tv Washington Journal CSPAN September 17, 2014 7:00am-10:01am EDT
send us a tweet, post your comments on facebook, and you can also e-mail us. during opening statements yesterday up on capitol hill before the senate armed services committee, the joint chiefs of staff, general martin dempsey had this to say about the possibility of combat troops. >> our military advisers will help the iraqis conduct campaign planning, and coordinate the coalition activities. if we reach a point where i believe our advisors sure
accompany iraq troops on attacks on specific eye sill targets i'll recommend that to the president. saying that he will recommend that to the president, the possibility of combat troops, if he deems it necessary. front page, courtesy of the museum here in washington this morning, with the headline, case for ground forces. they shows this, bipartisian support fraction, a majority in both parties back president obama's plan for military campaign against militants in iraq and syria. bae 53% total approving, 29% disapproving, republicans back it by 64% to 27%, democrats 60% to 24%, and independents 47% to 33%. on this question of whether or not the u.s. should put boots on the ground we want to know your
thoughts. robert, maryland, go ahead, robert. caller: thank you. i want to say -- you know, the ebola virus, this new strain of the -- first of all can you hear me? mnchts h. host: yes, we can. how does that tie to what we're talking about here? caller: i believe the person said you wanted people to talk about the comments about the ebola virus. host: no, sorry, we're going to be talking about that coming up here in about 45 minutes. we're going to be -- we're going to be talking about the ebola situation, but right now we're talking about the possibility of ground troops to combat isis. do you have thoughts on that robert? caller: yes, basically i believe that people have been saying for a while that the advisors are strictly that, but i believe they're pretty much special ops
troops. but more to the point what i want to talk about as far as the so-called advisors what we need to do to really less ten hatred that we are generated towards the country and around the world is we need to stop acting on behalf of israel. we -- we are looking on as being basically israel's -- host: robert, why do you think, what evidence do you have that we are acting on the behest of israel? caller: number one, they've always had an issue regarding libya, you got libya, you got iran, you got iraq, you got syria, and basically they have been about seven, eight countries that israel has pretty much wanted to bring within its submission so they can be pretty much the predominant power in the league.
we fund them way beyond anyone else in this world when it comes to military preparedness. host: we provide aid to these other countries, as well. we're getting your thoughts on u.s. ground troops. may be needed to combat isis, that is what the senate armed services committee yesterday heard from the joint chiefs when testifying up on capitol hill. we covered the whole hearing. if you missed it, by the way, go to the web site c-span.org. but first, joining us on the phone is bob cusack. the editor in chief, to talk about the -- what we heard up on capitol hill yesterday. let's begin with that hearing yesterday. what was the reaction from democratic and republican lawmakers? >> well, the reaction very strong certainly from the left and democrats, there's this
growing concern among democrats that there's a bit of a mission creep that we're going to get into a situation, and the troops are going to eventually be there. now, of course, after dempsey's comments yesterday the white house stressed again there's not going to be any ground troops, and that's not an option. dempsey was saying he possibly could recommend ground troops or operatives, certainly in decisions if they were needed. so that happening on the eve of the house vote today certainly complicated things for the white house and set off a bit of a frenzy. on the republican side there are republicans who are going to vote against this syria aid package but most republicans are i think in the house are going to vote yes, and some of them do not like the fact that president obama has taken ground troops off the table. host: after six hours of debate on the house floor yesterday, they will vote, the republicans,
as you said, on this aid to syria. that is to train and equip the syrian forces. what did we hear from general dempsey and defense secretary hagel about the length of time and how it's going to work to train these syrian rebels? >> well, it's going to take months, and it's at least going to take three months, three to around five months perhaps six months to arm and train them. the major concern is that these arms are going to fall into the wrong hands and isis could eventually get them. can we actually train these syrian forces? it's going to be very difficult and if you look at the experience of the u.s. training iraq troops, as well as afghanistan troops, a lot of people forgetting we have the united states has major decisions on troop levels in afghanistan at the end of this
year, and part of the quandary is that there -- it's been seen, it's been a failure to train troops both in iraq and afghanistan for them to take over, and that's why we've been there so long. host: despite this hesitation, despite these concerns, your headline on the hill web site this morning, the hill.com, lawmakers we will pass this syria aid. >> it looks like it has the votes, greta, looks like there's going to be a lot of republicans voting yes. but not enough just on republicans alone to get it through the house. a number of democrats were saying yesterday that in order for this to pass at least a third of the democratic caucus to a half of the democratic caucus needs to vote yes to push it to the necessary 218 votes to pass. so you know, we -- we'll see, i think a key element yesterday thatuwe have in our store today
was that was the vote on the rule that allows the vote to happen on the actual bill, there were only a handful of republicans and a handful of democrats who voted no the rule. that's a procedur procedural vo. but if you feel adamant about something you'll vote on the rule and the bill. the fact that there were only a handful of votes, there will be a lot more no votes today, let's be clear on that, but this is a situation where it looks like they have the votes, the white house is onboard with this bill. they are urging their caucus to vote yes, but if you talk to a lot of the liberal lawmakers, and we did yesterday, they're concerned. they're concerned about looking back at history, the vote on the iraq war. so the white house really needs a strong vote. they don't need to limp across the finish line, they need a strong vote or it's going to look like kind of a divided congress barely gets this over
the top. very vote is important to the white house. host: does that mean the white house is picking up the phone and talking to its own party and the republicans and are the -- is the democratic leadership in the house whipping this vote? >> they're not tick technically whipping it, but they are -- they want as many yes votes. they're urging the caucus to vote yes, but not technically whipping it. but they certainly want yes votes. they know this is a vote of conscience. if somebody feels strongly they're not going to convince them otherwise. i have been struck by how many calls the administration has been making on this. it shows you how important it is, ranging from the president to the vice president, to senior administration officials, this is the white house that has been criticized for not calling members of congress on a regular basis, but they have been burning up the phone lines this week. host: the other headline on the fill.com this morning is from the speak he of the house saying the president can still ask for
broad use of force -- authority. is that likely to happen before the election? >> no, it is not. this is the only vote we're going to see, should it pass. there could be another vote if it doesn't pass. i think it will pass. this is the only vote before the election that we're going to see. remember, lawmakers need to pass a government funding bill, they want to pass this syria aid as part of it. and then they want to go back to the campaign trail. they're not long for washington. and so john boehner saying if the president wants to get a broad authorization passed by congress, well, the onus is on him to submit it to the congress. and certainly there are democrats and republicans who believe there should be a broad straight up or down vote on this, not this what critics are saying is a small buy in for congress to approve this. so will there be this broad authorization post election? maybe. there is certainly going to be a lot of debate when they come
back after the election. and, of course, we don't know what the situation is going to be now, but there is no doubt about it, there's going to be debate on it. authorization vote before the election? no chance. host: what about in the senate? another headline is senator tim cain is proposing to limit troops. >> it's fascinating that he has been pushing back at this white house, remember cain was a finalist to be obama's running mate in 2008, he's one of three finalists. he has been adamant that he supports air strikes but he wants this resolution that would remove prior authorizations, post 9/11 authorization, as well as authority for the iraq war. and that sentiment has support in congress, even among some
republicans. they're wary of having different war resolutions that the executive branch can rely onto go into other countries. so kaine is pushing this, has been pushing it for weeks, and it certainly has raised some eyebrows over it the white house. host: bob cusack, this benghazi hearing, the select committee has been formed. they're going to hold the first public hearing this morning. what will you be watching for? >> well, there's certainly going to be a lot of theater here. he's the chairman of the committee, he does not want to have a lot of theater, he wants a thorough investigation. this investigation is going to go into next year. he says it could end probably by the end of 2015. some of the witnesses are state department official, former director of the secret service, who have been part of a best practices panel that as the panel was formed to look at
security, at diplomatic sites around the country, around the world, u.s. sites, and how they can be protected better. i think the focus is going to be what they learned from benghazi. and gowdy criticized the review that the state department did on benghazi, something clinton said they reviewed this, and gowdy says that's not an independent review. regardless there's going to be some theater here. the relationship between gowdy, and cummings is good, certainly at the moment. we'll see where that goes from here, but with the backdrop of the 2016 presidential election, there are liberal groups who started a web site to push back on any republican claim that they feel is false. so the liberals are mobilizing to get ready for today's big
hearing. host: all right. thank you for your time. >> thanks, greta. host: we will be covering that hearing this morning, the first public hearing of the house select committee on benghazi, 10:00 a.m. eastern time on c-span three. we're getting your thoughts on u.s. ground troops may be needed to combat isis. william, port republic, maryland, republican caller, william, do you agree? caller: i kind of disagree about the entire conflict. i mean, i kind of see this as big dismanipulating our government again specifically oil. i mean, isis they finance themselves by selling bootlegged oil at $25 a barrel. you get enough cheap oil like that on the market prices at the pump go down. i think somehow behind the scenes big oil companies have been able to turn this deal into something that we can actually put people in harm's way to try to stabilize their profits. that's my view on this whole
thing. host: we'll go next to mike, tucson, arizona, republican caller. mike, what's your view? caller: i keep seeing this climb of dempsey making the statement of he would recommend to the president boots on the ground. he says he does not recommend that at this time, and then also he goes through this three faced description of how he views the whole situation. and that is we can either go in there and clean that place up ourselves, which hasn't worked, or try to form a coalition, or we can get the people there to do it themselves. right now that's what he's recommending, getting the people there to do it themselves, not sending in more ground troops. it seems like the news is misrepresented exactly what he said. host: and like i said, mike, earlier we covered that hearing, so if you want to watch it
unfiltered -- >> watched it. they're showing one statement that he made, that contradicts what obama had said, and it's -- they're making a big deal out of nothing. host: go to our web site if you missed it, if others missed it. caller: i watched the whole thing. host: you did. i'm saying for others, if they missed it and seen what other media is showing you. this is from the "washington times" this morning. general democracy's comments sent the rest of the country scrap binging.
troops if there was -- if they started the draft, because -- so that the poor and middle class kids won't be the only ones going over there, and the upper class, the top 10%, i guess, their children will be involved in it, too. host: okay. caller: if there was -- let me finish, please. host: sure. caller: there was a draft, and it passed to do a draft i guarantee you they would stop talking about going over there, because the wealthy don't want their kids going to a slaughterhouse. host: okay.
george, a republican caller, your view this morning. caller: i'm a retired military officer, and i'm also a research ph.d. my view of this whole issue is that you cannot stop what's going on purely by drone strikes. you have to have boots on the ground. unfortunately we're going to have to get the buy in from the other countries, the other supporting nations, in order to make this thing work. if the u.s. maintains its position as purely an air war, more or less identifying and hitting select targets that's well and great but you have to have boots on the ground. at this point i do not believe it should be american citizens. host: okay. so george do you think this could work with boots on the ground from other countries? caller: absolutely. absolutely. host: but take a look at the "washington times" headlines. these u.s. trained syrian rebels not likely to hit the
battlefield until 2015. caller: they aren't the only solutions, they aren't the only ones who have skin in the game as it relates to this whole issue. this thing is far more complex than anything we've ever come up across before. and we're going to have to think outside of the box to solve these challenges that are before us. host: all right. jim, fisherville, georgia, democratic caller. hi, jim. jim, good morning to you. fisherville, virginia, democratic caller. one last call for jim. let me go on to scotty in, west virginia, independent caller. you there? caller: yes, ma'am. host: you're on the air. caller: i don't think boots on the ground is the solution. i think that if we did go there, we would have to get other countries to fall in line behind us because without a plan to set up a government we seen what
happens. look at iraq, we spent billions of dollars and lost countless lives, and right now it's falling right back into the hands of the way it was. we lost equipment out there that they're using against our own soldiers now. our borders are unsecure right now. what's keeping ios is to coming up from mexico? it's easy to get around the world nowadays, with planes being stolen and stuff. our borders is going to have to be secured, number one, or isis is going to march right up through mexico. and a lot of politicians know this and a lot of people in this country know this, and i'm just -- host: there has been questions about that theory, and the possibility of that happening. folks are saying that people on the right, on the republican side, are saying this is a possibility but homeland security, fbi officials say they
don't see that happening. caller: then tell me why did homeland security and -- buy up all these bullets? enough to fight three wars. that's public knowledge. host: where did you hear that story? caller: it's all over. it's in the news and everywhere else. that's -- i mean, look it up. it's fact. they got all this ammunition stored backed and bottled up, and if they're not going to use it to protect our borders, what are they going to use it on? and as far as these camps that think got setup, fema, you know, which is part of homeland security, supposedly all these camps are being built and set up, what they going to use them for? i figure, you know, this is something that the american people know this. we're not -- we're not as dumb as these politicians think we are. host: all right. on your point about a government
needing to be set up in iraq and other areas, here is the "washington journal." the iraqi lawmakers are stalling on key posts to their government. iraqi's parliament rejected two appointees. a sign the prime minister is struggles to set up an exclusive government host: william in alabama, independent caller, you're on the air, william. go ahead. caller: okay.
well, i just want to say the deal with isis, they come up, whatever you call them, they come out of nowhere overnight it seems like. and everything boils down to oil over there. they have been sticking each other with swords for, what, 15,000 years. and we trying to make them live like americans. they don't want to, and we're trying to make them do that. that's not never going to work. the religion thing and the way and that's just a little bit of it, you know. host: cody in alabama, what's your take? >> i think that this is all just perpetuated back to 9/11 and shoddy arabia. we have been hunting these invisible terrorists forever, and it took us seven years to find some man hiding in the cave.
and borders are wide open, none of the people in congress, our president is not doing anything about it. american people are not stupid. and how long is it going to take before we are attacked, and what are we going to do about it then? host: okay. all right, cody, kenneth, pontiac, michigan, independent caller. caller: how you doing today? host: good morning. caller: good morning. i want to say there are a few things that can be done. number one, bring back the draft. during the vietnam era you had the draft act. number two, i hope listeners are listening, curse those that curse you. that's relating to israel. that's why we are always backing
israel. if it wasn't for israel there would be no christianity. host: got your point. the general up on capitol hill, martin dempsey, saying in his opening testimony that if needed he would suggest to the president the use of troops to help with air strikes in iraq and syria. if you missed that testimony, you're interested, go and watch the whole thing on c-span.org. he was questioned by senators about arming and training these syrian rebel forces. take a look at what he had to say. >> we think three to five months to establish the program, some of that is consumed by contracting for equipment. it's not as much maneuvering people into the right place, but during that period of time, as well we would have to -- with the help of in particular some of our regional partners,
recruit and vet, but three to five months, and deliver capability sometime between eight and 12 months. so that's kind of the time frame that we're working towards. host: general dempsey on capitol hill talking about how long it might take to train these syrian rebel forces. the "wall street journal" editorial weighs in this morning. they say this.
host: the "washington times" reporting this morning, that the continuing resolution, which is a stopgap measure to keep the government funded is on track to avert a preelection shut down. and in that is this amendment language that gives the president the authority to arm and train the syrian forces. that debate took place on the house floor yesterday and the
vote is to be happening today on both that amendment and this larger what is called a continuing resolution up on capitol hill. it says this. that instead of immigration, the big debate now will be on whether to approve president obama's request that capitol hill authorize him to train and equip syrian rebels at a cost of $500 million to fight back against islamic state militants. so as we heard, it looks like this could pass when that vote takes place today on the house floor. tune in to c-span for our coverage of that. the debate yesterday, as we said, was six hours. want to show you a little bit of what the debate was like on the house floor. representative peter king, who is a republican of new york, here is what he had to say, his argument for arming the syrian rebels. >> i believe the president has the constitutional and statutory power to act, but i think it's important for congress to work
with the president. the president is asked for this power to train moderate syrians, and i'm not certain if that would work, i think it's going to be difficult to vet a sufficient number, it's going to be difficult to fine them, to work with them, having said that as commander in chief the president is entitled i believe that is his perking on testify and we should stand with him on that because if we can put together an effective fighting force on the ground that will make our air power all that more effective. host: that was peter king on the house floor yesterday. also speaking on the floor was representative rick nolan, a democrat of minnesota and he expressed his reservations about arming the syrian rebels. >> at the end of the day, we have no friends in this conflict, and either directly or inadvertently they end up using the arms and the weapons that we have supplied against, yes, you guessed who. us. it's time to wake up.
it's time to put an end to it. it's time for this congress to step up and assume responsibility the constitution could not be more clear on who declares war. it's the congress of the united states, not the president of the united states. my fellow colleagues, please, i beg with you, i plead with you, step up, assume our obligations here. if there's a declaration to be made, let's make it, and most importantly right now let us reject this amendment and stop pouring money into this conflict that goes back thousands of years and can only be resolved by the people in that region, and a part of that conflict. host: representative rick know hundred on the house floor, democrat of minnesota expressing his reservations about arming the syrian rebels. the debate was six hours, and they will vote today. so tune in to c-span to watch that vote take place. "the new york times" front page this morning.
host: irvington, new jersey, independent caller, go ahead. caller: good morning, ma'am, and god bless you and your family. i just want to make a plea to the american citizens, please speak out and keep the politicians from putting our soldiers on the ground. they have not -- isis has not shown a need yet, not yet, for soldiers to be on the ground. it's so disheartening that the politicians are playing politics, to get their way for whatever they're trying to do, and this notion about isis coming through the border, i think that's just another way of them keeping immigrants out. it seems like they're willing to
do anything for political reasons, it's just so unfair. and it's scary. i'm just saying to the american citizens, please keep out. keep our families safe. the entire country will know this and there will be support. host: mary in grand blej, michigan, independent caller, what's your take on this? caller: i just wanted to say two things. first of all, some of the areas that isis now controls has old stockpiles of saddam hussein's weapons of mass destruction, which everybody says were not there, but we've now found out they were there. it's something that he was doing that has chlorine, all kind of different biological weapons that they were producing.
they also have universities with good labs, and they have people that have -- are joining them from all these countries that have training in how to make these bombs and weapon onize these agents. now, they can be -- those can be brought in through the borders and used by people in this country against our people here. so i think we need to do whatever we have to do to take care of those people over there before they come here. host: okay. all right, mary. "the new york times" editorial board, they called the testimony yesterday by general dempsey the flippy slope. . host: david, texas, independent
caller, go ahead. >ahead. caller: oh, man, these people, they don't even have a navy. they don't have nothing. and where -- we are armed to the teeth. those people here, nobody wants to come to this country except not even mexicans anymore. we kill our own. we'll kill isis that comes over here. and by the way, we already have a terrorist group. it's called the religious right. they assassinate doctors because the doctors want to do what the women want. host: okay. nick, el paso, texas, republican, good morning to you. nick, you there? oh, pressed the wrong button. caller: good morning. i'm a republican, but if president obama comes to congress and asks for permission
for comit bat troops i will back him 100%. we cannot be getting in bed with iran, russia, or syria. we cannot seen by the sunnies and the -- and that part of the world as being on the iranian side. we cannot depend on shiite militia from iran, like hezbollah, the iranian republican guard, we cannot get in bed with the iranians. host: take a look at the front page of the financial times.
code pink.org there, standing behind the secretary of defense, chuck hagel. susan, hampton, virginia, republican caller, hi, there. caller: good morning. thanks for taking myal today. i feel like we should be independent on our death, our funeral, just americans jobs that way we won't be sending money over there. i understand these rebels make a million to $2 million a day. cut off their money, choke them out, and maybe that will do it. thank you. host: okay. andrew, new jersey, independent caller. andrew, let's see, are you there, andrew? go ahead. caller: yes, good morning. host: good morning. caller: first of all, i would not believe the joint chiefs of staff, whatever they say, they misled the american people back in the 60s about getting involved in the vietnam war and how the vietnam army would take
over once the americans left. well this proved to be a lie. and now we see it again. instead of using taxpayer's money to play poker with these guys over in the middle east, who are playing us for a cheap suit i think we need to protect our country, protect our borders and we have to watch who we're giving passports out on student visas. let us remember that the 9/11 attackers all had student visas. wake up america and don't get fooled again. host: all right, andrew. reaction on capitol hill via twitter. here is tom rooney, a republican, says obama willing to put boots on ground to fight ebola, not isis. what do you think? and the press office of senator inhofe, republican of oklahoma, who chairs the armed services committee saying the president's claim of no boots on the ground
is an insult of the men and women in iraq today who are serving in harm's way. and then another republican from michigan, when syrian rebels receive arms, who do you think they'll target? we'll keep getting your thoughts for about five more minutes about this idea of the possibility of ground troops being used, combat rolls for the united states. "the washington post" this morning in other news has this headline about the nfl.
the marketplace section of the wall street gorp all this morning, the sponsors of the nfl with commercials and other corporate buys is now -- budweiser is pressuring the nfl amid the scandal. it says that mr. kelly declined to share financial details of the nfl sponsorship, but six year dealmaking bud light the official beer is worth about $1.2 billion.
back to your calls on this issue of combating isis and the possibility of using combat troops. richard in maryland, independent caller, what do you think? caller: okay. i think we need to go back in the memory bank here a little bit and remember that at the end of george bush's tenure or close to the end of it, iran was on the board to be attacked, at least wmds disposed of. and that is still very front and center issue at the present time. and not only that, but george bush also identified the axis of evil. iran was one of those, one of those countries. so i feel that obama, our
president, is the only person who has stood between that endeavor, to attack iran. host: okay. caller: and he's actually at this point trying to essentially delay that and conservatives are trying to keep it from the senate but they're not talking about it. host: let's go to spring in springfield, ohio, democratic caller. caller: hi. good bless you. i called about two months ago, and i called about these chicken hawks again. again i just want to let you know these knee oh conservatives are concerned about the war, troops on the ground, bring back the draft, put their kids and all these other chicken hawks' families over there.
my kids, i have five in the service at the same time. i got three granddaughters in the service right now. and you know what, for you to put people back over there six and seven times, that's unpatriotic. these so-called flag wavers, get your kids, your grandkids over there, and let me see if you're serious about this war or you just trying to make obama look bad. host: okay. all right, frank. more reaction from capitol hill, jim mc government american, a democrat from massachusetts tweeted this out. unless some of our soldiers weren't given shoes, we already have boots on the ground. democrat from massachusetts. senator jack reid from, rhode island, veteran himself, says that the hearing this am was -- with the secretary of defense haggle and general dempsey discuss facts to defeat ice sell and keep americans
safe. coming up next, we're going to be talking about the president's pledge to send millions of dollars in aid and the u.s. military to west africa to fight against ebola. dr. scott gottlieb joins us next to discuss the spread of ebola and the international efforts to combat the disease. later we'll be talking about representative luis gutierrez, about the future of immigration reform. we'll be right back.
>> here are a few of the comments we recently received from our viewers. >> i enjoy c-span every day, and especially i enjoy watching c-span three to watch real america every sunday afternoon at 1:00 pacific time. i love real america. i've never missed one episode. please keep real america on the c-span schedule. i say what every american says. thank god for c-span. >> c-span has gone downhill. it really has. the heritage foundation is funded by time warner and you can't say anything to criticize israel or they cut you off and they cut you off with a question, and also i want to make a comment, you have the national summit on c-span three,
which nobody watches, and some people don't even get it. and you have the israeli relations, and they were telling the truth. and they aired it. and you should have had that on c-span one, i think. >> i've been watching washington journal for many years. this show this morning is the absolute best. it's impossible for me to relate it's so good, it's over the moon. and this, in my opinion, the format of this show, and the -- how it has moved forward this morning, to me is the answer to all of our problems. because what it does is it allows all of us to see an in
department look to heaven at a specific problem or specific topic that is important to all of us, to every last one of us, not just the republicans or to the democrats, but to all of us, and it will -- these conflicts will bring good to our society. and thank you so much. my vote is that we have many, many more of these kinds of shows. just like this morning. thank you. >> and continue to let us know what you think about the programs you're watching. join the c-span conversation, like us on facebook, follow us on twitter. "washington journal" continues. host: we are joined from new york this morning by dr. scott gottlieb, a resident
scholar at the american enterprise institute to talk about these headline. dr. gottlieb, talk about the commitment that was made yesterday. what does it entail? >> well, it's a robust commitment. they will send 3,000 troops under the leader ship of the pentagon. the aid relief that we're providing includes enough money for about 17 facilities, they'll each have about 100 beds to treat affected individuals. it's a robust effort. you have to be concerned that we're late to get into this, it's going to take a good amount of time to get the resources into the region, probably most will not be set up until the early part of october. you have to give the administration credit for pulling this together. now one thing to keep in mind is those resources are only going
into liberia for the most part. there are other affected countries in that area. i think the administration is hoping that britain and france step up to help those countries, those two nations have historical ties to the region. so far the europeans have not done that. the only robust response has been from the americans. host: the front page of the "new york times" this morning says what you just said, that they want more response from other countries. and in it, they write this, that so far france has sent 13 million to guinea for two tons of medical equipment and the construction of medical centers and 15.5 million and 24 doctors to the ivory coast. british troops, the government said last week, are headed to sierra leone, a former british coul any, to build and staff a 53 bed facility near the capital of free town. dr. gottlieb, why -- what is
this money going to be used for? the united states, the continuing resolution which funds the government includes $88 million. the president is saying we're going to set aside $500 million from an overseas contingency fund. what costs so much money to fight this? >> well standing up the facilities and keeping people in that region is very expensive. and we're just -- we're playing catch up trying to get resources into those affected countries to do the tracking and tracing of people who have been stick when the virus so you can basically isolate them and reduce the number of infections at each affected individual is going to cause. and also get treatment facilities set up so you can start treating people and isolate them away from people that are healthy so you don't continue to spread the eneffects. what we're not doing enough of in my opinion is going into some of adjacent countries that either have had sporadic outbreaks of ebola or are at risk of contain june and putting
in resources in those countries to make sure that doesn't continue to spread outside the affected region. we need to think of western africa as one big hot zone right now. the entire region is affected by this and we need to be putting resources into all those nations. the u.s. has done a very good job announcing resources they'll be putting into liberia. it's natural that we would go in there. i think the europeans and the united states need to focus on the other nations in that region. host: what will the troops be doing? what role will they play? >> they're going to be helping to set up the facility, people like the army corp of engineers, helping to actually build the institutions, they're going to be helping to staff some of the institutions, particularly the facilities that will be used to treat health care workers, if they become ill. they will be used for training, as well. we'll be providing training to health care workers and other people who are going to be on
site. what they won't be doing is providing any kind of security or maintaining the quarantines, doing anything the local government is going to be doing. this is just a relief effort to set up these kind of facilities. it's not that different than what we did in haiti. this is something we've done before. host: why the military, though? >> well, quite frankly there's no other organization that has capacity and heavy lift capacity to get the resources into the region in a timely fashion. that's been the problem all along. people have been looking to international relief organizations like the world health organization. i think what we learned in this outbreak is there really isn't a body capable of doing this. you have groups like doctors without borders who haven't wanted to see military assets go in calling for it in this case,
precisely because they recognize that nobody else has the capacity to get the significant number of resources you need into these regions, not just medical equipment but also actual facilities and help stand those up, help build them up. only a military organization is capable of doing that. host: what is ebola? >> well, it's part of a family of viruses, it's similar to -- it's basically a -- it's surrounded by seven different proteins, and highly, highly ineffective, meaning once you get it you get very sick. it basically ravages the body of a very high count of the virus in your body. it's not very contagious. at least in its present form, as best we know. it can only be spread through direct contact with body fluids and sometimes through droplets, respiratory droplets, but it's not airborne in the sense of a
cold or the common flu is airborne. it can survive for an extended period of time in dry air. what it does is breaks down the immune system very quickly. it does what aids does in ten years except it does it in ten days, basically ravages the immune system. host: it's not airborne, but you have warned that possibly it mutates and could become airborne. why do you think that could happen? >> well, it is mutating. i think this is the concern that's prompting such a robust response from the united states. you heard very concerning remarks coming out of the cdc director. the most concerning statement i heard in recent memory, usually they try to temper their remarks. i think he has been out there very aggressively talking about the risks of this. the virus itself is now taiting. we know that. we have proof of that. there was a study published about maybe two weeks ago
looking at different forms of the virus that have been isolated in the current outbreak. we see it's mutating. you worry that it's going to mutate in ways that make the virus more contagious. it would be unusual for a virus to mutate in a fashion that would change its mode of infection. suddenly becomes airborne, but a lot of things that happen along the way that could change the virus into forms that are more contagious without becoming a fully airborne illness, doesn't need to be fully blown airborne virus to be able to be far more contagious. when you get infected with ebola the virus itself a lot of it is sequestered in the liver. if the virus changes where more of the virus becomes sequestered in the lungs, when people become sick they have a higher count in their lung tissue that could increase the virus to spread through respiratory droplets. so there's a lot of things that could happen to this virus that
would increase its ability to spread. that's what you worry about. there is some indication that it is spreading in its current outbreak than past outbricks. from the data we have it looks like for every new -- for every infection you have you get two new infections. in past outbreaks that figure has been 1.3 new infections for every infection. we don't know if that's because now the virus is spreading in cities where you have closer contact and higher pro density to spread or because something has happened to the virus to make it more contagious. >> i read the phrase this is an urban ebola. >> right. host: what does that mean? >> well, we've never had an experience with ebola in a city before. all the outbreaks of ebola including the original outbreak in sudan were in remote villages, remote regions, so it was easier to completely isolate those villages and contain the spread. now that it's gotten into major
cities it's hard to isolate people inside those cities. at one point the government was just basically putting up a military cordon around the entire region and forcing marshall law, not letting people leave and just figuring the virus would continue to spread and burn itself out. that's not an effective strategy but it shows you how desperate the situation is and how rapidly it's spreading in those regions. >> the estimate about a month ago was $100 million. that's the topic this morning as we discuss with dr. scott gottlieb the threat of ebola and the president's decision to send 3,000 military troops to west africa to try to combat this.
therapeutics to really change outbreak.rs of this e're relying on public health tools to isolate individuals and tracking and tracing of the people who might have been in with the virus. that's important. the s the main stay of tools used. thehis continues to spread, only thing that could be a game hanger here and change the contours of this is to introduce the therapeutic. we're close. away from hat far effective vaccines. proxies for good in what we might see humans. compounds, the cancer compounds have shown good activity against ebola.
so we are testing these things. we should focus much more effort that. it could be a game changer and we could end up needing it. million, $30 million is going to cdc. the balance is going to an called barta to underwrite development, continued development, of some therapeutics targeting ebola. to the caller's point, the nih release in 2001 announcing a successful vaccine primates to n protect against ebola. and here 13 years later, we one.t have the closest we are is an experimental vaccine that jsk is testing a company. i' i've done some work with. tests seem to be going well but months away. caller, ary, republican hi, mary? caller: yes, i just -- i'm just the fact that we bring the sick people over there
to our country and we send well soldiers, young people, there. for what purpose? i don't understand. the 't understand president. i don't understand him anyway but i don't understand him in this. americans ging sick back to the united states to be treated. ow will the soldiers be protected that are going to west africa? give president obama credit. i've been critical of him in the outbreak. credit im a lot of meeting with the individuals who was brought back. gottravel organization that sick. brought back to atlanta and treated successfully. that esident met with individual in his office. it showed the world it can be successfully treated. showed the world that individuals who are successfully treated are no longer infectious. the president wouldn't be meeting with him? e show the world that we owe
these individuals we who are willing to risk their lives and of ver there a debt gratitude. someone who does that deserves an audience with the president. a bold gesture. there's little risk of bridging americans who s, get sick. particularly americans who are trying to provide relief workers get sick. we owe it to them to bring them back here to try to bring them treatment dical possible. a viruslittle risk that would populate like that. as long as you maintain good avoid the ou can spread. as far as the individuals who do go over there, they are at risk. the individuals at the cdc and the military have more them.ces available to they ear much lower risk because they'll be able to protect themselves. ood equipment, good year, good training. the individuals who are more at risk are the health care workers there, less training, people going to work for example doctors without borders and some
americans going over to staff the clinics. as part of the announcement, the they were going to be standing up some training facilities in the u.s. to be doing this outside of alabama, i believe, provide a're going to three-day course for americans reliefverseas to provide aid, health care workers. there's a risk. you have to admire the courage in doing it. groups most aggressive here in providing health care resources on the ground has been without borders and some of the religious territories in the u.s. courageous in going in there world health organization was going out there, we do owe them a debt of gratitude. as far as why we're doing this, this does have broader applications for the u.s. if this is not stopped in africa. if we don't contain the spread will virus, the virus continue to mutate and spread.
it will spread outside of the region. control of to get this is get resources in there. it's clear, they've been degrade n terms of the health care facilities and the capacities, its's clear they're not going to on their own this host: talking with a practicing scholar and resident at american enterprise institute and the co-author of this piece washington journal. ebola's warning for an unprepared america. we can delve into that a little here.more but first, i want to show our viewers what the president had to say yesterday when he center for the controlled disease and announced to the 3,000 troops. say aboutat he had to why america needs to make this step. >> here's the hard truth. in west africa, ebola is now an pidemic of the likes that we have not seen before. it's spiraling out of control. worse.etting it's spreading faster and exponentially. oday thousands of people in
ed.t africa are infect that number could rapidly grow to tens of thousands. if the outbreak is not stopped could be looking at hundreds of thousands of people profound political and economic security of us.tions for all so this is an epidemic that is not just a threat to regional potential t's a threat to global security. if these countries break down. down.eir economies break if people panic. on alls profound effects of us, even if we're not directly contracting the disease.
adjacent the countries so far that haven't been affected or haven't been by ebola, theyly ave handfuls of cases, they're sealing borders, cutting off trade, stopping air transit. further ing to exacerbate the strain on this region. this is counterproductive. we're going to have many, many years in terms of the ability for the country to continue to grow and build out economic prosperity because of this crisis. you have the potential for failed nations as a result of this. liberia said that the head of liberia said their entire nation at risk. i don't think they would be overstating that at this point. richard in to philadelphia. independent caller. hi, richard? how are you doing? wo things, i'm trying to understand if i read the article directly. it started with one person about three months ago.
it's been mutating over the last three months at least over three countries. nd the question of how is it mutating so quickly over a short seems it's me it been in the ebola or the congo egion for a long period of time. it's been over there for ten years looking at ebola. sudden this here virus that's mutating so quick lip. and the other thing is the command. i believe in august, i believe i've seen that it was said that setting up a was particular ebola watch. s this money going to be funneled to the command and then the communities. cdcsaid individual units or
or when ever they get this money? guest: let me answer the second question first. announcingnt will be that they'll set up a second command, even monrovia, the of liberia where we have cases.of that will be the command center for the country. command utting the center and resources in the hot zone. as far as mutation -- and the undergone some drift over time. there are five different versions of ebola if you will identified.en but the issue with the virus, its's a single strand of rna. that means is it e's -- when replicates, it breaks apart. it's a sloppy replicator, if you will. it replicates, one virus grows into two to three viruses, of the structure of the virus, it's prone to mistakes.
you get a lot of reassortment, the changes along the way. the other thing is people get sick with ebola, they have a call viral load. the facts combined the fact that individual has billions of viral particles in their blood and every time the virus even in the individual, you're going get a lot of changes in a virus ecause it's such a sloppy replicator as the virus goes. that leads to excessive mutations. we've known that about ebola. what we've never had before is an outbreak of this magnitude. you're literally getting billions and billions of reassortments of this virus for every infected individual. you're goinghance, some that are going to be changes. mean that because one individual somewhere develops a mutation in the virus that could
it more contagious that that particular viral particle oes on the affect another individual. that's -- that's part of why you want to contain individuals, you to quarantine people to spread the virus. but it does create the potential could have a breakout new strain of ebola that has qualities that make it distributed. this what's driving response. the president is explicit. you would expect u.s. officials measured in these kinds of situations to not want unnecessary anxiety on the part of americans. i think the fact they have been this is loudable. they're being honest about the risk. thei also think it reflects magnitude of just what the concerns are. if this was to continue. host: minnesota, ronald, democratic caller.
caller: i had one question on some of the news programs, they were showing somebody coming in canada or der in -- they're saying down in mexico that there's people that have ebola. and they can come across. this be -- can it be vial or powder or dry? or held t be carried that long? doesn't it have to be from a person? guest: you could have an infected blood sample. concerned about people trying to bring it in in a terrorist-type scenario brings in a vial of tainted blood, but people travelling from the to on who come in proximity the virus and get on a plane and come back to the united states. he virus has an incubation period of up to 21 days so you could incubating the disease, it it, have theosed to
virus, and feel fine for up to three weeks. o there's at least the possibility and it's probable that we will see cases in the u.s. that people will go over, it.xposed to catch the virus, come back here, and not become sick until they are here. in the past seen errorist groups trying to look at using ebola as a weapon of bioterrorism. group in japan that et off the sarin attack a number of years ago in the subway system prior to them sing the gas, i think that's the gas they used. they have been reported to and now it's documented that they sent some individuals to -- congo, to get a sample of it for terrorism. i guess there's the risk that someone could go to the region nd get access to the virus easily. but more likely, the scenario that's going to play out here in
u.s. is going to be just travelers that don't know do know and they want to come back here and get medical care and do come to the with the virus and potentially affect other people. caller.mike, democratic you're on the air with dr. scott gottlieb, go ahead. caller: i believe that they're alking about the targeted therapy. i have stage four lung cancer and being treated. it's uke university, wonderful. nd far too long we cared more about money than we have our in africa tions underprivileged, whatever, i feel like it's time that we show our american spirit. ost: go on to russell in
riverview, florida. republican caller. russell, what are your questions this morning? or comments? caller: i think it's just travellers. outbreak in new york, how fast will it spread? if you don't check people coming in, that means quarantine them when they come in or whatever. so you know, you're not carrying it. host: should there be travel bans? guest: i don't think it should be travel bans. it's productive. it will prevent resources from region.o the we should be. we are stepping up surveillance entry.ts of i don't see how customs and cdc, customs and border patrol fully deploy resources. there was an alert. was an additional health screening tools there. they are doing, you know, uestionnaires and some random checks. they've also put in more resources in to some of the are going to be the likely catch areas to this.
here are we likely to see ebola? have people you coming back and forth to western africa. people travelling to any part of country. to play the probability, you want to make sure that the are well staffed and briefed on what to look forward to. to. host: what technology do they screen for ebola or other diseases. host: the best tool they have questionnaires. they haven't instituted routine questionnaires of everyone. the capacity have to do thick things like take
people's temperature. it might not be as efficient. people might not be sick. need to consider is putting in place tracking and tracing mechanisms so when the e come over from infected region, we screen them and do some follow-up where three, five, sure they later to didn't become sick after they got here. people early and anyone you may be in contact prevent t's how entellics in the first place. we have the resources and the time to do it. to the this is coming u.s. what you want to prevent is outbreaks. you want to prevent clusters of infections. you want to make sure people do come over, you can isolate it. last five in the year, ten incidents of in the u.s.fevers not ebola, but others, close cousins of ebola. case, in each of the others , there were no
that brought it here. have the capacity to contain this. >> what's the difference between epidemic, pandemic. an outbreak -- it's all lex kolling. it's no clear definition. outbreak is local. an outbreak in the school. nd epidemic might be in the midwest with the echo virus where you're seeing hundreds of thousands of cases within a certain region. a pandemic is typically multi-continent. so in this case, people have started to refer to the ebola an reak in africa as epidemic because it's affecting many nations. if it goes to the other ontinent, you have to use the word pandemic. some people think it's a pan democrat eck now because it's area, ifg more than one you will. most folks are saying it's an
epidemic. host: philadelphia, janet is watching us there, an independent caller. good morning. got to get your dog under here.l let geese to yolanda in mansfield, ohio. caller.can yolanda, go ahead. caller: hi, yes. was just calling -- i mean my hair stood on end when i heard the president wants to send 3,000 of our troops over to fight ebola? i think maybe we should have experts, people trained in the health field. guys, they're trained to fight. this is something they're not trained for. this scares me to death. doctor?s that true, guest: people going over medical personnel by in large or logistics or build facilities. we're not sending front line or special forces to fight ebola. there are a lot of resources on theses specifically
kinds of infectious diseases. those are the individuals that are going over. krvshgs dc is deploying a lot of individuals that work on special pathogens. so we do have those resources. quite frankly, if you ear in the pathogens ks on hot like this, you want to be there. this is the place to be. this is where you're going to training,of important a lot of important insight to this outbreak. potentially, if it does come here to the united states. so there's value of having some of the individuals in the very region. that not just providing relief aid, we're continuing to learn about epidemic. we've never seen anything like this before. this does have global phone shl. host: the "usa today" saying --
late to this. was criticizing for not reacting earlier. it's hard to motivate governments and get bureaucracies to do things. fact they could pull it together deserves a not. they pulled together a pretty robust response yesterday. to escalate it even more. the way to keep it from coming it over there.t if it isn't snuffed out over there, there's the potential of hundreds of thousands of individuals. we get to that order of magnitude. that seems like the likely scenario right now. see spread outside of that region. if it continues to spread among individuals over there, we're mutations in the virus itself that could make it more contagious and make it harder to treat. have got to get the resources in to that region that and containeat this
it and quell it. the reality is, as we're seeing it right now, no other country is prepared enough to step up to do this. have an nd france historical obligation to some of he nations in the region badly affected by this, their response so far has been minimal. the again, it will fall to united states do this. host: back to janet, philadelphia, independent caller. hi, janet. caller: hi. can you hear me? yes, i had you on speakerphone. don't know if someone else asked this question, why can't we just send the vaccine over there. wish we had one. yeah, there's a couple of vaccines in development, some that look promising. developed with the canadian government, a biotechnology company.
further one looks along. laxosmithkline is undergoing testing. they tested it in 10 healthy with no s so far eported adverse effects and demonstrated to be effective in monkeys. not easy. you need boosters to maintain effects.ine's the effects don't last in perpetuity. you need to be reboosted. it gets deployed in the near term, it will be likely to be eployed first in health care workers. there are promising therapeutics in vaccines. i think we must be doing more to accelerate the development of these. view in ms to be a public health circles as with raditional public health pools of tracking, tracing, uarantining people, that's all well and good.
to do that is to increasing the therapeutics. host: in "the wall street is warning for an unprepared america saying something eutics is the country needs to address along with detection. brian in dallas, texas, independent caller, go ahead, brian. caller: yes, you haven't sending athat cuba is large contingent of doctors over there. my question is, are we going to politics aside and coordinate with these doctors or play politics take longer to solve problems. guest: cuba sent over 155 personnel and laboratory facility. oing to stand up a hospital to treat. they went to another country. sierra leon. or
they didn't go to liberia. it looks like the u.s. is taking getting resources into liberia. in part it's because of the ties with the nation. the u.s. troops will not be as welcome in other nations as they liberia.in that seems to be our obligation right now. and quite frankly, liberia is hardest hit so it will resources.e most the fact that we're focusing thing s probably a good host: cedar park, texas, call er ic caller: do they check to make coming to ot mosquitos? yellow fever they didn't know it mosquitos. from it took months and months. are they locating eating the meat. nd again, please, people quit panickings, that's what's causing us to shrink from the
problem. at it and knock it down like we always do. okay. guest: it's believed it's coming from battles. transmit it through feces to ransmit it to monkey s humans. it comes from the bats and ransmitted to humans or transmitted to monkeys for things like bush meet and people will get the virus from the monkeys. host: thank you very much for your time this morning. conversation. appreciate it. guest: thank you. host: coming up next -- >> the justice department says the team of criminal justice
researchers will conduct a of racial bias in law enforcement in five american cities. experts will suggest strategies to address the problem across the country. not yet e cities have been selectled. new report by the inspector of ral of the department health and human services says 90% of the hospitals in the to heast were not prepared deal with the aftermath of super storm sandy. hardest hits in the areas in new york, most of connecticut, all of new jersey. problems cited included difficulties in getting fuel and failures. financial markets are awaiting the end of a federal reserve to see whether the fed sends any clear signal about the timing of an interest rate increase. the phrase that investors will be alert for is, quote,
a member of the hispanic caucus. i want to ask you about the vote take later today to arm and train syrian rebels. vote? you plan to guest: i don't know yet. a robust debate six or seven today. i'm inclined to vote in favor of army and supplying the syrian others.d i think the assad regime should be toppled. it's fascist regime that does people.e things to nd if the people of syria want to fight, we should make it much more level. i haven't made a decision. inclination, to help them. host: "the new york times" dempsey's ut general testimony on the senate side yesterday raising the possibility of ground troops in syria. "new york times" saying what new ntelligence is there that he
would raise this possibility? you sit on the panel. guest: this is what happens when you answer a question fully and honestly and all of the can extrapolate from anything there might be a need. a -- a pilot in a jet, he's knocked down, knocked air.f the do we send troops in to rescue him? i imagine so. we're looking at the possibilities. we're not talking about operation storm or operation esert storm or operation hatever where you put together armed forces to go in by the of thousands. there's the fear of the creeping. today, 400 tomorrow, 1,000, someone gets
captured. we need more people. need toomething that we be very, very cognizant of. host: "the washington times" the danger of a government shutdown receded to day as the house voted take up a stop gap spending bill hat bypasses the thorpe debate that had threatened to ensnare congress in a deadline showdown. what do you make of the shift? it is a umber one, if shift, it's the correct shift. i think at this particular point. the president is going to act. act.congress has refused to they're not going to take up immigration reform in any way.antial meaningful let's do something substantially meaningful that we can say we today.r job so as we look moving forward, i hink it is an appropriate debate that we have.
i think the president is doing the right thing. thing by the right making sure that the congress of the united states has an discuss, ty to debate, and vote. members of the house and senate should just shut up until they've taken a vote. opinions on the cable night shows and on the sunday and here on shows c-span about what the president doing do or whether he's a good job, do a vote. the president of the united going to use the executive authority until after the election. what do we hear? whether we're going take a vote. n whether the president of the united states should expand his authority beyond the authority
already granted by congress to iraq to syria. host: you think the president is doing the right thing on isis., and on guest: i think the president is doing. he's taking many correct steps yes.sis, and i want to make clear that i think he's taking the right steps in that, there's a debate. there's a discussion. it's not a unilateral decision on the part of the president. there's a robust -- i think any you think about war and committing men and women and lives, it should be a robust debate. host: did the president do the by delaying action on immigration? i think what is fair and just should never have political partisan consideration. i understand that the president make sure wants to that it's done the right way and that this will give him time, he the sentence,d of after the election.
any time you say after the election, it's like saying there on my e a referendum actions, i won't do it until after the election. i think that speaks to why so of the american public of n't have a high opinion politics in general and the congress in particular. host: isn't it wise, to wait until e after the election so you have a democratically controlled senate agrees? guest: i get that. people alwayse is say it's the smart thing to do, the wise thing to do. he smart and wise thing to do politically for your party. it doesn't necessarily mean you get justice or fairness or good policy you can be proud of. i would rather be clear and transparent. believe it's it's sary, uh you believe
necessary today. justice and fairness. you're thinking about the lives of the five senators? fine.e going to be just the democratic party will be just fine. the tens of thousands of people unnecessarily deport the tens of thousands who their mom and dad in the interim period is who we should be concerned about. concerned about the lives and children and families in america, not just the politicians. ever a good time for the president to act unilaterally on this issue? put it in context. the president of the united states has worked. year, in june of last year approved a comprehensive immigration reform bill. i checked, 68-32.
and senior citizen voted for the proposition we should secure our borders. ways to secure our borders and make america safer s by fixing the system in its totality. and they voted for it. new york times. "the washington post" or "the new york times," they agree. how about "the wall street journal" and the new york times. have different opinions. i read them both, just in case you're going to ask me what i is a trick question later on. i read them both. diamet rishgs cally opposed opinions on so many topics.t not on immigration. afl-cio, unions, the the teamsters down the street from here. commerce.hamber they spend literally tens if not hundreds of millions of dollars to try to influence the outcome
of legislation there. evangelicals and catholics, hindus, mine, s, muslims, religious community together. we need to fix our broken immigration. like the only place you can't find consensus is in the house of representatives. host: senate majority leader this tweet. since house republicans have ailed to act on immigration, i know the president will. when he does, i hope he goes real big. what because real big mean? guest: i hope he does. the president has taken action in terms of taking the broke up system and making deportation somewhat more umane in that he has prioritized them. right? what does that mean?
dealers, rapists, murderers, drug dealers. we should get rid of them right away. let's say for a moment you've been here ten years, 15 years. american is an citizen. american citizen children. hould you be a target for deportation because the congress can't act given that the senate is already acting. hat would most american people think should happen to that individual. given a chance for is own expense given a work permit in the interim period. we could set millions of people aside. nd we would no longer have to ment dollars on ment them. we can use it on other people who do present a danger to america. host: phone calls. brent is up first.
charleston, west virginia. caller: thank you for taking my call. host: good morning. guest: good morning. one r: it boils down to question, will the federal government enforce federal laws or will it not? will it selectively choose which aws it will enforce and which laws it will ignore based on expediency. i and millions of americans believe this issue has been and is about and will a massive bout democratic party voter drive.ration it was historically shown that hispanics voted republican, left would be quiet on this issue. i think our immigration system a curious thing what happened in the country in the last 30 years.
runave a federal government mostly by democrats at the ongressional level, in the congressi congressional --s the legislative brafrm branch. enforce refused to certain immigration laws and coming to us and saying, oh, the system is broken. wouldn't have m been broken -- the system would not be in the condition that lawsin had our immigration been enforced completely and the fically and fairly in first place. try to do ng to justice. the politics of it -- the last in 1986, amnesty, congress passed the immigration reform and control act. people ed 3 million undocument in the united states to get access to green cards, most people as would understand them. and most of the people today are citizens of the united states. but guess what? it wasn't democrats that led the
gett for those 3 million to legalized. guess who it was? it was ronald reagan. he campaigned for that in 1984. and really was a clamp i don't know of immigrant rights having from california. e would see apple groves, orchards, and say who's going to pick those apples. so, look, this is not in the been a democrat and republican issue. the immigrant community has received help. loved ublican party had to talk about ronald reagan and in his spirit and his image. issue of t in the immigration. let's all, number two decide we want to enforce all of but aws of the country we're not going to have the federal government organize a mass roundup of 11 million or people. it's not going to happen. it's not feasible.
there are 5 million american are part ildren that of the 11 million undocumented. it's not going to happen. we're not going do create that police force that's already been looked at and nobody actually proposes that, one.r but what we can do is we can ask people to come forward and in he future, put the kinds of laws in the books that don't allow people to simply be here undocumented. one of them is this one. it's the one insupport. i think moving forward we'll help to settle this. we need a verification system in the united states of america which says two things, number one, if you want have to go , you through the verification system. and if the employer puts you to pays you without, you haven't gone to the verification system, he goes to jail. your ike you don't pay taxes, you go to jail. you go to jail if you hire undocumented workers that don't go through the verification system. that's a genuine way to solve our broken immigration system. host: to beth in illinois.
democratic caller, you're on the air. caller: hi, so glad i got to gutierrez.sentative i have so much respect for you in a committee meeting, you made illegal nt that all immigrants do not cross the border. planes, ships, and boats. i think sometimes it comes down to as i listen to the republican side mostly, is a prejudice the mention cab people. they're poor, work hard, coming as a representative from a different class.
i don't think there's an understanding of these people, no respect. and yet people who come and visas, they're not looked at. there's no plan to look at the belong to.t they guest: sometimes in answering a you may come off as being elitist. so with that caveat, look -- educator. the fact is that americans are of ing better educated all the time. but somebody has to work the fields. somebody has to. have not spent the last 30 years, right, raising my family and making g them sure one daughter graduated already with her bachelor's working on other is the phd. so they can do filthy work under the son picking onions in texas.
ot trying to say that isn't valuable work. that's my point. it is necessary and valuable rewarded.hould be but we all know who does that work. and it's not my kid. of growingt the kids populations. pick mebody is going to our food and make sure our agriculture system is strong here in america. they. >>er going to pick what we eat here in america and pick what we eat in foreign countries and then it's brought here. how do you want to do it. going to pick re our food. so the question is always that. and second lip, i just want to time they ow every say secure the border, secure the border. if they would secure the border. bluff. even if you did everything they wanted and we have done much of they still nted, won't vote for it because the senate bill included 20,000 more agents but won't take up the bill in the house, number one.
numb beer two, secure the border? border are you talking about? but they always foe does on the border because they always want on mexico. to focus on ant central america. the 11 inute, five of million to 12 million undocumented workers in this country didn't across that border. sealed it, you would still have millions. how did they come here? on tourist visas. host: this is a debate that's reoccurring as par it of the strategy against isis. gotten a back-and-forth with sean hannity on fox over some are saying that isis could come across the exico border guest: sure, but that's not the real present threat. e're going to use all of our resources on the border. but what happens with sean hannity and the fox news network all they want to talk about. they want you to be afraid of those brown people crossing the mexico.rom it might do great things for their ratings, but it didn't
make you safer. if you simply focus on that border. about the border of j.f.k., l.a.x. san francisco, ? what about all of the other people have. let me that i can this clear -- as a member of the intelligence committee, i can tell you that are 2,000 at least isis militant s militants jihadists that are sure we -- let's make get this clear, right? our westerners. in france, born italy, oh, england, by the hundreds. unfortunately, we fighting with -- orn in this country, fighting alongside of those islamists. they can come back to this. foret's just think about it a moment. hmm, i'm going to cross the rio
grande, the desert. we have tens of thousands of border patrol agents to come to america. exactly what the group from hamburg did that caused such devastation and pain our country on september 11. i can get a visa, turn that in , which they did, back 2001 to a student visa, then cause damage in america. but this time they don't have to do that. there are not visas required for to visitpean countries the united states of america. we know that there are 2,000 eople being trained today in they present the danger, the greatest danger to us if we're going to look at them. i'm not saying don't secure the border, they have put ample forces on the border. you leave america vulnerable to the attack. host: i want to be clear. question of whether or not isis is trying to come across the mexican border. access to the intelligence. is it a possibility?
always a 's possibility. but if you're going to put your out -- s, think this look at the pass. why would they change. 911 ou look at the commission, right? what do they say was crucial in of al qaeda choosing those people to come and attack us. you know what they said? get visas to enter the united states of the united states of america. host: mark, go ahead. morning, c-span. caller: i'm with an organization c-40 s investigating the cities leadership group. and your name keeps coming up in this. this group?mber of if so, could you tell us about it? treasonous organization wants to throw the government out by 2040 in favor
brazil. guest: i can't help you on that one. somebody ave thought would bring something i don't know anything about. host: good morning. caller: a couple of things. i wanted to thank you guys for a now.e in terms of the -- yeah, i -- i see the information issued there. a lot of them just lost interest in politics and i feel it's it.ost passion towards and i see why there's things that we cover there. so one thing with the -- you know, with the -- there's always a border. border language on that one. thing. one it's not that. i myself i grew up here undocumented and i have it covered and i went through degree i have a double my bachelor's, and got it right on time and it happened. job. a i'm blessed on that.
on that subject. can you bring -- i lost my card.t and the fact that they literally the card, you have to pay the full price of application to get the card back. host: congressman? guest: it probably isn't unfair. not something that congress dictates. the department of homeland apply for ys if you the american citizenship, a all of the a visa, things need to occur without a taxpayer money. subsidy.no so i imagine when he loses something, the processing fee and whatevercessed the cost is, it must -- it must that's by the person requesting the service.
subsidy no government to it. host: two tweets for your here. congressman gutierrez did and sandy wants to know you announce for certainty that president obama was going to amnesty before labor day? what happened. guest: i didn't announce it. said since the republican congress would not take up immigration reform, he executive from an position to do the same by the summer. so i guess labor day is a good way to put it. end of summer. sounds good to me. i said that's a poor decision on not following through on the promise. the president has and this is in the law, hed broad authority when it comes to issues.ion
he has a responsibility to take resources of the government and put them where they do best safest.p us point; in 2012, we spent $18 billion in immigration 2012.ement in that's more money than the federal government spent on the dea, the etf, on all other federal enforcement, on that enforcement. point being that, look, you have limited resources. spending a lot of money. you have limited resources, bad guys.fter the if somebody's been here, going o repeat this, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, years. they're working. they established roots in their community. shown themselves. ready to go to the federal government, go through an back ground check, work n't we give them a permit so they can live with their american citizen children wifeover husband. that's what the president is talking about, taking the
immigration system and fixing it. farmers out there, farmers, american farmers, right? red, white, and blue. they need workers, a stable workers. the president may say and i hope saying a reculture dirty, filthy, back-breaking work. and you would say, wow, you know what, we should give those people a break because there's nobody else in america ready to that. we need to bring stability to the economy and the high-tech industry. host: guest worker programs? guest: no. say the president can do is they're a necessary part of our economy. they're doing great work. they ear not criminals. and there ain't nobody else in america going to do that work. farmer, american united american --
states citizen father-in-lawers of the work you need. ain't nobody going to respond to that kind of work. caller: you've said so many outrageous.are let's start with fact that you homeland security and tsa absolutely do not work. that they're broken. ecause you're -- they're not going to come through the mexican border. we're not going to have any trouble there. they ear going to come through airplane. they ear going to come through on a student visa. that's like sticking your head and saying, you know what? they have ten different ways to come in. not going to come in only one way. we've had situations already on that are not rder mexican people coming from northern countries. that's just a fact. we do need some -- guest: you got that from fox
news network, i'm sure. from the fox news network. i can see you watch fair and balanced news network. but here's the fact. the fact is i didn't say that. i said we should have security at our border. demonstrated to you that we're spending $18 million atf, than we spent on the dea, and others on enforcement when it comes to enforcement of policies.n we doubled the number of border patrol agents. quadruple it. we are taking actions. point, you need immigration oken system first. because it's kind of like the doctor says to you, hey, by the you're ill, i'm going to medicine.ome men but you don't follow your diet or do exercise. what good is it if you don't follow a complete regime to make
you healthy. that's my point. f you want to secure the border, border security, if you just focus on the border, when from e that they came hamburg. you know there are 2,000 fighters, islamic fighters that westerners with passports visas to t require come to the united states of america and american citizens ighting alongside of them, a little bulb should light up in your head and say, wow, this is the way they did it before. tell you, they use heir twitter feed and other facebook. because it's what the enemy always wants you uh to do. coming this way, this way, we're coming this way. to -- it's a focus on area you're not coming through. ne thing is, they're terrible, violent people.
5 million of the 11 million didn't come through the border. in the united states today two dozen fighter get to the united states of from a because they come western country or because they're american citizens. host: independent caller. caller: good morning, greta. good morning, america. time. to hold for a long i was getting a headache. it's worse than a car salesman here. have a question, a statement, and a comment. i always wondered this, what is briefly l crime, very can you tell me? for crossing the border. 18 years and up. visa.ve an expired you come across the border. illegally. what is the actual crime? is it a misdemeanor, a felony, quickly?t real guest: to be caught crossing
the border to the united states. caller: fair enough. my comment is what you said about ronald reagan, looking atr the hill, you're looking apple trees and he said who's going to pick these apples. said. that's what he caller: what you're talking lucifer did s what to eve. guest: car salesman, lucifer. it's a brisk morning. to roll my not eyes, so i'm trying not to. host: so your statement real quick. caller: so my comment here is you took a row to protect our borders. thank god for the constitution. we're supposed to obey the law. the lay politics with constitution. there are isis people, there are terrorists coming across our now, sir.order right protect our border. ecause on this issue, you're our enemy. uest: lucife, enemy, used car salesman. thank you for those wonderful
comments. who would have thought c-span how would i say it? so spicy first thing in the morning. irst of all, look, i love this country. i want to protect this country. let demagoguery take me away from the foe does protecting the united states of america. more resources on the border. no one has done more than i do. what you got. this gentleman and others would say don't do anything, secure the border. what do you get? no progress at all. a system thathave we have more and more people let's have d, i say a, wore verification system. let's send companies, officials to jail that hire undocumented -- you don't hear about it. cornerstone ofey fixing the broken immigration
system. have to fix ay you its totality. if you go down and say we need immigration reform if we're the border secure. he asked the question. illegally entering the country. okay? ask me. what is the number one crime level ted at the federal under the barack obama administration? illegal re-entry to the united states. number one crime. drugs or kidnapping, for your own satisfaction, prosecuting the criminals. host: pike creek, texas. bea, a republican. here's that caller: thank you. mr. gutierrez. i'm from the rhee you grande originally. i'm in my late 70s. guest: where do you live now? caller: i have seen a lot of things. you take the cake. first of all, why are you illegal immigration? nd second of all, why are we
using our tax dollar to give cell people welfare, phones, food, and everything else? and you're not helping the united states guest: it's illegal. it.y don't receive legal immigrants, that is to say the uniteditizens of states but are naturalized and take a group of those of us like you aned born here in this country. you will see the rates of using higher among h those of us born in the united states than those who came from and became tries naturalized citizens. that's a fact. to ow that everybody wants fold everything into one and now the latest thing is the cell phone. i don't know where it comes from. i haven't seen these cell phones. but the latest thing is, they're on welfare. it's illegal. you cannot obtain welfare.
ven if you come legally to the united states, your sponsor is responsible for you. and you are -- when you look at comprehensive immigration reform package in the senate, here's what it said. "we will allow you to legalize. years, you first ten are ineligible under the structure and the rums of the immigration and the reform big in the senate, you're means tested any program." host: care, welfare? guest: kate a minute. barack obama said i'm for reform, but they can't use my famous, you know, obama care. they're ineligible. their own y use money, they cannot join the health care system that the rest american, even using their own money. can you learer message send? i think people want to take a
a reality that just doesn't fit the actual facts. leesburg, next to virginia, democratic caller. claudio, go ahead. yes, good morning. host: good morning. it was good to hear you stick up for the right thing to immigration. i came through the border. americans are f like that. ignorant. history, you ead know? i become citizen in 1995. make us read history and all kinds ns of stuff. a lot of americans don't go through that. they're born here. hey don't read history of the united states. they don't know about texas -- all of the new mexico and years ago was mexican
territory. a lot of them were pushed down south, a lot of them were here because of medical conditions or whatever. americans need to educate the history of the united states. guest: let me say this. my mom and dad came from puerto 1952.in if we were to open up the newspaper, the "new york times," as new york newspapers hundreds of thousands of puerto icans began to arrive in the early '50s in america, we would have read stories about they're tropical diseases. they're going to be unwealthy. they're going to be on welfare. he same argument that you hear today were made against my mom and dad. dadi assure you, my mom and worked very hard for every cent they spent. they worked very hard. to send their d son to college.
i don't think they only taught it's speak spanish though the only language that they knew when they came here. every effort to aculture and assimilate to and made sure that their son would have the opportunity to be a member of congress. that's the story of america. arguments that they make today against immigrants today, name re you, if your last is o'malley or o'rourke, they irish, thegainst the germans, the chinese. they were wrong then. they ear wrong today. immigrants are a vital part of american economy and of nation. as a they make wonderful contributions and they make us the wonderful place that i know we all love to live at. host: this headline -- if they do not prove their
they'll lose the health care they're getting on the obama care exchange. guest: it wasn't the republican congress. obama had put that in the bill on.ly yesterday the census bureau just issued some more statistics. know, the that, you incomes of americans was pretty with the year, exception of -- hispanics. here was an increase in income among hispanics in this country. ook, sometimes the facts are hard to have to deal with. but ity will facts are better. not a fiction show. > marion next in elston, virginia. democratic caller. good morning to you. caller: good morning. taking my call. conversation icy this morning. guest: yes. caller: minute question to this is a concern to democrats, independents, and
republicans on immigration. think what you have to understand from the callers is that we feel pinched. an area in virginia that is very, very poor. if there promise you would be plenty of americans here where i live that would be to take onions. but for a liveable wage, not for under es they're doing the table. guest: good point. caller: my thing, we're talking about the wrong issue. o please, republicans, listen to this. million visas e we give out every year. ost of those -- those of them staying, 11 million that are here, have overstayed those visas. we do something cut simple, which would be those visas that we give in half until americans that are here -- a legitimate complaint that they want the job and they
can't get one because they're who are with people coming here illegally or visas.ying the that's a fair argument with the american people. guest: i agree. let's fix it. one thing i will agree. it's an argument that i make. million undocumented workers in america undercut the wages for the rest of us. just do. employers are going to say i can pay these people less. so how do we raise the wages for all. legalize the 11 million. it's for that or have this lewds of an idea that you're going to round up 11 million people. and by the way, no one had that idea. no one has said, here's minute -- here are the resources, the economic resources. here's all of the things that we're going have to put together at the federal level and let's round them up, 11 million people, no. if we're not going to do that seems to me the sensible thing to do was to do what we did in 1986.
forward, that moving we put two things in place that are very important -- is the people are able to come here according to the needs that we have. while the woman -- and i will do, shegument said at a wage. that's what's important. at a wage. people who argue for -- against immigration reform will tell you, "it's to have $7.45 as the minimum wage. propose to will the minimum wage. if you're going to do the beket, you need everybody to in the market equally. not only do the salaries and the undocument i go p, which increases our purchasing power and stimulates the economy, because they're competing. americans also increase. i agree with her.
let's just remember. increase.u're going to i'm a proponent. in seat seat. $15,000 minute mudge wage. it's tough living on $30,000 a year in the united states of america. raising a family of four. so i think $15 an hour increasing wages. ost: dean, our last, republican. go ahead, dean. taking myhank you for call. i appreciate the fact you're tanding by and taking these questions. i want to state first of all, i'm retired army. that goes family back to the civil war days. i serve with members from puerto rico. respectful of the .nited states we all got along.
work vp worked together. they don't want to be the 51 rz question, but that's not my question. many immigrants are intelligent. free school, many cases, ducation all the way up to college. they become doctors, lawyers, get into politics. those tion is why not do in the country from which they from? why not go back from where they in inated from, do that their country. make their country better. to take over our country in a silent fashion. guest: they're not coming here country in a ur silent fashion. clearly they are here. voices, raising their they are anything but silent. they're not coming over to take over our country. that's always been the argument. the irish going back, oh, those irish, they're catholic.
anglo saxson ite protestant. the only fidelity will be to the pope. i guess when john f. ken dip was elected, the president of the states, it's settled," that's it. once and for all. immigrants come to contribute to america. they just don't. i'll give you an example. the president uses the executive authority in june of 2012. he says it doesn't make sense to oundish children for the actions of their parents. $1.2 here were about million documented youth in america that came here as children. as so he said, you know what, i'm going to allow them to get work permits. dreamers.lled we see them everywhere. there are 700,000 of them. tell you something, they don't get -- even though they permit, a social security card, face like mine,
people are smart and caring and loving. driver's licenses, that's to say they get to go to work. qualify for pell grant, not one cent of government assistance. the tuition ey pay the old fashioned way, they work and play it down. of n't know this myth taking -- having found them. i wish someone -- because it's ind of like the ronald reagan story of the welfare lap dip, right? living the life of lar jetsz that we found out it didn't exist. he was mythical. there seems to be other mythical people. i understand that in america there are a lot of people who are having a hard time making ends meet. a better job to address their needs. but the undocumented immigrants are not their enemies. allies. friends and we should try to figure out a way to unite working men and
together across america. they're not enemies. real lip, the interests are so similar. host: thank you, sir. appreciate the conversation. been a pleasure. host: coming up next, the c-span bus big ten tour today with the university of illinois at urbana champagne. nd we'll be talking to the provost there. right after this news update from c-span radio. who's who of current and former lawmakers as well as parties ts from both start today to draup a plan to social security. jobs and balance the budget. the no labels group wants to a iver that plan just over year from now, just as the next presidential campaign startles to rev up. passed a bill last night to make it a little horder or people to use government welfare payments to buy marijuana in states where the
drug is legal. the bill would prevent people government-issued elfare debit cards to make purchases at stores that sell mash. it would prohibit people from withdraw cash to from atms in these stores. federal law prevents people to use welfare debit stores, casinos, and street clubs. finally, question beck vat separatist will be watching losely to see if the scottish movement has failed from their attempts to break away from canada. rejuvenated if scotland does vote to break away from the united kingdom. party that's cleaning this vote gn for scotland to yes has been advised over the quebec.y separatists in province where
host: with university presidents is part of c-span bus's big ten tour. the we continue with university of illinois and the c-span bus this morning is the university to join us for this conversation. let me begin with what you see as the top challenges for higher education? guest: well, good morning. we sit incation where the middle of the prairie in the issue of access and affordability, for young improve themselves in the world, access and affordabilit affordability. the cost of higher education has gone up many years. figure out as a
country and individual institutions how to make it accessible to young people. because education is transformational. experiences make the whole individual. citizens of great any country, especially the democratic environment. so how are you doing that? he university of illinois at urbana champagne is in state is 15,000. out of state, 30,000. come in and board can at nearly $11,000? guest: yes, indeed. over the last many years, we've terms ed our efforts in of financial aid. we have over -- we're giving in financial on aid. and we've been going out to our alumni trying to
raise scholarship funds. four or five s, reasons that the student don't accept the invitation to join illinois is ily at mone money. funding, tuition. so we recognize this completely. the major problem is the funding over the last many years for institutions like ours. us to really go out. education is powers, especially higher education. at the increase in employment, in economic country, t, for the education, especial lip higher is critical to making abun tant in terms of
the country. we're making sure that our aid for student, go out, raise scholarship fund so across bring everybody the economic spectrum to the university of illinois. what role should the federal government play, do you hink, sir, in providing affordable college university american students? student loan. more student loan with the lower interest rates, that would be the students. lower interests on the loan. of here, they ut
will not be burdened and have a lot of debt on their head. be proud on our low s that we have a default rate. and the loan on our student is lower than the national median. we're proud of that. but we believe there's room for the federal government to really make a big impact on students. families and the university as a whole to be a bedrock of a democratic society. ost: at the university of illinois at urbana champagne, you have 19-1 student-to-faculty ratio. 150 undergrad majors. 84% six-year graduation rate. so it takes over four years. 84% of student there is are taking six years to graduate. in 2013, your research
expenditure, over $743 million. is your job placement record for those students that re graduating from the university of illinois? guest: very, very high. 8500 year we had over companies visiting our campus, top g to recruit the talents from our campus. and probably more than 100 of fortune 500 companies come to our campus. it's very, very high. not showing the specific number right now. we're sure that the talent we have at the university of desirable, they're high rate.a we bring our best to the table the rms of what i call workhorse and a racehorse pproaches and talents for this country.
when you look -- my understanding is that c-span is through the big ten. e have a cic counterpart, the aspects of the big ten. work together, collaborate in programs, alsoic collaborate in terms of what the administrative program. the total u look at produce the e largest number of talents for this country. doing is plan is presently is exposing and bringing to the country the terms ofthe big ten in national development in economic our society.n host: our goal here as part of the monthlong series of nterviews with university presidents is to talk about the issues of higher education. this morning our guest is the provost of the university of illinois. to invite viewers to
join in on this conversation. we divided the lines by students, parents, educators. 202-585-3880. the student of any university, not just the university of illinois. parents as well. kids heading to college, we want to hear what your concerns rshgs 202-585-3881. educators, the same, 202-585-3882. and illinois residents, 202-585-3883. i want to get your concerns, and comments on higher education here. how do you address the curriculum at the university of illinois to make sure it's job skills and what companies need in the workforce?
guest: the fundamental role is for critical nts thinking and to partake in society itself. just being a job shop is not has the practice of each individual major as students can go out and be productive in society. we know that students many things in their lifetime. engineering school, business school, we have our own attributes. if you look at the totality of ies, the social sciences contribute to the training of students at the fundamental level. university of illinois is doing and great institutions like this are doing to make sure that students are only prepared for just one
job, but able to transition from a lifetime.ver that's our philosophy. 's the philosophy of vocational s, schools that prepare students faculty lly for some jobs. we prepare the whole individual to become leaders in society. month, student in rose california. go ahead, tony caller: hi. after not to school being in for quite sometime. and i go to a very nice university. there's also a lifetime limit on how much the government will help you. a new law in place that pell grants for
so many years. that's not helping people who ent to school earlier in the '90s and are returning to school now because now i'm on the limit federal ch the government is going to help me. so i would like for you to that.ss thanks. thanks. for your call.ou the main chancellor, myself, we ave a foundation and we're orking very, very assiduously to make sure we're helping people like you. we're raising money for scholarship, grants, and people here and get a very ood education our issue is raising money and provide grants and scholarships to everybody that's interested in coming to university. so as i mentioned previously, decrease in state funding in
the last many years has been a challenging to all of us, to say a truth. but over a long term, you find great institutions have great foundations and able to raise money, to really help -- on the students. because that's the committed -- that's to the university and fundamental aspirations of the institution itself. afford n the issue of about, the university newspaper there had this headline that are illinois students attending the university due to costs. dee, you're on the air. dee? through your phone, please? turn your tv down. caller: okay. ost: go ahead, dee caller: good morning.
this is my first time calling cnn. a pleasure to see people of my heritage. i'm so proud of you. god bless you. guest: thank you, thank you very much. lot of we have a don't have the parents or the parent doesn't have a good credit line. they are declined. to drop out of college. what are the position that rbana champagne has for those kinds of students in place? uest: well, we don't like students dropping out of our institution. main thing is if we are able to connect to the students, get to the students beforehand, able to look at the portfolio of funding that may be student. to the so if you know any student that's in that situation, send to my office. send them to the advisors,
because one thing that happens not aware dents are of the resources on campus that can help them. an education we have to give to our students. financial have -- campus.e a literacy on how do you get a four or ix-year training on behalf of the individual of yourself or myself to be able to go to the university. not owing too much. e're aware of having the students when we go out that you want to encourage at all. the graduation rate and 46% rate over six years. my goal as the provost, the of this nomic officer camp was actually to get to 90% we can graduate
students at a high rate and work in this country which is a very great country. >> mt. claire, new jersey, a parent there, go ahead? think education is up reason is america are making a profit from it. college, i went to a community college and i a state college, my $5.it was worth now my student and grand student jersey.over $200 in new i think i'm advising all outicans who can vote to go and vote for the party that will that will be receptive to problem of the society. what we have -- the people we now, not e block
receptive, they're receptive to the people. that would be it. host: is the university of illinois listening more and more to wealthy donors? to wealthy people? is to the minority and attend ple who want to the school? guest: not at all. this is a public land grant university. we're created as such and we believe in that mission, passionately. public i'm a product of education. front of rofessor in my name, but i'm a product of experiences could do to an individual. we are listening for everything the rich people who want
to donate here, we have to make that the values are in line with the campus'. ot just the money, but the principles but the core values deep.ld a public land grant institution, level, have the state local level, and globally, that's a vision, that's a vision. that's what you're set to do. host: john, bloomfield hills, a parent there. go ahead, john. caller: good morning, a first-time caller. i listened usual in the morning. i have two in the college and i its's important to understand that there's a disconnect of what i believe niversities are generally offering in terms of overall edge dhags the guest was talking about. requirement to get a job that pays. michigan ghter at
tate university chose construction management over veterinary science because she knew she couldn't get a well job.ing she just did get one. another son going to ohio northern university because he job that my daughter got a doing that. important to understand that you can't go get a soft degree today. you have to have employability. we don't have soft degrees at the university of illinois. in, what i dents call raw young minds to illinois young n them to refined minds when they leave here. very focused, the type of job they're going to get when they place.his that are some students still trying to explore.
own human being aspects of hemselves and take some time before they arrive at where they feel comfortable in life. provide the education. as a chief economic officer of i believe in that. what we call general education. if you're in engineering, in social work. provide a spectrum hoff activity, research for students. the whole person, not just the first job, but the whole person for life. function of public in my ant universities, belief, and at the university of illinois. host: we're talking about the provost at the university of part is urbana champagne of the big 10 buses tour. we kicked it off last week at the university of minnesota and through the week.
and this week as well. yesterday we talked to the president of the university of wisconsin. of the wisconsin systems there. we're at the university of illinois and this tour will continue for a among long as we talking about higher education issues. that's the topic for all of you out there. what are your questions, omments, concerns with higher education? keep dialing in now. e've got about 20 minutes left here. pat next in carbondale, illinois. go ahead. is er: several, one particularly the parents plus affects how that got children i have through school. two, one is in college now, one college.go to parent plus loan says it's safe to do that. that's ragedy for how set up. and also applying to school, if they middle income, assume you have money to pay for
college and you don't get all of the benefits of financial aid -- in terms -- you get loans but that's all your children can get. child.my last hopefully he gets a full ride somewhere. we are considering your school. want to know what is actually out there for middle income people who they say have all of this money, we're paying house notes, car notes, all that. what do we have to help us get our students through school? guest: well, we're working very, very hard, really. it's not only our institution. we're for the lower income and the middle income families to be afford college. apart from the federal loan, the state loan, and the money -- we're trying to separate all of these. we've got grants and scholarships from the campus. we don't have enough, we
don't really have enough. i call en going to what a great ungrateful alumni to build up our portfolio to be people like your family to come to the university of illinois. we're allmething that doing. the e making sure that increase is held at the making sure that people can really afford school. i went to school -- like previously and a four year college after that. the w at that time, institution rate was very, very low. the -- for the economy. the state e in funding has been very, very increase the ability excellence and
teaching capability of institutions. main focus now is making sure for we raise funds scholarship, for grants, making sure that it will bring your to places andalso prepare them for a life long life long job, and life long citizenship in a great country. from one of our viewers, lauren who says virtual will be .10 the cost. guest: virtual schools are interested in e that. believe sincerely in the residential experience for students. i mean it's not only bringing it -- bringing them to to create networks,
to make friends, to meet with them. your bedroom and do a -- that's very difficult. ery, very difficult to produce what i call a whole citizen. we believe we produce on-line are tion for people who desirable of that and we teach they can n campus so have education any time they want in the day. my eventually, in my -- belief and the belief here is education is al extremely important, not only aspects, buttional for the social development of oung people to be able to partake in a democratic society. host: another exciting topic you. the issue of free speech on college campuses and civil discourse. there's the headline from the guardian that a professor at the illinois was fired
or israeli -- israel criticism and urges the university of reinstate this profess professor. what is the university of illinois's policy on civil discourse and free speech? guest: civil discourse and free speech are the linchpin. professor in question was not fired. he was just not fired. on that classrooms, all campus, campus, talked to the students. there's no restriction on free speech. and the chancellor and myself, talking on g to -- campus really debating, trying to get everybody to really start
discussing, debating free speech and freedom in this new age. and we're visiting college. a college thinks free speech is done. it's done. professor who teaches free speech for a whole -- ster and things may be there may be limits. but these are subject for discussion. new generation has to vibe, the lessons that people have fought for for country.me in this free speech -- academic freedom. life on that campus. something that recommended to -- no police thoughts yet. -- no trying to limit any speech. the challenge any establishment in the classroom because you have to train our students. you just have to train the
students so that when they get a respective parent, being of other, just engage in it, a tremendous number of foreign ate students, students, how do they become a citizen? free speech and academic freedom this.art of host: what about out of the ryou monitoring social media? guest: not at all. they are doing that means we have nothing to do on this campus. we don't want to do anything that the faculty are doing outside of the classroom. faculty, student, staff. do anything you want to do. say anything that you want to say. that is a -- tradition of the campus. that's a great place on the to come. a destination for people to come
out here. come out by the library in the world. of any campus. that we take as a given on our campus. academic freedom, free speech. -- a call of this -- institution as well, of course, as for the country. professor was this not hired? guest: the board of trustees board made a decision. i don't want to second guess. andry to move on from there encourage our faculty and students to really come together. discussion.d in the university of california, berkeley, yale university, these topics right now being
discussed. we want to be in the middle of hat, in the center of that discussing the issues of free freedom.d academic the board of trustees made the decision not to hire the person in question. it's for us to talk amongst ourselves this particular issue. host: to lowella in bellville, illinois. go ahead. caller: hi, i'm really happy to be able to get you guys. trying since 2006 or 2007. my question is pertaining to children of military families, retired.ty and can you hear me? host: we can. so what is your question? caller: my daughter is active duty military. stepson. she also has two younger children. so does she qualify for any kind assistance for her stepson?
their home state of residence. because she plans to use her other benefits for her two other children. can she use the benefits for all three? the exact on't know conditions. institution endly to the families of veterans. 'm sure we have programs hon campus that cater to veterans and their families. this is a to say is destination for veterans. we're pleasantly building a wounded veterans in higher education. that's coming up. ada standard, the
boss -- all of these were invented here or developed here illinois.versity of so this is an institution that has catered to veterans and a long time.s for we have a destination for veterans. i will look over and act what you said and maybe you can call to really seek out -- seek out if you let me know your number. talk to our veterans office and they can call you and give you the information on that. for the call ing after he leave this place. host: out to south burlington, go ahead, rob. caller: thank you very much. i think one thing that we're not eally kind of addressing in this discussion is how broken model of traditional higher
education is. the financial arrangements which are heavily dependent upon student loans, and also adjunct salaries. untenable.just you can't expect people to pay $4,000 a year 0, on education and have that the tion be valued when first two years are incredibly classes. where the debt that families are having to take is so large. really important to recognize that there are a bunch businesses, and institutions that are kind of stepping in. course -- why ut aren't the university of schools accept mooks for credit for
introductory classes. introductory classes are taught students who aren't getting paid very much money. of : what are the students economics 101 taught by adjunct professors? guest: we take pride in our many of our hat introductory classes are taught by professors in the classroom. something that we take pride in. campus an ongoing compositions on education. reimagining, rethinking how we teach our students. can check it out, anybody can, our commitment on our first year prep -- all of the first year is srooms -- the education
professors. we have adjunct. adjunct.call them we call them specialized faculty. we make sure we develop great tracks for those individuals if they choose to a long n our campus for time. i don't know about other schools this is something we're committed to. the model for higher education, broken.er said the i don't know what is broken. we're partcan say is f the -- we're a -- the institute. we offer mooks. from our classes here. both of ourself and our students in terms of flipped classrooms. students taking those -- listening to the lectures and hen coming to class to ask questions.
so these are where we're looking at every model possible to make sure they can deliver education. host: jim next in robinson, illinois, parent there. jim.head, guest: can i add one more? add one thing. ratio is t faculty 19-1. we take pride in that to make students we touch the that come to this campus. host: let's hear from jim. is a senior in high school. we're about two miles -- two champagne.h of it's a land grant college for illinois. and our schools, it seems like our kids somehow are kind of a less of a disadvantage like they don't enough so nd science entrance exams for
the big ten university of illinois. farm belt would like to our kids to go because we're fifth generation farmers down there. i would like to know if there's of program that gets kids their families have lived in illinois all their lives kind you know, so many people out here say you ear not from a country or something like that where your math is science is good, you can't go the university of illinois. teaching from the local schools, in terms of improving the standards to give ammunition in terms of teaching students. ne thing we're looking at on implementing them is using this platform to oot
start it with the high schools teachers in ave physics or chemistry or this and area.n that so we've got to start engaging at look -- to look out families and schools, preparing students to partake in this institution. we're looking g out very, very seriously. because when the farmland want to make sure that the opportunities is flat. we brought a flat environment students from any -- any rea or any -- any financial background, going to be able to come to the university of illinois. -- that's something you may see some of the faculty or area and talk e to teachers in high school. of timee're running out here. the house of representatives is about to come in for their morning session. me go to a tweet if i
could real fast. this from one of our viewers to know how large is the international student body. according to the campus paper, this graphic, er this map that shows there's 658 china.s from 132 from india, south cree yeah, singapore. 21 in taiwan. 18 students. the international university of illinois? uest: well the university of illinois over the last 100 years -- we have international students. china, have been there. more nd out the campus is than after the university of illinois urbana champagne. over the -- i was an
nternational student once, i came and i stayed. i believe many international students come and stay in this the ry because of opportunities. and we have -- we have over state ofshmen from the illinois. hat's all the -- those are the stakeholders. we have students from illinois. years, we've many grown in terms of students. e've taken out of state not only international students but students from california. a lot of students from california, new jersey, and from the country. so this is the international environment. we always said that our students can do study abroad -- illinois study abroad on campus. we're proud of that. host: okay. we're proud of the global reputation. host: i apologize. but we have to leave it there. the house is coming in. we thank you for your time. we must go to