislation being crafted by the intelligence leaders. tucker, georgia, democratic caller. your thoughts on whether or not the congress should and doors. the nsa spying program. i endorse the spying.
god bless america, if we do not spy on them they are definitely spying on us. if we can go back into history with rosenberg, i believe it was in the 30s when they sold out information to a foreign country. they were, at that time, executed. i don't understand how this -- and theyho is are not allowed to go over and pick him up or have him sent back to the nsa and he should -- sent back to the nsa. and he should be prosecuted. --elieve they should stop when they stop spying on foreign countries we are asking ourselves to be bombed and we go through the same thing the other countries are going through,
running from bombs. comments,e type of the questions you have about spying on u.s. allies are sure to come up when the house intelligence committee meets this afternoon at 1 p.m. eastern time. to hear testimony from the top nsa security officials, we will be covering it on c-span3 and on c-span.org. the chairman of the committee, mike rogers, was on the sunday talk shows. he defended spying on u.s. allies and made the case that it actually helps our allies with the united states is doing. he also tweeted this out yesterday evening -- 24 members of the republican
party met with nsa officials for briefing. we will be talking to a member of the intelligence community, mike conaway from texas, coming up here on "washington journal." i also want to share with you a video that was posted by the pentagon on youtube. that the nsarview director, general chief alexander, did with the pentagon blogger. here is a story about it from msnbc. the video, which looks like a bit like the corporation for public broadcasting come a to produce an episode of wayne's
world inside up young young studio featuring alexander answered questions -- you don't hear her pose the questions, the questions are posted as they watch the video. here is keith alexander, the director of the nsa, talking about the news that came out last week about the united states spying on france. [video clip] the papers convoluted these stories and they immediately say -- i think we had one today saying 70 million phone calls are being intercepted over a one-month time. 70 million phone calls. i don't know how many phone calls you get a day, let's say 30.
let say they are in a foreign language, because most people speak french. it is not complicated. you need french linguists. if you did 2 million french phone calls per day, listen to them, and try to write them down, how many people would that take? >> a few more than two. >> yes. the average analyst may be able to do one every 15 minutes. lesse going to need about than 100,000 people just for france. france is an ally. it is absurd. a get it wrong. it has nothing to do with spying on france. the reporters who got this see this data and quickly run to the wrong conclusion. that is wrong. i am concerned that what they were doing would do great harm to our country and our allies. we have to figure out how to fix that.
the other part is i think it is wrong that newspaper reporters have all these documents, 50,000 or whatever they have, and they are selling them and giving them out. we ought to come up with a way of stopping it. that is more of the courts and policymakers. from my perspective it is wrong. host: general keith alexander, the director of the nsa. if you want to watch the whole thing you can go to youtube. this from "politico" -- you heard the nsa director saying something needs to be done about journalists getting these documents. the general will be testifying on capitol hill before the house intelligence committee.
that is 1:30 p.m. eastern time on c-span3 and c-span.org. independent caller, hello travis. caller: frankly, i really don't care if the nsa spies on foreign leaders and merkel -- four leaders,- foreign merkel, spanish, french. what bothers me is collecting metadata on american citizens. we have a fourth amendment that should put a stop to that. they are not adhering to the constitution. it is pretty telling that obama --host: you broke up there. caller: it is pretty telling that obama does not know anything that is going on in his federal government. he did not know anything about the irs, he had no idea that the
an endorsement from "the new york times" on that legislation. we want to get your thoughts on what should congress do about these nsa spying programs. should they endorse them, codified them, or should government shutdown the echo we are going to go to travis in louisiana, an independent caller. i think it is ridiculous that snowden knew we were spying on merkel that obama did not know. the -- hecked it was was the executive of the government. for him not to know anything that is going on in this government is ridiculous. i think it shows his lack of experience. the syrian thing and the redline.
the nsa really needs to stop monitoring americans, especially in secret and it has no place in america. the same opinion -- that is eugene robinson's column in "the washington post." we will keep getting your phone calls on this this morning. " notinghington times the one-year anniversary of superstorm sandy.
times" this morning. the house ways, and means committee at 10 a.m.. the new york times says the leader will be in the hot seat. a picture of the medicare chief there. "usa today closed quote has this on their headline -- "usa today" has this on their headline -- "the washington times" has this piece this morning --
also up on capitol hill, there will be a memorial service for tom foley at 3 p.m. eastern time. will be making remarks as well as the former president bill clinton. our coverage on c-span three at 3 p.m. eastern time. also this week, the conferees our meeting between the house and the senate to work out a farm bill. this is the headline of "the washington post" -- the food stamp program costs
about $80 billion per year. a lot happening on capitol hill today. go to our website to follow our coverage of all the different --rings and this morning different hearings. this morning my your take on whether the government should endorse or stop the nsa spying program. don is our next caller, go ahead. appalled at the
metadata collection on american citizens. wasn't targeted as this mass collection. how well this mass collection is working, because if you take the boston bombers they went to, russia, they had no idea. russia called and told us they were danger, we didn't follow-up on it. we did not have any kind of correspondence or any collection of any of the calls he would have made back to the united states. i think they are substituting this mass collection for good old-fashioned place worth -- please work we have to look into things and investigated. host: if you are interested, go
watch the video on youtube put up there by the pentagon. to give theut how information to the fbi so they can follow up on it. missouri,o jerry from a republican caller. caller: good morning. excuse my speech. go ahead with your comment. caller: i am opposed to spying on americans. i just think it is wrong. i don't think there is any good in it, i don't think there is anything that will come out of it -- out of it. garrison new hampshire, republican caller.
new hampshire, republican caller. i am opposed to the nsa spying. they should be ashamed of themselves. the department of homeland security, the nsa, they should all be removed. congress gave away our right after 9/11. they gave their rights away to the president. that is our voice, our rights. they need to take that back and rain and the nsa and the government. they are going crazy. john is next, a republican from louisiana. a lot of the nsa spying is due to the technology. it used to be a scanner is all you had. now it is on a global magnitude. what are they intended to target somebody, i believe that comes under the fisa court. to fact they listen
something is basically because they can. it would be physically impossible to analyze, to the degree that people think it is being analyzed, all of that data. on the other story, which has been echoed on collars and other things, i am one of those that is skeptical that the president did not know about this. go back to fast and furious, benghazi, the irs, it is almost like he has the sergeant schultz of "i know nothing." dianne feinstein is time to provide cover to support that idea. i find it hard to believe the commander-in-chief knew nothing about this. it does not make any sense. it does not pass the smell test. it will all come out in the end. i think.
i don't know. congress doesn't seem to be doing much of anything, especially when it comes to this. and we are going to come up with something new. thank you, c-span, you do a wonderful job. are you going to be watching the hearing? i'm retired, i am a c-span junkie. i recorded it or i watch it. you get to see the real people saying the real things. i will be. if i don't watch it i will record it so i can watch it later. span3, itorded on c- span3.- record it on c- the house set to vote on two bills that are reported by wall street --
"richmond times dispatch" on the virginia governor's race -- and president obama will be stumping for terry mcauliffe on sunday for the election of that state policy next governor. -- that state's next governor. jesse is up next on the lines. caller: i think they should keep spying. average americans don't know how safe they are because of spying. on theme not spying they are definitely spying on us. the average american does not know how safe they are?
caller: exactly. host: next from texas, a republican caller. what are your thoughts he e -- thought seattle caller: -- thoughts? caller: i don't have anything with spying. it should be else with the agency in congress about what they can and can't do. my main concern is because of the move toward more socialism and more control over people in and openmaintain roads bigger agendas, all of that information is going to be used at later times. buildings are being built to house an incredible amount of information. down the road, it is
inconceivable this kind of thing that could be done. how many actual terror attacks are espionage. good information has been received as a result of this particular act. insidious kindn of encroachment. i don't want to sound like a theorist, there is a lot of proof of government continuing and continuing. there is absolutely no stopping it. otherset me show you and a bit more from general keith alexander's youtube video that the pentagon put up last week. here he is talking about two of
the surveillance programs. [video clip] >> the other program that comes to that shows it -- that comes to that and shows our capabilities, it is not the united states we protect. review the metadata content programs we have and actually help our allies more than it helps us. differentout 54 parish related events those are plots and financial track sections that are -- financial transactions that are key to the things happening. dealt with 16 key offensive the united states, -- key events in the united states. what the nsa can do is see work medications can go and take that to the local law enforcement or intelligence agency so they can do something. alexanderral keith
who heads of the nsa in a youtube video put together by the pentagon and posted on that website, talking about the success rate of the nsa surveillance programs and how it has been used to stop terrorist attacks and to how it has benefited our allies. this -- twitter says we have a couple of minutes left here. we keep getting your thoughts but we want to share this news with you as well. this is in the obituary section of the new york times --of "the new york times" --
what are your thoughts he e -- what are your thoughts? i think she is being disingenuous if she does not know she is being tapped. we still occupy germany. military in the late 70's and early 80's. were all very afraid at that time that germany -- afraid of a united germany am a is what we have now. continue, what does that mean for today? caller: i would expect people are still fearful of a united germany. the presidents disavowing any knowledge, that is what politicians do.
that is what they did in the bush administration. i feel like we have more than enough intelligence to protect ourselves. we knew that 9/11 was going to happen. we have only seen an increase of the buildup of military installations and the spying. continue with your phone calls about the nsa spying program. mike conaway, a republican from texas and a member of the intelligence committee would be here to answer your questions about today's hearing on the nsa programs and the news that we have been talking about here on "washington journal." we will switch gears later and talk with bill pascrell of new jersey. he sits on the house ways and means committee, which will be holding a hearing later today. we will be right back. ♪
[video clip] what am a firm believer of they call the "unauthorized biography." it does not mean it is not true. it means you are doing it without the cooperation and blessing of your subject. i do believe it is a legitimate and wonderful way to cover history. thatially public figures have spent many many years and millions of dollars creating their own image. and so i think it is valuable sometimes to go behind that. usually i am the one who is behind that and
tell you what is going on. >> political intrigue and american culture. kelley sits down for your calls and comments. in the months ahead look for other in-depth guests including christina hoff sommers on december 1st. you still have time to post your comments on this month's book. >> c-span, we bring public affairs fans from washington directly to you, putting you in the room at congressional hearings, white house events, briefings, and conferences. and offering complete gavel-to- gavel coverage of the u.s. house, all as a public service of private industry. we are c-span, created by the cable tv industry 34 years ago
and funded by your local cable or satellite provider. and now you can watch us in hd. >> "washington journal" continues. host: we are back with mike conaway, a republican from texas and member of the house intelligence committee. but me begin with the news of the u.s. spying on its allies. did you know that was occurring as a member of the intelligence panel? guest: it is clear we always collect foreign intelligence wherever we can. interestamerica's best from a national security standpoint. as you heard keith alexander say, much of that data collection has been used to help subvert problems in europe. our allies benefit from the collection that we do. it is an important security issue that we maintain this. host: senate intelligence
chairman dianne feinstein of california said yesterday that the intelligence panel has been left in the dark about a program that has been occurring over the last decade. on in i do know what goes the house intelligence. we have keith alexander discussing what is going on with the intelligence committees, the collection gathering. the cia opted to do our oversight responsibilities. i don't feel that way from the house side. i don't know what goes on in the senate. host: you were briefed that we were spying on u.s. i -- u.s. allies in government leaders? guest: i was briefed, i have to be careful here, we collect foreign intelligence from overseas. we do know that the united states has not only collected through the nsa but a variety of other methods.
some of the policymakers can have more information. the more information have -- inflation we have the better decisions we make. host: according to the white house president obama was not made aware of this until the summer. what is your reaction cap go -- your reaction? ofst: those are the kind questions you ask when deciding whether or not this president was doing a good job. we decided that was a relevant. he is not running for reelection. him, i suspectr you will give him a pass again. if you did not vote for him you will be outraged. there is not a lot of middle ground. host: it sounds acute doubt he was not made aware of this. guest: -- it sounds like you doubt he was not made aware of this. know what he did or did not know.
do endorse dianne feinstein's idea? asst: there is nothing we do a federal government that shouldn't be subject to review and analysis. z review is fine. it is part of our oversight responsibilities on the intelligence committee both in the house and senate. i don't think it ever hurts to they are doing, how they are doing it, is it effective, do we still need to do it? notes"the new york times" that what ms. feinstein is talking about would be a "major undertaking." again, i don't know what she is talking about. on the house intelligence committee, we review things constantly. if you want to go through everything the nsa does that is
something we will do. host: this afternoon's hearing before the house intelligence committee, what will you be asking those two? asked most of the questions in private sessions. we will ask the kind of questions that allows general alexander and general clapper to explain to the american people what we are and are not doing. made,is a lot of mistakes some honest and some for sensational value. there is enough misinformation as to what the an essay is and isn't doing, particularly with u.s. citizens. having general alexander explain the differences between the programs that are out there, what we can and can't do with respect to things in the united states and u.s. citizens, just to continue to try to get that record straight so when we do
make a decision with respect to policy issues we are basing it on facts rather than just the innuendo that is in the newspaper articles or the misinformation that these journalists continue to put out. sometimes they are honest mistakes. host: how will you vote on what the "washington post" says are dueling pieces of legislation? a legislation would've rein in what the nsa is doing with its records onollecting americans. you have mike rogers on the house side and dianne feinstein on the senate side wanting to have more transparency on how the nsa doesn't program. how would you vote on those two? i saw a brief description of the list -- of
the legislation. i don't know what it does or doesn't do. i can't take a position with respect to that. on the select committee's legislation i am in favor of that. host: explain to our viewers who do not get a briefing like you do what this would do. mystify theould de- things going on. folks are distrustful, particularly in the arena where we are now. americans don't trust the government, they don't trust congress. a bit ofs met with skepticism. we have to try to maintain personal integrity and those kinds of things. having additional information
about the programs and what they do and don't do, particularly where the knowledge of the public is with respect to these issues, the impact it will have on our enemies and on our folks, they know much more now than what they should have known before the leaks. we need to help the american people understand we are using this information properly. there is good supervision and oversight through the courts. host: let's get a phone calls. richard has been waiting in lake placid, florida, an independent collar. caller: good morning. there is ato me that purge going on in the obama administration with our military. retiring orlly forced out 197 or 200 high- ranking officers, field hasanders, admirals, and he
given -- the obama administration has given a litmus test to terry personnel as to -- to military personnel as to whether they would turn on their weapons to u.s. citizens. this is a scary thing. i read a report in three different sources. i would like to ask the congressman if he knows anything about this. would he comment on this and what is going on with this administration the echo it appears -- the administration the auto it appears -- the administration? we don't know what is going on with any of the incidents like benghazi, the fast and furious, irs. i would like representative conaway to comment on this, please. guest: i appreciate that. we are having a shrinkage in the
united states military because of sequestration and cuts that this administration has done over the last five years with respect to military spending. of -- youink the size cannot maintain the same top to bottom. the truth you are talking about maybe the fact that we have some reduction in the number of flag officers. to tie that to a litmus test or anything else would be totally inappropriate for this administration. particularly the idea that the military would turn on u.s. citizens. i have not heard anything whatsoever on that from official or unofficial sources. you are the first person who has brought it up, with respect to tying the reductions and flag byks and others, is driven sequestration.
flag rank said others are driven by sequestration. it would be totally inappropriate. given the number of people that you talked about being involved, this would have come out officially rather than just through the innuendo of tying it to the cuts. mike conaway is our guest. he sits on the house intelligence committee. we are taking your comments about the nsa intelligence and surveillance programs. democratic caller from vermont, hello ron. years ago j edgar hoover had many files on people, especially in congress. the wholeat right now democratic process has been undermined. free when no longer we have files, electronic files, on all congressman, on all
senators, on all leaders. how can we trust anybody in our government any longer? how do we know that you aren't being coerced into voting certain ways? i have had it, the government is corrupt. we are looking elsewhere. host: let's get a response from the congressman. guest: i would like to ask you what form of government you would prefer? would you prefer a different form than what we have? are you looking at some other form of government? you were making a point, explain a little bit more, what is the alternative? the old adage that our government is the worst out there -- our constitution is
strong and healthy. of claypeople with feet that are trying to do the best they can. i am not aware of any file on me, i am not being coerced in any shape or mannerform, shape,. in thene of us has public record and internet file. you just have to type in the last name and love all sorts of information that was never available until we have these internet, those kinds of things. we have to cope with the paradigm. or awarebeing coerced of any file out there that would be used on me. >> --host: this message from twitter --
guest: that would only be as good as the folks willing to do it and stick by it. i do not think that that is going to work. internationally i think these places around the world would not be willing to honor that agreement. we will need to continue to collect foreign intelligence. host: what do you think about the front page of "the new york times"? guest: that is up to the president. the key thing he should be worried about is protecting america, american interest, and americans around the world. there are grave decisions to be made, but they are his decisions to make. we will have the oversight in committee to see what the direction is. host: what a ban hurt intelligence gathering echo guest: yes -- gathering? guest: yes.
host: how so? would not be able to better protect americans around the world. the white house will be getting a visit from a delegation of german officials. when they come to the white house in the coming days they are expected ask for an agreement similar to what they have with britain, canada, australia, new zealand, can you explain that? >> those are five trusted companies that -- trusted countries that we dealt with coming out of world war roman to an earlier. we have agreements with those folks because we have similar entries, backgrounds, and philosophies on government. i suspect it will be a pretty tense meeting for the german delegation coming over. ourof the criticisms of resident is that he does not build personal relationships with world leaders.
the reason you try to build those personal relationships are just for these times, when you have a dustup like we are having with the folks in germany. if we had a better relationship you could work off of it and deal with it. if the rationale for treating germany the same as we hast the other five eyes yet to be seen. do you think there is a rationale? guest: not at this stage. host: brooklyn, new york, independent caller. adam. caller: i just want to ask you -- it feels like since 911 we are moving towards a police state, ok? losing our rights to due process.
it is all good until you come out and say hey, good intentions , that is how germany became how it became. just because you guys come out your constitution is working does not mean that somebody cannot come into power and basically switch it very quickly. so, what are you talking about? disagree, when you give folks power, authority, responsibility, it tends to be abused. built in checks and balances, a core system that protects us and a legislative system that oversees much of what the executive branch does. we do grant the executive branch a lot of authority and power to do things that we think should get done. can those be abused the echo certainly. it should come upon all of us to
make sure that we are not asleep at the switch and that we maintain the oversight of the legislative ranch with a strong court system. having all of those coming together will protect us from the abuses you are fearful of. oklahoma, good morning. caller: good morning from oklahoma. i just wanted to say to the congressman that my son is a disabled veteran and belongs to your organization. my grandson is fixing to join the navy this month. yes, that is in their, they have to pledge, now, that they will fire on american citizens. absolutely, in all the branches. they are all upset about it. a lot of them plan to get out. they do not want to kill their
families back home. it is in there. the national guard knows about it. there is so much stuff going on it is hard for the congressman and senators to keep up with all this stuff. the white house in my opinion has a socialist program going on . but i know that obama tried to build his brown shirt army because he had no army to control. there were national guard units in each state that belonged to each state. they have been use for wars for bush and everybody else. host: let's get a response from the congressman. off, thank you for your son's service and sacrifice. those who are disabled when -- after they serve get to deal with their service sacrifice every single day even when they are out of active duty. thank you for your grandson's future service. i am proud you have got such a
good family that the father can suffer a disability while serving his country and yet his son is willing to that into that uniform and take those the same risks. pledge to fire on american citizens, i am not sure where that is coming from, but i have a couple of guys on the who are looking to see if there is anything in the official oath of office they could be misinterpreted that way. just on the surface to me it does not smack is being something that would be a part of the official signing up process, but we will do a quick review of that. host: congressman, here is a tweet from jack -- guest: i don't know that we could. given the role that "the guardian" wanted to play when they put this out, maintaining relevance in the arena, it should have been better by not allowing edward snowden to steal
the documents that he stole from our country. "the guardian," is operating in its own best interest. they have inherited stolen goods, stolen information, and ind to be held accountable informing the world of these instances. what was stolen, we have tried as best we can to figure out what all he does have, but we are really at the mercy of "the guardian" as to how they roll the revelations out and how they spin them. it is a mostly inaccurate portrayal of that data. do you and the intelligence communities know exactly what he has? guest: no, he could have some stuff that we are not aware of. host: do you have an idea a echo
-- id a? guest: -- idea? guest: we do in some instances, but not everything. host: they still cannot answer that question? guest: not definitively. no one can answer that question. host: how is it that that is not possible? there is a lot of it that he took over a long. of time. host: so, there is more to come? guest: i do not know, in infinite wisdom. host: kevin on twitter asks -- guest: you're caller earlier talked about the boston bomber and why we did not catch them. we did not catch them because we did not mind that metadata for anything. we need a reasonable suspicion
before we mine that data for anything. consequently we were not mining the data for that kind of information. it is only investigated when we an articulate suspicion, then law enforcement kicks in. tough sell right now, i understand that. i understand the kind of fellow that man is and how jealously he guards american privacy. he clearly understands the powerful tools that he gets to oversee and how they should be restrained and not used. he is good at conveying that to the folks back home, which is difficult. there is a real distrust for all of government, congress, this it is a tough uphill battle and we have to continue
to talk about what we are doing and not doing, try to get that message out. we have a public session this afternoon with keith alexander. host: on that point, what do you take of the general taking to youtube and doing that interview with the blogger? it did not get a lot of media attention. guest: general examiner is trying to use all the tools he can. he wants to understand that we are not violating those limitations. quite frankly, it is innovative, using that particular model. having that out there so that anyone anytime, anywhere, can go to that and try to make their own decision as to what they think of him and his open straightforwardness, which i find him to be, for themselves. it gives an intimate look at what he does and those kinds of hope ithe did it and i gets plenty of attention and lots of hits, as they say.
oft: we showed a little bit it earlier, we will show some more later on. shelby tweets what you have been talking about congressman -- let's hear from wendy in lynnwood, washington. republican caller. hello. have never called here before, i am in the hospital watching this in the middle of the night. i am an american citizen who is worker, ahealth care cancer patient, watching all of this and i am no longer officially a democrat. insane. the intelligence, the disturbing stuff that is going on. the president not knowing what is going on. our own country, our people losing their insurance.
she brings up a lot of questions, a lot of issues. towardseral attitude the government, towards congress and the white house, people are frustrated, they do not see it working the way they wanted to. they blame congress, but i am reflective of the folks who live in district 11. either towards tax increases or this on affordable care act, as my constituents like to call it. i am trying to represent them in washington, d.c. we have heartfelt decisions on the other side of the aisle from last november. you can look at divided government from the reagan era, where there was divided control. very important things got done because the president led in
that arena. just a divided government. i do not sense leadership out of the white house. there is malaise going on. we appear to be adrift as a country and it is fomenting into an overall distrust from the american people. i get it. i am back home trying to do town halls, i will be doing one tonight to buck up the attitude going onabout what is in washington, d.c., and clearly this caller is very discouraged about what she sees going on or not going on in our country. host: how long have you served on the intelligence committee echo guest: -- committee? guest: this is my third term. host: liz, you are next, republican caller, maryland. for you and congressman , i was on the spot
over at the capitol and i have an issue with the way they are turning the local and state governments into police states. they are intruding into people's personal business affairs using these crazy aerial surveillance to track the movements of people. none of this has anything to do with terrorism. it has to do with intimidating and suppressing freedom of speech. think that these program should be de-funded immediately. it is a misuse and abuse of taxpayer funding. so, you agree with the efforts earlier this year to defund the nsa surveillance program? host: death -- caller: definitely, definitely. the bill that they have now, ath conyers, yes, definitely
new bill, we should all support the need to get rid of this spying, it is not doing anything to stop the real people who are causing the domestic terror. you: congressman, earlier told us that you disagree with the legislation. why would you oppose those efforts? it will be less safe -- guest: it will be less safe, folks will die. there were 54 events around the world, 13 in the united states, 41 overseas that eventually resulted in people dying. not something i want to have happen, so part of my job is to do the oversight and work with the system to make sure that privacy is not being abused and if it is, the folks are being held to account. i understand the overall disdain for what is going on. she mentioned drones and other
things, it has absolutely nothing to do with nsa. we have new tools to try to prevent crime in the united states. each local jurisdiction, each state gets to decide for themselves. she has mixed her message is there between what she does not like and the nsa programs. place. good processes in earlier you mentioned a front- page issue that talked about some vague reports from the fisa courts, nothing could be further from the truth. those quartz arm actively involved in the most minute details in everything and -- everything going on with oversight. our military has all kinds of weapons that, used improperly, would be outrageous. we trust those guys to not do that.
we have tools that if the nsa was using improperly would be outrageous and we must maintain close privacy over that as well. i want to keep america safe without throwing the baby out with the bathwater. bad, evil people are trying to plot around the world against the united states, that is something the federal government is supposed to do. those are enumerated powers and this is part of that process. host: this tweet from mike -- guest: what force? it is part of the common defense. these are international threats that come at us and our allies. they have benefited from these programs. it is again a tool that needs to be watched carefully and make sure you have the right people in place to do that. host: on oversight, how often are you briefed by nsa what is
-- on what is happening echo are you told about successes when they stop terrorist attacks? from time to time, yes, we get briefed on the events, the , they may have had incific briefings on that terms of what is happening and not happening. host: how often do you meet with nsa officials? is no set schedule, but they are often up there, the fbi, cia, with pieces related to intelligence gathering. we have got all the other afro -- alphabet soup agencies coming to our committee from time to time to talk about what is happening. host: have you ever attended a pfizer court seizure? >> that is not allowed. why not let an intelligence member in? guest: i do not know.
was the case, giving the close hold they have on the process. one of the things we're looking at is how do we open up those court operations without revealing sources, methods, giving away trade secrets, so to speak, getting more visibility and transparency into that process. do someoing to have to things to regain the trust of the american people and it may well mean that we have to open up some issues that you would rather not. issues that we really should not or would not otherwise have done , trying to reestablish some sense of confidence in the american people that we are not spying on each other or gathering e-mails from twitter and facebook. all the stuff the newspaper is reporting with those issues, it will require us to do some things we would probably rather the greaterin
interest of maintaining programs in their core, we will have to get the trust back from the american people that the oversight is proper and if something goes wrong it gets caught and whoever did it gets punished. host: jim, west park, illinois, independent caller. first of all, i wanted to tell you that i had a very enjoyable time in your district back in the mid-1980s when i was stationed at the air force ace. air force baset has had a long association with national security. have you ever had a chance to tour those facilities? also, were you at any point in time involved in the nsa yourself? guest: first off, come back, take a tour yourself, you would
not recognize the air force base. .t has continued to grow the mission of training cryptologist, linguists, and others, it continues. the facility often and been up there to see what we are doing. former association with the nsa other than as a member of congress. district you have this space that deals with training. talk about more about what they do there. guest: one is firefighter training, all entry-level firefighters come to the air force base to gain those entry- level skills and they have follow-up courses as well. the other bigger piece is to provide airmen, marines, and soldiers into the intelligence system coming for basic training , how to become cryptologist,
those folks filter out and go into the other areas of intelligence, that is where the schoolhouse is for our men and women in uniform who are trying to begin to people these slots that conduct intelligence. andrew, wisconsin, democratic caller. go ahead. caller: i was born in tennessee and had a chance to march with dr. king before he died. democrats phones have been tapped since the beginning of time. i moved to wisconsin. black people's phones were tapped in wisconsin. nsa.e they have had my phone cap for two years. when they got surveillance on it was one day behind.
whatever you are saying, you have got your beliefs, but we know what is really happening in society. host: how do you know that your phone is tapped the nsa e caller: -- nsa? the nsait came out that was tapping phones, and the day behind, it said tuesday but my said monday. host: would someone know that the nsa is doing this? guest: no, they do not do that without a warrant and those phone taps would be done by the fbi, local police, state police and others. i do not know how that would indicate that the nsa is doing it because the data is collected away from the phone itself, it is collected as a process. not directly off the phone. i am not sure about the proof or
why his phone would be one day off like that, but i cannot imagine that it has anything to do with the nsa. the data center being used in utah to collect this information, they are having power outages and issues with having enough power to operate. have you been briefed on that? what is being done about it yeah -- what is being done about it yeah co --? contractors will have to get that fixed to make sure the site is up and ready to go when it is time to go. it has got to be consistent and reliable in this whole environment. contractors will have to get thatyou have got to have ths on and the power coming at you. host: have you visited the site?
guest: i would like to, sure. there are a variety of places around the country where we have intelligence, my plan is to talk to theoperators, talk folks manning this around the world. there are members of congress who do those things when you're on the committees and it goes to to her. laura here, saying -- " watch like a hawk, no one is aware of the breath or depth of these programs your co guest: we are, but the problem is we cannot communicate that to the american people, have not found a way to communicate that to the people. we on the committee are trying to figure out how we can do that
, without disclosing sources and methods, without tipping our hand to the bad guys, how can we begin to tip our hand and build confidence for the american people yeah co we are trying to find that sweet spot, so to speak, of doing that and still perfecting the country, but giving the people some confidence that this is being done appropriately and that there is a separate set of eyes watching the process. that if it does get out of bounds within the narrow bounds of what the nsa can and cannot do in the united states, that it is caught and that there are consequences for the folks who did whatever it is they are accused of doing. host: another tweet -- have a rolling system of data collection where each month it rolls off and is
destroyed, absolutely. do what we need to do to regain confidence in notamerican people yet advantage the adversaries who are bad people. we are going after the heartless and cruel people who would kill american -- destroy american property just because we are americans. we cannot let our guard down, but we must restore trust as well. can you give viewers watching an idea of how many threats there are on a daily or weekly basis? on the kind ofds threat. if it is a cyber threat, there are thousands every day. i cannot hazard a guess on the number that varies, but there are plenty of bad people out there that want to hurt americans. host joe, janet, west
virginia, if you can make it quick, that would be great. a few thingsler: to ask about, when you say the nsa is not crying into the telephone calls of people, how about the irs? to getnied conservatives their countries -- to be able to ?et their money also, there should be a time limit for congress. i do not know if connolly is in the house or senate, and how come they did not have -- help the republicans? just like vladimir putin said. he did not understand what obama was doing. he was either ignorant or trying to destroy america. guest: she brings up a great point, the issue i was talking about, so many instances where executive branch agencies have screwed up. i can assure you that if the irs
had the oversight of the nsa, that would not have happened. if they are so distrusting of governments, we have to fight that. people want to paint our government with the same brush, she is exactly right, there was some abuse of power over there at the irs and we have continued to investigate that. it is against that backdrop we are trying to defend programs that are important for this country, defense, and national security. that is the tough battle i have got. we are trying to find some things to do to help with respect to the intelligence we beingthering where it is properly overseen, gathered, and watched like a hawk. host: congressman, thank you for coming to talk to our viewers. guest: greta, thank you for having me on. i did not mean to pitch myself. [laughter] you. well, thank talk about health care and
healthcare.gov from bill on the ways and means -- bill pascal -- bill pascrell of the ways and means committee. >> at the last meeting the fed decided not to reduce bond buying, which was a surprise decision at the time in light of what the associated press called the tepid economic recovery, the decision to continue bond buying is expected out of this week's meeting. capital hill, meanwhile, there is a senate hearing to discuss state capital defense laws with stand your ground provisions. fulton, the mother of trayvon martin, the mother of the boy who was killed by the neighborhood watch captain in florida, george zimmerman, she is wanting states to clarify the definition of stand your ground.
the first of two house hearings in the rollout of the affordable act hearing today, the ways and means committee needs to hear testimony from maryland cap and are, considered to be the official closest to the day to day implementation of the healthcare.gov website. you can watch live coverage of this hearing on c-span three or listen to it on c-span radio. the gavel comes down at 10 a.m. eastern time. those are some of the latest on c-span radio. [video clip] >> i am a firm believer in what they call the unauthorized biography. it does not mean untrue, it means that on c-span radio. you are doing it without the cooperation and blessing of your subject. i do believe it is a legitimate, wonderful way to cover history.
especially public figures who have spent many, many years and millions of dollars creating their own image. so, i think it is valuable sometimes to go behind that. usually i am the one trying to get behind that and tell you what is going on. >> biographer kitty kelley sits down for your calls and comments live for three hours, sunday on book tv. in the months ahead, look for , includingpth guest christina sommers on mark first, on january 5.n do not forget, you have a few more days to post your comments on this month's book club selection, john lewis on the early days of the civil rights movement.
guest: you have both the administration and the state administration playing the same situation, sitting on money that has been voted on, you know how difficult it was to get the money in the first place. guest: you have both the administration and the state administration playing the same situation, sitting on money that has been voted on, you know how difficult it was to get the money in the first place. back then there were people against this and are asking money for their own problems in their own state, which is a bit hypocritical, but the fact of the matter is i am concerned about the flow of that money. i had a press conference yesterday into towns that were dramatically affected by hurricane sandy. trying to pay attention to the fact that the storm did not only shore, whichrsey is important to tourism, lots of money into the state, but it is important that when you go in land many towns were affected. we cannot forget that. while all the advertisement and glitter was on the shore, those people have been really hurt and they are not back to anywhere close to normal, it is the money that has already been allocated that is either tied up in bureaucratic not or we change the rules.
many people started to fix their homes only to find out they had to elevate them and they were passed the deadline to apply for such money. i have asked the governor of our state to try to rectify that situation. there have been a lot of problems and your question reflects concerns that i have. host: representative coburn, from oklahoma, he watches congress when it comes to waste, fraud, and abuse, he is quoted here in "the washington times" saying that it means congress acted too quickly to frontload the money or that the obama administration had been too slow in delivering aid. --guest: is it? host: it is a bit of the second one and a bit of the third one, they have been acting very slowly in terms of getting money out to residents and businesses. it was a horrific storm, no two
ways about it. we are not trying to point to anyone in terms of blame, we are saying we need to move on and get this done, to help our citizens. that is what the government exists for, to help folks in distress. host: this headline this morning -- guest: one of the major factors here is the cost of flood insurance, which has gone through the sky now. how will you sell your house if the flood insurance doubles, triples, and quadruples? we had that problem in those towns that i mentioned, waunakee where the fairy, folks want out, they do not want to be near any possibilities again. and the- host:
government is going to have to buy them out? guest: when we cap -- when we keep putting money back into areas that easily flood? that is not a wise situation. host: do the taxpayers lose the echo guest: well, you never -- lose? you never get the value, you cut your losses, but most of the people are saying. it is all right to fight the situation, fight the bureaucracy . afterwards you say it is straining my family. the matter of psychological problems that have existed because of this, when you are in and out of your home for so long , there is a real distress within the family and it plays on everyone. host: let's talk about
healthcare.gov, different committee topic. marylandrom the medicaid chief. what are you going to ask? i will ask you, basically, if we see some positive things in trying to fix these glitches. this is the minimizing of what is a major problem, no question these are major problems that -- that exist. we have had other programs myore and i certainly have commitment to the affordable care act. i am committed to it and i think it is going to work, but there is no denying that there are problems there in terms of rolling it out, as they say. not like problems from other programs we have had in the past . that is no excuse, but we are talking about huge undertaking, no question. host: should she be held responsible for the problems
with the website? guest: when the dust clears, someone is going to be held responsible for not having the mechanical aspect of this up. the websites, the software companies, they put -- they paid good money to hold this together. the point of the matter is i think we should be in the mode of trying to fix it rather than trying to talk about who is to blame. the people making major criticisms now are the administration and the affordable care act -- the people making major criticisms of the administration and the affordable care act right now do not want it to survive. remember 10 years ago? to our listeners and viewers, when we changed the medicare in some and brought relief for seniors, particularly on prescription drugs, that was
rolled out to a tremendous tremendousroblems, a amount of problems. it turned out to be successful because we fixed it. in fact the affordable care act cleaned up the part d plan by chasmg in that famous that existed between those who were paying for premiums and not , the famousbenefits doughnut hole, we have done that. what are they going to do with all of these people who gained from the prescription part of the affordable care act? that game from the kids with the preconditions? the insurance companies that toe had the pay go back their clients, a lot of the money under the law 80% has to be spent on those people who are their clients.
all of these things, we are talking about millions of people now, they are going to say -- let's get rid of this thing again. law -- it passed, failed by supreme court decision, they said it is ok. it's work together to make better. there are problems with the aca. do not deny it. the ways and means committee will hear from the chief of medicare and medicaid when she testifies this morning. we will be covering that on c- span three, tune in for the coverage there. this ahead of the hearing on wednesday where kathleen sebelius will be testifying before the house energy and congress committee. let's get to the phone calls. diane is in michigan and is an independent caller. hello. good morning,er:
mr. representative. how are you? sun isoctober 29 and the out, it is a good sign. [laughter] caller: it is cloudy here. [laughter] am calling is i would like to ask a question and then regret i have a question for you, please. ok? harry reid was on a couple of days ago on your radio station. he said that we did not have a deficit problem the -- but that .e had a revenue problem on the floor yesterday he said the american people want to pay more taxes. i am sorry, sir, i do not want to pay more taxes, i barely make it as it is. in youw is your last day guys are taking a vacation again for another 10 days and i would like to know why, when there are so many things that have to be done in congress? guest: well, there is a
schedule. as you know, we were supposed to be off two weeks ago when we had the travesty of trying to get the government act opening and. when people say vacation, i know i will be in my district working every day. most congressmen will be doing the same thing, regardless of which side of the aisle. this is not a vacation. people think that if we are not in washington we do not do anything. people have to speak for themselves, i can assure you that is not my cup of tea. your second question about harry reid, there is a problem in terms of revenue. there is a problem that we have in the deficit area the commitment to his cut the deficit in half, which is very good, we are going in the right direction. when you shut the government down and have a plan for sequester cut by five percent, it hurts the country from going forward again.
chris, good morning. caller: thank you for taking my call, the show should be on 24/seven. 24/seven/7. is on about thism talking program. the affordable care act, i have been letting it go, letting ago, because i do not have the computer. i called the one 800 number and had a very enjoyable little talk with the girl who was there, she was very nice, very help will. getting onder time c-span than i did getting a hold of her. guest: there you go. caller: it took me about two minutes to get through. do you have a plan?
caller: i will tell you what happened. she took my information, she was very nice, said she would send me something in the mail in .even days if these people cannot get on the internet because it is being blocked, why don't they just call one 800 number, do like i do, get the paperwork, fill it out, send it in? host: --guest: that is an interesting point, there are paper applications and there were some problems with those applications, but they have been since corrected. we have on -- we have got a long way to go with this thing. we are up to the end of march, where no one will be penalized. we expect the bulk of the people signing up for this after they look at their options, after they are clear which program is going to offer this or that, what suits you personally, going into the private market, we are
not buying a government plan here. thank you for calling. the headline from "the washington times," this morning. nothing in the plan "requires you to change, the white house knowledge yesterday that some will be required to switch plans because the health law requires certain standards of coverage, however "washington times says that many middle-class families are finding out they will be required to pay her -- to pay higher premiums and that they do not qualify for new subsidies. guest: the rules are pretty strict. we want to make subsidies available to those who are eligible for those. if you do not monitor sandy money, if you do not monitor the money that will be subsidizing your ability to have health insurance you have never had before, even for people that
work, they do not have insurance because their company does not offer it. this is a great opportunity. when some plans have to be altered it is because there has to be a certain standard. bare bones, then you do not have insurance. you are paying into it without getting the support that you need. host: some premiums will have to be higher, then? that will not be the general mode of what is happening. those people should have coverage because you never know when you are going to get sick. we are not just talking about senior citizens and little kids, we are talking about the general public who has been without insurance and has had to deal with preconditions. theirave had to deal with insurance company not really responding to their particular needs. the laws are very clear. will they be changed over the
next five years, like medicare and social security act out like medicaid? -- plann b e yes. host: b e yes. -- plan b? yes. host: this from "the washington times on kodak -- the washington times," guest: things happen in different parts of the country. the president is on his game and he knows his subject matter and he is trying to get republicans to understand the necessity of the aca. i think he is doing it to the best of his ability. look, there has been a problem in the communication about what this is all about. some of the blame lies with the them -- with the administration, some of it lies with the members
of congress that did not want this to work in the first place. why are you talking about rolling the plan out when you do not want anything to be rolled out? you have tried everything to , tormine it, minimize it wipe it out. it has not been successful, thank god, and this will not be successful as well. you notice in the questions today, the ways and means committee, you would think that the other side asking those questions are really -- they want this so badly, that they just want these problems to be corrected tomorrow morning. that is not their objective. i am not speculating about their motivation, we know how they voted before. james, sterling, virginia, democratic caller. guest: hi, james. caller: hello, good morning.
yes, i agree with chris, the previous caller. there were problems, and also with yourself. there were problems with the paperwork that have been fixed, but there are some elements that people seem to be missing. some people, like myself, are not insured, but right now i have to choose by thursday, by the end of the month, i have to choose my plan. i have been going to healthcare.gov and it is a dead link. you go to washington, d.c., it is good to go, maryland, good to go, but if you go to any of the red states, they do not work. most of those red states, as you refer to them, are governed by the federal government because they chose not to have their own exchanges. most of the states that had
their own exchanges are doing much better. have you checked that out to see if i am accurate? you might use the phone number that would assist you just as quick. that is true,er: and i tried that, but at that time the paperwork situation was not good, so i called again and they said i could do the paperwork now, and like i said, i call on monday, but i have until thursday to choose. i am locked into my current health care and stuck for a year. i hope that you choose wisely. gathered, theve insurance companies have been very cooperative in this problem-solving effort we are in right now. usually on the backs of the insurance companies, they seem to be cooperating, from what i can see. tony, dillon, colorado,
republican caller. caller: congress, are you still being subsidized by the taxpayer? are these subsidies based on income? , if why does the taxpayer we are $17 trillion in debt, are we subsidizing 72% of your health care? host: since 1950 not --guest: since 1959 the federal government has contributed that, like any company would do for their employee. that is how you track certain employees. if this is to be taken away from the members of the house, the senate, the president, i think that is ridiculous. as part of any organization, thatc or private, i think their contribution is reasonable and worthwhile, sensitive to the needs of the individuals.
aboutone thing, but how our staff members who make 25,000, $30,000? you are taking that contribution away from their health care, how do they work, here in washington, d.c. e i would fight like heck for those folks on staff. , but weend for myself have got to help those folks and i think you would agree. the officein structure of a congressional office. how many staffers are typical? making less than 50,000? how many are making more? 18 people, 14 full-time, for part-time. host: that is between your tc and district offices? yes, 750,000 people to take care of, from veterans,
seniors, middle-class folks who need help every day, day in and day out. situation.everyday i do not know if i could be a caseworker, to be frank. they get attached to their clients who have terrible problems. when i say there are 14 full- time people, there is a chief of director,istrict legislative directors and assistant legislative personnel. , the chief of staff is obviously going to be the highest a person on your payroll . we have a certain amount of money being given to us every year. there have been no salary increases for staff members or congress. this is not how we saved the
country, this is not how we saved the deficit to any great degree. we cannot nickel and dime those people who are working for us. if they are not working, let's get rid of them. host: sam, your next. span and thedo c- friends of the democrats think it is ok to steal more money from the hard paying taxpayers? i would like to know why you think it is ok to steal more money. why do they think it is ok?
guest: host: i disagree --guest: i disagree with your premise, but i will fight for your right to speak. i have insurance, greta may have insurance from her company, or in my case, the government, although i do not have that plan , those folks are paying for the individuals who do not have insurance, who use emergency rooms, and if they would begin to understand that and wake up, we are paying for people that do not have insurance is the day we understand that everybody has got to be in. if everyone does not get into the pool, we cannot provide insurance for everybody. bringing down the high costs, the increases, already in the past two years we have reduced ,he increasing your premiums the increase in cost of health
care, i think that is a significant place to go. we are going in the right direction. please understand, please examine your premise. thank you, stanley. host: on the everybody in premise, insurance for young people could be $50 per month according to the report from hhs determined that 2.9 million adults between ages of 20 and 34 living in states eligible to buy insurance on federal or state arner ship insurance marketplaces and of them they found that 1.3 million, or or 46%, couldn't pay less than $46 per month for a broad determined that 2.9 million adults between plan, bum joe says -- guest:re-bones -- bare-bones, i would agree with that analysis, but if we do not
get the healthy people as well as the people who are more prone to be sick into the plan, it does not work. that was proven in the massachusetts experiment that did work. that was that you needed young and old into any kind of a plan that is going to have any kind of universality. it is not a government plan. people are going to be buying private insurance. keep the insurance they have when they make the comparison. if they have to change because of conditions, because of the plan that they have not meeting what they consider to be bare necessities, then they will probably have to change the plan . that is not the general case at all. lincoln, california, thank you for the call. being on.ank you for i want to preface what i have to say by saying that i believe
very much in the statement that a form of insanity is to keep doing the same thing over and over again and expect a different result. we have had a group in the house of representatives that voted 41 .imes to overturn this aca in my opinion, that is in my opinion, that is crazy. guest: it is crazy. caller: how are you ever going to get this thing fully implemented when you have people that are so crazy and so dedicated that they are going to do anything, absolutely anything, probably pushes off the cliff in january, to stop it? --st: well, i think that thank god the greater majority of folks within the republican party aren't feeling that way. they have been told along with no excuses here by a small group
in their partner -- in their party and they have every right to do that. they haven't done anything illegal. what we need to do is make sure we are very aggressive about this. i ran in 2010 in my reelection bid for congress on health care. many democrats ran away from it. they didn't want to bring it up. i can understand it. it wasn't a pleasant subject to debate. you remember those community meetings we had which turned into raucous meetings many, many times. if you can't stand the heat, harry truman said, get out of the kitchen. i am proud of what that legislation is going to do for health care in america. i see people who don't have health insurance, i see families wiped out, and i want to do something about it. we have a plan. it's been voted on. it went to the supreme court. we had a presidential election. i don't see any alternative plan that even comes close to doing
what the aca will do. only god is perfect. times"n "the washington -- "the affordable care act isn't." " think about how changes like this affect the economy. if you suddenly have to come up with $200, $200, $400 a month or more, what do you do? you economize. you have less could you rely on older equipment longer. you reluctantly raise prices, knowing it will cost to customers, cut back on hours for employees, and most importantly, you stop hiring. guest: he doesn't know what he's talking about. let me say this about heritage.
10 years ago now, greta, when the congress passed the prescription drug bill, i voted no. most democrats voted no. we felt there were too many cap senat -- too many gaps in it. we felt the federal government should have a place of the table when negotiating drug prices. i still feel that. passedout after it was and went to town meetings and went to senior groups i said this. i have a responsibility to educate you to the best of my ability, even though i voted against this bill. i want you to know about it so that you can make reasonable decisions about your drug purchases. i didn't say let me find a way to undermine this. let me go to senior groups and tell them don't believe this
stuff, don't even participate in it, even though it will hurt you in the long run, because it is a step in the right direction to rein in the cost of prescription drugs. why haven't they done that? why, when we've had the law passed and upheld by the supreme court, and we have had our election for president of the united states, why haven't any republicans reached out to help their fellow citizens understand what the aca is all about? why haven't many republican governors done that? they are entrenched in an ideology and i believe health care is more important. host: republican say that they disagree with the law -- guest: i disagreed with a law. 10 years ago i voted no, i argued on the floor against it. people are paying premiums for
prescription drugs and i getting any benefit. but when -- not getting any benefit. but when i was passed, he was passed, the loveland and i think i think i have an obligation to help people understand what the of the land, law and i think i have an obligation to help people addition with allies. " 15 to 45%bc news, of people who buy -- 50 to guest: i certainly don't accept a letter from the insurance company haas the end-all. i would want to know why he was cut off and i would demand to know what are my options with the insurance company. there will be situations like
this, no question about it. i would first say examine your options within the company that supposedly is cutting you off, january 1, let's say. but you are to explore the aca. you are to explore what are the options available to you that could give you a better chance at atting health care better price than we already had. host: did you know the number could reach as high as 80%? guest: no, i did not. host: does that concern you? guest: of course it does, but i think we can resolve that. you've got a talk to people who have never had insurance before or the company dropped them. they are on the website, they are anxious to call. explore it at least and then
decide. host: when were you briefed that people were going to receive cancellation? guest: when people were receiving it, i found out from my constituents and i said, are you sure? " here's the letter, congressma n." yes, that is no small problem on my agenda. host: so what do you do about it? guest: called insurance companies myself, dropping so many constituents. "we can't --"is, baloney. then you don't want their business. all these people coming into the marketplace. we have a little competition now. we didn't have competition in many states before, greta. drilling health
insurance. that is not free enterprise whatsoever. for the companies who do not want to become part of this, that is to their detriment, not mine. host: on our line for republicans, steve in pennsylvania. guest: hi, steve. caller: hello, good morning. thank you for your service. i understand your political affiliation, but let me get this out. i have been a truck driver now for about 20 years -- guest: god bless. caller: i've been with the same company for just over seven years. my insurance for seven years has been $50 a week, $500 deductible. guest: how much does your company contribute to health insurance? caller: 50-50. guest: $15? week.: no, $50 a
guest: $400 a month. caller: blue cross blue shield. after the government passed a law, the insurance company and .y company sent me a letter insurance rates per week and the deductible doubled. doubled? -- why has its doubled? caller: regulation written in the law. guest: like what? did they explain it to you? did they say in the letter, these regulations are in the affordable care act, and now we will raise your premiums because of those? is that what they said, steve? caller: i'm going to paraphrase because i don't have the letter in front of me. guest: of course. caller: they basically said because of regulations that are
going to be going towards the crossnce company, blue passes that down to my company, every othere company, the cost gets incurred -- companyith the aca the has to provide 80% of the money they take into providing health care for their constituents. many insurance companies were not doing that. many insurance companies were only putting in 50% of what they make. if they want to increase their profits -- i'm not going to call them up on that. but there is a time for everything and there is a time to provide service to your constituents, and you have gone on, i guess you have looked at the options of the aca, steve? caller: i have not yet --
guest: i'll ask you to do that. caller: let me finish. right now it is $150 a week. they still cover everything. it goes to $175 a week, $5,000 deductible. it is the federal bare minimum. i have a family of 4, a two- year-old and a four-year-old. this is getting extremely tight. steve,i would look also, into the possibility that you may be eligible -- i don't know when your income is, none of my business -- you may be eligible for a subsidy. you may be eligible for money that would help you pay for the insurance that fits your family. and if you have a problem in the meantime in trying to make that decision, call me or call your local congressman or call me in
my office in washington and i will be glad to try to help you. host: james parker on twitter says this guest: four insurance companies? caller: no attacks credit for others to say that the premiums are going up. i think that is something we can look at for the insurance company. yes, i would look at that. host: new jersey, independent caller. caller: good morning, greta. i would like to remind you that the collections are coming -- elections are coming, and a great job you did with the 2010 elections. as far as your guest today, i would like to mention 2 time frames. one is next year. ons is where the costs
insurance companies are coming economy sick by the insurance companies going to be -- saved by the insurance company is going to be zero because of the deductible. the check to your doctor, your hospital, -- you will write a check to your doctor, your hospital, your lab, and there will be more unhappy people. the second time frame is september of next year, when lookinge companies are at the budget for 2015 and they will take all premiums and take all the payout for pre-existing conditions, and i can guarantee they are going to ask for more , and that is going to make me more people unhappy.
let me briefly say this to you in response to what i think our coach and -- are cogent points. the cost for health care in the last 2 years specifically have come down. i would suspect there are market factors that are involved in that. also that thet reason why there is a reduction in the increase in costs, going up 15, 25% over the year, because of the coming of the aca. i think it has had a positive effect on not only premiums, but health care costs themselves. within the affordable care act, there are many ways to reduce the costs, going from fee-for- service to what the service is, they are good
results but it is having with doctors and hospitals across america. i want to bring you to the extremes in massachusetts, from the bulk of people who signed up in massachusetts who came in the last 25% of the time reading up to the deadline. i am hopeful about this but we have to correct the problems that exist right now and we need to look at what greta asked just a few moments ago, in terms of credit for folks like steve, who was on the phone just a few moments ago. we want to help steve. the purpose of this is not to punish steve. if he gets punished, i want to do something about it and help to the best of my ability. host: another tweet guest: well, that was discussed when we were debating the bill. i hope that is not the case, i hope companies don't take that
attitude. the whole purpose of the aca is going to be lost. i think that there has to be fines in this because everybody has got to be in. first of all, this is not a democrat idea, that part of the aca. that goes back to heritage, their recommendations on what health care is needed. we have had 8 presidents try to do this, tried to bring about health care reform. we need to say thank you, president obama. say it. read my lips. you are not going to get hurt by saying it. he did not create sandy, he did not create the monsoons. he has done some good, believe it or not. when you step back from the click and you understand that we should be examined -- from the cliff and you understand that we need to look at the objectives -- i mean, i does agree with the administration on many things.
but for crying out loud, get off the guys back. he has done a good job. host: pennsylvania, democratic caller. patrick? patrick, you there? one last -- caller: yes. guest: hi, patrick. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. i want to call in and say -- well, 2 things, one a statement, one a question. first, the statement -- i find it ridiculous that so many people are coming in -- calling it and blaming the government over the aca as the reason the insurance premiums are going up and as you stated, just insurance committee causing the issue. i'm not sure why we are getting behind insurance companies and supporting the fact that they can basically treat american people like commodities. guest: you can't punish insurance companies as part of health care reform.
insurance companies -- i think you would agree with me on this -- work as partners in attempting to bring about bring -- bringing about health care for the american people, the uninsured in this country. that is my response to you and i hope you understand what i am saying. caller: no, absolutely, you are absolutely right. we are looking at possibly the biggest insurance boom since the early '70s. guest: that's right. caller: now the government has given people who are entrepreneurs the opportunity to become a reseller agents, an insurance agent for state farm, allstate, and start up their own insurance reselling company, their own broker company, and now having an influx of third- party companies that can offer a cheaper rate because they are reselling it to smaller businesses, claiming that the larger company is kind of screwing them over. i don't know why people aren't seeing that. i feel it is a pretty wide open
field right now. you are going to create jobs, you're going to turn companies that are only just brokers now into insurance firms that can actually offer and resell their own insurance -- not host host: ok, patrick -- guest: i think what you're saying makes a lot of sense. this is a free enterprise piece of legislation. if we go back three years and we start talking about universal coverage by providing medicare for everybody -- that is not this plan. that may be some people's intentions in my party, some of them. but that is not this plan. the aca is a very calculated attempt to boost private enterprise. folks are going to buy private insurance, except those who are eligible for medicaid. there will be more people and illegible for medicaid.
i think that this is very, very important to understand -- more people eligible for medicaid could i think this is very, very important to understand, that this is a boost for private and a price. host: congressman bill pascrell -- guest: always a pleasure. host: thanks for talking to our viewers. next up, the nsa spying programs. should congress endorse them or stop them? that is after this news update from c-span radio. >> the labor department reports that a drop in food costs held down wholesale prices in september, the judy chu 0.1% -- country bring to a 0.1% decline. if all is a .2% -- it follows a .3% rise in prices in august. a drop in auto sales lowered retail spending in september, but americans boosted their spending on most other goods, suggesting confidence in the economy.
the commerce department says that retail sales dipped 0.1%, the weakest showing since march. this tweet from cbs news correspondent mark knoller. the eternal flame will be returned to the john f. kennedy gravesite. it was at a temporary location while the gravesite was undergoing repairs. only one other president has been buried at arlington cemetery, william howard taft. noller notes that he has no eternal flame at the cemetery. those are the latest atlanta c- span radio. >> author and astrophysicist neil the g -- neil degrasse tyson. so,s nasa's future goes, too, does that of america. if nasa is healthy, you don't need a program to convince people that science and engineering is good to do, because they will see it writ
large on the paper. there will be calls for engineers to help us go ice fishing where there is a notion of water that has been liquid for billions of years. we are going to dig through the soils of mars and look for life. look at the nasa portfolio today. chemistry, physics, geology -- planetary geology -- chemical engineers, mechanical engineers, all the stem fields represented in the nasa portfolio. umps that, asa p flywheel that society taps for innovations. >> booktv has aired over 40,000 programs about nonfiction books and authors. booktv, every weekend on c- span2. "washington journal" continues. host: we are back to the last remaining minutes of "washington to go outsideant
washington and in your take on whether congress should endorse or stop the nsa spying program. you have seen the papers this morning, that president obama was made aware is past summer about spying on allies, and the head of the intelligence feinstein, said that that is a big problem and she would like to see a total review of the nsa program. that comes as the white house responded to senator feinstein's statement yesterday, telling "the new york times goes with that congress may ban spying -- telling "the new york times" that covers may ban spying on heads of state. we want to get your thoughts.
we will get to your calls in a minute. a technology reporter for politico joins us on the phone. the house intelligence committee this morning -- this afternoon, i should say, 1:30 p.m. eastern time, we'll be hearing from nsa director keith alexander, also the nid director james clapper. what are they expected to tell the committee? what are lawmakers going to be asking? guest: alexander and the rest of the nsa establishment are playing defense these days. you know it is trouble for the nsa when you have folks like senator feinstein, a longtime intelligenceof the community, questioning the administration, we getting to look at the broader surveillance authorities here. we should hear questions from lawmakers who are very interested in ending bulk collection, the program that
allows the nsa to collect phone records in bulk. there is new legislation out today that would do so. the leaders of the house intelligence committee so far have been on alexander's side. we will see if the tide turns given the recent resolution -- revelation that heads of state may been monitored by the nsa. host: talk about the legislation that is going to be introduced by a bipartisan group of amicus, spearheaded by senator patrick and jim vermont sensenbrenner, republican from wisconsin, was integral in crafting the patriot act after the 9/11 terrorist attacks. guest: these 2 lawmakers want to end bulk collection and go right at the heart of the program that privacy hawks see as especially concerning for americans and those who should not be targets of terrorist investigations. the sensenbrenner-leahy bill would add new text to the so- called fi -- new checks to the
fisa court while at the same time putting in place new transparency measures and making public some of the fisa court's orders. it is an interesting counterpoint to feinstein's legislation. it is suspected that the intelligence committee will mark up in secret her measure and that would keep bulk collection in place while growing some of the nsa's authorities. there are checks there, but we are on a collision course between those who want to end bulk collection and those who don't. host: "the washington post" calls them duelling bills. you have the idea that if this legislation makes it to the floor, congress will be endorsing the nsa spying programs or it will be stopping them? is that correct? guest: it is a little bit more complicated than that. there are all of these overlapping parts about what the
nsa can do online and the information they can get outside of bulk collection. the big fault line, the big dividing line, is over bulk collection. those who want to end the program see a lot of opportunity in the house. they point to an effort by representative justin amash to essentially defunded the bulk collection program, which fell short of passing. that was largely symbolic. it was never going to end the nsa authority and the senate was never going to take it up, but many say that if we had just a few more votes, we could do this. the question remains, once this leahy-sensenbrenner bill comes to the floor, whether the votes will be there. we will surely find out how the collision course results itself. truly find out how the collision course results itself. host: if the intelligence
committee is going to be marking up the feinstein bill in secret, could members of the senate vote for it and not know that it is part of some sort of legislation? guest: for now what we know is that senator feinstein is going to put out information about the legislation after today's markup. we are not even having conversations yet about when this stuff is going to make it to the house or senate floor. plenty of work to do. authorities in 2015 -- a lot questions about getting it done by the end of it to next punt year. there is a huge try to get something done and soon, and proponents of killing nsa authority think they have a lot of momentum on their side. host: we will see today at the hearing by the intelligence committee. that will be live on c-span3,
1:30 p.m. eastern time, as well as cspan.org. bye in to hear testimony national security officials. tony romm, we had a video together put together by the pentagon featuring nsa director keith alexander, a 30-minute interview he did with the pentagon's armed with science blogger. what do you make of that effort? guest: alexander has been on offense for quite some time. with each appearance, each panel discussion -- we had him at politico for our event -- alexander has been especially critical of media. yes question did -- he has questioned journalists, questionably, raised the idea that journalists are not doing due diligence in getting the sense of how the programs work and how the nsa uses his -- it uses its
authority. that department of defense video really confirms that. that said, despite the optics, we do know one thing, that alexander plans to leave his post sometime in the next few months and that will touch off another fight on o, especially for those who want to see the nsa not only with more oversight but determining his successor on cyber command as well. romm, technology reporter for politico, thanks for your time. guest: thanks for having me. host: now we turn true all of you on these nsa spying programs. j in atlanta, georgia. caller: good morning. i will be brief. inst, these programs started 2002 under george bush and a new york paper talk about that yesterday. second, these things have been going on -- whenever we spy on them, they spy on us. it has just been brought to life under president obama and i
more it is obama bashing, of the same. my question is this --what is the big deal? it is not like we are sitting and listening to people's wordin g. they monitor millions of calls. about them doing something in the legislature now, they may or may not do anything about it. after the dust settles, they probably will do nothing. know, countries -- james bond movies? that's the part of the james bond movie that's true. we have always been spying on them, they are spying on us. nothing brand-new, it is as old which is and, fictional character, of course. it's not a big deal. and this particular program with the nsa started under george bush. so why wasn't all this big hoopla made under him?
it sounds like you say to continue these programs. should there be more transparency about these programs? should the public know more about them? caller: i think not. you can't to disclose all of this stuff publicly to the media , because our enemies are also listening. you just can't tell everything because our enemies are also trying to use these things against us. tell alljust can't of these things because we have to protect the united states of america and our allies. you still have to have some secrets and try to guard them from those who are trying to steal them. whether they are simple as commercials or cosmetics or military, or anything, you have to have some restraint. you don't tell your children everything, do you? host: steve in massachusetts, independent caller. what do you think?
caller: it seems to me that the american people in massive numbers no longer trust the american government. that is increasing. and i think it has to do with more than just the nsa spying on everyone in all forms of media. it has been a total transformation of this country in the last 20, 30 years. television used to be run by ghouls, shaping mines in terms of violence and sexualization of the american people, an attack on the family and the very destination -- very definition of marriage. endless wars. the wall street heist in 2008 of the american people and their money. decimation of the middle-class. it seems like something very serious is going on in this country, and it is a transformation. host: carrie in florida, democratic caller. caller: gerry, and what i wanted
to say is executive what the independent caller said, the caller before. this whole thing with the surveillance stuff that has been going on for so long, george bush started most of it. i remember, what was it, the ohio bell people, them listening to everybody. i think obama has continued on with that because he thought it good stead with the people, to be in good stead with congress. he is trying with all his might to make us a safe country. when people just to deny him and im, it is and deny h very sad state of affairs. host: let me ask you what i asked the first caller, what about transparency? should there be more of it? caller: i think obama has initiated a lot of transparency
that wasn't there. he left this come to the surface, didn't he? i mean really, he had to let this come to the service and he said to all of his handlers, whoever they are, ok, let's just let the american people know what is going on. i applaud him for that. host: about the video that was put together by the nsa keithor, general alexander, posted to youtube, i want to show you a little bit. he responds to the transparency issue and letting the american people know more about what's happening. here is what he had to say. [video clip] >> shouldn't you have released all this data? i don't believe so. if we could only give it to the good guys and tell them to keep it secret, then yeah, give it to all the good guys. the problem is that the bad guys are amongst us. this happened in 1990 after the east africa embassy bombings.
somebody revealed publicly that the way we tracked bin laden was satcom communications. within two days we never saw bin laden into medications again -- in medications again. my concern is that the revealing of these programs allowed terrorists to know the best weapons we have against them. it will cause irreversible and significant damage. it means that terrorists have an upper edge and conducting attacks, in europe and potentially in the united states, and our ability to stop them is reduced. thoseeople die, responsible for leaking it are the ones who should be held accountable. in angeneral alexander interview with the pentagon's armed with science blogger. the pentagon uploaded it last week. he talks about the nsa spying and gives a preview of what he might say at today's hearing, this afternoon and 1:30 p.m. eastern time at the house
intelligence committee. live coverage on c-span3. john, canton, ohio, republican caller. caller: good morning good i agree with the independent caller, his statement about the trust could we can't trust our government. we are having issues here, whether the examples of benghazi or we haven't gotten answers about that come up fast and furious, how about the irs? i was looking at google earth and they are showing my house, bike inrty, my kids' the front yard, my garage door open. i don't understand why we need that kind of surveillance on this. we are distrustful of the government right now, and we know that something is going on, and we know that we are paying for it and we're getting angry. people have been asleep for years are starting to wake up and realize that there's something going on. that is my statement for today. hollywood,a,
florida, republican caller. monica, you are on the air. caller: yes, i am. hello? host: go ahead. caller: the reason i am calling his years ago, i don't know if you remember, you might be too young, because of watergate -- the case of watergate, they were ying and united states, and they made the president richard nixon resigned after the the -- trying to impeach him. now this president, which i voted for him, as a matter fact, even though i am republican, he not only is spying from within, he is spying on his friends in europe, and nobody has said anything about impeachment. what is the difference between watergate and what is going on right now? host: ok, monica -- caller: have people gone blind?
host: "the new york times" editorial board weighs in this money. -- this morning. " is it really better for us to think that things have gone so far with the post-9/11 idea that any spying that can be done should be done and nobody thought to inform president obama about tapping the tone of one of the most important american allies?" they go on to write that "legislation introduced today by senator patrick leahy of vermont and republican rep resented of jim sensenbrenner would end the collection of bulk data. the bill, the usa freedom act, would require that the 'tangible sought through data
collection are relevant and material to an authorized investigation into international terrorism or clandestine intelligence activities. they would also have to pertain to a foreign power or its agent, activities of a foreign agent already underestimation or someone in touch with an agent." "the financial times" editorial board also weighs in. " u.s. pays a price for spying on merkel." "the threat to governments and businesses from snooping is minor compared to that done by china and russia. ms. merkel is right to be enraged by u.s. snooping, but she another european leaders must not forget where today's other cyber threats are coming from." said in chicago, democratic
caller. oh, i got to push the button. my thought. caller: hello? host: you're on the air. onler: number one, spying our allies, that will never make the u.s. safe. we have to differentiate between who is our enemy and who is our. -- our friend. if we are spying on the american people and our allies, that is never going to make the u.s. safe, and that will damage the u.s. image outside the united states and create more enemies of the u.s. i don't see any reason we spy on our allies. no reason at all, completely. host: have you heard the idea was made this morning on "washington journal"? republican on has intelligence committee and he
says that the spying as a stabilizing helped our european allies -- the spying has saved lives and help our european allies. caller: the reason we do this spying is to make america safe. the question here is what is the point of spying on our allies? are they our enemies? why are we doing so? host: ed, independent caller. caller: good morning good i would like to address the lady from florida who think that this is the most transparent administration that has ever been. my god, lady, please have a cup of coffee and wake up. i agree with the man from canton, ohio, that distrust of the government is so out of control. they want to concern us with hollywood costumes and silly things. chem trails in the sky with heavy metal toxins. those who think there are no
problems with the nsa and drones in the sky, there is a lot of folks -- things going on under your nose while you are distracted by the silliness of the unholy alliance between hollywood and washington, d.c. for those of you who think there is no problem to be domestically spied on, why don't you take the curtains off your bedrooms and bathrooms? have a nice day, america. host: fort lee, new jersey. hi, barry. caller: i think the media is 100% to blame. the media has been hijacked by ultra liberals, lapdogs, and competents -- incompetents. they refuse to ask hard questions of our government, such as benghazi, the iris debacle. they knew years ago that millions of people would not be able to keep their insurance.
that is shoddy reporting to find out after the fact. that is highly incompetent. the reason is that the media has been hijacked and until the media asks hard questions, big government will run amok over the common people. this is just like in europe, where the european media is elitists,ig family construction companies, etc., who impose their will on the people, and it is coming here to america where this elitism has been imported and the media has been hijacked by ultra-liberals. i will even take it a step further and say that the media is run by ultra liberals whose agenda is to globalize the world and get rid of sovereignty, religion, culture, from everyday life in america -- your ok, barry, those are thoughts, and i will pick up on health care, and we are joined
on the phone by a health-care reporter with politico to talk about today's hearing before the ways and means committee. who'll be testifying, mr. cheney, and what questions are likely to be asked? guest: persons testifying are the medicare and medicaid services administrator, an obscure agency, but they are the ones responsible for building the and roman system for the affordable care act -- the enrollment system for the ford motor ac -- for the affordable care act. they have quarterbacked the whole construction of what to say. so many questions to ask it is hard to know where to begin. what is the timeframe for getting this working again? what went wrong, and why did he go so wrong so early? that is where we will see the outset. and then they will dive into specifics of why didn't people
see the delay of the enrollment system when there were so many warning signs that there were going to be flaws? it will shed light on things we have been wondering about for a while. host: what do we know about ms. tavenner's involvement in the website? guest: i don't think cms -- their job was to put all the disparate pieces of the site together. we heard from the contractors who worked on the website last week and they said that we each were responsible for different silos of the website, and cms' role was to put them altogether and make sure that the process worked from and to end, when the user signs on to healthcare.gov and all through the enrollment process, picking the plan, finding if they were eligible for subsidies, completing the enrollment process. cms length all of those processes together and was supposed to make them work seamlessly. it hasn't been that way so far. host: what have you heard about
how ms. tavenner will respond to the questions about her role, and a she bear response ability? we did not learn much from the testimony she released ahead of the hearing. other than that, she said that things are proving every day. the administration has called on thisteam of tech experts, tech surge of the best and the brightest. hear from them that those will be up and running by the end of november smoothly. the administrator will talk about the day-to-day improvements they have seen and knocking off their so-called punch lists. they have a lengthy punch list of items they want to repair and i'm sure she will get into the nitty-gritty of that, although it is unclear how much they will divulge. it is hard to get some of the specifics to date. host: that is today's hearing.
tomorrow, the energy and commerce committee will hear from hhs secretary kathleen sebelius. what do you expect? guest: i think that is the main event, especially from the republican perspective. they really want to get her in the hot seat and get her in an unfiltered way. it is going to be a bit of a free-for-all, i would imagine, because there has been so much especially from republicans calling for her ouster at health and human services. that is the backup of the hearing. there is so much we don't know specifically about what is happening with the website and what needs to be fixed. on top of that, there is this layer of politics, republicans calling for the secretary to be fired. she is going to have to defend beingle in overseeing and the person accountable for the entire project but also explaining why she is the best person to lead this thing forward. host: our cameras will be there from beginning to end today
before the ways and means committee. 10:00 a.m. it is about to kick on c-span3. hhswe will be live with secretary kathleen civilians. kyle cheney, appreciate it. back to our questions about the nsa surveillance programs. them, congress codify endorse them, or should they be arraigned in? -- reined in? host: another tweet from @boringfileclerk. host: and these comments. host: eric in california, independent caller. caller: like so many of the
other colors said before, the people i know fear the government more than they fear terrorism. i can't believe there are some in people willing to give up their freedom for the sake of safety. i mean, give me liberty or give me death, not save me from death and take my liberty. seen't say that -- i can't how we have the secret courts with super laws and say that we have a government of the people, by the people, and for the people. people should make this an election issue. host: bernadette, democratic li -- democrat, caller. caller: first hand, i have experience with nsa stuff, and maybe not directly them about through municipalities and city governments. right now we are being controlled by the so-called grid, our electricity usage, water usage, and if they can't get the money out of us one way,
they will, for example in the utilities, cause leaks all over the place with newfangled meters. they are trying to control our water usage. we do, we care about our water, but we should not be subject to this type of abuse and bullying by our local governments. host: jeremy, houston, texas, independent caller. caller: how you doing? i want to speak about the nsa and just say that the problem is that we in america, in my that we when we say protect and honor and will uphold the values and stuff that we all believe in, but which spying and espionage, we will not do on our allies or our citizens. in concert with the other 2 callers, the distrust of
government is there, and it is filled amongst the everyday people, and it is really -- it really saddens me as we continue on this path. i would also like to say about congress, they have a really big part. mccain, schumer, mcconnell, feinstein, these people have been in office for years and these things happen on their watch. forget the president for now. these people have been in office for tens of years. where is the accountability for these folks? it is time we get back to the business of the people, taking care of us. thank you. host: all right, jeremy. on oversight of the government and oversight of the nsa surveillance programs, we heard earlier from mike conaway, republican from texas, and he talked about there is a lot of oversight over these programs. director, general keith
alexander, also in this pentagon interview talk about all the different agencies that oversee the nsa. here is what he had to say. [video clip] >> now, the key part, what people miss, is first, they are collecting all that data. i explained how important the constraints are on this data set, but there is more. the oversight and compliance on these programs is greater than any other program in our government. it is from within nsa by the general counsel, the inspector general, the oversight and compliance director, from the dni's general counsel and inspector general and civil liberties and privacy officer, by dod inspector general and general counsel, by department of justice, by the white house, by congress, both committees. when you look at that, these are the ones who apply oversight and they can see what we are doing. it is not a program that's secret.
it is one that congress, the administration, and the courts have all approved, and the court is the final one. from my perspective, we have convinced all three of those that this is necessary for the security of this nation. and we have not had any willful or knowing violations of those programs, period. youin those 2 core ones bring up. who are they spying on? you call them spying programs. people say we are spying on americans. absolutely wrong. we are going after terrorists. director general keith alexander talking with a pentagon blogger for 30 minutes. the questions were not posed by the blogger -- typed up on the
screen with music in the background. you can go to youtube. the pentagon posted it last thursday. president obama will be meeting with republicans at the white house today to talk about immigration reform. "the hill" reports that mario balartullard -- diaz- will be meeting at the white house. he has been working with both parties on all copper heads of house bill. -- comprehensive house bill. "the congressman is determined to pursue his own legislation. although lawmakers are expected to attend the meeting come up the process guest list is unclear." " the wall street journal" reports that senator marco rubio, part of the gang of eight in the senate, bush the theslation -- who pushed legislation in the summer, says he is backing off a comprehensive approach, saying he wants to give us more time to
work its will. becky, michigan, democratic caller. caller: hi. i just love the question you asked about -- ha ha -- secrets. saying "could somebody secretly take the secrets = or .omething like tht it is so confusing. i want to know, hasn't this been going on since forever? i'm 63 years old. when i was a kid, i used to have to listen to my mom and grandma talk politics all the way to church and all the way back. it was the cold war back then, and everybody was spying on everybody.
i mean, what really happened with that information? host: so, becky, it doesn't bother you then? caller: well, yes, it does. my husband refuses to talk politics. i could tell you on five fingers everything he has said about politics in our whole life. said, as they were talking about this german chancellor or whatever, being know, i, you asked him the same question, and usually he doesn't answer me, but as he walked past, he said, "yeah, they have been doing it forever, but they shouldn't." host: david, were public and
caller -- republican caller. caller: hello. i'm talking mostly about the congresswoman was on before. i'm personally against them collecting information on people, but the congressman who was on before, he has been on about 10 times and he says he that people were going to lose their insurance policies, and he didn't say anything. in president looked at me the eye and lied to me. he said i could keep my insurance policy if i like it. well, i can't. apparently this person knew it and he did not say that the president is being dishonest or anything. host: all right, we're talking about nsa surveillance programs. a virginia, what do you think? theer: my opinion that all people who are worried about the
nsa, you are probably giving away more of your private personal information when you sign up for obamacare then you will ever give away by someone spying on you. and that's the fact. host: andre is next in d.c., democratic caller. andfre? good morning. caller: good morning could i just want to say to each and every american that until we come to the realization that we are the employers and everybody on the hill are the employees, they are going to continue to -- host: ok, that will have to be our final thought. the house is about to come for their warning this -- morning business. live coverage of c-span on the house. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute]
[captioning performed by national captioning institute] >> the director of the economic council gene speerling talks sly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.] the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the chair lays before the house a communication from the speaker. the clerk: the speaker's room, washington, d.c., october 29, 2013. hereby appoint the honorable chris collins to act as speaker pro tempore on this day. signed, john a. boehner, speaker of the house of representatives. the sp