tv Washington Journal CSPAN September 26, 2014 7:00am-10:01am EDT
will also talk to a reporter about the resignation of eric holder. you can join the conversation on facebook, twitter, or by phone. "washington journal" is next. >> i come to this moment with mixed emotions. it i am proud of what we have accomplished over the last six years and at the same time that i will not be a formal part of the great things of this department and this president. host: we want to get your reaction to eric holder resigning as attorney general. it even see the screen.
you can contact us via social media. part in the conversation that is quite lively. e-mail,ant to send an these are some of the headlines. .he "los angeles times this is the "washington times ." "the wall street journal." successor will inherit many of the thorny issues mr. holder has wrestled with.
i remember his confirmation hearings to be attorney general, even from the earliest days of this administration. he was a polarizing figure and a target for republicans. when heer the day reentered the justice department as attorney general. employees greeted him with wild applause. some of that early glow faded a given the controversies on his aate area to it has been remarkable a five and a half years. was this unexpected? he has been signaling tot he has not intending serve a full two terms. bosses, janetmer
reno, did so. he thought that was a marathon. he did not want to serve a full eight years. the timing here is delicate. you don't want to leave with less than a year in the administration and leave the political problem of replacing you before an election. he figured now was the right time. he said he is going to stay until the senate confirms a successor. that sets up a big battle between democrats and republicans over the timing of that decision. they started to engage yesterday afternoon. charles grassley said they did not want to have confirmation hearings during a lame-duck session. this is tooy said important to wait and we should handle the situation in the lame-duck if possible. host: what is your prediction?
what i was hearing from high levels in the administration as they hope this decision will be ready within days or weeks and not months. i don't think they have decided fully on a strategy. they have known since a labor had a long when they conversation at the white house. the holder was going to go this year. they have had some prior notice. ofy have a list replacements. i think the real list is much shorter. they are weighing a number of factors like who could be confirmed or if the senate shifts to republican control. that becomes more difficult in 2015. ?ho is the front runner
i think people who are known quantities to the obama white the top solicitor to the supreme court. number ofdled a difficult situations including the states secrets cases. counsel whouse recently referred to private practice. tom perez, the labor secretary the justice department's civil rights division early in the administration. that represents an important part of eric holder's legacy. host: he is in a position now of not making decisions since he has announced his resignation? guest: that is a great question.
his aides labored to demonstrate that he is as engaged now as he has been over the past five years. they are teeing up a number of ajor announcements, including revision to the guidelines of racial profiling and federal investigations and expanding categories beyond race to include sexual orientation and ethnicity and religion in some cases. though have been long-awaited for five years. we are expecting more development in his efforts to become smarter on crime and produce lengthy prison sentences for nonviolent criminals and to make sure that prosecutors are not using the threat of lengthy defendants -- go to defendants into pleading guilty.
on civilld be news rights investigations. it seems like it would be too soon for them to conclude what happened in ferguson, missouri earlier this year. carrie johnson broke the news. thank you for being with us. we want to hear from you. tyrone is in north carolina on the democrat line. good morning. caller: i hate to see him go. thes a disgrace the way republicans degraded this man it yesterday. they degraded his name. news, theyo fox degraded him. it was disgraceful for his family. i hate to call myself an american and see this going on.
this is a racially divided country because of a black resident and it is not right. think this is a racial issue rather than a political issue? caller: yes. you have never seen a president or attorney general treated like this. for them to degrade him like that is that a full. it is a shame and a disgrace. the chair of the -- i welcome
tom is in florida. i think mr. holder divided america. it from the beginning. about how we were a divided country and we were cowards. we just elected a black president. this man has done everything he could from philadelphia with the black panther situation. going to the ferguson situation. .e avoided everything else he divided the country and that's all i have to say. host: patrick leahy in the
one of the major issues is the fast and furious. federaltand that a judge determined that information concerning the fast is furious situation supposed to be turned over. more than two incidents that he resigns and saves his but for political regions. host: andrew is in virginia. i am local. i wanted to agree with the first color. i think this country has huge racial values. i don't think racism is an
issue. what i wanted to bring into focus is i am a teacher in virginia. doing our best. i know the justice department is on how tohigh schools get students to learn english and be proficient. , i way they went about it think he did a terrible job of doing that. i think a lot of teachers are in an uproar on how to go about teaching english language learners. island. is in rhode caller: good morning. it is sad to hear all the black population. it is all that they are black. everyone else is a racist.
ferguson, down in just like martin luther king when he was shot, we had a president that was shot and you didn't see the white people riot. listen, the people that are committing the crimes are the mine. they are committing 99% of the crime. not one reporter will talk about it. they won't ask the question. holder has protected this resident. the black population won't accept it. a lot of tweets from members of congress. lisa is in kansas city. you are on the air.
i am glad we had our first african-american attorney general. what about all of the scandals that are connected to him that have not been resolved question mark --? the nsa scandal. what about the scandals that are connected to him? afraid -- due to his not investigating, maybe the president sees this as a way of pushing away all the scandals connected to the white house.
tryinghis is his way of to bring about a more democratic midterm election. lisa, you are in kansas city. it do you think the attorney general has an affect on your life? caller: no he doesn't. it makes me feel sad as a democrat that the attorney general hasn't solved all these scandals. it makes me feel sad that we have an attorney general that concentrates on lesser scandals. anthony on the independent line. keep talkinge about fast and furious rate that
was not started with eric holder. he put a stop to it. scandals,se so-called these are not scandals. most of these are made up. there is nothing there. how can you investigate something when nothing is there? . i think he did a very good job. people forget about the money he got out of the financial institutions because of the recession. it seems like no one mentions that. was a good u.s. attorney when he was in washington. more from "the wall street journal."
fort pierce thomas florida. caller: good morning. -- calling.ing he was a good attorney general. don't a lot of people agree with that. is madf the republicans about it. race in this country is split down the middle. we were taught that race is over with. came right back in our face when president obama was elected. everybody's got their opinion. stands in the country. it is a shame. that first color set it all.
president obama is not a president -- black president. he is a mixed-race president. it is going to go out sooner or later. he is the president of the whole united states. karl is in a west virginia on the republican line. caller: good morning. when it goes back to when he those likeprosecute panthers in philadelphia standing in front of a polling place with billy clubs and intimidating people. people, been to white they would've been prosecuted to the hilt. attorney on tvs that was working in the justice department when he took over. that was his first orders.
when he wiretapped the phones of fox news, that gets scary. when the irs can come down on people for donating money to this is something that is scary i think. john is calling in from hampton, georgia. john? zache going to move on to and pennsylvania. these are good issues. everything needs to be kept in context. no one likes to get in a way of putting the truth and a good story.
fast and furious was under the bush administration. he put an end to it. thatiretapping, whoosh did at the beginning of the patriot act. the patriot act made a lot of this possible. it is the standing ground against all of these extra powers for the president. they gave it originally to george bush. how can they put that all on holder and the president when the patriot act was enacted under the bush administration? do wasng obama did not the banking scandals and the recession and the wall street guys. holder did what he could do. he got the most money ever from these guys.
the president did not go after political opponents and try to impeach them or lock them up. he worked with it. there were rumors of money being spent on tractor-trailers and iraq. you will remember what we will show you next. had an exchange with eric holder. >> i renew my request. >> we will reap -- provide you with -- is in adequate and i realize that contempt is not a big deal to our attorney general. it is important that we have proper oversight. >> you don't want to go there. about the contempt?
thatu should not assume that is not a big deal to me. i think it was inappropriate. never think that was not a big deal to me. >> i am looking for evidence. normally we are known by our fruits and there are no indications that it was a big deal because your department has not been forthcoming in producing the documents that were the subject of the content. there have been other questions asked. >> the documents we made available we are going to make available now. about the gun lobby and the desire to have -- >> people died. we can't get the information to get to the bottom of that. i don't need lectures from you about contempt. >> i don't need lectures from
that last film clip was shameful the way louie gohmert tweeted this -- treated this man. there is a horrible view of have some sense of reality about them. about would like to say the attorney general is the remember him in phoenix when he called the sheriff the most corrupt in america. he spent five years investigating the sheriff and refused to prosecute him for criminal activities. there was a whole slew of criminal acts that anybody who is familiar with this situation
out here would be aware of. the depth of the problems when you can't take down an 82-year-old sheriff who has run rampant and a county for 22 years. think he will be remembered as somebody who saw the light. eric is in illinois. suggesti would like to a successor to eric holder. they can get the former governor of illinois. be the ruling class. take care of that working class. ruth benjamin suite
independent line. caller: good morning. a previous color mentioned black panthers again. eric holder did not prosecute them. florida here in 2000, jeb bush had his secretary of state make up a list of names who were not allowed to vote in order to stop them at the polls. the problem was most of the names on the list had different mental initiatives -- initials -- middle initials. the black community remembers that. it. did not want to repeat that is why they were there. our next call comes from janice in maryland.
caller: good morning. i've been listening to all of the comments. what mr.ate most of holder has done for the country. changing the scope of how the justice department especially in the last administration. people forget what mr. gonzales did. it was not a pretty picture. the rancor and --tiness and artisan bite , i am struck with we thought this president and this man was put into the justice department, maybe we had gone the problems the country
has had historically. as we have seen with all the nastiness, truth doesn't seem to matter. partisanship. against the stroller, i wish he had gone after people like mr. cheney who condoned torture. after thehad gone people on wall street who stole equity out of my house. they were able to take away from people what they worked so hard for. i want to thank him. there are some things i wish he had done. i wish people would get past their ignorance and their partisanship. check it out before what you are saying is correct. thank you. nebraska ons is in the republican line up. i wish the same thing
that lady just wished. started and first was under the obama administration. runnings a gun operation under the bush administration. force them into the united states to sell them. those gunment forced dealers to sell them. if you like to know about eric the border agent can tell you something about what she thinks. 250 mexicans are killed with those guns. host: this is the -- "the hill"
newspaper. michael is in california on the independent line. caller: thank you for taking my call. eric holder did some good things. but what about the wall street fiasco? he did not prosecute anybody. nobody went to jail. a law firm in washington dc. totally immersed in corporate law. all they do is represent white-collar crime. he is going back to that firm. hill" newspaper
this happened, one of the things in the bible that brings the end times. with all these nations coming together, -- host: why is this such a big deal to you? caller: satan is coming. he is setting up over there. the whole world will take after him. one of the people at the catholic church in new york said it is ok to go out on st. patrick's day. there was a big earthquake in alaska last night. there are so many happening.
that is what i am trying to do. floyd in virginia. to lendi really have some clarity to these comments about the black panther situation. i recently moved to south carolina. polling place was the one where that incident took place. people don't know what they are talking about. a mostlyhborhood is black community. they were not intimidating. they were not intimidating anyone. this is a fox news report here
and people don't know what they are talking about. you have to member what an attorney general is. it is not law enforcement. black people are supposed be locked up in the eyes of most white people. look at that idiot louie gohmert. you can tell the man is not that bright. can you imagine being in front of him as a judge? with his ignorance? eric holder got in his face because louie gohmert needed to be put in his place. john ashcroft was a klansman. he had to renounce his membership with that or it hos : host: john ashcroft was a klansman? caller: absolutely. when you listen to the
conversation about eric holder, isn't all about race to you? it has touched a nerve. this resident who appears to be sit with does not mostly white america. the attorney general -- when most black people tell the truth, they are called racist. the truth hurts. race is an issue -- host: if white people criticize the president, is that racist? caller: no. not at all. of course not. please don't misunderstand me. host: make a final comment. race is a deep issue and
it needs to be addressed. president has people wholot of have racist tendencies. host: jack is in louisiana. i would like to take a motherto think about the and the father and the wife of the dead agent that was killed with the guns. general will not answer the questions or provide the information to find out who is responsible.
caller: good morning. mr. holder's richer from barbados. he is a man of honor and respect and integrity. is problem here in america he was not allowed to do his job drop early. people keep mentioning the agents that got killed and the gun a trade-off. what about the guns that john russia and this stupid isis? mr. holder did a wonderful job and i respect that. thank you.
to turn our going attention to the war, what is going on in iraq and syria. that is our next segment. kevin baronet will be joining us. we cover a lot of debates during campaign season. 100, many of over them live. debate in there was a nebraska. this is a swing district. here is a portion of that debate. 20 20.sight is troops on the borders with syria, we could've
maintain some training and some support mission on the border theoretically. that train has left the station at this point. i don't see us coming back into iraq with that kind of force now or in the future. i agree. the policy of the president has not helped with the establishment of the government. government started punishing segments of their society, we should've been much more involved in that. ,f we would've been more active we may not have had isis.
i support the president on his strikes. i think that is the right thing to do. it is in our national security interest to do that. we have to make sure that this the kurds should be armed as well. they are good fighters. i think the boots on the ground should remain iraq he boots. >> you did recently vote against are aiming -- arming the syrian rebels. >> i was the only one in our delegation that voted against that. i have seen too many incidences where we train a group of people and then as we are training them, they turn their weapons on us. -- syria is one of those places where it is
difficult to tell who are our friends. i worry they would turn on the united states and we would've trained them to do that. >> this is what i think about this. it is impossible for me to know about the bill because i was not briefed. i don't know about the intricacies of that. is howdo believe congress could have left washington after four days coming back from a summer vacation and had a vote on training syrian and moderate rebels without a thorough discussion and debate about where that was going to go. those questions need to be asked and the authority needs to be debated. what authority do we have to make this vote? debate.washington and
i think it should've been thoroughly debated over the weekend after that vote. >> there were several days of discussion. the president asked for congress to make the authority. deadline because of that continuing resolution. journal"ngton continues. want to start by showing you this story. this is in the "miami herald." we have 1000, this new group is going to be the headquarters.
they're going to be split between baghdad and the curtis can region. the first wave of the 475. host: what will these troops be doing it? advising and assisting. they will help guide the iraqi forces. they will do everything from a to help coordinate the fighting. the big question is how much -- willy be allowed they go out of control? makes it more difficult to say they are not combat troops when they are facing isis fighters in the field. go out forse people
better targeting. the pentagon says no boots on the ground. we will see how that goes. host: how well-trained are the iraqi forces? caller: trained and disciplined are two different things. there are pentagon at leaders , theyd the iraq war repeatedly said they don't think that's the reason the iraqi army melted away. .t was that they didn't want to they did not want to fight for this government or the commanders that melekeok gave them. the americans who
were trained up a back during the war. there were soldiers who are standing in their post and collecting a paycheck. they got out of the way fast. the question is not sending trainers to see if it know how to shoot straight. .hey need to reorganize if they have the backing of the government that is inclusive and does not stoke sectarian fears. host: this is a story from the associated press. the british parliament is
debating whether or not to join the coalition. how many participants are there? all u.s. with some side or is it a shared burden? guest: in the case of the they have not done any airstrikes yet. yesterday, the pentagon ticked off a list of this new coalition . we are talking about non-americans. publiclyat the open othered in attacking terrorists in their own region. the arabthe saudi's, there arejordan, five.
the fighters that women are the americans. the second wave was mostly americans. the final wave was mostly the rest of them. how many bombs of the dropped? yesterday they were briefing us on the previous day's operation. about 40 bombs. these are the precision guided bombs. is it more serious or more iraq right now? caller: more serious. serious -- more syria. the number dropped off.
i think the same thing in syria right now. was some them catchments. the oil refineries are on long the syrian border. area.a remote oil is key to their revenue. the pentagon went to great lengths to show satellite side of the yard or depot had been bombed. they pointed out they left the tower standing. incapacitate and not destroy it. fore are revenue sources serious and will have to be in the future.
it goes to show the great lengths the military goes to when they undertake these kinds of operations. are we at war? guest: it's hard to argue that we are not. asked congress. as the president. is about thetion authorities. how long can a president attack another country before going to congress and getting that declaration. day deadline. we will see. the pentagon and the president are setting us up for a long fight.
dempsey said it would be eight to 10 months to get the training down up. this could be years. the pentagon has not named the campaign yet. the pentagon likes to name everything could we're waiting to find out what this will be called, operation what? assad seemsbaron, benefits from u.s.-led raids. how is that? guest: we are doing this fight for
we could have been launching missiles against him and the timber. we gave him a whole another year. the group isis or isil, which has been around since 2011 in iraq, has had enough time to congeal and form. they took on a sod -- assad somewhat. meantime, there was a stalemate and a lot more death and destruction. for now, the status quo in syria , the man in charge gets to still be in charge or the u.s. is not corded 80 -- not coordinating with him directly, but these are being permitted to happen. we are taking out one more group that is assad's anomie. a case of my enemy's enemy is my friend. i do not know. they have a plan to not only back to to bomb isis finally train of an armed the syrian army somewhat. but we will see. right now, the focus is entirely
on this terrorist group, the islamic state. part of this was the aid to the syrian rebels. has that started, and what kind of a? guest: i am not sure if that has started. what is important is that it has started. there were a lot of calls, especially from washington, not just from the hawkish side like john mccain, but a of moderates or security-minded liberals or democrats who thought we should have been giving them much greater weaponry or at least support a long time ago. at the beginning of last summer, spendeneral odierno who more time in iraq than anybody else, he was saying publicly that assad's days were numbered. the territory the rebel groups
held, the damage inflicted, the disorganization to the assad regime -- i do not know if he was overestimating or was hopeful or if it really was that close and things changed and they lost their ground and assad was able to establish himself more and more. where are the bombers taking off from? guest: all over. f-22'sst real wave had and others, and there are aircraft carriers in the region. they flythe b-2's, from the u.s., all the way over. from across the gulf, some out of europe. it is kind of amazing. at least half a dozen types of
aircraft. the level of sophistication and variety that the americans will bring to some thing like this is fairly staggering, including use f-22'sof 22's -- of the am a designed specifically to do aerial dogfights going back to and maybe andon china to come. the u.s. significantly decrease the amount of these planes they originally intended to buy because there is nothing to match them with. but they are sitting around and it costs a whole lot of money. millions and millions of dollars each or so they were used for the first time to drop bombs, f-22's with incredible stealth capability. you have seen pictures of isis.
they drive around in pickup trucks. so there are a lot of questions about costs, extremely high costs that was employed to go after this group. host: is there an estimate of the cost so far? coming.t is they say they are working on it. the spokesman yesterday said it $10 million a to day, which is not that much for a military operation or you can count the planes and the bombs, but how many people, how many bases, how many commands, central demand, headquarters. central demand is based out of tampa. the pentagon, you know, i cannot imagine how many thousands of people are involved or have eyes on these things. host: militarily, what has been the results so far? things, tactical and strategic or tactical, we checkpointsages of
and encampments. there are a lot of so-called bad guys being wiped off the face of the earth. strategically, this was the pentagon's point yesterday, going after these oil refineries . which was not a target to go after commanders are individuals or chemists. it was specifically to basically shake the tree and radel isis' base, take out the funding, let them know what is possible from the u.s. and the coalition and , how theyey react make up the difference. will it change the amount of fighters flocking toward crisis? will it hurt their ability to recruit? will it cause them to stagger? it reveals a lot of intelligence usually. they will keep coming, for sure. these strikes will keep coming. baron, executive
editor of defense one to we will find out what that is in a minute. the phone numbers are up on the screen if you would like to participate -- are talking about some of the military operations being used in iraq and syria. what is defense one? guest: we are the latest new website from atlantic media, part of the same family as the "atlantic monthly" and "national journal." op-ed a lot of commentaries from the secretary of defense, members of congress, as well as our reporting and pretty much of the national , all in one shop.
it is a cross-section that has to do with national security in tohington, from the politics places around the world were military is deployed, looking at technologies being developed faster than ever before. the main structure, the doctrine of future plans of not just the u.s. military but u.s. national security. the height everything is the future of defense, where we are going next. what is coming forward? a lot of wheels are turning, and we're strategizing and thinking about how the u.s., especially the u.s. military, needs to be structured, built, equipped to handle the threats of the future, a much the u.s. needs to get involved and is responsible for u.s. security. these are the questions we are asking. not only with our website that with our annual summit in we had a large event last year with secretary hagel on stage.
this year we will have dempsey and general odierno and others joining us. that is what we do. host: let's take some calls. ourave a call from maine on republican line. you are on with kevin baron. caller: good morning. yeah, my question is -- i grew up in turkey and have a strong interest in turkey. i am curious to know with a curious -- what the current status is in terms of trying to persuade turkey to be more involved. my understanding is that the turks do not want us to use the air force base which is right near the syrian border and would be an obvious source of attacks , butsyria from there what is going on diplomatically with trying to diss -- persuade turkey to be more involved? also, turkey is importing oil on
the black market scale from the -- isis-controlled oil refineries. i would like to hear a little about that. guest: the easy answer would be to check out the "wall street journal" front page today. on howve a great story turkey's attitude is changing rapidly ever since the release of these 49 hostages are turkey sidelines and on the when there should have been a lot of commanders because of these hostages. they have now changed their tune since last week. the vice president met with the president, i believe, and i believe president obama called turkey's president on thursday. you are right. i have been there a few times. there are plenty of air bases in the region.
the u.s. does not particularly need that one base. i think the reality of it is that turkey is the northern border and will apply a lot more pressure militarily and politically on the regime than it has in the past, and now the hitch that capped them from doing so has been removed, you are right that there has been a lot of eager folks in the pentagon and across nato that are hoping that turkey will get in the fight in a big way. host: a call from virginia, good morning. good morning. is the security force protecting these civilians in iraq? are there any security companies that use contracts to protect those civilians? guest: who is protecting the civilians? american western civilians in iraq? when you are a civilian
contractor working for the military, in a lot of cases you're on the base. otherwise, you are on your own. there are lots of contractors in really nobody is covering. i think there are a lot of good sources for a lot of reporters, especially coming out of baghdad where there is really not a lot of information coming out of now and for sensitive reasons. it is not like the days of the war with blackwater and the old days -- just not that level of an operation yet. statust sure beyond that of the contractors there. host: where are most of the reporters covering this space? guest: most of them are right here in washington. onre are no american troops the ground going out of control. coverage is specific to the war in iraq then, and afghanistan.
this is a lot different, a free-for-all in some ways. had a crewfor bbc right up in there iomn fallujah. was a reporter in the north kind of embedded with the kurdish peshmerga. e --s a little odd to se these reporters, just like soldiers, lived through the war, some for years, and they cannot believe they are going back to iraq again. it is a lot of crazy deja vu. more and more slowly, some reporters will need to initially get into their, especially tv and crew. and those that follow the secretary of state, for example, they have had a couple touch and go's/.
beheadings think the have kept people away in a big way. people have stayed away since syria started. no one is in syria. it is an invisible war. nobody is there, very few people. the people that went, a lot of them were freelance. they did not have an employer to which is what a lot of employers are doing because it is too dangerous. even libya. all of these skirmishes, this is not like you are going to the front with the troops and are under their protection. i am curious to see what happens going forward, because this is not going to turn into the iraq war three at that level. so journalists want to cover it. it will have to be hopefully a hybrid version of war. at least journalists will be protected so they are not picked
up and held hostage and have their heads cut off. hopefully some will develop. at the same time, there dying to know what is going on there. i would love to get out there. host: patricia in illinois, hello. caller: yes, i think the strategy that the u.s. has adopted towards isis is absolutely ludicrous and the definition of insanity, which is to repeat actions which lead to nothing and nowhere. interestingly enough, as an aside, i take note that the mention of al qaeda has disappeared altogether. i just want to point that out. at the bottom line is that the u.s. needs to rethink its strategy towards iraq and pull out all of its contractors, and it needs to rethink its policy towards israel and the middle east as a whole. i do not know why this man is saying that he does not see there is going to be a third war or that there will not be boots
on the ground in the future. i cannot believe that that will as we havein time multiple embassies over there to protect and we also have u.s. oil interests over there to protect. so the bottom line is that i am concerned that the u.s. should withdraw from iraq altogether and let their people decide their future as they see fit. when i say withdraw, i mean also withdrawing all the contractors, period. host: thank you. guest: that is a common feeling. theare absolutely right, mention of al qaeda has somewhat disappeared. that is kind of to be expected because there is a new, urgent media story happening. at the same time, in this region , at least, al qaeda was never really the source of conflict. they were fighting in yemen and that is still the greater terrorist group, but in syria it
and this is a group that splintered off al qaeda. in a way, a name is a name. a rose by any other name -- this is the same group. wasal qaeda of old really the core group based out of afghanistan, pakistan, and that has degraded for a long time. it does not take much then raising a black flag to call yourself al qaeda around the world. in the middle east strategy, you are right. on the academic side of national security in washington and across the think tanks, if not inside the white house and others, other places in government, no this is a big opportunity that not just requires rethinking of a larger middle east strategy, but we should take advantage of it. , att now, the middle east
least some of the middle east, is in such chaos that we are talking of doubt a chant -- talking about a chance to redraw maps. what can the u.s. do to get it in that direction and get to state?d we talking decades-long strategy , not what we do now against isis in the next six weeks -- when i say weeks, i mean months. i do not think that there is going to be a ground war or iraq were three. you know, we are in it. we are back there. it is fine. they're absolutely will be some sort of combat level. if i had to guess, i would expect that you will see some special operations forces fighting. there has already been a request to let them get there and be out in the field to help with some of this targeting and get involved. but this president, you have to remember, has shown time and time again an extremely high bar for that type of military intervention. he has had a very low bar for
other typesrikes or of military intervention. it is false to say obama does not want to get involved or does not want to fight. it is how. he came into office thinking this and saying it, you know, that he was going to end this war. and he also sent 30,000 additional troops into afghanistan on a major surge. now we keep hearing over and over again that it is a very high bar. exactly what you were saying, this is a new era where many people in the pentagon want to see this region fight for itself. i was told a couple years ago, it is time for them to bleed for themselves. american fighters went and did their jobs. they are not involved in the politics. so it is time. i think that is why it is so important to see the coalition of the arab states come out and at least get involved in the air
campaign. you're not going to see saudi tanks heading across the cousin you would see iranian tanks coming from the other direction. it is something totally new, something we have never seen. as regions are shaping and redrawing, i mean, that happened in world war i and world war ii. it will change the next 100 years of the region. so how much the u.s. and washington can be involved and should be involved, you know, can direct the outcome -- we will see. i guarantee you that you'll not see a complete pull out of the region. it is too important. yes, the oil is too important for our economy and for our lives. the region, the stability of these major countries is delicate. so the number one concern, at least in the pentagon, is security. not human rights, not democracy.
america'srity, security. as long as anything threatens that sensibility and that since, you will see america absolutely involved for a long time to come. host: kevin baron, a tweet -- let you knowi will as soon as a novick he over afghanistan, victory in iraq, right? the general does not say victory anymore. it is "succeed" in the mission. and is so disruptive dispersed. whatever towns that they were in. they have pushed out and are back into this kind of no man's theywhere they were, where are not controlling a swath of territory.
so the defeat will be when life is normal in a lot of these cities and when they are back to being in encampments are having underground types of movement. there is plenty of acceptance that you are never going to defeat completely these groups as long as there is an ideology. i often go back to an here references to the ira in ireland. were they defeated, dissected, or degraded good enough to a point where the arming's slowed down? there is still something, at least a few years ago, from that group? that isow level threat manageable and life goes on. then there is a new era of terrorism. same kind of thing. in afghanistan, the phrase, is afghan good enough? is the war over?
you will know when you see it. i think you will know when you see it. perhaps in iraq's case, at least, when we know victory over isil or isis, it will be when iraq has its stuff together, when it gets its act together and has a government that is providing services to the country. we're not talking it -- and when we are not talking about them anymore. when we are not talking about them anymore, that is when we know. host: dennis, alabama, republican. caller: i am a vietnam veteran. i think this will be a long drawn out affair and tell america changes its mindset. world war ii was nasty and a lot of the billions got killed. we were not worried about collateral damage when we dropped the bombs in nagasaki, and then the war was over. this will drag out, drag out, drag out. terrorists not
bothering russia? because they know putin will come there and will not care about collateral damage. he will get over now. why does the united states not get that mindset? ok, thank you. guest: well, terrorist do care about russia. there is plenty of violence going on and separatist movements, call them whatever, but they are disruptive groups going out. yes, there have been some iron fists happening there. it is hard to make that comparison in america when they are in russia and being attacked by the russian army. that is different. sake --a and not the and nagasaki, these were states against states where the entirety of the regions were going against each other. this is not the same.
-- they are inry skirmishes and fights. it is different in syria. syria looks like a full nationalistic war across the country. this group like isis with the might of the united states military? commanders will say you are not going to see tank division storm across the deserts to go after these guys. there has to be precision in a way. i do not think -- i think a lot of people are dissatisfied with the taste, the decision to go after this group, into which we could possibly be dropping on's and taking out their fighters and commanders. that is a different question than how do you do it. it would make no sense to carpet after any or to go
mass ordinance. this is the new era of precision strikes were you do not have to do that. we have changed the calculus somewhat. host: a tweet -- guest: benefit from the confusion? host: that is the word she used. know if ih, i do not buy that. israel needs stability just like every other country in the middle east. hasn't he still that keeps holding. both of these countries have an enormous stake in stability. that keeps economies going and keeps life normal and keep the populations happy, democratic or not. there is a reason why you have not seen america push for an
overthrow in bahrain. there is an article by a human rights group now saying this should be an opportunity for obama to be pressuring a country which has cracked down hard on its human rights leaders and its democracy movement. naval bases a major there that historically across from iran which is extremely important to u.s. operations and u.s. security. the saudi's want stability because they are eight players on one side. the iranians want stability because they are players on the other side. you do not want the neighbors to fall into clay -- into chaos either. host: a headline from this morning -- obama turns to egypt in that a against isis. bob from version yet. it was said that they
would support the kurds with heavy weapons, let them basically create a proxy states and the ukrainians to the iranian border, from turkey to baghdad. a do not need any. of the wholee care group with the sunnis. what about that? guest: yeah, right. kurdistan. and twon be kurdistan others, the tripartite option of iraq, and joe biden long ago thought that was one way to go. we will see. i will tell you what the pentagon and what the administration thinks and what i think i know. they still want iraq -- one iraq. moreraq is stronger,
stable, and has a better chance androviding people the hope a future that prevents terrorism in the first place, prevents the conditions which disenfranchised young males turning towards terrorism and these extremist groups. excluding off kurdistan would cause a 50-year type of destruction that would only feel, at least in the short term, terrorist groups and threats. then it would just spark the sunnis and shia to be in a major power battle to get whatever they could from the rest of the country and to set up three independent factions that do not touch each other as much. that is one thought. in the thought is that arming the kurds -- yeah, well, that --s back to the physical back to the first gulf war and the first george bush. it was pretty harsh and we're still paying for that decision. at the same time, there are a
lot of questions about the real fighting capability of peshmerga. how good are they and how much could they really do on their own? ableo knock what they are to do yet, but it is almost mythical when people talk at all about #of. peshmerga was in charge of the region and isis came through. now they are fighting to get it back. do not forget, they were sitting when this all happens. there is no movement in the united states happening to set up an independent kurdistan right now. right now, it is about the military operation to go after this group. this reminds me of a good point. we have another piece, a brilliant analyst -- [indiscernible] recent wiki.
there is no military solution to this problem, but where is the nonmilitary solution? virtually nothing about the u.s. plans are what the u.s. wants to happen when it governmentsraft and in the region. maybe it is just too soon to some, but we are hearing way too much about military strikes. host: here is a piece -- "close your eyes and listen in a texas accent" and you might go back to that time. just because the sunnis agree that we need to have strikes and get back into iraq, that is not the same as what is going on. the bush administration had a
full-blown war with tens of thousands of american troops across the country. the decision to pull them out by the obama administration was representative of obama's own not a goal that we are nation that occupies other countries. at some point, you have to pull back. , pulling troops out of iraq is different than the idea of pulling out of afghanistan and that right across the border are huge american bases and right in that region, there are a lot of american bases that are a real short hop rum iraq. it is not -- hop away from iraq. there are guys on control to pacify full survey does not mean we would have had enough american troops watching the northern border that we would have prevented or seen this coming.
it may not have matter that we had 8000 to 10,000 troops in iraq because the government was still back. still ousting his opponents in a dictatorial fashion, absolutely. american troops may have cut street violence down or ied bombings down, but not an entire -- entire movement of thousands of people furious with their own government to take up arms and that is what happened. host: a call from florida, democrat. morning, thank you for taking my call. my question is -- we know war is money. i would like to know what you think about how many members of congress own stock in these companies that supply this weaponry in these perpetual wars when all of them refuse to maintain our roadways, our
bridges, or anything in our country. they do not want to invest in our country anymore, but they want to invest in these countries because i believe they are making a fortune off of it. i will listen to your comment off the air. guest: yeah, i hear your frustration 100%. of thew, the lack ability of this congress to get anything done is duly noted, and most members of congress are wealthy and a lot of them, i am sure, have stocks in defense suppliers. but here's the thing, it is not really work that way, and it did not work that way even in the early days of iraq where the cheney companies like halliburton were getting major -- $500 million types of contract to rebuild that country . in 2003, we do not know that war was going to go on for eight
years, i worked at the center for public integrity and we look into every contract going out and looked into their boards of directors and their connections to the administration and their donations. the reality is it does not go on dick cheney starting a once in the money off to these companies to go get rich. these companies already are the only companies that do this. so they are the ones that are going to get the contracts when a war starts and we need more missiles, ammunition, and more aircraft or whatever it is. i cannot imagine every single member of congress saying let's start a war to make more money. it is more like the politics matter more than anything. -- the region has , but itut of stability is in a time when northern go backdoes not want to
in and nobody wants to get involved in a ground war, for sure, until american journalist get their heads cut off in television. and that changed everything. policy, the white house, the president shifted his tone after those two deaths and in a big way. because it became a lot more real. and the population that does not want to get involved in a ground war, it also shows a country that never wants to sit on the sidelines. they think if we can do something about some horrible , then weearth should. there's something going on with the public, especially the republican party, to say you want a smaller government, do not want to get involved, and they do not want to let bad things happen to americans. them, as profiteering yeah, there are a lot of companies that are going to get
rich, but honestly, they already are. ombss no matter if the b fall or not. they are already designed and built for the pipeline of the future. so i still subscribe to the -- iy that politicians just do not subscribe to the theory that politicians start wars to stuff their pockets. host: next call. caller: hello. host: we are listening. m, i have a little reading assignment for anybody that wants to do it. china."ll and it has a lot of parallels to iraq and afghanistan. lastin thing is, the conscious thought the squirrels should have is seeing some dots on the horizon.
what can they tell? warthog, ground attack. we're using air superiority fighters are bombing. host: all right, thank you, sir. big-ticketa-10 is a item in the budget five. the pentagon is asking to cancel them. they are legendary aircraft, look really cool with the teeth on the front of them. they are ground support, and a lot of soldiers can thank the a-10 for saving their butts. at the same time, these are considered close ground attack and ground support aircraft. with we were in a ground war and had people in the ground, you might see them being used. but they are not going to be sent on long-distance flights
into especially syria which has significant air defenses. there is a reason why we saw b-1's, theb-2's and stealthy as to airplanes the u.s. has. there is much greater risk to 0 at a lower level to hit these kinds of targets. i just think we do not need them. if we needed them, the pentagon would deploy them, budget fight or not. they may have been used actually , but i have not heard that. host: kevin baron, a tweet guest: they do not have to. they do not have to. you do not hear terrorists ripping out on china, at least we do not hear it. the great state, the united states of america, for good reason, going back to the
1970's, and china had its own reasons, i guess. host: white house and the pentagon, are they in agreement on what is going on over there? and what should be done, more importantly, i guess? guest: yes, i think. attempts toeen some drive wedges between the generals and the white house. i think the only wedge right now would be that there have been generals, including general austin, head of central command, heisman trophy chain of command other than the -- the highest chain of command other than the secretary and president , he made a request that was denied by the president. general dempsey has said he thinks the right balance of force is there now. , general dempsey in congress said should things
change, yes, he would recommend ground troops at some level depending on the situation. right now he agrees with the president. wait atook that to mean, minute, obama said no troops on the ground ever, but the general said differently and we might still have them, so there must be a huge risk. combat commanders in the field, they never have enough troops, money, and equipment. they are always going to ask for more. a lot of senior generals, especially those that have spend a lot of time in iraq, feel that this administration could be doing more earlier, could be doing strikes or something. i also know everyone is professional to the core, and they make their recommendations. when there is a policy objective , here is the military contribution, it is still up to the president to make this policy issues. no, i do not sense an enormous on or somet is going
faction in the pentagon working back channels to send in the 82nd airborne. gary, south carolina, independent line, on with kevin baron. we were inh, when iraq and afghanistan, a lot of our success was due to our air power. since we are already calming over there, why didn't we do anything to help the iraqis before their towns were overrun g- since we are already bombin over there? since we already knew about isis, we cannot afford a plane or two? guest: thank you for calling. on.d questio the answer is this happened too fast. we knew about skirmishes, but people were focused on the forceswar between assad
and the rebels in this group was a splinter. just last week, the new head of nsa and cyber command them is that he thought they had a lot of the intelligence but that they do not raise the warning flag enough so that group came storming in very fast, so fast -- you know, u.s. is not the airpower protector of iraq. iraq has an air force actually. they have plenty of aircraft. as you saw, the iraqi forces themselves completely broke down and melted. so you would have needed a much closer, ready to go relationship . when something like that happens , the solution was going to be, here come the americans to bomb them back down. it happened so fast. this group going and going and going, it just stunned the pentagon that the iraqi forces
let them come in so fast. nobody thought it would be necessary. if baghdad baron, would have following, would the government have falling? guest: i do not think baghdad would have fallen. there is a different group and even the group isis themselves just kind of stopped. they have not tried in baghdad. if they had, there would be a lot more skirmishes. the government was shaky enough as it is. maliki finally gave up the goose. so i do not think so. whether it was because of the security or because the isis fighters probably knew that it would be too much for them, they got the territory and states they needed. they have the money and the fighters. they got their message out. now they are for real. host: coral in ohio.
ohio.l in go ahead. commentyeah, the first i have is, yes, this is a vietnam all over again. bombing starring the late 1960's when lyndon johnson was president. it did not work. my second comment is -- when are our government leaders going to wake up and realize that this is a biblical war? it has been going on for thousands of years. it started where baghdad is at going toit is not stop. it is enough. guest: well, a lot of people have raised the vietnam idea, not because of what you said that the cause they are concerned about being involved in the region. not because of carpet bombings.
yes, that was a good example where the pentagon went to 12 oil refineries with about 40 precision guided bombs. that is it. that is not carpet bombing. that is a big difference. to keepe great pains these countries and regions as contact as possible so that life can go on and people can be happy and happy with the u.s. involvement in making their lives better. past this era get of terrorism somehow. timely,iblical and yeah, this is timely. isis is not fighting against -- not going after, i guess, western targets so much. they are going after each other, fighting their own people, other arabs. muslims against other muslims. it is for control of power. backof these groups -- the story of how the terrorism era started is because you have these regimes they control these
countries, these oligarchs and monarchies, and many are completely secular. they may where the ropes and drivere muslim, but they fast cars and have big fancy appeared to have more gold than you can imagine. in the populations are incredibly disgruntled and very angry. so the only option to vent the anger at to find an alternative was in the mosques. enter -- until there was another option of some kind, that cycle will continue. there is consternation right now about the solution to go after this terrorist group, to involve all the same regimes that the people are angry with to begin with and to legitimize them by asking their militaries to get involved up a country like bahrain, saudi arabia. in some ways, they are good friends to the united states but
they hold rights like women's rights to their own people. it is an interesting era to see how the u.s. and how the region pulls out of. host: kevin baron, a tweet -- mission policing or war? we are policing because we're not on the ground. that is what i thought about the end of iraq and really afghanistan going forward. we are not policing in these ends where -- i heard an analogy once where if there is a bar fight going on, the cops are always going to be called. and they show up, break it up, and go. at the bar fights will happen and that is ok. but think is trite, of it when you think of the
entire middle east and north africa. there will be a lot of fights in that region. at some point, he gets too big and too dangerous and somebody will call the police or call 911. what the pentagon is hoping is that they do not have to call on the pentagon. they can call on the forces in the region, these very capable h-endell-equipped with high a machinery that we have been selling them, time to step up and use it. host: kevin baron, please come back. journal"ngton continues, a roundtable discussion on the new census report on poverty in the u.s.. after that, we will go to phones and take your calls and go to the newspapers. this is the "washington journal" on c-span.
♪ >> this weekend on the c-span networks, tonight in prime time on c-span, the values voter think senatorxas ted cruz and kentucky senator rand paul. saturday night at an being easter, national cap hall on the critical and historical impact of voting. sunday evening at 8:00, washington post columnist sally quinn. greent on c-span2, daniel and william mullen, to operation
-- two operation iraqi freedom veterans talk about isis and the use of american force. saturday night at 10:00, eight bullets are prize-winning reporter on the distractions of technology and its impact on society. annualat 1:00, the ninth brooklyn book festival. tonight at 8:00 on "american , talky tv" on c-span3 about the relationship with the commander-in-chief and how he makes important decisions. saturday night at 10 a clock p.m. eastern, author jonathan white on the role of the union army and abraham lincoln's 1864 reelection. sunday afternoon at 8:00 p.m., and author explores the evolution of first ladies. find the schedule at c-span.org and let us know what you think about the programs you are watching by calling us or you can e-mail us or send us a
tweet. join the c-span conversation. like us on facebook, follow us on twitter. 2014 debatestent continue today to :00. the oregon governor's debate between the incumbent democratic governor and the state representative. sunday, the iowa u.s. senate debate between u.s. cargo mr. andacken bruce braley republican johnny ernst. c-span campaign 2014, more than 100 debates for the control of congress. camthe 2015 c-span student video competition open to middle and high school students to create a five-minute descendent -- to seven minute documentary showing how policy, law, or action by a branch of the federal government has affected you or your community.
200 cash prizes to students and teachers totaling $100,000. studentcam.orgo "washington journal" continues. . host: census report am a new numbers on poverty in the united states. 2013 the census bureau says 45 million americans lived under the poverty line, which is 14.5% of the population. you canorical purposes, see other your spirit 2012, 15%. 47 million people. population in the y.vert 1959, 40 million people. of the american enterprise institute, when you see that number, 14.5% of the population and poverty, what is your reaction? discouraged and
disappointed care we are worse than we were in 2007. and significantly worse than we were in 2000. we reached cut of a trough, and we have gone backwards since then. it is disappointing and we have to rethink what we are doing and examine how we got away from what we were doing that was successful in the late 1990's. olivia golden, center for law and social policy. last: we had a reduction year and we had a reduction in child poverty. so we roughly addressed that during the recession and got close to 2007, but that is not an acceptable level. five youngve one in adults beginning their careers, ages 18 to 24, and because we know a lot about the lifelong consequences of poverty in those years, i think we have to take
really seriously what we do next. which, for me, has a lot to do with the economy, low wage work, and challenges that families face. host: talking about 2000, good economic year for the united -- you think that poverty levels would go down. that is true, but there was much more focus into getting people into employment as rapidly as possible. now i think we are more focused on providing assistance which is good but can't distract from the central -- but can distract from the objective of getting people .nto employment point we're not back to where we were in 2007. we are a long way from where we were in 2000. host: i have a different analysis -- guest: i have a different analysis. when you look at the numbers for
ink, and looking at the one five kids who are poor which has been true for some time even before the recession, there is a lot of work in those families. about 70 percent of those children live with someone who worked. so the issue is not people -- it is not whether people want to work and not even linking them to some work opportunity, it is that the jobs are low wage and not enough hours. circumstances of work that are hard to combine with raising a family. so we need to build on what seated which is a set of programs -- we need to build on what succeeded. employment insurance and social poverty,has reduced food stamps, snap. that is an import and success, but the piece that has been a headwind for families, particularly for parents, is the job market and the nature of
low-wage work. i think there are lots of things we can do that would build on successes we have had and help those families do better. full-time forwork a year, the percentage of people in poverty is less and 3%. so i am not so sure that it is wages. it is the extent of ours and the availability of work. and it is also programs focused on encouraging people to get into work as rapidly as possible. we have a growing number of people that are recipients of assistance, like snape, a food program. it is a great program in america, but it is not helping people get into employment so they can really raise their incomes and move out of poverty. we need more of that in our public policy focus, from washington and from the states. specifically, what would you do to change the food assistance program. guest: iran the program in new york city and we saw a huge ran the in number -- i
program in new york city and we saw a huge increase in number of people getting food assistance. but we also wanted to get people and employment as quickly as possible. the two often did not meet. then we had a program that would provide assistance but it was not set up to encourage people into employment services programs, either by encouraging or by requiring. for certain populations, single individuals without children, who are perfectly able-bodied and working age, i think there should be a much greater focus on helping them get into employment and encouraging them to get in employment. only in that way will their incomes really rise. i think the evidence is kind of different from that when you look across the country. ,hose poor kids i talked about 70% of them living with someone working, almost one-third of them living with someone working
full-time for a year and still poor. i think the difficulty people have in getting full-time hours is an enormous issue. ,he states i am working with and it is consistent with research, are finding that if you make sure that people have enough to eat and they have health insurance and have help with childcare, that actually stabilizes and improves their work experience. from my perspective, and these are not primarily liberal state, idaho, rhode island, colorado, etc., so i think my perspective would be that when you help parents put food on the table, be able to pay for their kids' health care, and help with childcare, you are helping them stabilize. the picture that is our public programs discouraging work is a , ature about 25 years old picture of programs before we improved them so that they help
low-income working people. now what we have to do is have the economy and the nature of work support people the way our other kinds of help do. guest: i was as big as a proponent as possible. the results and the poverty numbers are showing we are not getting enough work. we are not focusing enough on job creation. proponent be a major to make things stronger. as i incremented the style of indications for people knitting together these benefits and not working, that their incomes were staying below poverty. that was not helping them the way they wanted to be helped. statistics that
are discouraging. real median household income for african-americans is down 14%. 14%. we are way off for blacks in america. i do not know that now we have done this work support for the last seven years that we should you more of it. we should get back to a full employment and much more aggressive focus on employment. >guest: it is important to highlight all the things we can do and have done well. increasing coverage among -- host: are those people still included in poverty? guest: it shows up in people's lives. we know a lot about the
long-term effects of having health insurance. you can get treatment for a chronic back pain or mental health problem you can do better as a parent or worker. that is a big success. despite the picture that congress cannot agree on anything, they did pass a revision, improvement of the work training program. we have been working with staff for 10 years and we are excited to do better. it is the center for law and social poverty. we focus on policy. we work with federal and state governments, all parties, community organizations. host: is it a think tank? guest: advocates who are grounded in research.
i would prefer all the people watching to our fact sheet on the census figures. we do lots of practical advice. it might be something like the program working with the states and the staff who need good ideas on what to do. we might work with legislatures and staff. our goal is policy that will help people parent and children succeed and move up and have better lives. with hhs during the clinton and administration. democrat,florida, please go on with your question. caller: how are you doing? [indiscernible]
speak out. host: thank you. we talked earlier about eric holder. we are talking about poverty in the u.s. michelle on the republican line. caller: i hope everybody is having a great day. we're always talking about the symptoms and not the cause. skills tonot have the get the jobs that they need. jobs are given to people -- people who have skills who have hundreds of thousands of jobs are unfilled because people do not have the training. you can fix these little things on the fringes. you have to teach them how to fish. people have to know how to improve their skills.
a lot of people complain about not getting jobs. create your own jobs. people are forced to find ways to create their own jobs instead of waiting for some job to be handed down. guest: i think it is a great point. turning to the issues that lead to poverty is an important part of the discussion. which children and households raised by single parents are far or likely to be an poverty. i think we need to talk about that as well. we need to send a message that if we want to raise children successfully and properly, to involve -- two involved caring
parents is better than trying to do what is difficult but sometimes harrowing to raise children on their own. i also think training education programs play a role. they have to be linked with a job. whate cash welfare world, we were doing was saying training education alone does not help people get into employment and raise their incomes. supplement so people can move up. if we get overly focused in training adults and say let's put you in a training education world without an attachment to work, i am not so sure we will be successful. host: hi, nancy. caller: i am glad to hear some of the points you're guest just made. your female guest needs to have
a violin over her head. downtrodden,ut the let's get real in this discussion. there is fraud and deception and loopholes. people go to work every day. the extra money is going to people who have nefarious intentions. i see it every day. people use those cards every day. they pull a lot of cash out of their other pockets. those cards are not just use for nutritional purpose. i see people use those cards in clothing stores. home goods products. nobody is going after this because it is politically incorrect. guest: let me highlight two
things. the picture that both callers should have in your mind about who is poor in america today. a young woman i met who provided life father-in-law extraordinary home care in the last year of his life while she was also raising a child. think about a parent who is working probably irregular hours, maybe in home care or retail or a jerk store or fast food -- or a drug store. that person is struggling to do what we want them to do, which is work more and move up. you have to have education and skills to move up. we focus on access to community college and training programs. that is what it takes.
that young woman i met needed to be able to make the leap if she was going to support her family. i ran programs in three different states and working with six states now. i would highlight there isn't a lot of fraud or error but you do have to pay attention to it. technology is you good ways to make sure you're using all the information you have. you do not want it to be impossible to get health insurance. you want to use all the data you have. there is good work going on on that. guest: on the question of those that we limitosed the use of the food stamp card in the case of sugar and sweetened beverage, a leading
case of obesity and type two diabetes. it to go for nutritious foods and not foods that are bad for people. york to a test in new see how it worked. we were not able to do that. when it comes to the use of that ist cards, something we need to work harder on. host: a call from kansas on the democrats line. you are on. caller: i think the biggest problem is too little wages. people cannot live on minimum wage if they work 80 hours of work. beef has doubled in price. i think every ceo should have to work one year on minimum wage
and see if they can live off of it. anst: well, we have assortment of programs which make wages that are minimum for households with children go much further. you can get a $5,000 earned income tax credit above the value of the minimum wage. you can sometimes get food stamp benefits. we shore up wages in that way that makes those wages go farther. i am concerned of the negative impact on a mandated higher minimum wage on the people that are struggling the most in america. further oute forced of the labor market. guest: i think the minimum wage ismpople need to be able to support a family through work. we work with employers.
low wage jobs often have other challenges that make it hard to raise a family. one issue is scheduling. you find out your hours a few days in advance of your shift. you cannot make a steady income when you cannot better yourself by going to school. improvements in wages at work and in scheduling of low wage work are important. host: dave is in california on the republican line. we are talking about poverty in the u.s. caller: i hope i do not get nervous. the minimum wage should be no less than $15 an hour. host: we are listening to you. caller: $15 an hour. inflation. with
my wife works at an office on a computer and gets paid a good salary. people doing all the work, dishwashers, working at mcdonald's don't get any money. all they have to do is raise the memo wage to at least $15 an hour. i will let you comment. host: thank you very much. let's go to tax policy. earned income tax credit. has that been effective? guest: earned income tax credit has been effective. there were some expansions in the recovery act to help target some of the children's tax credits. that has been effective. proposed by republicans and
democrats is expanding the earned income tax credit to some younger workers. that might address some of the issues for young adults and two adults who don't have children. a noncustodial father could get that boost as well. i think that is an important part. i agree with the last caller. guest: the earned income tax was very effective in shoring up low wage workers and there is a gap. oftenyoung man who are noncustodial parents. we passed the first earned income credit targeted at those individuals that were working at low wages and needed annexed her boost. i am glad to see both democrats and republicans talking about
it. there are childless adults who are a lot of people. some people are poor and struggling. if we pass a change that benefits all of those people, will that change be sufficiently targeted or will it be a large expenditure without sufficient targeting? host: george in kentucky, democrat. caller: i disagree with this notion of skills. corporate retail outlets all over the country, they would prefer people that they could control with mindless obedience. there is so much micro management from the corporate level. that is number one.
when you do not have a good public sector like in large cities, we have pit poor districts against large districts. the poor district do not get sewage systems, public libraries, schools, parks. they get nothing. the well-off districts get what they need and then some. the disadvantages grow over time. it is not resonating in better wages. guest: i am sympathetic for the comments about corporations. look at the chart i your screen. the median household is down. that is terrible. i believe we need a greater consciousness among corporations.
customers, they're always pushing to lower prices. investors, which focuses on investment returns. and employees. that is who i think they are not caring enough about. much more focus to attention toward american corporations, which are now the largest employers on their responsibility toward employees. a lot of benefits when to health care. moreully they can provide in wages and salary. focus on the second part of your comment. one of the things in the census data was that poverty is bad
enough for people in general in the united states. it is worse for african americans and latinos, particularly children and young adults. part of that is living in communities where you don't get the quality of education and services. we look at the details on how that plays out. they are less likely to have a calculus class or a college counselor. i think that is an important point to keep in mind. there are effects in terms of work and the economy and there are effects that are particular to local places. lindsay is in chicago. caller: i would like to make a
comment. statistics point that the poverty started when one of reagan came in. look at the policies that were lamented. the minimum wage has a long-term detrimental effect on a so security check. people not making enough for the family and they have to be on food stamps. that is unacceptable. wage.1980 minimum guest: on the second point, i completely agree with what you highlighted in terms of wage levels going in six or seven days and just working a couple of hours. some of those issues of scheduling are being addressed in the congress with her postals. the are postals have not passed
yet. on the history, in addition to the problems over the last few decades, there have been times when we invested on the public side and times we did night. the work effort of individual people has increased over that time. half of the women were in the labor market in the 1970's. now two thirds to three quarters of all mothers are working. of the lastriod several decades, we have had a big commitment to do more work, but we have had an economy that ihas undercut some of that progress. guest: we have had a big commitment in government expenditures.
the overall spending for low income americans has not diminished over the years, it has grown. holding ronald reagan responsible for bad times now is difficult for me to comprehend. the 1990's were good in fighting poverty. we participated in welfare reform initiatives. since 2000 or so, we have gotten away from what was clearly working. i look at the chart and i see the high points where poverty was at its lowest. there?what were we doing how can we get back to there? it was about rewarding work. we are not doing that in the right way. from ed is a republican
north carolina. caller: good morning. experience personal that i would like to pass on. give me a couple of minutes. my wife works in a store that provides something in the medical industry. there are people in training programs that have vouchers provided i the american people -- people like to say subsidies. in while the program goes on. later, they have a different voucher on a different program. it wasn't cut out for them. a gentleman had a story in walmart where a woman was in
line. his wife started talking to a lady, commented on her $400 purse. she was dressed to the hilt. winning came time to pay for it, the ebt card came out. her comment was, "what do you care? it is a government money." money andit his my everyone's money." i don't mean poor people should be stressed. the fraud and abuse. host: we get the point, ed. thank you. guest: the first point about the way it is not working well in the store were your wife works is an important one.
when you look across the country, is less about the people than some of the pathways that the trading system works. there was a lot of discouragement or lack of success in providing training that was well linked to needed jobs and the needs of people. i mentioned the bipartisan law that congress passed, which gives states the tool to focus in on training that will take long enough to bring someone where they need to be. i think there is lots of room for improvement. when i think about all the people i have known -- i'd -- people i talk to. people in the states where i work. what stands out for me is how hard people work to take care of their families.
they're always going to be people and you need a good way to address fraud and technology has made easier. i want to underline that your values that you have of working hard and taking care of your family, that is what the people in the census numbers are doing. they are working, but they are working really hard to take care of their families. it is not just a small number of people finding themselves in those circumstances. poor 40% of families are or near poor. i would think about those values that so many of us share as characteristic of those people. in --this tweet came
in anti-poverty programs for 18 years. i could call myself a conservative as well. i don't think that is what is stopping us from helping poor americans. our economy is not growing rapidly enough and providing enough job creation for people to take advantage of. not enough focus on getting people rapidly into employment. it is not the absence of employment -- people need to work if they had an opportunity to work more and their incomes would rise. it is not about being contemptuous on poor people but
about being respectful of the taxpayer. we have lost sight of the fact that these programs to have the credibility with the taxpayers, they have to be viewed as being clean and fairly going to the people that are truly in need. programs rules have changed significantly. we are getting the assistance in all of our ways to people who are truly in need. host: greg from kentucky, democrats line. caller: thank you for having me on. the programs are fine. i think they need to be left alone. for once, they just need to be left alone. i think we need to get back to
real problems. get our energy costs down. the utilities are high and you can't even breathe. you cannot do anything. you cannot travel or work because the energy costs are so high. you got your gas and everything else. you are paying too much money for all the utilities. that is why the poor people cannot move. host: thank you, sir. any comment for that caller? guest: you focus on the cost people face and the costs can be great when they are working. you highlighted energy. childcare. if you're thinking about a family that is working, they are trying to make sure their kids
are well taken care of, both further education and to be able to work. that is another big piece of the puzzle. we made a lot of progress on. i would disagree a little bit with robert. the progress in the second half of the 1990's was also because we change the public programs to help low income working people with a lot more money to help with child care and health insurance and also because we had a strong economy and less inequality. onhink that you're focused putting together the pieces of what somebody needs to keep moving forward is an important way of thinking about the program. host: are there a lot of working poor and the poverty figure we showed earlier? time, if you work full
the percentage of poverty is less than 3%. it is not to say they are not struggling or low income. they are classified as that number. that is not the case. there are sources of assistance that are not counted in that number. we didn't really talk about that, but the extent to which the measures sometimes overstates the material hardship of americans is true. earned income tax credit, food stamp benefits would bring 3 million, 2.5 million more people out of poverty if we counted them in the measure. the real problem is they are not working enough. they are working some, but not enough. i am not holding them accountable for it. i'm holding our economy and economic policies and public
assistance programs that aren't encouraging and promoting more work and providing greater work opportunities. host: william is in glen rose, texas. you are on "washington journal," william. guestcaller: all right. i am in my 80's. when all these people get the country back to the 1930's, they are not going to like what they see. these companies, they preach the big lie. they are not trying to develop jobs in the united states. they are developing them in china and mexico and all over the world. we are buying the products on the credit. the poor people don't have a chance because they don't work for minimum wage, they don't work. the big lie is when you get people back having scurvy stores like i had when i was a kid,
,here is no money for doctors people had opportunities and they could live or die. we ate roadkill, we ate anything that wouldn't eat us. got 10 gets back, we've times more people now. there is not enough fish and not enough possums. there's is not enough road tilt of t -- not enough roadkill to feed the poor people. host: we will let your comments stand and listen to roberta in oklahoma. caller: i have a, and then a omment and that a question. in 1973, the minimum wage was was5, the largest salary $300,000. since that time, they have added
one halfs to the top of 1% of the population, and ino zeroes at the bottom. and our economic policy that was triggered by the opec recession -- opec caused this imbalance. until we declare you can't always bring the top salaries down except by taxation, it is time for the federal reserve bank to step forward and fund arrays of minimum wage to $70 an hour -- $17 an hour until the balance is achieved. and then you won't have to have all of these policies of giving away money and creating poor people and suffering and all that. i think you would have to stop some of the wars, too.
for that is my comment. ok, we are going to let that comment stand because we have talked about minimum wage what of it. you look like you want to say something -- guest: the topic the caller is raising is an polity. i do it, in terms of being a poverty fighter, as a little bit of a distraction. i don't think it has contributed to improving the livelihood of low-income americans, and i think it has taken us away from the focus on helping people get back into work. i think there are issues with regard to inequality and i mention to the corporate focus --allergies and wages salaries and wages. yes, but if we focus on that we lose sight of the real problem. are not problem is we creating enough opportunities and jobs and public assistance programs are not encouraging and promoting employment as much as we should. that would help more americans will stop if we focus on how rich they are, we will talk about it and make a lot of noise
about it and we will make progress. -- we won't make progress. guest: i think inequality does matter because among other things it means that sometimes people who are making policy or thinking about choices and the preparation have a harder time imagining the lives of other people. i think it is crucial that we all understand how much we are in this together, and how much the challenges are shared. i think it is important in that way. i think it is important because it makes moving up the ladder harder. somebody earlier expressed the view that still training doesn't really work because corporate bosses just want low-level people. it is not true of all the people who run companies. there are businesses who want talented employees to move up. but again, it is easy people are nother worldwhole not to think about it. i have not as pessimistic as the caller or robert about making progress about it. i will give the example of
health care. just a few years ago it was unimaginable that somebody working in a low-wage job would be able to get health coverage for themselves, and right now that is true. people can. the numbers show it and the stories show it and that makes a difference in people's lives. i think it is important, and i think there are steps we can to resist imitating. persistently taking. censor youe not to two. [laughter] jump out of your skin. host: that he is calling in from albuquerque, new mexico on the democrats line. caller: thank you, peter, thank you for the two guests discussing a subject that is so serious now. i'm tired of these people who call in with these radiant --
reaganesque welfare queen stories to the largest employer in our country right now, walmart, is the biggest welfare queen in our country. the use of americans in every state where there is a walmart -- millions of americans in every state where there is a walmart is picking up the tab for what walmart does not provide for its employees. we are picking up the tab for the health care, for food stamps because they pay these people so little it is absolutely end of seen it he. obscenity.ely an this five-member board, the they are some of the wealthiest people in america. as far as other corporations go, they are sitting on billions and billions and billions of dollars right now, most of it is offshore because corporations just don't want to pay the taxes they should be paying into this country. host: all right, we got your point, that he. -- betty.
olivia golden, when it comes to walmart are they a good corporate citizen, in your view? guest: i don't think i know enough to comment on corporate citizenship across the board. the caller's point about the consequences of low wages and part-time work hours and uncertain work hours, when corporations do that, it has consequences for the people that work there, it has consequences for the families, which means for all of us, and it has consequences for taxpayers. the call for corporate responsibility is really important. so is helping on the public side with something like health insurance that shouldn't depend on whether you work for a good citizen. and wonderful treats in -- tweets in guest: well what one of the things to keep in mind, it in
class we do a lot of work with employers to choose high road strategies -- paying workers enough, training, providing them with a belief. many low-wage workers cannot get a day off if they are sick or their child is sick. what is most important is that is that it gives you better stability. you don't spend time with turnover and churning. there is a business model that really works, that has higher pay and better conditions for employees. i think we have to be countries of the decision-making process that businesses go through. it is not easy to open a business and to run a business, not easy to hire people and take risks that come with employing people and investing in a potential business opportunity. my view is that it might be better if we lived in a different kind of welcome but the fact is, it is a very competitive world, international global economy, and over many years, democrats and republicans have supported ways to
supplement low wages through government transfer or. the things that -- government transfer programs. i don't object to that. in the absence of that we would have fewer opportunities, and we would have greater poverty, not less. it is important for policymakers in washington to be conscious and not idealistic of how hard it is to make decisions about growing a business and how every additional job that they hire or decide you have is a commitment on their part that comes with risks. --want to make that risk < we want to make that risk less difficult, not more. that is what i worry about in america. i don't think we are making policies conducive enough to greater hiring by american companies. host: terry is in missouri. caller: yes, hi, i just wanted
to make a quick comment about a couple of items. one is the ebt cards, the nutrition program. i believe mr. doar mentioned limiting sweets on those types of purchases on those cards. it is very expensive to eat nutritionally adequately. it is very expensive to have proteins and fresh fruit and festivals as opposed to what a lot of groceries sell now, carbohydrates. foods, andepackaged they are much cheaper -- host: all right, we got your first point. what is your second? caller: second point is i totally agree with the caller running walmart -- regarding walmart. they really are taking advantage of the government as far as the
programs that they don't offer. host: thank you, ma'am. we have discussed both of those issues a little bit. poverty in the u.s. is the topic. we will start with you and finish with olivia golden. final comment, poverty in the u.s. is it possible to alleviate? guest: absolutely. we can do a lot better than we are doing now. we did better in the 1999 and 2000. the reason we're not doing anter is we are not creating apartment where opportunities are more prevalent than they are now and we are not requiring giving assistance programs so that they support and enhance work, not replace work. it is five years from the end of the recession. it is getting old to hear people say well, the recession was
really deep. spent appoint we have not enough time on is the high rates of poverty among children and adults which we have had for death -- decades. getting to the place for young children is going to require work that is very doable. high rates of poverty for those groups have consequences for the whole country and for our future. orther among the callers viewers you yourself know somebody struggling, people who are going to be the workforce in the next decade are growing up and struggling families. what we need to do is what one callers said,g -- keep the momentum going on the programs that work, and figure out how to take on some of the issues of low-wage work. i think there are lots of different strategies. we talked about some of them -- improving the minimum wage,
education and training opportunities, and work on other conditions of low-wage work. host: olivia golden, robert doar , please come back. guest: thank you. guest: thank you. host: it is open phones. we put a lot of public policy issues -- eric holder, public whatever public policy issue you want to discuss, you can see the numbers on your screen. host: we will continue in just a moment. >> c-span campaign 2014 debate coverage continues today at 2:00. the oregon governors
today. -- debate. sunday, the iowa debate. c-span campaign 2014, more than 100 days for the control of congress. >> here are a few of the comments we recently received from our viewers. >> c-span2, usually booktv, i really enjoyed that. it looks like maybe you are experimenting, trying to find a new format. i think booktv is one of the smartest things on television. it is what you hope television would be. it's too bad there isn't a cable channel devoted to it. i'm glad c-span is doing it and .t is really important
i watch it for general information, two. >> i want to tell you that i don't watch tv anymore because i can't euro is going to be shown -- figure out what is going to be shown. it over thetch weekend, and comcast in , they say they're going to be talking about some book but they only give you the first two words of the chapter. it doesn't tell you what is going to be coming on. because i don't know what is the. to be on >> you are the best news source i have the moment. i love your show, i have watched for years. keep up the good work. >> continue to let us know what you think about the programs you are watching.
"washington journal" continues. host: leo is in lafayette, louisiana. caller: i am appalled at your callers, specifically the one that went in depth on buying food on the card. recent statistics show, which would never hear about, 24% of corporations have moved money overseas to foreign banks. what is the difference between a poor lady buying food with an eb t card and people that have money moving money overseas to foreign banks?
what is the difference? host: linda is in knoxville, tennessee. democrat. caller: i was trying to get in on the last segment but good so this is to the poverty thing. toant "washington journal" do a segment on the return of debtors prison. the vespers and you have on would be the woman -- i didn't have time to look at -- the best person to have on would be the woman -- i didn't have time to look it up -- the attorney general of illinois. restrictions are requiring people to pay court fees. they should pay for the cost of processing their badness. then they turn these court fees that poor people can't afford into accounts receivable and turn them over to a private collection for. this private collection from charges and interest rate or fee they please so that a $100 fine
turns into thousands of dollars. host: very quickly, tie this into the debtors. that debtors is an issue. -- the debtors prison issue. caller: now you are in contempt of court for failure to pay fees and you can be held in jail for contempt. host: how do you know some about that? -- how do you know so much about that? caller: because i've watched other segments on "washington journal" and i have seen this slowly work itself out in my own county. the general umbrella idea is how different states' laws create kind of a black hole with the gravity well and how the ravi well -- gravity well to be a different shade. host: did you see the show we did when we did a three-our show on race in america, class in
america? how about a show on debt? caller: i'm not sure this particular topic -- if you did ebt.aspects of d the user elong. i have lived in liberal states all my life until i got down to tennessee and i was shocked by how every strip mall has a place,loan or title loan fleecing poor people out of the last bit of emily wealth they have -- family wealth they have. it is a multibillion dollar industry. host: "the wall street journal" has this article. "he obama administration finds repose tougher -- plans to propose tougher protections for personal loans to the military, circumventing -- lenders are circumventing rules designed to protect service members from taking on high-interest debt. the dod plan is expected to extend the 36% cap on interest
rates on loans to troops to include a broader swath of s -- such as credit cards -- that had previously been exempt." brenda is in tallahassee, republican line. caller: hi. i would like to say that all these people who think the minimum wage should go up to $15 thatur, don't they realize the corporation never loses? it is the taxpayers and senior citizens you have to pay the higher prices that lose. they can talk about raising it onl all they want. it is affected by higher prices. host: walter is in arlington, texas. independent. ,aller: talk about race inequality, poverty, i think those go hand-in-hand. we talk about we need to go back in the past and look at what has
been done for those people. youth can't have anything because of what was taken from their parents. any man who wanted the job could have the job. those jobs are outsourced and then positions were given to illegal immigrants. or whatever. but nothing has been put in place for blacks. preparations was never given to african americans in our country. we were just put out here to go on our own and we did pretty good in some places, but then the government would come in and take over. if we were given a chance with something of our own, we could do a lot better. we wouldn't have poverty in this country. as far as the elderly, they have lived their lives and most of them are content with where they are. but middle-aged black people lost and are constantly losing.
host: the census report that just came out on poverty in the u.s. -- here are median household incomes by race. $67,000. why, $58,000. his dad, $41,000. -- hispanic, $41,000. african-american, black, $34,000 per year. jesse is in michigan. democrat. caller: good morning to you. i want to comment on -- [indiscernible] is, we -- if my figures are right -- $125 million a day in iraq. i hope i'm not wrong.
we wasted all that money in iraq. african-american product in the white house and he said that $10 an hour would get people out of poverty. he must be out of his mind. this man cannot have you -- this man care nothing about you. we haven't had a raise in social security -- $20, something like that. how is he going to manage the bills that are going? you he will have $20, $30 for a whole year? this is outrageous. this man is in the white house now -- i don't have no confidence in him. they voted for him once, i'll never vote for him again -- host: all right, jesse.
linda is in east point, michigan. republican line. caller: i just want to say that this whole poverty thing is starts much longer. i think it is a matter of teaching our children personal responsibility so that when i get to the workforce they my daughter is 18, she has worked for company, she started when she turned 18. for less been open than a year. she has watched a minimum of 50 employees, and go around her. they, laid, they leave early -- come late, they leave early, they don't come in uniform. where is the resource possibility -- personal responsibility? comes.w when the bus
be there. host: "fbi chief slams apple and google for phone encryption." "post" you from the might be interested in, kevin brady of texas is going to challenge paul ryan for chairman of the ways and means committee. georgia, independent line. caller: good morning. now, i listen to discredit it, and what you hear are the symptoms of a major problem that we have in this country. and that is the proper representation in congress. now, it is my opinion that is not in compliance with the articles of the constitution. that being in article one, section two, there should be one
for every 30,000, one congressman. we don't have that. we don't have proper representation -- host: do you think the congress of several thousand people would be a good idea? caller: yes, sir, because some of these congressmen representing 3 million, 4 million people. do you really think they contact those people on a personal basis to get their opinion? no! host: sheila, kansas. hi, sheila. caller: good morning. i would like to talk about corporate responsibility. s are blaminger impoverished people for their own property. but a generation ago when the company hired someone, they provided the training for that person.
now they found that they can the -- pushed back onto the government and the taxpayers and have welfare trainingpay for the and they do the same thing with food stamps could consider giving them race, the people have to get the stamps. manyuld get rid of so welfare programs of the corporations would take responsibility like they did a generation ago and our economy .as much stronger host: from "the washington some" "say is that breaks from yemen embassy -- state it stateave to mak -- evacuates some from yemen embassy."
lisa is in jacksonville, florida. caller: hi. i have a couple of things to get on. one religion was talking about earlier on poverty and couples without open contact breaks and so forth. husband and i, our children are grown. i am now unable to work so we are living off of one income but we are having to help our twodren, who are working part-time jobs and my son is trying to raise two daughters and we are constantly having to help the children so that they above water, and my daughter works two part-time jobs and has no children and she tries to get insurance of the marketplace and they wanted so insuranceth for the that she couldn't afford to pay .er bills
i appreciate that there are many people out there who have great jobs and the jobs went away but s.ey now getting cell phone we worked our whole entire lives and we share one cell phone. i just don't understand the concept of give, give, give, not expect people to stand up for -- host: all right, that is the last word for this morning's "washington journal." we will be back at 7:00 a.m. tomorrow morning. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute]