tv Washington Journal CSPAN September 23, 2014 7:30am-10:01am EDT
joining us is jay solomon. to start with isis, the president will be headed to the united nations general assembly, what can we expect to hear? >> he is giving both a major also sharingek and a special session of the un security council. looking at the flow of foreign fighters into iraq and security -- syria. i think we will hear the president keep holding on this idea of a united coalition against the islamic state. war,is not just a u.s. this is a threat to the entire region and europe. that's why we have seen secretary of state kerry put such a focus on building arab participation. it started last night in syria.
jordan, saudi arabia and qatar. three of the nations were involved in the airstrikes. diplomatic who or victory for the white house. there was a lot of fear that if we went in this alone, the u.s. would be seen as launching another war in the muslim world. a war in the arab world. to have these key arab states participating was a big deal for the white house. i think you'll hear the president build on this and the idea of the threat by isis. and the need to cut off funding of the organization and the foreign fighters. to thell be the focus u.n. speech. we talked a lot about this idea of coalition building. thoughts,s for your
we had a list on the screen a couple moments ago of the nations that are aired. countriesno western involved. is that something you expect to change? guest: the french have been involved in the attacks on iraq in recent weeks. there have been western european involvement. germans, and the french have been heavily involved in providing weapons or humanitarian aid through military drops and airdrops to the kurdish forces, the iraqi people who have been targeted. there is western or european involvement in the military operations. theree right, last night were no other european fighter jets involved. the french have cited their fears that by taking out isis, they could strengthen the syrian
president. a -- the french have been very aggressive in trying to remove him from office. the syrian component has been a little more tricky. it is still interesting that so many arab states were willing to take part in military operations against sunni muslims. which is the body of the islamic state. it is unclear if you might see more french, british, australian participation moving forward. that is a possibility. you'll see president obama and secretary kerry continuing to try to build and open up this to more countries. one of the key countries that wasn't involved is turkey. a nato member and his neighboring these countries. the turks are starting to feel more isolated for not being involved.
they had nearly 50 other diplomats kidnapped by isis in the city of mosul. turkish officials had cited these hostages as a reason they were reluctant to be more heavily involved. maybe that will change now. i think there is skepticism. i would look to turkey is another important of this emerging coalition. our guest is jay solomon, the foreign affairs correspondent at the "wall street journal." joining our conversations you can reach on the phones. host: i want to take a step back and talk about these meetings in a broader context. what are you looking forward to.
the rhythm of the speeches by the major world leaders really takes off. president obama speaks, the speaks, aresident number of other key leaders -- i think what i am looking for is some of the stuff we have are ready talked about, a sense of how this air war, this conflict ,ith isis will be touched on how it will be described. we have arab support and at least from some of the arab states, and how will the iranian president describe it, how will some of the countries that have been traditionally hostile power the u.s. regionally, some of the developing countries whether it is india, south africa or brazil. how will they describe it? and the russians will be very key because as the closest ally
of the syrian president, have been pressing the u.s. to get a security council resolution in order to do airstrikes. they have been demanding that the u.s. coordinate any military operations with the syrian regime. something the u.s. says it won't and hasn't done. though the syrian regime overnight put out a statement that they had been tipped off that the air campaign was going to start. i think as the speeches start to gain momentum come a i would listen to how this is being defined. a voice foroften developing countries, third world countries and they are historically very hostile to u.s. military activities no matter where it was whether afghanistan or the first iraq war. i would look for that. outside of isis you'll see a lot
of focus on climate change. the secretary has given speeches about that. efforts to combat the ebola virus in africa will be another major theme. assembly isneral particularly interesting. many diplomats and world leaders think the world has not been this unstable since the late 1970's, with the isis threat, with russian president vladimir putin's push into the ukraine, talking about the ebola virus, and continued instability in afghanistan, concerns about china's -- china making territorial gains -- there are so many issues that are facing the global community at the same time. and how they will address them is going to be dominating the talks throughout the week. host: let's go to the phones.
in birmingham alabama. calling because i am so proud and thankful that barak obama is the president of united states. i am glad that he did not go it --ne, for the republicans to "obama is going alone." that was very smart of him. and president obama, he has a lot of criticism but i love this man who takes his time. he is patient. he doesn't rush into anything. chief andcommander in he gives the orders to the military. it is very smart of him. regardless of whether they did the strike -- i know saudi arabia did -- i'm glad that ifack obama -- all my god
that romney we might have been at war a long time ago. host: your thoughts. guest: it is been interesting to watch president obama's evolution striking syria over the past year. as many viewers remember, last august president obama basically committed the u.s. to launching airstrikes against the assad regime after u.s. intelligence concluded he had used gas -- sarin gas on his own people, killing more than 1000 people. rolling, set the ball and then didn't do it. and that caused a lot of irritation among america's allies, particularly in the middle east. if the u.s. set read lines like he did and didn't enforce them, that was
only going to encourage hostile countries in the middle east or elsewhere to test the u.s.'s will and to test the west's will. by not going forward he given encouragement. throughout this year there has been discontinued hemming and hawing and questioning whether the u.s. waited too long, is the rise of isis a factor that the administration didn't back more moderate elements -- did it week in the assad regime to help these more moderate syrian didn't docause they it and allowed isis and more extreme groups to move in. it is still unclear whether the policies would change until these horrific videos came out over the last months of american journalists being headed i to islamic state. -- by the islamic state. at that time you saw a shift in the u.s. outlook support for
-- public support for conflict. there has been war weariness in the united states. but these horrific images seemed to galvanize public opinion. i think president obama responded to that in some ways. as the caller said, he has been methodical over the past four or five weeks of working to build this coalition which is key to helping the u.s. move forward. activities,ilitary the u.s. has been involved in in recent decades, as you, libya, if the u.s. military is involved they will be doing the majority of the airstrikes. -- in controloing of the command of these missions -- you know, if the threat is to u.s. air, -- it will be higher
if this goes ahead. it is very early days and u.s. officials are excited that they brought so many coalition members on board so far. at the end of the day it is still going to be u.s. air power that will lead this charge. as the strikes continue. from what we expect, weeks or months it will not be over soon. host: to maryland where ray is on the line for independent's. i just want to say, these airstrikes i don't feel they are being fully effective in their objective. i've been in the military and they will only give you so much effectiveness. you'll have to put boots on the ground. there are only so many targets you can strike, then what do you do. i don't advocate going to war but i don't think this has been
thought out very clearly. i just don't like the strategy. we are going to get involved with boots on the ground. you can't rely on training the iraqis and the people of the country. thank you. host: your thoughts. guest: i think the caller makes a good point is that is one of the main questions now as this war goes into the next stage. whose troops are going to clear out isis after they have been weakened why these airstrikes? there are reports on the ground that isis was moving assets ahead of these -- the air contained as they knew it was coming. the u.s. officials have acknowledged that it will have to be boots on the ground to clean this out. to push back isis once there
weakened. so far the plan is basically --t the iraqi military empowering more of the cities within the arab community to be a front spear on the operations against isis. the kurdish forces, the cashmere in the north to be another fundamental fighting force in syrianttle, and moderate rebels for forces in syria to push back isis. most of these fighters have not performed well in recent. said,s why as the viewer there is skepticism that americans themselves and allied forces, air of forces, others will have to come in and do the hard work to clean them out. repeatedlybama has
said there will be no forces on the ground. his generals, including the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, has hinted otherwise in public testimony. general dempsey last week was that ifshy, or hinting these troops can't do the job, maybe u.s. forces will be required. you are going to see a heavy effort over the coming months to train up the syrian army and the saudi government. they said they will open a training facility inside their country for 10,000 syrian rebel fighters. the prime minister, the new leader of a rock and secretary and secretary kerry have outlined a national guard in iraq which they say would be sunni fighters who are most under the isis threat being coordinated into the regular
syrian and iraq he military with a special focus on isis. this has similarities to what the u.s. did in 2007 and later against al qaeda and iraq. isis where they have gotten close coordination with sunni tribes. it worked. it worked pretty well. but then the process fell apart after the u.s. is engaged. -- former prime minister took power and was marginalized. you will see a grass of -- and aggressive push to train up these elements i outlined in the coming months. it is very unclear if they will be strong enough and committed enough to push back isis. then the question raises him a who is next if it doesn't happen? , lastrmer cia director
week, that he expected there to be 5000 u.s. military personnel in iraq by the end of the year. this would still largely be training and support staff rather than combat troops. our presence there is growing come a it just the hands if their role is going to be widened because our allies are seen as fit or able to do the job. that will be the continuing focus. host: i want your reaction to a question from twitter. what is the potential that the coalition we have built will cause a whole new set of power structure problems? guest: that is a good question. it has been a real difficult push to get the arab allies in place to begin with. you have real splits in the region already. datesn the leading arabs
and the muslim states. you have a traditional u.s. ally in saudi arabia and jordan. , beingted arab emirates supportive of the u.s. an extremely hostile towards the islamist governments that have come into power or gained strength since the arab spring started in 2010. you saw all of these countries take part in the airstrikes last night as well as bahrain. then you have countries like qatar and turkey, that have been pretty aggressive in supporting islamists's political parties in the region including hamas and egypt am a in the palestinian territories, the groups in libya and tunisia. there've definitely been splits between those arab and muslim
countries, then you throw in fishersher fishers -- -- fissures, theeen the shiites and sunni governments. iran is the largest shiite country and the most powerful and their allies in baghdad and the prime minister, and president assad whose family is a knockoff sect of shiism. they have been a real block. you could have this conflict dragged on particularly on the sectarian issue problem. saudi'si states, the have mentioned their concerns that the u.s. by doing this risks being the air force for iran. their hitting a sunni militant organization that is targeting shiites. they're trying to weaken the government in syria and iraq and there is a concern that this military action could benefit
the shiite government and hurt sunnis. that is one element of this. on the flipside, from the iranian perspective and the syrian perspective, they are on the one hand kind of excited for they think a weakening of isis youn their interest -- haven't heard much opposition to it but at the same time the u.s. stated objective is to remove the president from power. if these turn in the direction of weakening assad, you can see the syrian regime possibly try to sabotage u.s. and allied military operations. if you remember in the last iraq war. and the iranians played a major role in undercutting the u.s. military campaign in iraq.
the syrians allowed scores of foreign fighters, a qaeda fighters to go into iraq using damascus and the syrian border. the iranians funded and armed and brought in ied's and beefed up the shiite militias that attacked u.s. forces inside iraq. there is a risk that the u.s. could get stuck in the middle of another sectarian conflict which is playing out everywhere from lebanon to iraq to syria. that will be a difficult balancing act. keeping this coalition on board as military operations continue. it is always very difficult once there are pictures of arabs, of airstrikes,g from how long will arab governments remain committed to a coalition if they are facing pressure, domestic pressure at home.
that are all uncertainties the u.s. knows about. happens when what you fight in that part of the world. the wall solomon with street journal. the next caller is on the democrats line. caller: i would like to remind mr. solomon that last year when they had the gas problem in president, he is our president, he turned it over to congress and they ran like chickens. 80% of the united states people had risen up and said stay out of syria, but john mccain and lindsey graham and the wall street journal and fox news have stirred this thing until they got it the way they want it. they want us back into the war in the middle east. disgusted just listening
to some of these people talk. you see john mccain with his arms around people in syria, there staring this thing and it will be a at war. i am an ex marine i know what is coming. your response. guest: i think the caller is right, there has been and this country a lot of war weariness and a lot of ambivalence to have another conflict in the middle east for the reasons he stated and we were talking about earlier, once you launch the literary strikes there are unintended consequences and things take a life of their own. he is right that some of the senators he is outlined, mccain and lindsey graham have been for more aggressive than one year, for two years at the u.s. should have gotten involved earlier to support the
free syrian army and to prevent assad regime from remaining in power and from allowing al qaeda's radical elements to seize control. i do think there has been a shift. ,f you look at recent polls after the murders of these two american journalist, public opinion has shifted. to supporting military engagement of some sort against isis. i think that pressure moved the white house, that is why you have seen president obama who is extremely cautious about any involvement, move in the direction that he has. it is so early. let's see where this goes. if we do start seeing u.s. airplanes being shot down, or soldiers being killed or held hostage, does the public stand by and how is congress playing this?
in congressmbling that president obama needs some sort of new military authorization to continue expanding this conflict into syria. so far the white house is arguing, ironically, that some of the legislation passed after 9/11 is sufficient to support, legally, the u.s. conflict in iraq and syria as we are going against al qaeda elements. but there is a push from republicans and leading , like the chairman of the foreign relations committee, to push the white house to get new authorization to oversee or get legal coverage for this military action. it is a political year and the election is in november so who knows how that could lay out. -- play out. they said the white house is happy to work with congress on some new language but they don't
feel like legally a need to do it. it is unclear if the white house wants to go through another congressional battle in an election year. right there is a lot of uncertainty and still a lot of war weariness in the country. the murders of these two americans seemed to galvanize opinion. but that can partly reversed itself if the contract looks like it will drag on or be bloodier than many hoped. earlier in the segment you mentioned the cooperative efforts and the partnerships the united states has made. i was hoping you can address more of the role of turkey. it is a very thought after -- saw after ally. is a realkey difficult not to crack. turkey is not participating. it is a nato member, there is a
large u.s. airbase inside turkey. i could be one of the staging grounds. the turks have said they don't want the u.s. to use these basis. they were mentioning concerns about blowback or that isis would target these 50 turkish diplomats i was mentioning who were kidnapped and were being held in mosul. they are now free so the question is does the turkish president feel he has more political face and doesn't have this issue hanging over his head that he can engage more aggressively. turkey has been in a strange position throughout the arab spring and in the situation with syria they were first really engaged with president assad in believing that he might be able to reform this. this was after the civil war
broke out in 2011. when he basically reneged on the promises he had made to the president -- then prime minister, turkey became one of the most aggressive countries calling for the overthrow of the assad regime. ande islamic state fighters other fighting elements inside syria, rebel elements have used turkey as the main conduit for money and fighters going into western and northwestern syria over the last few years. this is been the criticism. it is come from the u.s. as well that they haven't been scrutinizing which fighters have been getting money and arms and getting shelter and turkey. the turkish government seems so obsessed with getting rid of assad after he snubbed the prime minister that they didn't do much quality control on which
fighters were getting strong over the border in syria and now they are paying the price. turkey is still unclear. they will feel pressure to become more engaged now that so allies the top mideast are engaged. the prime minister is a strong headed leader and it is unclear if now he will move or now he will take a quieter role. whether the turkish will provide intelligence and take steps to cut off the funding of isis. i think more than anything, that is what the u.s. wants from turkey. isis controls more than six oil gas fields inside syria and they are making estimates from wanted to million dollars per day. most of that oil is going to turkey.
if the turks sealed their borders and cut off that trade, i think that more than anything is what the u.s. and its allies want. there has been kind of a slow laxatives a effort by the turkish government and the u.s. really want that to change. >> i want to read some comments from the white house press secretary josh earnest. just a note for viewers and listeners, president obama is expected to address those strikes ahead of leaving washington today. we will follow those closely. comments onearnest turkey. he said nations like turkey have their own vested personal interest. -- the mayhem and havoc
let's go back to the phones now in alabama. cornell is on the line for independents. caller: the first thing i want streetis the wall is owned by the same fox news.at owns a lot of people do not know that. bought the wall street journal 3-5 years ago. affiliate of fox news. gentleman has lost through everything, but the government wanted to bomb syria a year ago but congress and the american people said no. from that point, they have been,
in my opinion, and elaborate, placeanda regime put in to turn the american public to combat any kind of work, just like it gentleman a few calls back, all they have done the show all the videos of people riding in trucks on a desert isis overthrowing iraq and the only people who could save them a the holy mountain was miracle bombing. they announced they bond that and then they said come have to bomb around the dam. they have the biggest dam in iraq and it is something where they will bomb that. so now, what they want to do, to overthrowing the government in syria, that is what the whole
thing is all about. i'm very disappointed in the obamaovernment, president . he ran and won two elections -- he reneged on his words. host: your take? not get into grand conspiracy theories but the caller is right, president obama to be the twice president and a large part of his campaign was, we are tired of a decade of war and we need to focus on the homefront. these wars have drained u.s. resources and trained the military. it is time to pull back and really focus on the domestic front. i think that is why you have seen so much resistance from the white house against getting
dragged into the conflict. they sucked their plans to pull out of iraq. the deadline of pulling out of afghanistan this year and a pretty small role in military operations in libya in 2011. is aee and a sense this propaganda campaign that got everyone involved. caused ahese murders firestorm in the u.s. and public opinion. but it can reverse itself quite quickly. there are democrats who are has givene president in order has been pushed by the public by these horrific images , the caller is
right that he did campaign on pulling back and now he has maneuvered into another war. very unclear if they can keep it as narrow as president obama has said, which is basically just air strikes. it can be a slippery slope. host: richard is on the democrats line. missouri. are you with us? all right, we will try to come back to richard a little bit later. we will go instead to amy in
mississippi on the line for republicans. caller: good morning. andother is an avid reader research inabout the high holy one, mohammed, and -- he died. people have been discontent ever .ince the brother-in-law of mohammed came the brother-in-law's son. sunnis and shiites have been fighting over the issue since 600.
i think instead of more many people as possible, and start and having .ood think it would be right for china. such a generous people. air drops instead of airstrikes. something in your hands other than guns. your thoughts on the humanitarian issue? guest: there will be a large military and component of
operations. there is a humanitarian effort they're -- there. many more countries are supporting regardless of what is going on in the military. i think they might have done something and i am not sure. i do not think they have the military yet to be that big of a in a military operation. i believe they're doing some humanitarian work. point by the collar, there is essentially a centuries old interreligious feud going on
between the sunnis and the shia. in iraq, you had saddam hussein, a sunni strongman ruling shiite pit when he was removed, it really changed the balance of the region. it empowered the shiites in iraq. in iran, who had fought a war with saddam insane, felgenhauer. they're close ally in syria felt empowered. dictated by things that are completely out of the u.s. to control, basically this feud inside a religion. can airstrikes and a military operation really play that big a in healing something that could take decades or longer to sort itself out? i do not think anyone has the answer. but if you see how many places
in the middle east are afflicted by the sectarian divide, whether it is in lebanon where the hezbollah,tia, basically the most powerful actor in the country and there has been tensions between hezbollah and sunnis in syria, where you have a shiite element ruling over the sunni population, they have sectarian problems. this is a regional issue. it is playing out viciously right now in iraq and syria. for people tot address something that is religious and cultural. a special focus of the u.s. has and will continue to be the political situation, political leadership in baghdad. malkirmer prime minister
who was a shiite was very much criticized by the neighboring city states for marginalizing and creating second-class citizens out of the sunnis. it was these policies that really reenergized isis. i think it is true in the areas where isis has gained territory, it was not just islamic militants who were fighting the iraqi government cared it was former members of the iraqi party. it was more than just isis. malki's replacement -- the u.s. hosted a lot more to basically reach out to a rack, sunni address the and
problem economically. it is hard to tell, basically in the political side of this, it is very important. whether the government can make will be a the sunnis very crucial factor determining whether military operations can bring a more lasting situation. >> the president has a security council meeting aimed at defeating isis, essentially. what is the sentiment personally sharing the meeting and what is the likelihood or the threat of this revolution that is likely to be approved? significance is that
it is the president himself putting his stamp on a global policy and that in turn puts pressure on u.s. allies and non-allies to fall in line. there has been a criticism of that he has not cracked down harder on some of the countries in the region who have been accused of if not supporting isis, then at least lying and i -- winding and i to the extremist groups inside syria. it has some working relationship with isis in the past. turkey, as i mentioned before, kuwait, the u.s. treasury and some of the financial arms have seen a lot of money going to militant groups inside syria
from these three countries. unmentioned a lot of different money being laid through social media, charities, and a lot of times, it is a complex situation and money being race allegedly extensivelyely -- used for military purposes. i think having the president sharing this security council meeting tomorrow, it will up the pressure on these countries to cut off on the flow of money and the country to the islamic state. if you do not get in line, you could potentially get targeted yourself. sanctions has always been a tool to force.s. has used individuals not provide money. that is a big part of the speech and howg the conflict
the financial element of it, the foreign fighter element of it, there has been a lot of diplomacy led by secretary kerry and others in the past few months to get the most important muslim country to basically promote religious tolerance, to have islamic leaders in their countries to the got against isis and push back against the ideology, which, despite being so gruesome, has attracted a significant number of followers. we have seen fighters from the u.s. and europe as well. all of these issues will be the focus of the president's speech and it will be interesting to see how these countries on the , iranians and russians,
how they will respond on the president personally outlining his vision. >> sam in new jersey is on our line for independents this morning. caller: good morning. my first question is, is there any current death toll out there in syria since we started the airstrikes? when isnd question is, this going to end? is there an ending? it just seems like another group pops up and then we go attack them, along with allies. then another group comes up. , what roleestion is is israel playing in this? know, they were doing heavy bombing in syria in the past year or couple of years ago .
we do not hear much about that anymore. still involved? i will hang up. they keep. -- thank you. heard i have not actually , the military operations started last night and continued overnight. i have not heard of death toll numbers yet. the pentagon reported hitting islamic state heavy in the basically itocco, has been hitting command and control centers. i am sure there will be deaths reported over the next day. i am not totally sure of where the numbers stand. a good question though, the question of the scope of the conflict and duration is not clear. president obama made a general statement that we will degrade and destroy isis, which is something that could take decades.
it is similar in some ways to president bush's speech after 9/11 that he will destroy al qaeda. , though it around might have been weakened. that is an issue that congress is concerned about and the public is concerned about. what is really the objective of the conflict? it could go either way. myself and the managing editor of the wall street journal last interviewed a president and he called for a broader campaign that yes, isis is a threat but we also have terrorist threats in libya and in sinai and sedan. some of our allies maybe for their own political reasons, are trying to draw the u.s. in a more broader conflict. that is something i think this president definitely is going to resist. at the same time, he wants to keep the countries on board in iraq and syria.
that will be a difficult balance to bounce on the one hand what our allies and arab states in particular are calling for and what i assume would be obama's limited objectives, which is to hurt and degrade isis. even that could turn into a much longer campaign. that is something president u.n. isis week at the to sharpen his message. how do we declare victory and know when the conflict will end? it is difficult to do that with such a murky organization and islamic state that has its tentacles in a lot of places where the last plan on israel, i am not exactly sure what he was referring to in syria. israelis in 2007 did launch airstrikes to destroy what was basically a nuclear reactor
assad regime had been preparing. there have been a few strikes on and off over the past couple of years. intermittently, where the israelis had targeted supplies going from syria and hezbollah. night, syrians downing an flying over the disputed controls thatrael serious still maintains is syrian territory they lost in the wars. layingt see it israelis publicly in any way a role in this conflict. it was brought in in a visible way and it would sever the coalition and you would find many arab states would not be able to participate, their own publics would be outraged. i think the u.s. has been telling the israelis they will
not play a role in the conflict. i am sure their intelligence is being used by the u.s. and that they have good intelligence on syria as a neighboring state. think israel's role will basically be in the shadows. hittingd still see them targets in syria that they think are direct threats to syria that are outside the campaign against isis. just a couple of minutes left. this will be our last call for this segment. democrats line. >> good morning. just calling to give credit to our president. he has got a tough road ahead. thing.is doing the right they keep trying to put the boots on the ground thing on him. good but hes pretty
has taken all of our time up. we did not have time to call in because he has taken 20 minutes to answer. 12 the democrats, midterms, let's do this. that is all i have to say. host: last thoughts? sorry to talk so much. it is a complicated situation. it will be interesting how the syria conflict and iraq conflict plays into the november elections. a number of callers have said, democrats, they voted president obama in twice and they did not .ant a war are democrats going to be able ?o campaign or are they going to be somewhat boxed in in that they did something the president and democratic voters did not seem to want. republicans, how will they play it out? it is unclear.
there traditionally hardliners on military force. they will probably say the president waited too long that he allowed it to grow and that it is too late, but i think it will be an interesting issue during the, elections that will -- the coming election cycle and how it might impact what is expected to be a close election. that could throw the senate into the republican camp, which could make president obama'last few years in office very difficult so the politics will be very interesting to watch. >> all right. correspondent for the wall street journal. busy day. thank you for being a part of it on c-span. rake andake a quick then be joined by jason grumet, the author of a new book on washington gridlock and his progression -- prescription to end it. waiter, we will talk with the
former indiana governor and now purdue university president mitch daniels. first, let's get an update from c-span radio. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] washingtonsays today informed president bashar al-assad's against the airstrikes hours before the american-led military coalition stronghold extremist . the associated press reports there were two groups of airstrikes overnight, the u.s. .nd five countries followed by a unilateral u.s. attack on what washington calls and al qaeda affiliate. syrian activists say the airstrikes caused casualties among the groups and some civilians. france's prime minister said his country will not negotiate with
a captured french man in algeria. they hold for 24 hours or the hostage will be killed. the prime minister says france will continue to fight islamic militants. president obama travels this morning to address the assembly. he is also expected to make remarks on climate change. also announcing plans to sign an executive order requiring the u.s. government to take climate change into account when it spends money overseas to help poorer countries. the white house says the u.s. will offer new scientific tools. the summit takes place on the sidelines of the general assembly meeting. those are some of the latest headlines on c-span radio. >> c-span campaign 2014 debate coverage continues thursday night at 9:00. the congressional debate between the incumbent secretary of state.
and the iowa senate debate between the u.s. congressman democrat and jody -- more than 100 debates for the control of congress. c-span student cam video competition is underway, open to all middle school and high school students to create a how intary showing policy, law, or action by the executive, legislative, or judicial branch has affected you or your community. there are 200 cash prizes for students and teachers totaling $100,000. for a list of roles, go to student cam.org. washington journal continues. host: jason grumet joining us and president of the bipartisan policy center, as well as the author of a new book, "city of rivals: restoring the glorious mess of american
democracy". thank you for joining us and congratulations. you said our government is more open and more transparent and less functional than ever before. what is that mean? >> the basic idea of the book is that we need to bring back a constructive partnership -- partisanship. we do not need nonpartisanship and we need the government to be a constructive collision of ideas. a number of the measures we have adopted with good intentions of making the government more transparent have empowered special interests and diminished the ability of members of the government to work together. >> we talk about bipartisanship and gridlock. you hear that we need to go back to the era. reform for the 21st-century first century. we always have an imagination that things were always wonderful in the past and they were not here it we had many moments of dysfunction in
congress. there has always been money in politics. we have been gerrymandering since 1812. we have to find certain aspects of the pass and bring them forward to the future. >> you established a bipartisan policy center back in 2007. all come from very different perspectives. you managed to create something focused on bipartisanship and cooperation. how is it existing back in 2007 when he created a different than what we see today? >> the basic things we see today were very much in motion in 2007. we have certainly had a more partisan ship in the last few years. it is more that the senators thatzed something happened was destructive to democracy. we wanted to come together and show a different pass. >> jason is the author of the
city of rivals and founder and president of the bipartisan policy center. to join our conversation this morning, you can call in, democrats -- republicans -- independents -- talk you little bit about think tanks in washington. do you think there are are a positive force in washington? guest: there are just not enough people in the building to figure it all out. i think of it as a think tank industrial complex and there are three types. tribal organizations, and we know who they are, and then there are organizations that are so interested in objectivity, they do not want to console themselves with relevance. these are scientific organizations. we want to be both politically and electrically robust.
we combine the rigor of a traditional think tank with aggressive lobbying. we have affiliated organizations. we do not have the hubris to think anybody will care. we tried to come up with ideas and fight for them. >> i want to get your take on one of the things from the book. washington's dysfunction is generally attributed to the unholy trinity of media, money, and gerrymandering. is fortunately wrong or highly exaggerated. these are the three pillars of dysfunction imagination. they're either kicking on locked doors or taking us down unfortunate past. when it comes to the media, we love to complain about the media. the election of 1800 with the statesman adams and jefferson, the media that was supporting adams, you basically had people going to the streets attacking and the papers
supporting jefferson is that he had neither the firmness of a man or the sensibilities of a woman. this is a statement here it the media has always been a challenge but the question is, what we do about it? you could whine about the media or month -- will move on. the supreme court is the supreme court for a reason. through welldone intended efforts is basically push the vast majority of money to the darkest corners. gerrymandering matters but not nearly as much as people think. we have had organic gerrymandering in this country. my favorite poll is the whole foods and cracker barrel poll. of the counties that voted for president obama had a whole foods. 36% had a cracker barrel. districts0 2% of the in the house that went from democrat to republican had a
cracker barrel. that basically means we have divided ourselves so that while there are certainly making -- manipulations that should be diminished, a stanford university study determined that seats were most, 6-8 influenced by gerrymandering. it is an issue but not the issue. call fromfirst carnegie, pennsylvania. patrick is on the line for democrats. caller: hello. good morning. it is astonishing when i listen to the narrative your guest is pushing. when president obama was faced with a response of the american british, thathe there was no support whatsoever in a conflict with syria. the narrative was dropped in both nations.
then, of course, when you look at the narrative today -- host: we are talking with jason grumet about his new book. is that the topic you're talking about? talkr: i am absolutely lee -- absolutely talking about that. he is missing the technological reality. he is talking about issues and historical nature that have nothing to do with our present time. he's using an 18th-century narrative, as if they're going to represent the crisis in america when it comes to democracy. i can cite you a study from princeton university that says it is no longer even a democracy but an oligarchy, which represents a crisis for the american people, particularly when it comes to a democracy. if your narrative is controlled by mass media and there is no discourse among your electric,
guess what? the media becomes a mechanism for tierney. the american people are dearly -- dealing with tyranny, which the mass media and the military industrial complex. together at the corporate hip and turning around and trying to rationalize to america. nowhere is this more evident in the war that we are now encountering. your guest is absolutely ridiculous. guest: thank you. you made 17 or 18 interesting points and i will try to respond. it is important that this is not some old -- 02-year-old washed in. personal destruction, the impeachment,dal, government shutdown, and yet it was a productive time because we still have the ability to have a constructive collusion of ideas. i am not harkening back to the 1800s story. this is much more a part of our
current clinical dynamic. the other point patrick makes is important, to think about the importance of technology. technology changed the way we interact in the way we imagine ourselves in democracy. there is no way to put that back in the box. i would say with great humility, c-span should turn the cameras off every once in a while, actuals needs to have an conversation without people looking over their shoulders. if we want the electric and the -- the electorate to dr. sarah. >> he mentioned the role of media in places like c-span. and in your estimation, has media helped or hurt the state of affairs in washington and the gridlock we see now? >> my largest point is i do not know and i do not care because it is the way it is and it will not change. on balance, it helps. engage with the public, the
ability to understand what is going on, that is essential to democracy and privacy is also a central aspect of our it. it is just finding balance. is thomas inolar daytona beach, florida, the democrats line. you're on with jason. click yes. i think the reason we have gridlock is from the democrats perspective, the republicans showed us just how far they way whento get their they really stole the 2000 election. they stole the presidential election in the united states of america. extreme, and then sue pass something like citizens , it has caused nothing but hate and discontent and mistrust.
nobody trusts somebody who stole from you. they simply stole the election in 2000. i'm sorry very that is the truth. -- i am sorry, but that is the truth. obviously, he was ultimately the supreme court that decided that election, which was clearly a very unfortunate moment for our democracy. it is also supreme court that decided the case of citizens united. , the deep-seated anger and frustration on both sides of the country is very real. it is a mistake for people to come here and say, the problem is washington and the country is lovely. the problem is how we feel about america here it in answer will have to be to try to wring people together in not just a coup myra moment, but where people talk to each other and argue with each other. >> related, i am curious if you think, we talk about how congress is broken and we say
every year the congress is the least productive in however many years. i'm curious if you think what we see on capitol hill is just showing off how dysfunctional the country is and how angry people are about politics or if you do not and congress is a reflection of that? >> there is some amplification but at the starting point, we are coming out of a deep recession and people have been very concerned, afraid, and angry, and that always breathes a deep amount of division. on top of that, there are ways we elect the members of congress and the way we treat them that amplifies divisions. as long as clutch or out of five registered voters are not participating in primaries and we have a shallow voter pool that pushes people to the edges, that does amplify partisanship. it is also true our constant
pursuit of transparency makes it harder for partisans to interact when they get here. togetherficult to put a political compromise, to explore new ideas and do something in the national interest and not just do something you want if your constituents are looking over their shoulders. it is a combination of how we engage. to exacerbate the existing polarization. host: let's go to manager. james is on the line for independents. >> thank you for c-span. if anything can save the republic, it is institutions like c-span. i wanted to add a more lighthearted touch to allay some of the anger. , i governor of massachusetts was hoping you might have known how it went from gary to gerrymander. my friend and i was in a town in massachusetts and the friend of mine had a flask belonging to
the former governor. so that and just another minor and trivial and pedantic point. as i was listening, i thought you said ye old washington. really phe in old-style. -- the. forgive me for boring you. guest: i love the show. i have asked the same question why we do not call it gerrymandering. the basic answer is that it does not sound good. i agree it is a disservice to his family history. he was a significant leader of the country around the turn of the 19th century. and yes. you got me, i always thought it was yield candle shop, so now i learned something. let's go to michigan,
where deck is on the line for independents. i do not know how to explain how irritated it makes me when people say this is a do-nothing congress when this bills,s has passed 360 spending bills, everything. , i am welle to know read in the constitution and have never seen anywhere in their where the majority leader of the senate according to the constitution, if congress passes a bill or law, the senate must hear it on the floor. they do not read anything, but at least vote on it. the mayor will not allow any of these bills to be voted on. congress is not do-nothing. congress has passed these laws.
one person out of 100 says no. we are not hearing them and not voting on them. how are we going to move forward if the senate will not vote on the bills that congress passes to be sent out to the president? >> caller makes an important point that i want to clarify a bit here the house of representatives is passing a lot of pieces of legislation not coming up in the senate and vice versa. this points to the fact that, in addition to the bipartisan challenge, we have a challenge in this country designed into the constitution, one more example that when the entire system is not working, there are so many places for it to get derailed. the point i agree with with the caller is, why are we so afraid of taking votes? the notion and i think senator reed is guilty of this as our speaker banner and others, but the notion that we bring people in congress and then protect them from doing
anything difficult, it is a really recent phenomena and not in the interest of the country. let them vote and let them take easy votes. the notion that people are watching that closely i also think is a little bit of an exaggeration. i also agree with the caller we should have more up-and-down votes on the issues of public policy. from florida, on the line for democrats. caller: good morning. i wanted to ask your guest's opinion regarding a lawsuit being brought against the senate by an organization similar to his common cause. just as a quick aside, i wish you could have someone on common cause to slain the lawsuit. it regards the filibuster. cause's position is that a filibuster is unconstitutional. the word does not appear in the constitution. the founding fathers never
intended for the senate to be a supermajority vote for any loss. there were five specific things the constitution refers to that must have a two thirds vote. the decoration of orientation and and a few other things. obviously, republicans have used the filibuster as a way of neutering president obama. i wonder what your guest thinks about that situation. thank you. >> the key question, and i spent a lot of time in chapter three in my book talking about the filibuster, the office the bipartisan policies enter, we have something in common with the heritage foundation. we do not imagine ourselves as a and particularly aligned with the question of the filibuster is important. my view is that it is an essential aspect of our democracy. we have remarkable, idealistic
founders of the country. one of the basic principles is the notion that the majority party simply has to deal with the minority party. we fundamentally obligate our political parties to engage with each other. it is frustrating at moments like this, but it is also produced a dynamic and resilient policy in the last couple hundred years. you have to look at the dynamic between the filibuster and this arcane procedure of filling the tree, basically the way the allows toeader exclude the ability of the minority party to bring amendments. majority of the time, the majority leader reid making it possible for republicans to make amendments, and their frustration. a filibuster everything. i propose in the book a little bit of a détente, which would essentially obligate the majority leader to provide a certain number of amendments for
the minority party and in exchange, the minority party would not filibuster the motion to be perceived. that would require all bills have the opportunity to get to the floor if they have 50 votes. then he could have the real exchange. >> allen in north carolina is on the republican line. are you with us? caller: hello? host: you are on with jason grumet. caller: [indiscernible] host: we are having a little time -- a hard time hearing you. we will put you on hold and i will try to come back later. in florida, independent line. >> good morning. yes, i believe what you're saying about harry reid and filling the amendment tree. that is true.
in my opinion, in the last four years, it has been the republicans that keep filibustering everything. that is why nothing gets done. when i hear the republicans in the house of representatives say, yes, we passed the bill, and harry reid in the senate is nothing, that is because, how many scores of bills have they filibuster? that is the problem. the senate is taken over by republicans, they will say, no more filibustering anymore. we will just pass straight up. that is why i am fearful of them. thank you. >> one of the dynamics the caller refers to that is somewhat optimistic as while we live in a very closely divided country, we see leadership flipping back and forth. to the extent you believe most of the polls and believe the republicans may gain control by a narrow margin, it seems very likely based on the numbers that
democrats may retake the senate. is dynamic that creates somewhat hopeful. everyone recognizes what the majority does with the minority is a flip in 24 months. we have gotten ourselves into a dish and it is easy and both parties are justified in blaming the other. the all of these conflicts, only way forward is to take a step forward and a iris real leadership. in the next senate, there will be an opportunity to have more votes in last filibusters. , author of grumet "city of rivals: restoring the glorious mess of american democracy" and the founder and president of the bipartisan policy center. (202)ats, your number is 737-0001. --
jason, i want to ask you, you have suggested the disdain for washington is something of a generational phenomenon. what do you mean? guest: it goes way back. with our earlier critique of history, mark twain said the honest person in congress stands .ut more than other places we owe headed this trust of our this notionrea but that everyone wanted their kidney president was something that, after the 1970's and the secret were in cambodia, and a deep a in the country felt over that crisis, we started to see the image of government and public service all began to change. we now really have an issue of engagement. we did some polling at the bipartisan policy center to determine that some millennial's today are deeply invested in public service. they do not believe government
is a form of public service. we have basically transcended the idea of government being the ultimate way to serve your neighbors and colleagues. >> what are they saying in terms of public service? americorps, the peace corps, community service? >> absolutely. but i think a lot of people are looking to express their own personality in the way they seek out service and the government has become somewhat of a barrier. makees the studies you did any recommendations that if people really believe that should be changed, how do they make it so people are proud of that public service? >> there are a couple dozen parts to the issue. up, government starts watching things again, it becomes a more enthusiastic career path. there is a virtuous cycle. civicser challenge is education. many guests here will point to
many of their concerns and say, it comes back to education. think one of the profound and remarkable things about the country is the way we have designed our system of government. not closing people on one governor gary was elected, we do a real service to make sure the younger folks in this country understood this part of democracy. >> the republicans line, robert in ohio. for taking myyou call. i have problems with the 17 amendment. i believe it is fraud and unconstitutional. because of what it says in article five, the last few words in article five. no state without its consent will be deprived of its exact suffrage in the senate. the 17th amendment is what destroyed our republican gave us democracy. 36 votes for and 11 against. state, cingular and
not plural. i think we had an unconstitutional senate for over 100 years now. i would like to have your opinion on that. thank you. school but ilaw never took a bar exam. you revealed an inadequacy that my parents still think is unfortunate. i do not have a constitutional view on the 17th amendment. ano not believe it is ongoing or serious topic of conversation. whatever that decision was, i think it is baked in and not likely to change. we need to recognize when a lot of people call for constitutional amendments, whether they address campaign finance or gun rights, these are not likely to be serious exercises for the next several years. our view is to focus on the problems we have in front of us. >> let's stick with the topic of campaign finance for a second.
he suggested if we lighten up on and return to earmarks, tell us about that and what makes you think that way. >> let's start with earmarks. of the constitution is to balance national and local interest. what has happened is the balance has shifted toward local interest. technology, the extent to which there are third-party organizations looking to punish --body who strays from work orthodoxy, it has been harder for congress to do things. earmarks are part of the equation. it is not just that they are a necessary greece for the wheels of government. it is a central design. if we want members of congress to make the right votes for typedef for entitlement reform and tax reform, they should be able to bring a fire station home to their districts every once in a while. otherwise, we will see hunkering down and fearful of their own constituents. it is not a new idea.
story is told about the fact that the reason we have the civil rights act in 19 624 was because he was willing to give an earmark to the then minority in theto build a center university. i think that was a good deal. when it comes to lobbyists, this is a place where political points scoring has gone too far. the caricature of the cigar smoking lobbyists has very little to do with the reality. first of all, lobbyists are people as well. the idea that the american lung association or the wind energy association or the joint institute, the obama administration as a cast is precluding you from working in the government, they should be treated like people like everyone else. the second thing is that we ask lobbyists to register and we have a law to ask lobbyists to
register so we understand what they're working for and what they're doing. we penalize people for that behavior and we tend to stop doing it. we have thousands of lobbyists deregistering and becoming strategic advisors. i think that is counter productive. this is a part many of your callers do not have as much intuitive support for, but lobbyists are some of the folks who make the government work. mrs. murray have democrats and republicans rarely talking to each other, it is often lobbyists moving information back and forth and who are the conduits finger -- figuring out -- i think it is a somewhat cynical effort by washington insiders to suggest they're not when they go home to the republic. it seems it has gone a step too far. phoenix, arizona, steve is on the line for independents. caller: thank you for c-span. are you sure congress is not actually representing the agency who put them into office and
each time we vote, it is not more to the right and to the left, it is more whoever got here, because i want to get back. my other question is, do you think the news media in general spent so much time on politicians that the general public has no other choice than to be constantly engaged? that is my question. >> the first question, and i talk about this a bit in the book, and we get back to the question of how we elect our public officials, 80 percent of the election not produce video primaries certainly skews the voter pools. i am promoting caucuses, we should have straight up primaries. it is time to get to the 21st century. we should have online registration which will allow us to improve the accuracy of the voter list, so we will have those access and integrity.
to towntwo days to ride from church on sunday. that is why we have elections on tuesday. chris rock said we have elections on tuesday because they do not want us to vote. think a lot of people feel that way. a lot of people do not even know the primaries are happening. if we can get the participation in primary elections from one out of 521 out of four or even one out of three, i think it would in fact right in the base. there are interesting experiments underway in california with the top two primaries. i think these are all worth pursuing. a little too early to tell if they will be successful or not, but you're right, people will be focused on who they believe to be their constituents. they just brought in the base. host: republican line. caller: bipartisan sounds nice, but i am -- i am tired of bipartisan. there is no more talking. democrats and republicans, if
they are serious about fixing washington, let them run on what they believe in. let the democrats run on higher taxes, treading the military, gay marriage, abortion, and let republicans come up with a decision we can all agree with your it all they do is talk and nothing ever gets done. nothing will will get done until we get with -- rid of career politicians and start having term limits and start getting rid of the fossils who have been in washington for 30 or 40 years. it is got to be. usually, bipartisan way, we feel lonely. therehard warming to know is too much bipartisanship out there. the caller makes a -- makes a point that comes up a lot on term limits. i do not talk about this in the book. that is a really bad idea. it is easy to say to throw the bums out because it makes people feels that feel good.
from -- there is a tremendous number of festivals we do not want to get rid of. the other thing that happens when you have term limits is you empower one group of people, full time staff, the ones who are there for ever, the members just figuring out where the bathrooms are when they get kicked out of office there in the thoughts of having those kinds of strict term limits have proven ineffective. host: the last caller mentioned the word bipartisan. tell meo get you to what is the difference between bipartisan and nonpartisan? thank you for asking. despite as much frustration as people feel, the answer is more politics and not less. madison said in the constitution we need to confront ambition with ambition, that the central idea that made america a great waste is a constructive collision of ideas that we have been able to challenge diversity and turn it into something unique. that is the way i think the country works. proud democrats and republicans
with strong differences of opinion who are able to sit across the table like you and i and learn how to agree. nonpartisan does not exist, that somehow we have a political system that does not have politics. of a glorious, come by, but highly unrealistic. the folks who want to go nonpartisan,d -- those in a people focused on 0-100 years. host: democrats line. caller: i would like to get back to this issue of filibuster versus the stopping of bills. have you really looked at the importance and significance of the bills that have been filibustered versus the bills that have been stopped that have come from the house?
control orde gun discouragement of bills related to infrastructure or minimum wage. they are much more important than the bills that have more stopped by the house majority leader, which are largely bills related to stopping of obamacare. you need to look at that as well because it's very superficial and very simple to say, look, everybody is full. look carefully and see the significance of each one of these cases. guest: it's certainly a fair point to look at the message bills. --re are a number of people that the majority in the house actually believes are likely to become law. they are more trying to make a political point. you are seeing that in the senate, too. filibusters, some of the most consequential legislative moments and battles
really do focus on the senate. leaderd house majority can pass a cheeseburger because they guarantee that kind of majority control. consequential things are happening in the senate. host: potomac, maryland where martin is on the line for republicans. i happen to agree with some of the be were statements, but i disagree with most. we have too much legislation. a do-nothing congress is welcome. if you look at the expansion of laws that we have each year, there is no end in sight. many of them contradict each other. some of them are needlessly complex. the fact that we get laws is largely due to the efforts of some congressmen who want to improve their careers and
chances of being reelected. and reactions of lobbyists of pro and against that legislation. guest: i think it's a very important point. , the legislative process in this country was not designed to be easy. the purpose of these checks and balances was to make it difficult, but possible. there are many people who believe that a congress that does little is not a bad thing. those folks should be quite happy with the last several years. we do have some issues that are in line that must be addressed. the issue of infrastructure, the ,uestion of our growing debt progrowth tax reform and entitlement reform and several others are at the point where we need some action. we have a whole lot of laws that
have not been reauthorized for 20-40 years. it's hard to imagine that those laws are really effectively addressing the problems of the 21st century. i agree with the caller that it should be difficult. but not impossible. dayton, ohio where leonard is on the line for democrats. caller: good morning. you're talking about taxes. hit the lottery and see how much taxes you will pay. you've got lobbyists -- trent lott lobbying for gp bank. what would the american people to get from the president down to take a half cut in pay? in the chambers hair tomple of their
make sure they are not under the influence of drugs. does revealnk that the mistrust people have of our political system today. pay congress to o little. we don't want it to be a group of folks who are so wealthy that they don't have to care about their salary. one of the reasons we don't have members of congress spending is that it costs a lot of money to maintain two homes. members of congress should have a home in their district and live where their job is. it's always popular to say cut their pay. i don't think that's in the interest of our democracy heard the drug testing, i have not thought about that much. of members of congress don't have a lot of hair, so
that might be short-lived. host: one thing you do talk about is the so-called toothpick rule. tell us about that. guest: there is a certain point sharkwe just jumped the when it comes to some of our ethics rules. we want members of congress to be honest and ethical. we don't want them to take gifts or bribes or be unduly rich. we have to come up with a set of laws that are like a seinfeld episode. if you are a member of congress and you want to come to a policy discussion, the organization can't have a meal. allowed. longer you have to have pieces of food that are small enough to fit on a toothpick. if you sit down for a meal, that would be the gateway. i had an experience several years ago going to a cocktail something and it was totally
unmemorable. i can't remember the association or the hotel and i got there half an hour early. l and in this hote that's all these lawyers at the buffet table hacking away at stuff while the caterers looked on in horror. i walked up to see what was going on and it turned out the attorney for the trade association had determined the food was unethically large. "smallifying" it. we are not going to address criminal behavior with portion size. to rachel on the line for independents. caller: i had a question about something dealing with online voting.
for people who had issues getting out of work. with the fact that there are so many cyber bullies in the world that can hack in and twist it -- everybody thinks the last election was rigged anyway. you possibly keep someone from hacking in and taking those polls? i don't think i want to embrace the tyrant conclusion. it's an important issue. you have to differentiate between online registration and online voting. i share your concerns about online voting. i don't think we have the public confidence to move elections entirely online. i do expect at some point in the future that will happen. the issue of blood registration -- a tremendous -- voter registration -- a tremendous number of people are not registered. you have to go to the department
of motor vehicles and fill out paper forms. forms are, those wrong. i think we could make a significant move to online registration where you fill out templatermation in a that you use every time you buy something from amazon and we would increase the number of folks were registered and increased the accuracy of that registration. there is good argument for automatic registration. there is no reason why everybody should not have the opportunity to vote. lorenzo is on the democrats line in louisiana. caller: glad to see a new face on. america would be
better off without any parties. the republican party and democratic party -- every man just go and vote on their own merit. guest: there is certainly a lot of people who are seeking to run as independents. there is efforts to make sure we open up the system so that independents can vote for either party. you're not taking ourselves out of that system. inse top two primaries it's the top two vote getters from either party in the ultimate election. some questions about that. turnout actually went down. if you have just to democrats or two republicans running, there -- as ise of engagement argue, is that collision of the two parties that has been the
essential engine of our democracy. i don't know what you would do if you took that organized politics out of the discussion. north carolina. jeffrey on our independent line this morning. caller: good morning. i have a comment about isis. i don't understand what the u.s. generals are doing. host: our topic for this segment is about bipartisanship. did you have a comment on that? maybe -- think that guest: i agree that time is on our side. i'm very bullish about the long arc of american democracy. five-year --ve a
100 year flood every five years. i certainly share the colors sense of optimism. .ost: one more call rachel in texas on the independent line. caller: i think the problem is that they campaign to much. my dad died two years ago from cancer. we begged him, do not call the house. my dad is dying of cancer. please give us a break. it's been three years now and he is still getting phone calls. sick.her is very cruzets calls from the ted , tea party groups. she does not have any money. i look at her phone and it's loaded down with phone calls for money. are over three
years and they can give her a break. what is wrong? don't they get enough money? they don't do anything. they just campaign for the next election. guest: the frustration over campaigning is widely held. suggestions.inal the year before my cane -- -- more took effect significant is where the money is going. it's going to these third-party organizations that don't have to disclose who they are working for what they care about. the last election cycle, 90% of the ads were released by third parties and were negative. 90% of the ads run by the parties were actually positive.
if we think about who is getting the money, that will reduce the kind of harassment the colors feeling. -- the caller is feeling. host: founder and president of the bipartisan policy center. thanks for being with us. we are going to take a quick break. c-span's top 10 tour continues. purdue university president mitch daniels. let's go to an update from c-span radio. >> the top u.s. military officer says combined air strikes on the islamic state group in syria have achieved their strategic aim of showing extremist that their savage attacks will not go unanswered. martin dempsey says the airstrikes made it clear that haveilitants in his words "no safe haven."
the airstrikes in eastern syria were carried out with saudi bahrain,atar, p jordan and the united emirates. at least 120 jihadist are dead in those us-led syria strikes. this tweet says russia criticizes "unilateral use of syria." the u.s. on in addition to airstrikes against isis in syria, military officials say the u.s. on its own launched eight airstrikes last night to disrupt what the military called "imminent attack lobbing against the united states -- plotting against the united states." military officials say those airstrikes targeted what is sometimes known as the course on group. this tweet from cbs news. the fbi is tracking 100
americans who have gone to syria to join isis. they have returned without our knowledge. president obama is scheduled to make a statement on the airstrikes at 10:00 a.m. eastern time. you can hear the president live on c-span radio or watch the president on c-span. reaction on the serious situation from former president bill clinton. they say the west must proceed methodically, but firmly against the islamic state group, trying to deepen its footprint in the middle east. believeston says he islamic militants want to lower american troops into a ground confrontation. that the united states cannot let islamic militants make the fight about us. international convoy tony blair tells the situation is nothing like the cold war and it requires strategic adjustments from the west.
he thinks the islamic state group wants to create a society that is not compatible with the modern world. those are the latest headlines on c-span radio. c-span campaign 2014 debate coverage continues thursday night at 9:00. terry andetween lee brad ashford. the iowa u.s. senate debate between bruce braley and joni ernst. more than 100 debates for the control of congress. >> "washington journal" continues. host: this week, we continue our series of interviews at the ofversity -- interviews university presidents. this morning, the c-span buses on the campus of purdue university. now, joining us from produce campus is its president, mitch daniels.
thanks for being with us this morning. caller: welcome to purdue. host: if you so much. -- thank you so much. what do you think the greatest challenges are facing higher education right now? guest: to prove that the value we have associated with a college degree is still there and then it's worth the money that colleges and universities are charging for it. here at purdue, we talk about higher education at the highest proven value. that may seem obvious. we look for quality compared to the price we pay. if that's not what's been going on in higher ed for a long time. higher and higher charges for diplomas that are more and more suspect. as is entirely understandable and appropriate, students and their families are beginning to look much more carefully at the cost they are being asked to pay
and ask the right questions about what i'm getting for that. here at purdue, we take that very seriously. we are working on the reduction of costs and approving of the quality that we know our graduates have always received from a rigorous education. host: let's talk about purdue a bit. frozen based tuition for 19 months after 36 years of increases. what did you cut or freeze to make sure students have that break? guest: it's true that we have close in it for the year that just passed. we have already announced that will can and you -- continue for a 30 year. saying to way of ourselves and our students that we really take seriously the importance of a student from any income level being able to access purdue's education if he
or she is up to our standards. having drawn that line for ourselves, we accommodated suggestions from staff, faculty provenus and it is not difficult and we have not done anything i would consider particularly transformative. we are glad that we've been able to make that improvement. some action we took along the next issue, textbooks. host: a big concern for anyone in school right now. why is it that the cost of college tuition continues to rise so rapidly? it continues to outpace the rate of inflation. guest: the rate of even health care, for instance. there are multiple causes. collegest is simply
raised costs because they could. the government was flooding the .arket with grants and loans colleges found they could pocket that money and raise their costs . families weren't much better off as a consequence. wasl recently, the market inelastic. the universities found they could raise prices and not only move somewhere else, but they assumed a more expensive school meant somehow a better school and nobody had any proof around to know if that was true or not. all of that was in the mix. it needed to change. it is changing rather quickly. we embrace that change here at
purdue. we hope to be on the front edge of that. host: our guest is mitch daniels, the president of purdue university and a former governor of indiana. if you would like to call in and join our conversation for students, the number is (202) 585-3880. for parents, (202) 585-3881. .ducators, (202) 585-3882 indiana residents, (202) 585-3883. first caller this morning is john, a purdue graduate. i graduated from purdue university in 1966. i'm coming up on my 50 year anniversary. i was looking at your numbers on your tuition and i remember when i was there, it was $149 every semester for tuition.
you could have room and board and i lived in the residence halls there for less than $1000 a year. amazing. i managed to make it through by just working. i did not take out any loans or anything like that. it really interesting when you see what people have to pay. more for thatng money now? . got a bachelors degree i spent 28 years and air force. i'm just wondering, what are those students today getting that i did not get when i went there paying less than $1000 a year? guest: you're asking exactly the right question. one that did not get asked much until recently.
is great equation of life value. we seek it in everything we do and everything we buy. the equation is quality over cost. we are working on the cost in ways i described. acceptinged, we are the responsibility to prove the valley of our product. we teamed up with the gallup organization and produced the gallup purdue index. the next fouren years of college graduates. for the first time, we have real, rigorous measurements of int and how they are doing life. not just their paychecks, but in terms of their overall well-being and health and so forth. purdue believe it's part ourur job to know how graduates are going, what people are getting for the experience of a purdue education and try to
learn how we can make that quality higher and higher overtime. , boilermakers stack up very well versus college graduates at large. up job is to drive quality and keep the cost down. in west go to dan lafayette. he's a parent. caller: good morning. having -- the problems of having the situation the same year after year is the fact that the money for your basic staff, your clerk: food staff and service staff, they have not had a substantial raise in five years. the cost of parking has increased greater than the amount of raises that these folks have had. you have to bring these long-term employees that have been there 25-30 years up
into the real income brackets they ought to be at? do better.ope to there were raises this year and we expect to continue to do that. our first responsibility is to the students who come here and to their parents and their families. we are not an employment bureau. as much as we want to support our employees. our first job is to try to be effective and efficient in everything we do. that will continue to be a priority one. those dollarsavor we can apply to higher personnel costs being concentrated on those at the lower income levels. of course, there are all kinds of competing priorities. the need to attract and keep the best faculty in the world and that sort of thing. you are raising a really good point. when we think about a lot.
our job really is to reconcile all these priorities and keep students first. before you came to purdue, you were governor of indiana for eight years. i'm curious what you learned from being a university president and how that has informed your feelings on educational policy. there's no short answer to that. i guess i have learned what i always suspected. today's students are incredibly purposeful. and very smartd and well prepared or they would not have gotten here in the first place. we are completely dedicated to their success in life. delivering that at a price they can afford. a student from any income level can afford.
then, monitoring their success later so we can be better tomorrow than today. james is on the line. he's a parent. caller: good morning. i have a question relating to purdueationship between and -- my daughter went to purdue for an engineering introduction as a high school senior. when she mentioned going to a iuti, she was told to not go to a community college. that seems like a disconnect because purdue used to be very well known. you don't see purdue banners anymore. what happened? guest: you are quite right. is not aniversity
community college. we have one of those. university.fledged a lot of happens there. it's a combined and unique joint venture between our two big 10 universities. i'm not sure who told your daughter that or cold at that -- called it that. it's erroneous and misleading. we do recognize that indiana university has supervisory .uthority at iup why -- iupui the visibility of purdue is very expensive. offerings there have become harder to spot. we will raise that with our sp t partners. twitteris question on --
they have all played some sort of role. it depends state-by-state. here in indiana, this state is in the top quartile. have one ofana, we the top few student support grants for low income students. there are places where higher ed spending has been cut by astonishing percentages. in those places, it will have played a role. there are bigger issues. the effectmentions of all the money that has flooded in through grants and loans, that has been documented to be playing a part. there has been a so-called arms race to provide nonacademic offerings, amenities of various kinds. going to runt is its course.
what have i learned since i came to campus? i generally start with food. college buddhists post be terrible but it's unbelievably good right now. supposed toood is be terrible, but it's unbelievably good right now. host: next caller in greenwood. i'm a poor guide at the statehouse. you were very interactive with our visitors. i still talk to people who have been up to purdue and i guess you were the same way with folks up there. i had a follower -- father from california who came to purdue and casually stopped by your office and he said you followed up and called him back. a lot of the students seem to be
meeting with you personally. how do you find time to meet all of these people on a one-on-one basis? i made it a priority. i did at the last job. when i said i worked for everybody in the state and they had a chance to see their employees, it's mainly about learning. how to do the job well. somebody asked me to make a new year's resolution and i said, ok, i want to meet 5000 students face to face this year. i know i have surpassed that by some number. i have dinner a lot with students in the evenings. i go to the gym several days a week. anywhere i can run into them -- it's fun, of course. it's a wonderful aspect of a job like this to get to know so many young people. it's really about learning what's on their minds, going on in their lives, how this university can do the best job
of preparing them in life. partalways considered it of any job i've had. you have to mark off enough time to make tree were doing it. to austin, texas where laura is on the line. she is a parent. caller: thank you for taking my call. i want to ask a question that will be a bit of a curve. right now, the university of texas violates federal immigration laws by allowing slots at therants university. i'm wondering what purdue university does to follow the law and to make sure educational slots which are a limited resource only go to legal residents and u.s. citizens. expensive.s in this country, if you don't have an education, you are not going to succeed. not succeed easily.
even if you have an education, because i have four degrees and i'm unemployed -- i'm worried for my son. i want to make sure that universities take this seriously. those slots should be going to u.s. citizens and legal residents. i hope that purdue takes the laws seriously enough to make sure that happens. thank you. you,: i want to thank laura. we do take our legal obligations very seriously. know how tohing we make sure that nothing is -- no mistakes are being made. nothing is slipping through at any point. a significant percentage of the students on our campus are international students heard they are here fully legally. in the globalis
world a valuable partner in education. it in ao keep reasonable proportion. a student coming to purdue university is going to meet people from virtually every country on earth. it can be a very enriching part of the overall academic offerings. note decisions are one-dimensional. they do start with abiding by the law. purdue announced the creation of something called a competency degree program that let students progress at their own rate. talk about why that is so important and what students who are hoping to target without offering. living inare still higher education with vestiges of this system that has been around for a millennium. many people believe that higher it is going to prove its value
and continue to justify in an internet world, justify young people picking up and moving somewhere for 3-5 years and spending a lot of money, we are se newer have to divi ways. it doesn't make sense to work on the old agrarian calendar for .ome programs lock everybody into two semesters -- if a student can arove they have mastered given subject matter, they should be able to move ahead now. technologycollege of is transforming itself to operate on that basis. students who are smart enough, to dont enough to be able two things, move through at their own rate, more quickly than before and demonstrate along the way proven competences
. no employer will have to guess what that certain subject meant. the student will have demonstrated a mastery of a specific skill or topic and the importer can look at the test and project that proved it. simultaneously, we have got a number of endeavor going on here to change those degree programs that can be for three years. the pioneering school was the brian lamb school of communication here at purdue. lambe very proud of brian who founded c-span. he is a boilermaker. how fitting that the school that he allowed us to name after him was the first to step forward
and five there are communication majors can now be completed in three years if the student is ready to put in a little extra time and work in the summer. i take it you don't believe that it's still necessary for students to go to college for four years as an undergrad. is.t: in some cases, it we have one of the finest engineering schools on the planet. there are a few who manage, but most of those degrees are going to take off for years. -- four years. is coupled with a work experience. the index tells us it can be one of the most valuable parts of a college education to have some sort of internship or extensive work experience in the area of study. there are plenty of degrees here years, butake four there are others. with a little extra work in a
semester or two or some work over the summer or online education offering new possibilities here, can be finished in less than four years. we can do that, the student and the family gets a higher education at a lower price and they get out in the world and have an extra year or more to earn money and build a future. on thenother parent line. betty in inglewood, colorado. you for bringing your business skills to my favorite university. it's a fantastic progress. a 12-year-old. you can hold those rates now, that would be helpful. i'm looking for ways to inspire her to want to come to purdue. tell me about innovation in technology and things that would get my 12-year-old excited about purdue. guest: first of all, i hope all
the 12-year-olds in america are interested in technology and science. this is where our future will have to be built. possibleng person should be conversant with these topics. whether they build a career or life in technology or not. we need more women working hard on that here in engineering and scientific disciplines. -- if you'red told-year-old daughter is looking that way. -- 12-year-old daughter is looking that way. we have a long tradition in engineering and science. one of the proudest of the world. students come from all over the world because of it. we made a strategic decision to invest even more heavily in this area. we think it's hours possibility -- our nation needs 12,000 are going to be
competitive and have a higher standard of living for our kids than the ones we enjoy today. it's what we think we are good at. so, by the time your daughter is ready to be a boilermaker, we will have an even stronger, larger and more prominent engineering and science program and computer science program than we do now. guest is mitch daniels, the president of purdue university and a former governor of indiana. is from leland, north carolina. also a purdue alum. caller: good morning. i was wondering, what have you withsince the late 1970's diversity issues?
i was almost the first of everything being a person of color, living in an area that -- iuys call the region felt we were somewhat mistreated. two items i'm concerned about. what are you doing with mental health issues to make sure that students are healthy? because of your rigorous program. second question, which most parents want to know, placement or how extensive is the placement for loans after they graduate -- four alums after they graduate? you had the six-point system that has transitioned to the 4.0 .
that was the integrity of students who go there. i was in the upward bound program in high school and started transitioning to the university life. i found it was difficult for me -- i ami was a gary us a semi-proud boilermaker. i do name drop and it makes people here in the south take a bit of notice. i'm really concerned of the mental health of students. guest: thank you. it's a very important and legitimate concern. , especially at a rigorous school like purdue -- a lot has changed since you were here. and more extensive
sophisticated mental health counseling services. one thing that has not changed is it's a very rigorous school. raise isssue people the so-called grade inflation. the average grade is so high you wonder what does it take to get a b? that's not true at purdue. the average grade here has barely moved since you were a student. that's a great thing. when you emerge from this school with a solid record, the world will know that you earned it and that you learn something, which -- you have that kind of school, there's a lot of pressure on our students. we try to learn more about that and take that into account. here is one other thing that has changed since you were there. you talk to boilermaker alums. they will tell you routinely
that when they arrived, some professor or more than one would tell them to look around, you won't all be here next year. the school was proud of its asor and saw its duty weeding out students. we don't look at it that way anymore. it's harder to get in. have the most qualified student body in terms of grades and so forth. we take it as a response ability to see every student succeed. whether it's the counseling or all sorts of activities we have two spot students who might struggle and bring tutoring or other tools to benefit them quickly, that's the way we look at it now. we just announced this week we have the highest graduation rate ever. we have the highest persistent rate. from freshman to sophomore year.
trying to be as supportive of our students while still very demanding and rigorous is the purdue way. host: a call from west lafayette. ron is a parent. caller: good morning. your leadership skills are extraordinary. indiana -- sof proud to have you with west lafayette. as proud as i am to be here, but thanks for saying that. caller: do as much as you can to hold the costs down. i know it's difficult. i know it's very difficult. do what you can. guest: ron, we will. i want to say on this subject, there is a lot of attention and it's completely appropriate on and the way they are passed on to students and their families.
it's really important also to say another reason to be really weeful about cost here is so can invest money in making purdue stronger all the time. i just talked about the growth of our engineering college and computer science college. it takes investments to change the way we teach and to make it possible for students to finish in three years or switch to a competency based degree. we plan to make those investments here at purdue. and have an action plan to do so. we are about to double the number of our students who study abroad. it was not very high. it hasn't historically been too high. we've made a huge jump just in the last year. it's partly about keeping the doors wide open to families of all income levels. it's partly about investing to make sure we are a university of the future.
if there is going to be a , weeout in higher education intend to be one of those universities who takes these challenges seriously and meet them head on and make the changes necessary to absolutely be able to say come to purdue and you will get value for the money you spend. host: i want to ask you about sports. purdue was one of just seven schools to not report subsidizing athletic groups. if you are looking at numbers from 2012 -- why that is so important and how purdue stands out. a huge sports fan. probably as big as you will find in a job like mine. a dozen rich the life of the campus in so many ways. support ourut and student athletes. enrich the life of
the campus in so many ways. i said to the athletic department and the university community that three things here at purdue, but the line. test, about the line. standards of conduct. we have to have the same high standards of character and conduct for star wide receivers as we do for any other boilermaker on campus. --tudent athlete has to meet pay for yourself. only one in 60 undergrads is skilled enough to be on one of our athletic teams. it would not be right to ask the other 59 to pay more money than they are already paying to subsidize the athletic department. i'm proud that purdue meets those three standards. we want to win.
our teams are really competitive across our 18 sports. we have a football program on the rise and a basketball team coming. top 10 women's volleyball team. lots of good stuff going on. andoes start with character genuine student athletics. our athletes have had a higher average grade point average than the student body at large for years here. say, beingas you self-sufficient and finding a way to do this without needing subsidy from a non-athlete. host: next up is jonathan who was a student in west lafayette. caller: good morning. thank you for your service to purdue so far. toquestion is in relation ity in the ways
students have input. how is purdue enhancing that are that 30,000 undergrads seeking to enhance the student voice? guest: the voice of the students are important -- voices of the students are important. i will be talking to many more. i consider it very much a part of my job. i hope i'm fostering that same interest in all the people here at purdue. faculty, administrators and others. a student on the board of trustees at any one .ime that goes bac that goes back a few years now. the student input is invaluable. there is a perspective a current student brings that even the
most vigorous and diligent board member cannot have. i have lots of interactions with student groups. tonight, i will be with the leadership of 100 of our campus groups, getting their input. i'm sure we can do more and we will try to find ways to do more. we do take. seriously -- we do take very seriously the feedback we get from students here. clearly, one of the most important elements of our overall decision-making. january, a purdue student fatally stabbed another student on campus. i'm curious if there are new safety measures in place for students on campus. guest: a host of them. eventediately after the .ommission a faculty led group
they produced a host of suggestions from improvements to system.t system, alarm a lot more locked doors. operating on many, many fronts to make what was already statistically one of the safest places in america safer. er was sentenced last friday. the prosecutor, the judge and the murderer himself are all stated in unequivocal terms this was a premeditated act, not an act of insanity. if that's going to be extraordinarily rare of an example, i don't know how you can reduce the chances of such a thing happening to zero. in this case, it was one life lost. a horrible tragedy.
was not more. given the nature of this particular perpetrator, he just had one thing in mind. unfortunately, he accomplished it. line.tom is on the he is a purdue alum. caller: good morning. my question today was, how do you differentiate running a state and running a university? i'm very curious to see what the differences are. first of all, i don't use terms like running. i did not imagine i was running the state of indiana. i was trying to make certain the government operated effectively. we did a lot to improve that. the state really is that some of the energies and the activities of businesses and citizens. i always saw the job there as
try to create the conditions where the important part of life , the private lives of people in the private sector can flourish. it's a little like that here, too. i'm not running this place. make itsg to institutional apparatus work in a way that our faculty can do the best teaching they can, the world changing research that they do and that our students toe the maximum chances learn as much as possible and go out and be successful citizens. difference when you try to leave for results or manage for results in the absence of fish in the apparent absence of competition. you have to find other ways to motivate and measure and reward people. in the end, there is a
competition. higher ed is starting to see it now. you can see it now. that competition brings improvement. another question from twitter. would it be better to go to trade schools or community colleges over a university degree? my take on so much debt? guest: this is a very good question. i personally believe there are many, many young people for whom this is possibly a better option or a better first option. there are some really important, necessary and good paying jobs in society that don't necessarily need a four year college degree. with certainty is everybody who wants to be a productive contributor and self-sufficient person in this needs to not only finish
high school, but go beyond. it could be to learn a skill or trade. it could be to go to a community college as a starting point. value today's young people need to embrace is learning will be lifelong and it may take these different pathways. they better count on it not stopping. but rather, being renewed and refreshed and extended later on. a couple of quick facts about purdue on the screen. enrollment is 38,000. that includes 29,440 undergraduates. 9348 graduate and professional students. one more question for you. it is political season around
here. any chances you have your eyes on the 2016 field? guest: no. only as an attentive citizen. i have my hands full and i'm stimulated in china to build the best value of higher education here on the great foundation that i found on arrival. -- trying to build the best value. host: another question from twitter -- what is the typical salary of a graduate from your university? guest: it depends on how many years out of school a person is. what we know from the kelp purdue index now with some accurate measurement is our graduates significantly out-earn
other college graduates. today's students have significantly less debt than they did two years ago. we know that our graduates who had any debt at all, if they had ate, had almost never hard time paying it off. them do have some problems, but the average is much more likely to have a job, have a good paying job, have a job there for filled in and be thriving in multiple domains of living than those who went to other schools.
it's our job to push all those numbers further up for the generations ahead. that there.ieve mitch daniels, purdue university president and former governor of indiana. thanks for being with us this morning. guest: thank you. host: that's all the time we have this morning. be sure to tune in for another edition of "washington journal" tomorrow. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] ♪