tv Washington Journal CSPAN April 30, 2015 7:00am-10:01am EDT
♪ host: good morning, everyone can on this thursday, april 30 2015. house and senate republicans have reached a deal on the budget proposal, leaving a vote -- a way for the vote on the house floor. meanwhile, a second night of curfew, but protests have spread across the country and the discussion continues about racial and economic tension and what to do about these issues. what is your take on this? the numbers are on the screen.
if you live in baltimore, we want to hear from you. where are changes needed going forward after the protests in baltimore. you can join the conversation on twitter or facebook, or you can also spent -- send us an e-mail. i want to show you the front page of the baltimore sun this morning. the article on the front page says masses of mostly peaceful demonstrators marched on city hall. officials on wednesday began their own offensive to prevent violence from flaming again on friday.
that is the latest from the baltimore sun. discussion continues in the paper today about what to do next, how to avoid this type of situation from happening again. what changes are needed? that is our question for all of you. the candidates for 2016 are weighing in. here is what hillary clinton had to a yesterday. [video clip] hillary clinton: there are police departments demonstrating strategies, and we need to learn from those examples on build -- and build on what works. we can start by making sure funds for state and local law enforcement are used to bolster best practices rather than to
buy weapons of war that have no place on our streets. [applause] president obama's task force on policing give assess -- gives us a good place to start. it is a recommendation on form from trading to technology guided by data. we should make sure that every police department in the country has body cameras to record interaction between officers on patrol and suspects. that will improve transparency and accountability and help protect good people on both sides of the lens. for every tragedy caught on tape, there surely have been many more that have remains invisible. not every problem can be or will be prevented by cameras.
but this is a common sense steps we should take. host: hillary clinton yesterday weighing in on what should be done about situations like those in baltimore where freddie gray was -- unfortunately died after being arrested by police. we are talking about what led up to that death and that is on the front page of the des moines register as well. criminal justice reforms are urged. michelle, independent, what reforms do you think are needed? caller: i think the changes that are needed are to fire all of the whiteboards that -- white boys that call themselves police officers and start a new. host: michelle, why do you think all white police officers are the problem? caller: because of american history, because the history of white people in america, the
killing, the robbing, the mugging, the stealing, lying everything white people do is wrong. host: michelle, i'm going to move on. michael fletcher had a piece in the post yesterday. if you missed it, you should read it. a longtime baltimore resident, and he said people in baltimore will tire you it's not just the white police, but the black police as well. in maryland, a democrat, good morning to you. caller: good morning. i have a very important question. if not partisan and is not a racial question. if anyone with brain can answer this, i will be the happiest person in the world today.
the kid in baltimore, he made the wrong move. the police looked at him, he ran, and they chased him down. he got out of the van debt. this other -- out of the van d ead. this other guy, he landed a gyroscopic on the lawn, right, and he did not get slapped around. he was somewhere getting coffee taking a nap. can anyone answer me that? is very mind-boggling. host: you were talking about the man who flew the gyro copter. this is what the post reports.
so to your point about what happened to this guy who flew a gyro copter into restricted airspace that is what happened to him and that is where he is now. we will be talking about that coming up later on the show with one of the lawmakers that was part of the hearing yesterday on capitol hill to review how and why that pilot was able to fly into restricted airspace. let's hear from less in detroit. caller: good morning, fellow patriots. the training that needs to be done the most is the training of our police force, not to be treating fellow americans like combatants and that is what seems to be happening
especially in the african-american community. we have police officers treating us like we are foreign citizens. there's no due process when it comes to african-americans. they shoot and ask questions later. the police set themselves up to be judge, jury, and executioner's in our community. until we start training are police officers, and that is all of them, that we are not combatants. we are american citizens. and some of us are misguided and criminals, but they should not be judge and jury. host: how do you change police conduct? is it a culture? is it federal laws? caller: i think we may have to go to the federal government for protection, and the laws and the
training and the attitude of some of these police officers needs to be checked. i heard from some of the police officers here in detroit that they have evaluation at the beginning of their career, but during the course of their careers their minds are changed. they need to have talks by psychologists or psychiatrists throughout their career. because it is a stressful job. i worked in law enforcement. i worked in a correctional facility. we need to try to change the attitude of our police officers. host: what do you think about body cameras? caller: i think it's a good idea. it protects the officer isolate the person being arrested documented evidence of what the police action is in the course of an arrest. i think that's a good idea. technology is here, so we should have body cameras on all officers. host: all right.
peter, germantown, pennsylvania, what are your thoughts? caller: i think one of the problems is all of these social ills, in the black immunity in the inner-city especially, they are just talking about symptoms but they are really not talking about the disease, which goes back at least 50 years, the rising illegitimate birthrate. you have now 70% of the black children born to unmarried mothers and there's no father around, you cannot create healthy family structure. that creates more chaos, more is the ability -- more instability. the kids cannot grow up without that cannot grow up with being instilled with moral values and you have all of these pathological lifestyles going on. the welfare system is only encouraging and enabling that. then you get all the symptoms the social ills. the high legitimate -- illegitimate birthrate is the social font of all of these ills.
proper family structure is the key to stability and preventing these problems. you have to have parents who are married and take care of their children and raise than the best it can also and give them the best chance. family structure is the foundation of society. and in these communities, the foundation just cracked to pieces. they're falling apart. host: that was peter in germantown, tennessee. the senator of walter scott was on yesterday, that is the man that was bitterly shot. -- fatally shot. take a look. [video clip] senator: we should always have as much information as possible, body cameras. if we use that, we would have a
different outcome. what we have seen from studies in body cameras is a 90% drop in complaint against law enforcement and a 60% drop in the use of force. i believe body cameras will help keep more people alive and help to restore confidence. host: tim scott weighing in on the situation, called for body cameras. he believes that will help the situation and not lead to what we have seen across the country and more recently in baltimore. i want to read you mr. lancey williams piece in "usa today your cap he writes the -- "usa today." he writes the opposing opinion.
that is his piece in usa today. catherine in new hampshire, independent. what do you think? caller: good morning. i have an idea, and it may be good, maybe not. i recall around the 1950's, maybe the late 1940's, the 1960's, is a young adult committed theft or destruction of property they would be given a choice of either join the u.s.
military or be arrested and have a criminal record and go to jail. and this option could be given to those who have committed theft and destruction in the baltimore riots. and it could be used throughout the country. in the military, these young people would learn discipline and maybe have a chance of getting a ged or learn work skills and have pride in being a respected member of society. and i thank you. host: ok. we will go to philip next in cambridge, maryland. caller: she just took it right away from me. i was going to 30 people are stuck there. the military will take them. you can learn a trade in the military. you can stay there for life or be out in four years and get your college education paid for. there are opportunities there. if you are stuck there, you got to pull your own bootstraps up
instead of asking more people to do something for you. i would love to say, hey, i will do something for the government and the government will do something back. i've got five people working for me and four out of five of them were in the military. one of them is the national guard right now and he is gone for three days now, and it's hurting my business because he -- i do have one of my main helpers with me. host: he was called up. caller: yes, he was. host: what did he say about being called up? caller: he loves the service and that is why he joined. it's what he does. another one of my guys was in the national guard and i let him go. he is training every other weekend and he's trying to improve himself. but he is trying to stop he is taking that opportunity to do something to help himself -- but he is trying. he is taking that opportunity to do something to help himself.
all of these guys, four of them have been in the military. they don't talk bad about it. they have their health care. they've been trained to do things. you can sit back and say -- it is easy to say, hey, i have no opportunity and i'm to pride. there is a bus out of their everyday -- out of that area every day. you can walk out. join the service. they will teach you something. host: ok, philip. the "washington post" this morning has this.
nicholas kristof with those details about freddie gray, that he did suffer lead poisoning as a small child and nicholas kristof links that to higher crime and mental illness. we will go to wes in cary north carolina. hi, good morning to you. caller: good morning. how are you doing? host: you are on the air. caller: i really believe these police issues are nationwide not particularly regional. we probably should go to the u.s. marshal system.
and secondly, the gentleman from tennessee was mentioning about the family structure that is damaged and all of that. basically, when nafta came onto the scene, a lot of low-wage workers were exported and a lot of jobs were exported offshore. -- work imported into the scene and a lot of jobs were exported offshore. and you have a lot of americans in jail for nonviolent, victimless crimes. that affects the family structure a great deal. and thirdly, i wouldn't call the police. i seen situations, heard stories where people call the police to help with a family member and in their loved one ended up being killed.
host: pamela in maryland, democrat. caller: i was going about one of the guys earlier about the jerome man -- drone man landing at the white house comparing him to the black kid that was killed. everybody was trying to say is saying there is no justice. he could have killed the president of the united states -- host: it was on the capitol grounds. caller: well, anyway, i think what he was trying to say is you can do that, but now a kid can make eye contact with a police officer and run and he can be killed. but the guy who did this is doing home detention. that is what i believe he was trying to say. host: ok.
the, roberts though, missouri, independent c. caller: i think a lot of this is due to the drug wars and police training. i grew up in the 70's and they would let you join the military back then. they won't do that no more. i don't know where these people are saying join the military. they won't even take the high school graduates with the cleanest place there is. and they said the jobs overseas. their income no chances for young people anymore -- there ain't no chances for young people no more. you put them in jail, become up, all that stuff, and that is the whole problem. we need to vote the people out of office that are in there,
democrats and republicans, they are all in the same boat. that is the whole problem and that is my comment. thank you. host: all right, steve. we are taking your comments about the baltimore protests and the calling for justice reform. where are changes needed beyond the criminal justice system? economic, community policing, etc. where do you think changes are needed? we have a fourth line for baltimore residents. we want to hear from you. the new attorney general loretta lynch, she talked about this yesterday, about the unrest in baltimore and the challenges that are there. here is what she had to say. [video clip] attorney general lynch: i want to make it clear that these grave acts of silence are not only that for the community and must stop, but we desperate are
also counter to the ultimate goal, which is to develop -- but are also counter to the ultimate goal, which is to develop a relationship here. it is a conversation i'm committed to advancing. i am heartened that the unrest of a few nights ago has seemed to ease and that community members are coming together to clean up their city. i hope that progress will continue in the coming days. let me add something else about this issue in a larger sense. as we watched the events unfold in baltimore through the relative security of our offices and the television screen, it's easy to see baltimore as a symbol of the issues we must all deal with. and of course, the difficult situation there does highlight so many issues that are part of the national debate. but i would ask that we remember that baltimore, as significant as it is, is more than just a symbol. baltimore is a city.
it's a great city. it's a beautiful city. it's one of our cities. and like so many cities, baltimore is struggling to balance great expectation and need with limited resources. it is dealing with balance in the challenges of public safety and community expression. host: newly confirmed attorney general loretta lynch there talking about the challenges that our -- that are present in baltimore and duties elsewhere. she talked about it respectful conversation. on that, here is the baltimore sun editorial this morning. "the problem with thugs" they write.
and people just continue to talk about it and you see nothing happening. when you compare ferguson with baltimore, for instance, ferguson didn't have a majority electorate, yet baltimore does. and the question is, what are the people in baltimore doing or what should they have done in order to prevent this? they appear to have gentrified a larger area of the baltimore city, yet they have seen to forgotten -- they seem to have forgotten those who are really in need. those people need jobs and education. we have attended the to focus and put our money's on the immigrants who come in, giving them jobs, giving them education, giving them medical situations. where are the catholic charities? where are all of these people? these people, especially in baltimore, they elected officials to do things for them
which they haven't gotten. same thing goes for the president of the united states. these people elected the president. what are they doing to help support the citizens in these types of cities as opposed to reaching out to other countries you know, other areas, and building of those communities building up those families, giving them good education? it doesn't seem to be quite right. i would think that once we wake up and understand we need to vote for people who will protect our interests, only then will things change. host: ok. charlie in new york, republican. caller: did you say charlie from new york? host: i did. good morning to you. caller: good morning to you also. over the past several decades, mayors have become increasingly
tolerant of lawlessness and thuggery. this is not rocket science. national guardsmen have automatic weapons. you point them in the direction of the looters and the rioters and you open fire. killed 200 or 300 people and the rioting will stop immediately. host: charlie, we will take your point. i want to read to you and others the "washington times," because some are saying it is that zero-tolerance you are talking about that led to the situation in baltimore, and some are pointing the finger at martin o'malley, former mayor and governor of that state. riots threaten o'malley's bid for the white house.
another 2016 contender, senator rand paul, as many of you know has been talking about reforms to the criminal justice system. it's something he has talked frequently about. last month at a speech at buie state university in maryland here's what the senator had to say about this. [video clip] senator paul: as i've learned more about the criminal justice system, i've come to believe that it's something that will keep these two america's favorite -- separate. there is one thing after another that are making it unjust and unfair for people. if you look at new york city $500 million in fines, about one third of the budget. what reason do we have to have politicians telling police that they have to take someone down for selling a cigarette that is not taxed? couldn't we give them a ticket? couldn't we say "move on"? and i don't blame the police.
i blame the politicians. politicians write these rules muscle we can change these rules at any minute -- these rules, so we can change these rules at any minute. host: senator rand paul about the changes he would like to see in the criminal justice system stop -- justice system. i would like to know from you what changes are needed. going from baltimore to other areas across the country recently, ferguson, missouri and now baltimore. other presidential contenders senator ted cruz from texas saying that president obama has inflamed racial tensions. he was speaking about baltimore yesterday and said that the president has inflamed racial tensions. and also been carson is expected to announce his candidacy next week. he writes an opinion piece in "time magazine" and he says
this. objectivity is the real answer and in order to get there, we have to sit down and have an intelligent conversation rather than demonizing each other. dr. ben carson talking about better relationships with the police and communities. mike in california, what do you think? caller: i was just listening to the comments about taking these young kids and putting them in the military. if the wrong answer. the military is not a place for malcontent delinquents. it doesn't want them or need them, and they don't need to be the babysitters for the nation's problem children. those children can be out picking up garbage on the roadways. it would be an insult.
host: are you or were you in the military? caller: no, i have three sons in the military. i think it would be an insult to allow these thugs into the most honorable institution we have, the u.s. armed forces. host: what about the opportunity to clean up their act and learn discipline? caller: and all think the military is responsible for the nation's problems. -- i don't think the military is responsible for these nations problems. these parents -- host: mike, let me ask you, do you think the military improve your sons? caller: my sense didn't need any improvement. they got quite an education and are still serving -- my sons didn't need any improvement. they got quite an education and are still serving to s. most of these kids would not pass an entrance exam anyway. the parents need to clean up
their act instead of continuing to look at the military as the end-all answer. it just isn't true. it may have been at some point, but it has changed. they want high-caliber people come and these kids, i'm afraid some of them may be able to clean up their act, but again one out of 10 possibly could pass the mental or physical entrance exam. host: got your point, mike. deborah in milton, florida democrat. caller: good morning, america. first of all, don't listen to what been carson and rand paul are saying. they will never be president. i would like to tell the people in america to call the congressman and senators and encourage the president to send a job. -- the job bill up that has been sitting on the table for long time. if all these people really want to help, get on the phone and call people. get the job bill out of there
that is the reporting by john hilton wrath and jeffrey esparza . the editorial board weighs in by saying the slow growth -- the fed can be blamed for slow growth. it is their policies, the "wall street journal" says is leading to the slow growth we are seeing and that traditions have been wrong and that it's time that the fed take a look at why their predictions have been so wrong about the economy. that is an economic news for you in the papers this morning. as we told you, senator bob corker, republican of tennessee who had been holding up a house and senate 2016 budget blueprint, he dropped his block to that yesterday and now the budget will be voted on in the house as early as today, and the senate as well. the president doesn't have to sign it, but it is a blueprint for how republicans who control
caller: yes, it isemil. i could say 100 things about your topic this week. i could quickly go through two or three if you will let me. host: ok. caller: jo from georgia and another caller earlier from new york, they nailed it. the underlying problem -- and there are a lot of problems, but the underlying problem is economic disparity and lack of opportunity and hopelessness. if i had to set priorities for the national government, the top three would be jobs and probably the next two or three would be education of our youth. that is where our future is. the other thing i would say is we have to put the discussion in context. too often you see it focusing in on simply racism. i don't want to dismiss racism. racism is out there and is
clearly part of the problem. but even in a lot of the interviews, the people in baltimore on the street said it's not a racism issue as much as it an economic problem. left to put these things in context. one caller earlier talked about the helicopter versus the young men in baltimore who died. host: freddie gray. caller: that is cherry picking. a few days ago, you had a former baltimore city police officer. he got into criminology. he is an associate professor at a college now and he's looking at comparing rate of violent crime between whites and blacks and rates of police killings and the threats that whites and blacks pose to believe, etc. and he came up with some
interesting stuff. try to put it into context. when was the last time we heard in the news of a white guy getting beat up, manhandled, injured by police? it happens, too. i don't want to dismiss the racism issue, but you have to putting to context. one more thing. i want to give people -- kudos to the people of baltimore. the rights of happen, but look at what has happened in the last couple of days. -- the riots had happened, but look at what has happened last couple of days. the people are trying to come together. kudos to them. host: if you missed what he spoke about in that program, you can go to www.c-span.org. it talks about criminal rates and police shootings in the u.s. another quick headline for you
the "wall street journal" front page. john delaney represents the family of worn weinstein who was fatally shot in the drone strike recently. the story is that the fbi aided more and more family in ransom payment. that in the "wall street journal" this morning will stop also in -- this morning. also in presidential politics, bernie sanders is going to run and he told usa today "i am running to win." he will be challenging hillary clinton in the democratic primary, and governor martin
o'malley is also expected to jump into the race. jim, republican, go ahead. caller: good morning. i been listening, and i wanted to start off by saying that i felt the culture of the neighborhoods, that was the change that needed to be done. the culture of learning, the culture of acceptable levels of crime, you know, that needs to change. people are complaining about immigrants taking jobs away. that kind of disgusts me because these people are not even citizens. they are probably living in the closest thing to slavery, which apparently blacks didn't like too much. do you hear them complaining about inequality? about the lack of opportunity? these people did something. they left their families.
they left their country. they risked their lives. how many of the people who are complaining about the inequality in this country are willing to put themselves at the same level as these immigrants? host: how do you know they are not? caller:[laughs] well, maybe i'm wrong. my sense is that they are in a culture of wallowing in their community leaders are probably greater to blame than anybody else. host: ok, jim in fort lauderdale, florida. carol, democratic caller. good morning. caller: everybody complaining but first of all, we are all god's children, no matter what color. and what happened to that guy it was wrong. it should never have come to this. and we've got them burning down
our own cities to get our point across. this did happen. if you want to call people drugs when blacks do things -- thugs when blacks do things, but when whites do things -- what do you call whites who beat up on blacks? you don't call themselves -- them thugs. big at the same thing that the white people did during slavery burned buses down, kill people. nothing happened. host: working on the defense authorization bill for this year , almost 19 hours of marking of that legislation.
here is leo shane. him tweeting that out, and then kristina wong working through the night. this is at 4:30 a.m. or so. you can see the lawmakers standing up and clapping after they worked. and our c-span cameras were there for it all, covering the markup of the defense legislation for 18.5 hours and ending earlier this morning around 5:00 a.m. tracy in cambridge, maryland, independent. good morning to you. caller: good morning.
i would like to fill the viewers in on something going on. i totally don't agree with the riots in baltimore. i live just outside of baltimore and i work in baltimore. maryland has a problem with the school systems. i have two children, 113 and 16. my 13 euros -- one 13-year-old and 116. my 13-year-old goes to school here. the school systems in maryland, and where i live is a poor area. we have boarded-up buildings stores closing everyday, and joblessness is through the roof. i don't know where some of these numbers out of me come from, but they are not right. -- out of d.c. come from, but they are not right. she was actually threatened with rape and murder on facebook. and we went to the school, which she has to go to the school because we are in this district, but they could not help her or send the police to us to watch her because we didn't live in
town. we were told nothing could be done. we went back to the school and the principal actually asked us if we had any information to please get in contact with him and tell him. nothing was ever done. on top of that, my 13-year-old daughter never has homework. they never have reading. they will put one or two problems on the board and have them answer them and that is it. neither one of my kids can barely write cursive. they don't teach it in school no more. spelling is not taught in school no more. the only program they have in school -- after school here in cambridge, maryland, it's like a babysitting program and you have to pay $50. we need to start in the schools. that is first and foremost. that is their future. they are the next politicians the next governors, the next congressman. it will be the kids we are
raising and look at how we are raising them. all you have to do is get away from the arguments on capitol hill. everybody is so caught up in the politicians arguments between each other and their own agendas and how they can pass their pockets. -- pad their pockets. we keep sending millions overseas to help foreign governments when we are already in debt, but we are not helping our inner cities and schools to raise our children and go the future. host: what was it like to center dot are up to school everyday, given that threat? caller: we want to move her, but i cannot afford to send her to another district. and to take her to school, i would have to drive two hours a day and with work and trying to work in state economy and put gas in the car and buy clothing and food, it all accumulates into one bag. you can only put so much in a paperback before a bus. host: all right.
sorry, tracy i did not mean to cut you off too early there. let's hear from thomas in baltimore as well. independent, you are on the air. caller: everybody seems to be blaming the police for all the stuff that has gone wrong -- gone on in baltimore and around the country. and i think it is. these black boys, their disgraceful -- they are disgraceful. it is dysfunctional and racist and violent. they are the problem, not the police. the police are doing a very good job, i think. host: that is thomas in baltimore with his opinion on the situation. we believe the conversation there for about. we will be switching gears and talking with democratic congressman ron kind about trade and the partnership and politics of these trade deals. and then later representative john might -- john mica will be
joining us to talk about airspace restrictions in the wake of the recent gyro after landing on capitol hill. we will be right back. ♪ >> she embraced the role of first lady and wore the finest fashions and looked like a queen, hosting afternoon parties for politicians to help -- her husband political agenda. and in the war of 1812 when british troops invaded the capital, she is credited with saving a portrait of george washington and other items from the white house. dolly madison on c-span's original series, first ladies, influence and image. examining the public and private lives of the women who filled the position of first lady and their influence on the
presidency. from martha washington to michelle obama sundays at 8 p.m. eastern on c-span3. and as a compliment, c-span's book is now available, "first ladies," providing lively stories of these fascinating women, creating look -- creating a lumen 80 -- an illuminating and inspiring read. it is available in hardback through your favorite store or online seller. >> sunday night on c-span skewing day, washington post national security reporter walter p gets on the situation in middle east and his opinion of the 2003 invasion of iraq. mr. pincus: i think those in the administration, they never claim to be an expert on iraq, and
proved it. in history has proved it. we look at things from our own point of you and get deceived by it. -- point of view and get deceived by it. you can go back to vietnam, and it was the first time we sort of did it openly. but we have a history of trying to think other people are like us, and the world is different. and particularly in the middle east, it's a totally different culture. >> senate night at 8 p.m. eastern and pacific on c-span's q&a. >> washington journal continues. host: back at our table this morning is congressman ron kind, member of the ways and means committee here to talk about trade. let's begin with the four agreements your administration is brokering, it gives the
ability of the president to negotiate without negotiating on the floor with members of congress. explain to me why you are for trade. guest: first, i am for robust trade so we can level the playing field for our workers our farmers from our businesses, so they can compete successfully in the 21st century and a global economy. if we are not there, the other nations will move without us and we could end up with no rules at all, and that meet the race to the bottom. we cannot can eat in that environment. -- compete in that environment. china would love nothing better than to establish these trade agreements on their own terms and then expect us to compete in that environment. it is obvious to me that we need to negotiate these deals and get the best deals for our workers and farmers celebrity can compete.
most of the growth that will be happening will be outside our borders and in the pacific rim where the current negotiation is taking place. there will be about 2 billion new middle-class consumers can developing over the next 20 years. we need to be in their competing. host: what does it mean specifically for wisconsin? guest: we are very dependent on exports, manufacturing, services stop i think people don't realize -- services. i think people do not realize how dependent their own state is on global trade. wisconsin is the number two state in the nation when it comes to gary exports. and manufacturing is still in important part of our economy. getting the rules done right be important to level the playing field so that states like wisconsin and other upper midwest state can compete. host: the agricultural lobby in this town is for this trade deal. specifically, talk about what it
means for farmers. guest: i think it is premature to say anyone is for the trade agreement, because of ill being negotiated. we will have to wait and see what the final terms are. we have the japanese minister in town this week and japan is for opening up their market for more auto products, agriculture products, and canada, to has put an meaningful offer when it comes to access to the market. those are very important items. the judgment is still outstanding whether or not it's went to be a good enough trade agreement for members of congress to support. conceptually i think there's bipartisan support for moving forward. because the alternative is for us to not either and for someone else to establish the rules, or trying to compete in a race to the bottom. we will not be able to do that. host: you have been trying to educate your colleagues about going forward with trade that would be good for the economy and for the country. were you disappointed that the prime minister did not come as
the "new york times" says in their headline, offer any concessions for trade deals? guest:guest: as the things to him carefully and one of the things that jumped out at me was the need to offer more policy and open up the market and make them more competitive and successful. that is a huge statement coming from him, because it's been difficult for them in the past. they have been one of the most closed economic societies in the world, especially when it comes agriculture, competition. he mentioned in the speech for the entire world to hear that economic reform is on the horizon and they have to start now and the policies of past will not get into the future. host: paul ryan, chairman of ways and means, wrote recently in the "wall street journal" that the country lays huge tariffs on american foodstuffs and erect barriers to keep out american audio -- autos.
guest: right, those discussions are still going this week and in the future, too. we knew that the toughest items are always the last to get resolved. 85% of the trade negotiation is pretty much agree to. we are getting down to the last very difficult items. it typically involves market access issues. we have a virtually unlimited free market in the u.s. that companies -- countries can already sent to. one of the objectives with the pacific negotiation going on is for us to get access to their markets to compete successfully. but they are not there yet. talks are ongoing. i thought we had a nice meeting with the prime minister when he was in town this week, but further steps will be required. host: phone lines are lighting up. let's get our viewers involved.
jane, republican. caller: i just have to call and tell you how much i'm against these trade agreements. nafta and cap to have heard our state so much. all of our manufacturing jobs left. i worked for a clothing manufacturer that have been in business for nearly 100 years and they went right ahead and moved all their business offshore as soon as they could. and now i understand the products they are shipping from overseas, with the quality, they are having to do repairs on the work. and not only that, it has impacted the jobs everywhere. that is one reason we have so much at risk in our country. so many people are idle. if you don't have something to do with your time, as the old -- old saying goes, and idle mind is the devil's workshop. host: your thoughts?
guest: i think jane is right and that is why these trade negotiations have to lead too good jobs right here in the u.s. i think people confuse doing with nations we don't have negotiations with. up to 20 nations that we currently have pit agreements with today, we are actually running a trade surplus in manufacturing, agriculture services, because we are able to negotiate roles that were credit for our workers and our businesses here. if we don't have a trade agreement with the country, it is hard for our companies to ship products into their market. and it is almost forcing these companies to move jobs into those countries just to get market access there. i think there is a lot of confusion about whether the trade agreements themselves are leading to a loss of jobs or jobs being shipped overseas. i wasn't here when nafta passed, if i was, i probably would have
voted against it because nafta, at the time, did not contain environmental standards in it. these negotiations that are taking place today have that in the body of the agreement. and quite frankly, it is an opportunity now to go back and correct the problems in nafta. get to labor and environmental standards. again, elevating it up to where we are. host: these trade deals point to nafta. they also are saying that these negotiations are being done in secret. that the lawmakers who are opposed right now are saying, we don't know what is in it and no one is telling us what is in it. is that true? what is happening up on capitol hill behind closed doors? what kind of education effort is happening? guest: i have had a different experience. we have worked very closely with the team. they are on capitol hill constantly, meeting with us, walking us through what is being
negotiated, listening to our concerns and it is really up to each individual member of congress to engage themselves at that level. host: are they showing up? guest: some are and some aren't. i have been in meetings where we have had these types of discussions, those walk-throughs. the ones in their other one to are saying it is all done in secret. but does the entire public have access? of course not. not in the middle of tough negotiations where we are asking the other side to make some huge concessions. we don't do that with any other trade negotiation that goes on, but the good news is with the trade promotion authority that just passed both the house and the senate committees, it requires a 60 day publication of the entire agreement. it is basically the entire world being able to look at the terms of the agreement for at least 60 days before the president can even sign the agreement. that is the most transparent
process we have ever had. host: linda, you are next. in independent caller. caller: good morning. i would like to ask a question regarding the safety of the food from japan. what protection do we have against the radiation of the food there? guest: linda, that is a great issue and it has been discussed quite a bit on capitol hill. a few years back, we did have some food -- pass a state -- pass a food safety bill. this will be -- we are also requiring the negotiations -- the nations we are negotiating with to reach the same safety standards we have in this country. i just had a meeting with the secretary of agriculture about this very issue. and they are confident they can step of the inspection regime and be able to enforce the safety physicians -- provisions
that countries not have to agree to abide by. it is a valid concern and something we will have to pay very close attention to. host: michigan. don. a democrat. caller: i want to thank c-span. thank you, greta. i was watching something on c-span, and you are on their -- there with the white house. and he was talking about this new trade deal. host: it was actually -- the democrat from ohio. caller: i'm sorry, yet. you are right. the bottom-line was he said, it was sovereignty. he said if a corporation doesn't agree with the law here in the united date, they can to our government. and the panel decides for us to change her law than to make a profit. right there is wrong because they are going to change it for
the better for them. not the people. here we go again, another democrat going to stab us in the back on the way out like the clintons. he did that on the way out. he made $100 million a day during the bush administration. host: tom, -- don, let take the issue that you brought up -- let's take the issue you brought up. what is your response to the critics have pointed this out? guest: there has been a lot of focus and discussion about the investor state issue. all it means is that if you are a foreign company doing business in another company as part of the trade agreement, you can't be discriminated against, you can't be treated differently in those domestic companies. if you feel there are, and we have had many suits brought here in the united dates -- united states because our laws are very good and other countries have
faith and confidence in our judicial process. but of the 17 cases that have been filed on this judicial panel, we have one every one of them -- have won every one of them. we do not discriminate. we treat all companies equally. so the has been no successful challenges. i think this has been blown up way out of proportion. quite likely, it is necessary for us to get this in the agreement so that our companies will try to do businesses -- do business in other nations are not discriminated against. it is really protection for our companies so that we can keep our jobs here. host: we will go to chicago next. steve is watching us there. a republican. caller: high, greta. how are you? host: morning. caller: i spent about half my time up in door county, and i am asked to register to vote in wisconsin because i am spending
more and more of my time up there. i think you guys have an optics problem. the hill reported -- i think it was on monday or tuesday -- that that trade, the language is in a locked room. on the hill summit in -- in some basement. to the american people, and i would think you might agree that is a little onerous to be doing everything behind closed doors and not at least get the major talking points, the bullets out there. the other thing is -- i read some other things on the hill i read the paper a lot, about immigration. were the workers are transferring country to country to country. and i worry that the immigration portion of this tpp would open our borders and it would be illegal for us to have secure borders. if you get my drift.
i will listen off the air. guest: first of all, welcome to wisconsin. we are glad you are coming up. it is a beautiful place up in door county. you know, this really isn't adverse impact on our immigration policy. they are separate issues. but what we are negotiating in these trade agreements are core labor standards, so that there can't be the exportation of child or slave labor that is used to make the products that are being sold. that there are collective-bargaining rights. that there are panels for worker rights provisions. and those are fully enforceable in the trade agreement. as far as the optics you described, we canceled briefings because of the sensitivity of ongoing talks during the course of these negotiations, but that does not permit any member of congress to have access to the talks, or to contact them
themselves and sit down and walked through the text specifically. and a staff person on our staff that we worked with on trade has access to the same thing. oh what i find serious greta is that we don't access -- ask this in any treaty negotiation. and we have a very important one right now between the u.s. and iran, but there is not a the member -- there is not a member of congress demanding to be in the room. you know how tough and sensitive those negotiations are. but we will demand that if there is a an agreement, we have the full right to review every line, every sentence, every dot of it. for 60 days, the entire world will be able to look at the agreement and make up their mind. host: congress will not be able to though, amend any negotiations. can congress go back later and make fixes? guest: you can always go back
and renegotiate your in fact when president obama first took office, there were three to traded -- three trade agreements pending. and the president didn't like certain things that were in it here he went back to those nations and fixed it. part of that is based on thick -- feedback that he got from congress. and this is also a crucial time for congress to be there, work with our u.s. traders up with -- trade representative team, playing out with the negotiations have to be. and this is exactly what the trade authority is about. sending to the administration what we want to see in the agreement. and if it house of short, we won't pass the agreement. host: new jersey, independent caller. caller: hi, thanks for taking my call. the question i have concerns how we are actually accounting for what we call our trade from
these packs -- pacs because -- pacts because as far as i remember, we would count those as being experts in domestic. then we would count imports after the five dollar an hour assembly or less. we would count that finished product as an import. so basically if we have this trade pact -- that is taken out from wisconsin, it would be shipped out to china where it might go into the auto industry, done by their labor, and the price difference between the chinese and american labor is -- really puts the americans at a competitive disadvantage. a brief example is in software development, where more and more is not being done in the u.s. more are bringing workers in from china because, last time i
checked, a 24-year-old chinese worker with a masters degree was making $15,000 an hour -- or $12,000 an hour in china per year. after five years, they were making $15,000 an hour. and a masters degree in america is roughly about $200,000. how can americans compete against that kind of backed trade, which is really free-trade as opposed to fair trade? guest: two points, first, the wages in china have gone up tremendously. therefore, it is becoming a more competitive environment. secondly, we are already trading in this environment. this has nothing to do with trade agreements. what we are trying to accomplish in the trade agreement is to get them to adopt standards that are comparable to ours to elevate that when it comes to worker conditions, pay, safety, and
whatnot. and environmental standards, too, because of these trade agreements fail, then we are still going to be trading with vietnam and malaysia, but there will be no incentive in those countries to change their standards whatsoever. the places new obligations on them, or they could face trade sanctions from us. again, people arguing trade and trade agreements as one of two things, but we are already trading with virtually everyone. they have access to our markets. oftentimes, we don't have access to their markets to -- markets. host: rex a republican. caller: yes, where a lot of able to understand is that much of this is wall street driven. it is all about profitability especially on motor companies. i just retired. i worked in mexico a lot internationally. and the average, i think,
manufacturing wage, benefits, package might be about seven dollars an hour in mexico. in the united states, it is around $58 an hour. you know, we send a lot of the manufacturing jobs down there in mexico, produce cars and trucks there, and we produce them for less money, but the price take doesn't show it when it is here. so somebody is making a profit. host: we will take your point on corporate profits. guest: a tremendous amount of small businesses will benefit and are already trading in these economies. a couple of weeks ago, greta, i had an owner of an auto parts manufacturing company in my office and he was there to ask me for my support of these trade agreements. he said, recently he had to move one of his products lines --
product lines down to mexico. he said it was just the fact that mexico has 46 trade agreements with other nations and therefore, it is easier for him to make a product in mexico and ship it to the other nations because we don't have trade negotiations and access. he had to move it to mexico just to get access to these other markets. that is what is happening right now, the world is moving forward with or without us. south korea and china just announced this week that they are entering into a bilateral trade agreement. there is china, again, at the table trying to establish the rules of trade. we have a choice. we can either be at the table trying to get those rules in place that will make it easier for our businesses and our workers in this country to compete, or not. and then try and compete in a trading system with no rules at all. or possibly with china's rules. host: we are talking with
representative ron kind about trade. if you could just, as that caller was talking about, and optics problem, people don't know what is being negotiated. give us the top five or three bullet points, if you can, of the trade deal, specifically the transpacific trade deal. guest: first and foremost, it is market access. oftentimes, the countries have very high trade barriers to our goods, our products, our services, making it very difficult for us to export into those markets. we are working hard to bring those barriers down. if they have access to our markets, we want access to their markets. and then what is new is getting core labor and environmental and now human rights standards as part of the trade agreements. that was never done before. this is very revolutionary. but it is in hands intellectual
property protection. some of the best ideas are being developed in the united states and the are being ripped off in other countries. and that is not fair to the inventors, the companies, the workers who have that product. and that would step up this enforcement. so, making sure that there is access to affordable prescription drugs to people around the globe. that, too, is part of it. and what is also new is the state owned enterprises. in a country like vietnam, where it is an economy controlled by the government, and therefore they control most of the companies and give them a competitive advantage over ours. so there is a lot. a lot of that was contained in the trade promotion authority that the committee just reported on, telling the administration these other things we want to see in negotiating that you have got to get in a trade agreement before we can supported here on capitol hill. host: ""politico -- "politico"
says there is a civil war over this. the agreement would force americans to commit -- compete against workers from nations such as get not, -- guest: it is just wrong. first of all, we are already trying to compete in vietnam, but without the rules in place. if we can't move forward on it, we and not going to stop trading with vietnam or malaysia or any other place. i don't get that argument that this is going to force us to have to compete on an unlevel playing field. we are already there. but also, in the trade negotiation, there is specific language that says nothing in
the course of these negotiations or in the agreement will preempt state, federal, or local law or any of our regulations. it is explicit language. again, if the members were just read the text that is provided to them, they would see there is nothing to you from this agreement that would change her force -- is nothing to fear from this agreement that would change for force -- it is going to be incumbent as us of members of congress to do our job and sit down and go through these provisions. and if we have questions ask the administration and the trade team that is negotiating it. but ultimately, it will come down to a yes or no vote on capitol hill. but i also want to caution people, this is more than just products crossing borders. this is an important role in our diplomatic arsenal. i think the world is hungry for
u.s. global leadership, and if we can't be at the table negotiating important items especially with some of our key allies, we are going to lose more faith and confidence in the united states' ability to lead and do good in the global environment. that's why think this is often understated. host: we will go to patricia in virginia, a democrat. caller: and i on the line? host: you are on the air. go ahead, patricia. caller: thank you for taking my call. and forgive me, i am a little nervous. i just want to try and get my point across. the u.s. -- we need another trade deal. we already have several out there. and i am just thinking -- i'm in, i don't know much about the tpp, the based on the little bit i am learning, i just think that is going to, you know, put again
, the u.s. worker at a disadvantage. i mean, i just understand why we need another one. we have so many. and we are competing with workers around the world. i'm sorry, i am just a little bit nervous. host: that is ok, patricia. we will take your points. guest: again, i think there is some confusion about the impacts of trade and impacts of trade agreements. those are two different -- thanks. with those 20 nations, we are running a surplus. those other goods and products and things we are growing here at home that we are able to export abroad. it is the nations we don't have a trade agreement with that can get us into trouble. brazil, china, india, the rest of the world out there that we have no enforceable standards. no ability to raise their standards of to where we are. and that is the will be live in today. and that is what -- the world we
are trying to compete in today. to me, it seems logical that we try to negotiate with these other countries that we don't have a negotiation with. that is the world we are ready living here in the united states. if we don't do this, we are going to be asked to compete with these other nations with no rules in place. i think, again, there is a lot of confusion out there about the impact of trade versus what trade agreement may mean trust here at home. host: los angeles. ed. an independent. caller: good morning, ms. greta. i am a vietnam that -- vet, and i find what i'm hearing very appalling. you have to negotiate with vietnam and you have vietnam veterans still sucking at home? -- the epa, because if we try to
enforce these rules, we could be sued. corporation and government gets paid, but we have to pay if we get sued. you need to straighten up the nafta and the wto, which did circumvent our constitution, the bill of rights, and the apa -- epa rules. can you please ask plan how you can even sit there and call the people around this world needs the american goods? ferguson needs america's goods. baltimore needs america's goods. guest: first of all, thank you so much for your service to our country. and i mean that. but the truth is, we are already treating with vietnam. but we are trading with the country with no rules in place. that is what these trade agreements are about to to make sure that be it -- are about, to make sure that they elevate their standards. we don't move forward and we
don't conclude this agreement, it will be absolutely no incentive whatsoever for them to do it on their own. that is the hook we have to get them to the table. again, i reiterate that if we can get these rules in place that we do level the playing field, we can compete successfully, make things, grow thanks, and service things here in the united dates without having to ship them to other countries to do. and the able to keep those good paying jobs right here at home. especially in places like ferguson, inner-city baltimore where you are starting to see this unrest. and i think this unrest is directly linked to and ability -- to instability. it is another piece that can politic place to help further strengthen economic growth right here at home, to create more job opportunities. host: nor folk, new york. gerald. a democratic caller. caller: mr. kind, you people
always talk about the export. why don't you talk about the $500 billion deficit we have? that is $500 billion of stuff we could be making in this country. forget about the $120 billion that we export. you can almost read from the obama and republican playbook. why do you straighten up and start representing the people you -- guest: i am trying to do my best, sir. a large part of that he deficit we have is actually energy. oil from other countries, including mexico and canada right now. it speaks to the need for a more robust energy policy so we can become more dependent and self-sufficient for the energy needs that we do have, but a light part of the deficit we haven't trade and strictly related to one sector. and that is partition of oil. host: columbia, maryland.
alicia. caller: good morning, greta. and representative kind. and everyone else. you know, if you can't sell your stuff, why don't you ask the manufacturing people to lower their prices. every day prices keep going up. i would like to know in this trade deal, are there going to be any pharmaceutical products and food? we hardly have enough workers in fda to inspect our own food. and we are having problems with the medicines that are shipped in here. we can how they keep up to inspect those. now, how are you telling me these things are going to be inspected in another country?
host: congressman? guest: i think it is a valid issue. and something we have been hard at work on, in terms of increased food and pharmaceutical inspections. again, at the point of origin. that is why, a few years back, we did has a major fate -- food safety bill that increases our enforceability and capability in doing that. another part of this agreement and stronger enforceability provisions and a dedicated funding stream for the first time. that can only be used for enforcement actions. i hear a lot for my colleagues, and it is a legitimate concern that we can have the best trade agreement on paper, but if there is no follow-up, it is virtually meaningless. i and a few others have been working hard on enforceability provisions with dedicated money for that very purpose, so that we can be much better in the future making sure that the terms that are agreed to are ultimately enforced. host: louisiana, an independent caller.
caller: yes, what i'm going to say to begin with is to my fellow americans. you know, we have -- our government is out of control. we have press warfare, make no mistake about it. it has been going on for 40 years now. it seems the time has turned toward the wealthy and the corporations to concentrate their wealth and take everything from the rest of us. now, people like this man, with all due respect, sir, what you are trying to do, you should be subject to public hanging -- host: let's move on. we will not tolerate that kind of conversation. paul, pennsylvania. a democrat. caller: high, c-span. it has been a while since i called in. but it seems like nothing ever changes. it is deja vu all over again. these problems go back 30, 35,
40 years. back to when we originally had these debates between fair trade and free trade. and the free trade, the t-shirt has the rights, not the people. we are talking about opening markets for our products. what products? what do we make here? when i graduated high school back in 1970, we made everything in pennsylvania. you could go get a good paying job any day of the week. you could walk out the door and go get a job. big manufacturers were here. and you could support a family. all you needed was a high school education and a willingness to work. and people had a willingness to work because they could make good money, buy a car, buy a house, have a family. where do you get a job now? that is what people are cooking crack and doing drugs. it is sad. it is a little late.
the horse is already out of the barn, and now we are talking about -- opening markets to sell a product. the rich have already moved everything overseas. we make nothing here. it is over. as far as the problems with the poor, there is no resources. we have segregated our country better now than jim crow ever could have because all the poor are in the same areas. so that is whether high school's have no money. that is why they get no education. that is why there is no jobs. that is why there is crime and riots. and the rich people are living in a gated communities. and they have everything. it is over. good night. it is over. guest: let me try to address your concern. i listened very closely, but i do disagree with the premise of your statement. we are still the number one manufacturing nation and the world.
as well as agriculture services. so we are making, creating inventing, producing growing a lot right here in the united dates. but oftentimes -- united states . but oftentimes, we find ourselves trying to get in other markets without any barriers. and that is the point of the trade agreement, to level the playing field. but absent at, again, we are being asked to compete in a race to the bottom type of global environment. we have found that that is not very good for us, and it doesn't help grow the good paying jobs we need right here. but i also agree with the other part of your statement, in that we do need a major reinvestment in the united states of america again. we have a deteriorating infrastructure system that is long overdue for modernization. that would lay the foundation for long-term sustainable
economic growth. we have inner-city schools that are failing to many of our kids. at the believe education is a great equalizer. not enough is being done to give those kids in hopeful future. job training programs, given the volatility in the marketplace. and what these debates in washington are about is getting our party straight and right for the american people -- our priorities straight and right for the american people. we are literally cutting the ability for us to compete on a global basis. that has to change. or we will be seeing more ferguson's, or baltimore's, or places like that. host: house republicans will put on the floor today a 2016 budget blueprint that has been negotiated between house and senate versions. how do you plan to vote? guest: i am going to vote no. again, this is huge tax breaks to the wealthy at the expense of research funding, --
and they don't even mention the infrastructure investment that we have as a nation. but they still found room in order to the letter -- to deliver massive tax breaks to the wealthiest 1% in the nation. last time i checked, they are doing very, very well. but the kids in baltimore right now or the people in ferguson, they are looking for a better opportunity and a better way. and that is not being reflected in the republican budget that we will have before us this week. host: myrtle beach, south carolina. michelle. a republican. caller: yeah, last year i read an article -- edgar -- agricultural bill that was sent through. and in that bill, we were going to other countries and using our money to build up their
infrastructure so that they could create things to send here. why couldn't we do the same thing with small farms here, instead of the only thing coming out is from tyson and the for distributors that to all of our food here? and the way they do it, i watched a show and -- i don't even eat meat anymore because of it. guest: michelle, you are preaching to the choir here. i am one of the leading voices for a farm bill reform, so we can do more to help her family farmers. one thing that irritates me is the huge amount of tax subsidies that go to a few very large agriculture businesses. it is leading to greater consolidation of production of agriculture, and it doesn't make sense in this era of large budget deficits that we are
facing. unfortunately, the farm bill falls short. because of it, we are in violation of certain trade rules. therefore, brazil brought a successful case against us on that. but instead of us performing a cotton program, we are now sending $150 million in annual payments to subsidize brazil cotton farmers. i am not making this up. there are a lot of things that need to be changed, but there has got to be more focused and more support on our family, so we can maintain and diversify agriculture in this country. host: congressman ron kind, thank you for your time this morning. guest: thank you, greta. enjoyed it. host: coming up next, we be talking with republican congressman john mica. -- in light of that recent gyrocopter landing. and later, the polling director
for the harvard is to the politics, to talk about a recent survey on the political views of millennials. we will be right back. >> 150 years ago this weekend, a grieving nation gathered along the route of abraham lincoln's funeral train as it made its way from washington dc to his final resting place in springfield illinois. the sunday afternoon at 2:30 on c-span3, we are live from oak ridge cemetery in springfield to commemorate the anniversary of
president lincoln's funeral. with over 1000 reactors and every creation of the eulogy. as well as historians and authors on the funeral's journey. and a tour of the newly be created lincoln funeral car. and saturday at 10:00 eastern the grand prize winners in our student cam competition. and at 8:00, the festivities of the state visit of the japanese prime minister, including his arrival at the white house. and sunny morning at 10:30, the supreme court oral arguments on the issue of same-sex marriage. on whether the 14th amendment requires a state to license a man -- a marriage between two people of the same sex. and saturday night at 10:00 author peter slevin looks at the life of our first lady, michelle obama. and sunday at new, our live three-hour conversation with
john bronson, who has written many books. join the conversation, who will also be taking your phone calls e-mails, facebook comments, and tweets. get the full schedule at c-span.org. >> the new congressional directory is a handy guide to the 114th congress, with color photos of every senator and house members to plus bio and contact information. also, district maps, a full capitol hill, and a look at congressional committees, federal agencies, and state governors. order your copy today. it is $13.95 through the c-span online store at c-span.org. >> "washington journal"
continues. host: we are back this morning. congressman john mica joining us this morning, to talk about capital airspace. many of our viewers are familiar with the story of the gyrocopter, the pilot being able to land on the ground of the capital. as the airspace around the capital safe? guest: no. [laughter] and there are new challenges. it is possible that we could shoot down an aircraft, a larger aircraft, in airspace that is regulated, as we have seen, both from the instance of the 15th of april with a gyrocopter, a low-flying vehicle, a small vehicle like that, can make it right to the foot of the capital or hit the capital. we have seen age wrote go over the fence -- seen a drone go
over the fence and into the ground of the white house. and you can look out the vista behind you, we have had vehicles penetrate the perimeter. we had a deranged lady, who came all the way from the white house , coming through all the barriers. a quarter of a billion dollars with the barriers, making it to the other end of the capital complex. virtually, she was killed by the police. but we are very vulnerable. host: yesterday, there was a hearing talking about this. c-span covered it. i want to show our viewers a little bit about what the commander of norad told you and the other lawmakers about the challenges of tracking objects like this gyrocopter. [video clip] >> it starts with a simple question of who is in charge? you have a dude in a gyrocopter 100 feet in the air crossing 30 plus miles of restricted
airspace. whose job is it to detect him and whose job is it to take him down? >> sir, as the commander of known wreck, that is my responsibility. >> why didn't it happen? >> because we are working against physics, sir. i system is not designed to track and identify. we have a decision-making process to decide what to do. and then we engage. and that system's sensors, radars cameras, and other capabilities that are out there. and we employ that system to the best of our ability. mitigate the risk to the best of our ability. but it is only capable down to a particular set of characteristics that the platform want to track and hunt against is the meeting -- and defend against getting -- is e mitting. host: congressman, what do you make of the commanders --
commander's answer? guest: not that we don't have technical capabilities. right now, most of our system air traffic control, is radar-based. and it has limits, as far as the trees and buildings that interfere. this guy came in pretty much at building entry height. that is are difficult to the pact. but there are technologies out there. unfortunately, we are following for the behind in getting a space-based system. they have satellites now that cannot only identify a vehicle, they can read the license plate. so, there are technologies out there, certain types of observation and communication systems that can allow us to do a better job. but what concerned me is the communication system failed. the guy made it in here. i sat at my -- i sat in my
office looking out the window and my desk faces out. i have a beautiful view of the west lawn, where he landed. and i never received an alert. there was no alert. i saw police vehicles go up the hill on the grass. i have never seen that. i saw capital police and others with pretty significant weaponry. and then police taking people back. so i knew something was happening, but members of congress was never notified. and this isn't new, either. the same communication failure we had and the same failures of the system -- and i wrote the chief of the capitol police, two years ago in 2013, with the one who went beyond all of the barriers. host: the communication to let
lawmakers to let those i capitol hill know that there's something happening -- guest: exactly. at least give us a chance. i have been through 9/11, i have been through the day they shot the policeman on capitol hill. i worked back in the senate when the weatherman exploded a bomb in the capital. but in this instance, we do not know. a week before, on a saturday, we had some shots fired. it turned out to be a suicide. but i must have gotten 10 notices. all of our communications, including a personal, the government cell phone -- we have it with us. they have a warning system that is relayed. when we went here are a you week ago saturday -- when we weren't here a week ago saturday, we were warned. when we are here in session, the
only notice we got was that the incident was over. and that was about four or five hours later. host: in this picture, we are showing our viewers, it was taken by you. outside your office, you saw the gyrocopter lands, took a picture of it, what you are not notified? guest: i have to say this, we didn't know exactly what happened because you couldn't see through the bushes. that is blown up a bit here and but -- blown up a bit. but we didn't know exactly what happened. that is part of my point. but i could see my window in the street and the lawn, the police activity. with the drawn weapons, with the suv police -- the police suv careening across the lawn, that something was happening. host: let's go back to what you've are set at the beginning of this, and that is that the
technology is not there. in light of terrorism threats why does the faa not have the technology it needs to track a gyrocopter or any other person coming into restricted air space? guest: next generation air traffic control, getting a space-based system rather than ground radar. the faa has been falling for the behind in moving towards that. it is just a failure of the government. they have tried to bring things quite a bit into have the government develop a system. the private sector is the one that will actually innovate and come up with these systems. but you have to acquire some of the systems both for surveillance, and then you have to have a communication system. what concerns me here more than anything is the communication
system that failed. the actually said the faa warning system -- i think that went up at 1:34. the incident took place at 1:23. the police declared basically a lockdown at 1:26, which is pretty good, but they never notified anyone. we didn't know whether to take cover. we didn't know, again, what was on that gyrocopter. we had heard later through media account that they sent a bomb detecting robot in their to find out. -- there to find out.
my second question is the google thing. the reporters were waiting for the gyro copter. they were way in advance before you knew about it. how could they be before congress? they were way in advance. guest: again. excellent points. those are some of the simple things. we do have some technology. it has not been deployed. i asked the secret service about
the fence jumpers. we have had other fence jumpers recently. i said, i know the name of a good welder i used on my fence at home. government is so awkward, so bureaucratic, so many layers to get anything done. we have the technology at the borders, we have it in our defense systems. we cannot seem to get it to the white house or the capitol. we had a breakdown in communications of not alerting those who should have been alerted. not connecting the dots, so to speak, with the different agencies. host: chicago. frank, a republican. caller: i would like to ask cam.
-- ask him. he passed the tsa law. he did not follow through on it. that was a total disaster. this is the same thing. it is just to protect to these few politicians that don't do any good for us at all. guest: the gentleman raises a good point. i was the chairman of aviation during the 9/11 period. one of my jobs -- president bush wanted transportation security bills on his desk. i helped create tsa. when we started with government screening, our vote in the house was to have the government set the regulations set the audits. we usually find prisons, nuclear facilities, dod, that screening
can be done better and more efficiently by the private sector or are -- sector, as long as the -- everything is in place. tsa was taken out of my jurisdiction. it went into homeland security. we have a total of 66,000 tsa employees. i have been complaining about the growth in size, each time trying to get it under control. it is one things i have been continuing to work on.
16,000 administrators. tsa was never intended to be that way. we have about 46,000 screeners. it has absolutely spun out of control, the gentleman is right. we are going to work on it. host: right. you have been talking about this. you said it is time to privatize unmanageable tsa. "the hill" reported that the gop privatized a bill -- filed a bill to privatize air traffic control. guest: i came out of business, not government. i tried as aviation chair and transportation chair to reform faa. we just heard about its failure to come up with next generation air traffic control. we actually created a position
of chief operating officer, to try to separate some of the faa responsibilities from management. while some of that has done good , i think it is time to look at other models. candida has -- canada has not exactly the same system that i proposed. we could get the employees to become owners of the corporation to run this and do it more effectively. that is what i proposed for faa. it is under consideration now. host: florida. david. independent caller. caller: i am a militant independent. i believe that the party is over. that anachronism. secondly clear vision,
integrity, and courage that we need in congress -- host: do you have a question for the congressman? guest: was he talking about me i hope? [laughter] guest: we did not quite hear the question. [laughter] host: nick in pleasanton, california. a republican. caller: glad to get through. i have been thinking about this drone bit. how in the world does any organization or government think that these drones are going to be able to be controlled. we are just talking about the giant agencies they cannot talk to each other right now. we cannot afford it.
these things are nice, they are beautiful, but they are not needed. there is nobody that will be able to control it. host: let's take that point. guest: i think that you can. they do have electronic systems and other parts that can be sorted -- thwarted through creating electronic curtains stop missiles, we can stop other devices. you can't protect everything from drones, but when you have the president of the united dates, the commander in chief -- united states, the commander-in-chief, we can create a barrier. the capital -- captiol is similar -- captitol is similar.
but threats change. you have to adapt. i am surprised that we haven't had more incidents. it is very hard now, without anything in place, to deter. host: this on twitter wants to know, what the bill will be passed based on the gyrocopter landing? guest: well, i don't know of a bill. we need to have agencies talking. we don't have to go into a full developmental program, but they can also put out requests for proposals from the private sector. they also have a solution. i remember when we had the secret service defends jumper -- fence jumper, i was stunned to find out you could hit the window and break you window at the white house. a gunshot did that. and he didn't find out for four days. i said, have you guys ever heard
of adt? because at my home, for example, and i don't have adt, but if you broke a window or left a window open, the alarm would go off and i would be notified. here is the white house. again, simple solutions. yet, there is technology available. yes, you can get the private sector to come in. but the right hand in government needs to talk to the left hand. and then we need to get the very best solution that we can at the best cost so that the taxpayer is footing the bill for all of this. host: todd indianapolis, hi. caller: thank you for taking my call. i was in the united states navy. from about 1968 to about 1972. and i was on the uss john f. kennedy.
we were -- our station was the mediterranean for about three or four years. when they went to -- had flight operations, the thing jespersen with radar. i imagine the technology they have nowadays is a lot better than what we had. but with all this radar, i mean to detect any threat coming in from the ship, i mean, it was unbelievable. even with all the technology that we had, this ahead people on the weather decks with binoculars. i think if you guys maybe put some people with binoculars on the roof, maybe that would help. [laughter] host: ok. guest: again, simple solutions make a lot of sense. host: what is security around the capital -- white house? guest: well, there is more security. we just had the prime minister of japan, and it was tighter
than i have seen. but again, some simple solutions. people need to sit down, look at what the threat is. we have a lot of surveillance security. we spent $250 million putting all sorts of improvements around the capital -- capitol. somehow, it is still not working. even if they had the capacity to listen to each other and communicate, they are not functioning as we saw with this instance. host: scott, an independent caller welcome to the conversation. caller: good morning. i just had a question as far as the comments he made as far as getting this fence work done at his home and offering to bring them up to d.c. to work on the white house fence. i am just wondering, with so many congresspeople that would have that are doing buying and
selling of stocks and company trades and things like that, but they do this little -- i will scratch your back if you scratch mine. i was wondering if he would be willing to list companies that he does business with and stocks that he buys and sells and legislation that he votes on for companies that he owns? guest: well, first of all, right now i cannot even name the company that did the work at my house, but i just offer that in just -- jest that i know a welder who could raise the fence a little bit. i own no oh -- no individual stock. you can pull up my financial disclosure and you can see my information. i think we have also changed
that now you have to report because of some instance where people did have conflicts and own stock or did transactions. it is a much more rapid disclosure and transparency. i think that is important. unfortunately, i don't have any interest in any stocks. i did very well in the private sector. don't know and -- owe anybody any money. fairly independent. but you have to ensure that transparency. it is there, and i think you'll find we have actually improved the law to make certain that members that have conflict. host: miami, florida. joe. a democrat. caller: good morning. i just heard you say about privatizing the faa. we had the safest years in history and aviation. guest: as far as airline crashes , large aircraft, yes, we have
here as far as incidents and the success of -- success of tsa almost every one of the instances have been a failure. we had very few agents will you should have them overseas. most of the incidents have been coming in. i found out that the shoe bomber came through -- he wasn't stopped by tsa or our security. he was stopped by passengers and people on the plane. you take the diaper bomber, the same thing got through. stopped by people. you take the new york city bomber who bombed times square. he brought his -- bought his ticket driving to jfk on the phone, paid with cash, went through tsa, and was stopped on the plane. the liquid bomb plot, i was in
texas the morning that came down. that was not tsa. that was british and israeli intelligence that i covered that plot because they can do a lot more. they stopped it. i could go through every instance. we started a behavior detection program. hired 2300 people. the inspector general has looked at it. it is a tremendous failure. 25 times terrorists went through airports. and that means some of them went through more than once. and the system has never worked. so we can and we must do better. we must get tsa into an important governmental, getting information, security, collecting intelligence. setting the parameters and the requirements. an auditing the system. that is the answer to your question.
i don't need 46,000 people and 16 bureaucrats to do that. that was never the way tsa was intended to run. host: we will go to nebraska next. carol, a republican. caller: yes, hello. i know this is probably a simple question, but to there are, as i understand, trained dogs that can sniff out ammo and drugs and such. wouldn't it be maybe a little less annoyance to people just to have good trained dogs at the airports? and perhaps expedite moving through the airport? guest: well, dogs are an interesting question and they are pretty good at detecting some neck trade based -- nitr
ate-based explosives. what have actually visited israel. they don't use dogs as much because they say the dogs tire. some of the threat that we face now is not nitrate-based. a gun or a knife it is very difficult to take down a plane. first of all because even on september 11, when the passengers and crew found out of a terrorist threat, they went after the bad guys. that is what you have seen in every instance on almost every play. then we have air marshals, we have secured cockpit doors. with a weapon, it is very difficult to pick on a plane. with explosives, everything we have at the airport this nitrate-based. a big threat now is not just nitrate, and that is with the dogs can sniff, it is other
substances. i cannot go into them. but that is the big threat we face now. the tsa is completely incapable of addressing that threat. right now, we are at a very difficult position. that is why go back to getting tsa into connecting the dots. we know who bad guys are. we know where they are operating. we have to stay ahead of them, as far as security and intelligence. host: tsa is completely incapable, you say, of detection. but what gives you confidence that if tsa was in private hands -- guest: that is a screening function. they are not law enforcement officers. they are screening. and screening is somewhat theater, i have to tell you because stuff gets through every month. there was another report, hundreds of items get through
but they don't pose a risk. nights are the big threat. explosives, we can get some of those with millimeterwave detectors, but that is 19-based. -- but that is nitrate-based. no liquids, take off your shoes they a looking at the next step. they have tried the diaper bomb. they have tried putting in cargo to blow up the plane. the next on as a various there's -- is a very serious threat. we are prepared for it. you spending money on security theater. again, our biggest facilities have private screenings, our nuclear facilities, some of our national security facilities, but they -- the screening function of passengers, they can be thousands of people who do this work, can be best managed
by the private sector. the government sets the rules. actually, our jobs is to connect the intelligence, connect the dots. every time, we have failed. look at the boston bombers. we failed there to connect the dots. so that is where you stop these instances and you have to stay ahead of it. that is my job to try and get things -- if you want to spend money on things that aren't working or don't pose a real risk, you have to keep the american people safe. host: dayton, ohio. an independent caller. good morning, jeff. caller: good morning. if you want to privatize tsa because of bureaucracy and everything else, why do we just privatize the military and have the bureaucracy taken care of their two? -- too? guest: i wouldn't say that. have actually shown great
leadership. this week, we will probably pass the first budget in six years. we started out -- the senate considered more legislation and one our side gained control. i was here when we took over in 1990 five. we balanced the budget. in less than three years, we had a balanced budget -- or at least more revenue than expenditures until 2002. i am very proud of what we have been able to accomplish. the other side had complete control. they had huge majorities in the house, the senate, and the control of the white house. i passed every major transportation bill, in spite of having the senate in the other hands, and they were able to do the other thing -- were not able to do the other thing.
please do not tell me that we are not doing our jobs. we are stepping up to the plate. i know that people have been disappointed in the past, but we are trying to turn it around. host: on the budget blueprint this is from the "washington times." the budget watchdog says the gop plan uses trickery to repeal obamacare, well keeping tax hikes and failing to account for the tax code. guest: there are honest differences on the budget. i'm sure there will be some
people that vote against it. i intend to vote for it. it sets a framework and allows us to go to regular order. we have not been able to go to regular order because we'd have -- we have not had a budget. the budget is just the framework. the words and deeds are what we do with the individual programs and appropriations. i am not a fan of obama care. i am not a fan of increasing taxes. we can have additional revenues coming in and be fair to people. we have a lot of programs that have failed. i am in charge of oversight for a number of programs. i have rarely seen any government program that we cannot do a better job in and save taxpayers money. we get down to the meat and potatoes after we pass the framework. that is where we need to be held accountable by the public. host: jim in new bedford,
massachusetts. democrat. caller: john. john. john. [laughter] caller: i think we are missing a big part of the point here. we have to move forward. social media. you don't need fences, dogs, satellites radar. that is money, spending huge money. 12 -- i use this word respectfully -- geeks in a room with computers will tell you before the guy puts the bomb in his shoe. host: let's take the point about social media and using that type of technology. guest: whatever works. the most cost effective -- it is a neck's a length point. government usually picks the most costly, most bureaucratic
solution it can take. you can take tsa. a lot of common sense does not prevail in washington. but you try to do that. i am the chairman of oversight over a bunch of programs. i am concerned about the public. i am concerned about the federal government sitting on its asset debt. the government has to stop sitting on its asset debts. look at the old post office. half of 400,000 square feet vacant. a new annex vacant for 15 years. i held my first hearing as chairman. it took me one year to get that put up for private sector bid. government sat on it. it will now turn around and be a
hotel. we will be getting taxes in. instead of an $8 million loss to the taxpayer, we will have a 40 million -- $40 million revenue. i am taking on the landscape . we have 144,000 acres that cape kennedy, 16,000 acres next to the air force. it is vacant property sitting there and i am battling with the bureaucrats to move projects forward. you have to do a one project at a time. 15,000 of those properties are other vacant or under he -- underutilized across the country. i could go on and on. host: we will move onto another
call. johnny in livingston. independent caller. caller: i am retired from private industry. one of the first things i have learned is that there is no one who cannot be replaced in doing their job. you are talking about tsa. you are talking about the secret service agents having prostitutes in south america and the dea agents who had parties that are being paid for by the cartel. government employees fill just feel that they cannot be replaced or fired. guest: you are right on target. i am former chairman of civil service. there were protections put in place for civil servants so that they would not have political retribution. they should not be -- there
should not begin to use for people in place who are incompetent. it is so hard to get rid of these people. the director of the secret service came to me and said, can you help? i cannot hire or fire people. i am having trouble getting in place qualified people. there were some conflicts to do with the regulations with law enforcement and how long they could be in service by the time they got to that peak. they were the best people you could get for administrative positions, they had to go out the door. she took the fall. she had to go. whether it is dea, they have difficulty because you have these constraints. with the prostitutes, the drug-financed sex parties, the
drug cartel financed some of these activities, those guys got eight day suspensions with pay. that is not right. but try to change it. it is very difficult to get everybody, particularly those in the civil service, lost. host: we will get one last phone call in for you, congressman. it comes from dave, a republican in chicago. caller: i am a flight instructor and a pilot in chicago. i wanted to get back to the drone issue. i have had to brief some of my students on how to avoid some of these drones. one fellow wanted to know about how to acquire one so he could do bridge inspections, which is a pretty valid reason for using them. i think the problem is going to be when more of these things are out there, flow incorrectly or in airspace that could be difficult to be detected, as
soon as an airplane hits one of these drones, it is going to be an extremely critical situation. i know the faa is involved in reviewing and coming up with regulations for this. i hope it is very tight. i wanted to make a comment. guest: this is a good time to weigh in. when i authored the faa bill that the democrats had tried 20 times and could not pass but i was able to pass it -- one of the provisions i put in was that we need some regulations on these drones. they are being considered by faa, this is the time to weigh in. they dupe pros -- they do pose a risk. host: you say this is the time to weigh in. guest: either through comments or letters. this is the time to do it.
through representatives. host: congressman john mica, we appreciate your time. guest: thank you. host: we are going to turn to a new poll out by the harvard institute of politics taking a look at the political views of millennials. ♪ >> the c-span's cities tour has partnered to learn about the history of topeka, kansas. >> the very act of signing the kansas-nebraska act was viewed by missouri is -- missourians as an act of war.
many missourians assumed it was theirs. there were raids back and forth across the border almost immediately. john brown, his sons, and a couple of other followers dragged five men from their cabin, along the creek, and they are shot and hacked to get a -- death with broad swords. that cleared that area of southern settlers. >> if you look at the schools into peak standing outside, you would be hard-pressed to determined what students are african-american students because the school board did provide all of the same materials that the white schools offered. what is even more interesting for most people is that they find out that after graduating from elementary school, african students attended integrated middle and high schools.
while they certainly were no supporters of segregation and saw the injustice of having to attend separate elementary schools, the african-american community also was very proud of their schools because these were excellent facilities. so while there was support for the idea of integration, the results are resistance from the teachers and the local check your's -- chapters of the end of all acp who for the loss of the institutions and the loss of those jobs. >> watch all of the events from topeka on saturday and on sunday morning. >> "washington journal" continues. host: joining us from new york is john della volpe, the polling director at the harvard institute of politics, here to talk about a new poll about millennials.
what is the take away from this latest survey of millennials? guest: there are a lot of takeaways. talking about election 2016, 1 of the takeaways is that more 18-29-year-olds prefer democrats to control the white house in 2016 by a 55 point margin. that is setting the stage for the 2016 campaign. we asked a series of questions about the state of the american justice system and plenty of other things. host: let's start with the politics and that poll. 55% of 18-29-year-olds prefer the democrats keep control of the white house. 40-40 percent wanting republicans. why is that? guest: clearly, when you look at 18-29-year-olds. there are 20 -- millions of them
of voting age. they align themselves more with the den -- general policies of democrats. that is less true today than it was back in 2008 at this stage of the 2008 campaign. young people had a tremendous impact it in electing barack obama. to put things into perspective today, when we just look at it as an example. in 2007, 40% of college students consider themselves to be politically active or engaged. liberals had three times as many students on campuses in 2007 than conservatives. today, it is quite different. you see only about 20% or 21% of college students saying they are politically act of -- active and you see the disparity between liberals and conservatives much smaller than it was.
there is a democratic preference, but the question is is that large enough to propel a democrat in 2016? host: when you take a look at the exit polls over the last presidential cycle, 2000 four through 2012, that age group did prefer the democratic candidate over the republican candidate by large majorities. what you are saying is that the trend has not continued? or might not continue? guest: it is a question -- i don't think there is a question that democrats will win the lion's share of the youth vote in 2016. the question is, how big of a share? in 2004 exit polls, when john kerry ran against george w. bush, john kerry won by about 10 or 11 points among young people.
he lost everybody over the age of 30. on the other hand, barack obama 166% of that vote -- one 66% of that vote. the question is, how close can the democrats get to that magic number of 60%? if it is a republican nominee how close can they keep the democrats to somewhere in the mid 50's. if they can, they have a much better chance of winning a national election. host: how does it break down demographically? race, gender, etc. guest: the poll that we conduct every spring and every fall, we have 3034 interviews. this survey is representative of all young people in america. what we find is that there are
some pretty significant differences based upon age, gender, and race. take barack obama's favorability. compared to the last poll we conducted in the fall, his overall favorability is up to 50%. a key driver in that favorability is improvement among young latino americans. he has increased his rating by 16% due to the economy and the executive action on immigration. we see very significant differences between the way hispanic americans young black americans think about the president and the issues of the day. we are beginning to see some subtle differences based on age. younger millennials are viewing
politics through a slightly different lens than their older brothers and sisters. host: explain that a little bit more. guest: what i mean to say is that when you think about the generation of millennials. it is america upon largest generation -- america's largest generation. 25% of all citizens fall within this broad definition. we are only looking at the 18-29-year-olds. the older cohort came of age when they remember 9/11 quite clearly, they remember the response to that, they remember katrina, george w. bush, and the obama campaign. they still hold slightly more progressive, liberal democratic views them longer ones. younger millennials, some of them don't remember 9/11, frankly. they came of age not necessarily during the bush years, which
were not very popular for young people, but they came of age during the great recession which followed a lot of hope and optimism and was quickly followed by gridlock and partisanship and institutions not working well for them or their families. because of that, they are not necessarily republican conservative, they just tend to be less democratic and more conservative. host: we are talking with john della volpe from the harvard institute of politics, the polling director. we have divided the lines. 18-29, you are the millennials. all others, your line is separate. before we get to the calls let's talk about number two in the survey. hillary clinton holds a largely the against other potential
democratic candidates. if a democratic primary were held today, which one of the candidates would be your first choice? hillary clinton is at 47%. why is that? guest: frankly because i don't think she has a lot of opposition right now, in terms of a formidable campaign structure who is positioning themselves in a prison -- significant way. she is essentially the only announced candidate. obviously, senator sanders announcing in the next couple of days. it is really hers to lose at this point. she has a commanding lead. we included senator warren as a potential candidate. a commanding lead. it is 18-19 months before the election and more than a year before the first caucus. it is a long time to go. it is good to see where the race starts.
host: let's talk to katie, who is in merrick, new york. how old are you? caller: i said independent. i am 27 years old. host: independent. 20 seven years old. you are on the air, katie. caller: among my friends and i, i would say that nobody is truly that political. there is pretty much myself and somebody who considers themselves a conservative. i would say that we are really split, most people are split -- they cannot identify with one party. i feel like the republicans have the economic side down. they have that on lock. they fix a lot of the economic problems. it scares me when it comes to their positions on social issues. i don't consider myself religious. a lot of arguments that are
god-based, i can't really get behind. there are problems on the democratic side, as well. i don't completely agree with a welfare state. i feel like it is really split. right now, i don't see any candidate that is necessarily fitting the bill. i would not vote for hillary myself. i am tired of the clinton-bush-obama proxy. i don't think the choice should be between bush and clinton again. it is funny. there was an "south park" episode years ago and it compare the candidates to a crab sandwich. it is the lesser of two evils. a giant douche and crab sandwich. the lesser of two evils. host: thank you. guest: the way she talks about
being independent and not necessarily comfortable with either party. when you asked us to break down who the generation is, we see that a plurality self identify as independent. when we ask independents who they prefer to win the white house in 2016, 40 3% indicated they prefer the democrats. 40% indicated the republicans. it is a tossup. one of the interesting things we have seen emerge over the last couple of polling cycles is that we have had a growing level of conservatism among independents. which means that those are missed placed votes that should probably be republican votes. a lot of independent-minded young people who may not align
with the democratic party don't feel at home in the republican party. the republican party is trying to rebrand the way young people think about them. only 23% of young people approve of the way republicans are doing their job in congress. a minority of young republicans approve of the way republicans are doing their job in congress. we will see if a moderate republican can capture that part of the electorate. host: paul is up next in massachusetts. caller: how do you do? good morning. good morning, sir. cert and ma'am -- sir and ma'am. when i was in college, back in the late 1960's, i took statistics. my professor told me that you can make statistics favor and
say whatever you want them to say. guest: that is true. caller: i also question the fact that i don't think your sample base is large enough. whenever i see statistics, i question them. i'm sorry. guest: sure. that is a fair question. we conducted more than 5000 interviews every single year. idle do think there is another national poll -- i don't think that there is another national poll that conducts any more than 3000 residents. the margin for error is less than 3%. most national polls are conducted as a sample size of 800, 1000, 1200. we are incredibly confident about the rigor of this work.
if people indicate that they are of hispanic or latino heritage we offer it in spanish, if they're more comfortable. it is a most rigorous survey. with a most sincere effort to be as representative of the u.s. population as possible. host: let's go to south carolina. elizabeth. caller: good morning. guest: hi, elizabeth. caller: i am 90 years old. you can imagine that i am a bit conservative. i pride myself in that i am willing to listen to all sides. so far, i have not seen anyone republican candidate that i would feel that i could commit to. i certainly do not feel very positive about hillary clinton. i am encouraged that sanders has
indicated that he will run. i believe in accountability. you can believe that. i do not think that we can continue a welfare state where the government pays people more to be unemployed than they can make working. most of us are human and we avoid typical -- difficult jobs in decisions. for our future we are going to need to make some difficult choices. host: ok, elizabeth. john della volpe. guest: one point that she talked about. i think she said she was 90 years old. that is something that certainly
connects all generations. we saw last year in the survey that we asked a series of questions about how much young people trust institutions like the military, the supreme court, the presidency, the federal government, congress, etc.. last year we saw less than 50% said they trusted institutions. this year, most institutions were on the upswing. i hope that continues. americans of grown more cynical toward government and institutions. it is frankly very important. we need to reestablish trust in government, trust in public -- politics, the efficacy of politics. unless those values are passed on to the millennial generation,
they will not participate in the numbers we would like them to. host: here are the numbers that john della volpe is talking about. most institutions rebounded from last year paul slows. when they cold these 18-29-year-olds, we are talking about the latest survey of millennials. they are 50 million-plus strong in the country. talking about how they view the key debates. adam you are next in michigan. how old are you? caller: hey, good morning. i am 21. host: what are your thoughts? caller: i was going to come on here and ridicule the poll, the sample size. i did not think that 3000 millennials was a good
representation of over 50 million people. mr dell volpe kind of calm some of my grievances or whatever about that. i don't think we have a good idea of how millennials are going to vote at this point. before the 2016 election. i think we need a clear republican front runner or something. i think it is too early. host: adam, would you consider yourself democrat, republican, or independent? caller: i would think of myself as an independent voter. as dave chapelle has said before , i'm not going to tell anybody who i am voting for. i am one of those guys. guest: adam, i appreciate the comment.
polling a population is a lot like a blood test. to understand somebody possibly a very small sample of a person's blood. it is representative of the entire body. that is the same thing with what we do. we take a sample of the electorate and are able to make rejections. i think he is right. we are not predicting who will win the election. outside of a horse race, we had over 100 questions about who they are, what they think, and what they care about on issues related to the economy, the environment, energy, foreign policy, a plethora of issues. i hear what he is saying. the reason that we conduct polls like this is we need to see a baseline in terms of where people are today and where they may move over the course of a campaign season. the other lesson in this poll there are some startling statistics in the survey.
49% of young people have little to no faith that the justice system treats people fairly with regard to race or ethnicity. that is a significant finding. when we asked that question among young african, it is two thirds. i hope surveys like this raise this issue into the national by a log. so that members of the media and members of either party can begin to address these issues and work on solutions. host: take a look at the poll results on this issue. nearly one in two do not have confidence that the justice system is fair. the deep divisions when you break it down by race. you look at how white americans view it versus black and hispanic millennials. they also broke it down by party. how democrats view the judicial
system, the blue being a lot or some confidence, the red line being not much. we will go to bennie in stockton, california. good morning. caller: good morning. i just woke up. excuse my raspy voice. when i turned the tv on, i heard the gentleman speaking about hillary clinton being the front-runner. it is too early to tell that she is going to be the front runner in the campaign. i think vice president biden is going to throw his hat in. jim webb. i would vote for jim webb. others don't think america is ready for a female president. i think hillary clinton has too much baggage.
every time you turn the tv on, it is something criticizing hillary. host: i am going to take your point about how millennials view having a female president. john della volpe. guest: that is a non-issue in terms of gender or race. i don't think there is a question about that. young people, i think all americans really view politics about what do you have to say. host: carol says this on twitter. many very young to not pay attention to policies and their influence i who was more cool and hip. most of us have been there. what do you think about that? guest: i don't think that is fair. there is an element of that. young people and all voters seek to support somebody who can empathize with their situation,
who understands where they are coming from. whether you call that cool hip, i don't know. young people want to see themselves and their vision and their worldview reflected in the candidate they choose to support. could be someone as young as marco rubio or somebody who is 20 years older than that? i don't think age and gender plays the way people think. host: on the republican primary side, the harvard institute of politics asking if the republican primary were held, no front runner coming out on the horizon. the republican primary is still emerging. 36% of millennials do not know at this point.
do you affiliate yourself with one of the parties? caller: i consider myself an indocrat. my name is derek. i wanted to touch on the hillary clinton thing. i feel like hillary clinton when i was younger, my parents were politically active. i watched tv on the news. i was aware. i am 29 years old now. i feel like she is in the front because my generation saw that her approach to the economy was good and everything was decent. we were being attacked by random terrorist. a feeling everybody just kind of wants to beef up when they are scared. they do not want to have kids.
are they going to be able to go to college? are they going to be able to have a job?'s are going to be water around? it is kind of a big influx and emotions. like you said, 49% of people don't trust government. when half the country doesn't trust them, what makes you think they are going to vote? you have all these millionaires who have their dream teams ready to go, we sadly see them lining up to push people out. people like bernie sanders and lit -- and elizabeth warren want to help and fix everything. they are not going to get a shot. that sucks. guest: i think the caller raises an important point. i think you can see the evidence of that in terms of income inequality. that is one of the most profound
issues for 18-29-year-olds. elizabeth warren has successfully raised that in the campaign, as will bernie sanders. i think what we have seen over the last several months is that you don't necessarily need to be a candidate for president to motivate some of the issues that concern young people and other generations. income inequality is there a terrific example. host: let's talk about the economy and prospects for growth for the millennials. there's an article in the washington post. parenting will take a bigger budget chunk for them than it has for their parents. daycare, the college, all of those costs are going to be a much larger percentage than it was for their parents. what does that mean you read
what did you ask the millennials about growth, economic growth? guest: we asked a series of questions. i saw another survey published that indicated that young people are saving their money at a higher rate than members of other generations. that is also something that we have seen reflected in a lot of resources. they have seen the impact the recession has had. it is easier to save if you don't have a mortgage, if you don't have car loans. it is good that they are saving. the other thing that is worth noting is that despite the fact a lot of college students feel like it can be difficult to get a job upon graduation, the generation feels that they are doing ok financially.
we have seen a slight increase in the percentage of young people who believe that, compared to their parents generation, they will be better off. 49% said they would be better off. last year, it was 39%. the number who thought they would be worse off decreased by five point in the last 12 months. we see a renewal of optimism around the economy with members of america's largest generation. host: let's go to bill in new hampshire. caller: hi. i'd like to see if we can get a view of the survey that you did but view it through another survey of how well do the american people, especially the millenniums, trust corporations who are the ones taking over the
country, at this point. anyway. host: we will have john della volpe answer that. guest: thanks for the question. we asked about other institutions other than the one that we showed. we have been talking to other institutions. we did not include corporations but we included wall street and the media. those two entities or organizations have less trust in congress. the number of young people who said they trusted wall street -- nine out of 10 young people do not trust wall street i know you are a member of the media, but
11% trust. c-span would be in a much different category. [laughter] host: roger in wisconsin. caller: good morning. in 1960 cut nobody had given john f. kennedy much of a chance to get the nomination. i was wondering how that would compared to a senator elect marco rubio. guest: i think marco rubio should be taken incredibly seriously. i don't think age is a key factor. you can use it to share your own experiences.
marco rubio is talking to other parts of the electorate that are seeking leadership at this time. nine out of 10 african-americans will vote for democrats. with hispanics, it is an incredibly important part of this segment. i think they are going to take a hard look at senator rubio. i think that some of the talk and the policy coming out of the rubio campaign is in line with where some millennials are thinking about foreign policy, to be quite honest. a hardening or more forceful interest in foreign policy from
this generation. i noted before that a majority of democrats and republicans prefer to have boots on the ground to deal with the situation around isis. we see the united states taking a more forceful role without the collaboration of the u.n.. i think marco rubio potentially could play very well. host: let's take a look at the other question you asked millennials on foreign policy. which of the following statements comes closer to your point of view? the united states should take the lead in solving international crises and conflicts? the u.s. should let other countries and the u.n. take the lead. you can see how that has decreased since 2013.
christopher. how old are you? and, north carolina. do you affiliate yourself with a party? caller: i don't really affiliate myself with a party. i'm 20 years old. i lean more left than right. i don't really affiliate with a party. host: go ahead. caller: i have a question. i am just wondering about religious affiliation among millennials. i'm wondering, do you think that being that religious affiliation is trending low in our generation do you think it will have impact on politics later in the future? in a decade? and is conjecture. guest: i think it is a really
astute question, to be honest with you. one of the things we found in the survey for many years is that when we look at all millennials, those that say whatever category, we look at everybody. we find that 51% say that religion plays an important part of their lives. the definition of important is different than the definition of our grandparents. religion still plays an important role. whether you color religion or spirituality, it is something that everybody needs to know about this generation. they do feel religious, at least half of them.
we have a majority of all young people who tell us they are concerned about the moral direction of the country. not to say that his religious, but they think about the issues of the day in moral terms. the issues of race and justice, income inequality, health care, foreign policy. young people put them on a moral spectrum. they are seeking to have issues like that addressed in those kinds of terms. host: we will go to robert in pikesville, maryland. caller: hello. host: go ahead. caller: i want to address a few things. millennials were responsible for helping barack obama be elected president the first time. now, what i think we are witnessing we are seeing the economic stagnation that it's attributed to him but if you
look at republican policies and tax policy that has contributed to the deficit, if you look at conservatives who talk about the welfare state but in actuality, we spent most of our money on military spending. we are seeing coming over this country -- we are seeing a conservative strain that has come over this country to blame democrats for the economic problems we have, when, in actuality, these problems are exacerbated by a congress that his republican-controlled and refuses to work on things like a jobs bill and things that can put people to work. this seems to be really carrying out an agenda that is harmful to the middle class and for millennials who are trying to make their way into the workplace and build careers. host: i'm going to jump in. i want to give john della volpe a chance to answer. guest: i think the point robert is making is that -- is accurate
in some respects. we have asked to these questions in the past about who deserves blame or credit. republicans typically take more blame for the stagnation in washington dc. there is plenty of blame to roll around. one of the most important things for the survey is this idea of trust and confidence in the judicial system and other parts of american institutions. until people realize, members of congress and other elected officials realize that they are turning off this generation and they need to rebuild the trust with the future and empower them to be active in politics and government. we will be better off when that happens. it is incredibly important. 10% to 20% of young people are passionate about government and politics. we have the opportunity to do
that much more and really motivate young people, whether it is democrat or republican. that is what we have heard all morning. i think elected officials and candidates ought to connect with them as soon as possible. host: we appreciate your time and explanation. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2015] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] host: now we bring you to the house. live coverage on c-span. aptimade possie the nionaptiong insttute, c. coopetion th thenited states hou of presentativ any usof the ccaned coveragef e hous procdings for potical commercial purpos is expresohibity the u.s.ouse opresens.]