tv Washington Journal CSPAN July 10, 2015 7:00am-9:01am EDT
t of virginia is here to discuss the no child left behind bill and other education issues. at 820 a.m., look at the impact of the environmental protection agency. our guest is congressman bruce westermann of arkansas. >> at 10:00 a.m., we will see the confederate flag come down. we are a state that believes in tradition. we are a state that believes in history. we are a state that believes in respect. so we will bring it down with dignity and we will make sure it is put in its rightful place. ♪ ♪ [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2015] host: that was the south carolina governor nikki haley. the confederate flag being removed will take place at 10:00 today. even as that happens, sharp debate over display of the flag and the confederate symbols in new orleans and louisiana and discussions are going on whether statues and even in the halls of congress yesterday, large debate
about the display of the flag in certain circumstances. in our next 45 minutes, we want to hear from you on where you draw the line when it comes to the display of the confederate battle flag or confederate symbols. perhaps you think it should be kept from public land or maybe it should go further. let us know what you think on two lines this morning -- if you live in the east, 202-748 -8000. if you live in a mountain or pacific time zones 202-748- 8001. if you want to post your thoughts on where you draw the line, you can post in our twitter page, on our facebook page, and if you want to send us an e-mail on this topic, you can do so at firstname.lastname@example.org. usa today takes that question on where they draw the line when it comes to the use of confederate symbols.
where do you draw the line? give us a call and let us know. we will start with jerry in naples, florida. where do you draw the line? caller: thank you for taking my call. i love c-span and love to listen to your program. it's the best program on the radio. the thing i would like to say is that the confederate flag actually symbolizes our differences. in a country that is so divisive at this point in time, i find it interesting that people will cling to the symbol not because it symbolizes slavery or bigotry or anything else but what it really says is that we disagree. we disagree and that's what led to the civil war.
if you look back in history, you will find that robert e lee said and i cannot quote them verbatim, so this thing and put it away. this is the end of our differences. this day at appomattox courthouse, this day says that this war is over, that we no longer differ, that now we will move forward and agree about a few things. host: when it comes to the display today of the flag or symbols, what you think is appropriate? caller: i think there is no place, no place where it is appropriate to symbolize the confederate flag except perhaps for historical reasons, to discuss the horrific nature and the horrible, horrible event that occurred in our history so
that we can never repeated again. host: thank you tony is up next from fort worth, texas. caller: how are you doing this morning? host: fine. caller: it took nine people in south carolina to die for the majority of americans to realize that there is a lot of hatred associated with this flag. it is a treasonous flag and i don't think there is no place where it should be displayed. it was a war. they lost the war. i think that all things associated with the war as far as the south goes -- we have one nation and one flag. we don't have two flags. we have the american flag in the confederate lag is more divisive than uniting. there is no place for it. host: would you extend that to
private lands if a homeowner wants to display it? caller: well, we talk about private and you talk about first amendment. of course you can do it like displaying a swastika if you want to your private land. you cannot people to do what they need to do for the private property. i don't think there is any room for public opportunities. . host: richard is up from lake lassa, florida. are you there? . let's go to california good morning. caller: good morning. i am kind of loan away at the academic dishonesty that the flag was created by william thompson to basically proclaim the superiority of the white man.
to fly it in public spaces is definitely a no-no. as far as people's rights to have it on vanity plates, that is their prerogative. host: the folks at the gallup poll did a poll on july 8. they asked this type political party. the one in south carolina will come down today. republicans and democrats will decide on how it's displayed once it comes down but for our first 45 minutes, your opinion on the display of the confederate flag or statues and other symbols. where do you draw the line?
let's hear from don in clifton virginia, good morning. caller: good morning, i think we are going in the wrong direction. i think it was a bad move to take it down in south carolina. the tell about is doing the same thing to all remnants of other cultures -- the taliban is doing the same thing to all remnants of other cultures in the middle east. they are destroying other evidence of other civilizations. i believe the civil war signify the end of the united states in the sense that the federal government destroyed all state prerogatives. it is a bygone era. i believe that slavery was the result of the way people saw how horrible the conditions of people but could not see themselves in africa. there was constant tribal warfare and we took them in and make them productive -- and made them productive. slavery was a win-win.
mohammed ali even said thank god my grandfather got on the boat. host: south carolina, go ahead. caller: first of all, what this fellow set is ridiculous about slavery was a win-win situation. that is not my point. it shows the ignorance affiliated with this flag. this flag to not only offend african americans but it should offend every american because it represents treason. that flag represented secession from these united states of america. for it to still fly on public land is an abomination. there is a passage in the bible that says ye shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free. even in south carolina that flag was not raised in its current position until the civil
rights era when martin luther king and other civil rights were marching for voting rights and educational rights and everything. that flag was raised in defiance of killing the united states of america that we are still not a part of you. it was raised then. it has not always flown where it has flown. for people to call in and talk about africans were cannibals and white america took care of us by cutting our heads off and cutting her legs off and having us in captivity and this represents the heritage -- come on, let's be for real. in the corridors of congress, john lewis said policeman in the south eating women children, sicking dogs on them, and wearing that flag on their helmets and we know what it stands for. host: as far as the governor
decision yesterday, was it a good one and what do you think should be done now as far as the display of the flag? caller: it was the proper decision. it was a godly decision and it should go into a museum. would you want to fly the swastika flag in a nation that had jews? it might mean one thing to the germans that this was our heritage that flew the flag but to the jews, it would mean something else. it would mean the holocaust. it should go in a museum and that's where to be represented. host: let's hear from trapper in alabama, you are next. caller: how are you doing this morning? host: fine, thank you. caller: honestly, i think the country has a lot more to worry about than the confederate flag such as -- what about the russian bombers nobody wants to talk about that was intercepted over the fourth of july. we are worrying too much about how much petty stuff -- it is a
flag and it stands for what it stands for and yes, we should take it down. do whatever you want to do but let's get back to what really matters at hand. the country is lost. host: let's hear from members of congress on this decision. one republican member from south carolina, part of the delegation limiting the american flag -- let's hear from that member. >> the flag that is flying on that monument today has been co-opted hijacked, and used by people who are ignoble in their means and who have used that as a symbol of hatred and a symbol that is not keeping with what people know south carolinians are. and what we have proved as south
carolinians over these last dreadful weeks. that monument that is on the grounds honors the confederate dead. those men who fought honorably and valiantly for south carolina. we should honor them. unfortunately, we have also seen many moves that seek to go beyond the flag. it seeks to remove vestiges of what the south was, to remove history, almost a cultural genocide. host: he was a republican
speaking in defense of the confederate flag. that took place as debate over the flag caused it to come down today as the governor of south carolina announced. the did they took place yesterday in the house and joining us to tell us more about what happened is matt fuller. good morning. guest: good morning to you. host: could you set the stage -- the stories in the paper are playing at what happened in congress. this is the headline with usa today and spending issues and dealt with displays of the flag at certain times. can you tell us what happened yesterday? guest: yes, we started the day. on wednesday night, there was an interior appropriation bill that they were working on on the floor. the starry -- the story starts before that because they always do. democrats had added a voice vote amendments that would have
banned the use of federal funds to display the confederate battle flag on federal lands. cemeteries under the national park service control that and would not be able to display the confederate flag. that was added in a quick voice vote. there was no republicans that voted against it and it seemed that provision would get through without any debate. apparently, we had some republicans not satisfied with that. they asked for a vote on the confederate flag basically on doing that amendment. they said if we don't get a vote on this, we will not pass this interior appropriations bill. the chairman of the subcommittee, the interior
appropriations committee he added back in an amendment for a vote which would have undone that particular democratic amendment. it would have allowed the confederate flag to be displayed on federal lands. that was on wednesday night and by thursday morning, we had woken up to what was already a growing public relations fiasco for many republicans. essentially speaker john boehner made a decision with other gop leaders that they would not have this debate on house floor it would not subject members to that particular vote right now. host: we have the speakers statement from yesterday as part of the debate.
let's listen to what he has to say. [video clip] >> the members rightly tried to address the concerns yesterday in a way that was consistent with how the obama administration has handled this issue. i frankly supported the goal of trying to work with all the parties to address their concerns. listen, we all witnessed the people of charleston and the people of south carolina come together in a respectful way to deal with what was a very horrific crime and a difficult issue with the confederate flag. i actually think it's time for some odd elses in congress to sit down and have a conversation -- for some adults in congress to sit down and addressed this issue. i don't want this to become a political football. it should not. host: will this become a political football? guest: it already has. they pulled the bill but under
the rules of the house, the minority leader can get a vote on a previous resolution. nancy pelosi which was advantageous for democrats -- they hijacked the floor and the news cycle for a day -- she put up a small resolution that essentially would only affect one flag on the house side. the resolution would remove any symbol or flag it has a reprint of the confederate flag. the only one that has it is the mississippi state flag. there is only one flag displayed that is not a nonmember office flag. the resolution was tailored to flags that were not outside of member offices. it was a very small resolution but truthfully, it was serving as a proxy for this entire debate. what we saw on the floor was republicans looking to avoid that debate.
we had the debate yesterday and we saw very clearly the division that exist between republicans and democrats on the broadbrush level. many republicans insist that if they had not voted on this calvert amendment the amendment would have gone down but you would have seen a lot of republicans who don't support the voting identity amendment. it would have been quite a revealing vote. instead, it was more of a party line. you had the republican from florida who refused to vote with his party. he is the only one that broke ranks. democrats made an incredible show yesterday on the flag resolution. it was a show of force. on the floor, they voted with their voting cards instead of voting electronically. they were shouting on the house
floor. host: that was the explanation of what took place as far as the issue of the confederate flag. you can read his story online. thank you for expiring that to us. guest: thanks for having me? host: your thoughts on the display of the confederate flag and confederate symbols -- las vegas, nevada, go ahead. . caller: as he was saying about the bill that was brought up in congress by ken calvert, i wonder why leadership did not have someone else present it. if they are plowed of -- if they are proud of displaying the lack, why didn't people say in front of the american people -- who is proud of that lack? why did they do it in a way that hides who is for the bill? i think that is the upper or. -- uproar. you have that much southern private you cannot get in front of the american people and say
this is what we are proud of and we have to hide in congress behind leadership. the whole thing kind of stinks. it has been par for the course for john boehner. everything he does seems to be a basic failure. instead of trying to get something done for the country they are out here trying to post on's. -- to pull starts -- stunts. it has taken 50 years to get that flag down so it shows you exactly how far we have to go with other issues of it takes us over 50 years to get a symbol of a flag taken down in one state. that is my comment, thank you. host: north carolina, you are next. caller: thank you for letting me speak. on the fact of the flag being taken down, i thought about this a lot.
i am thinking that flags of nonexistent government revelation not be flown over public buildings like state houses. the state flag, the american flag governments that don't exist that's fine. what disturbs me is that now there are so many people that want to remove the history of what happened during the civil war and with the confederacy. i moved to the south from the north and i have to tell you, i never thought of the flag is being a racist symbol. i always thought of it as being an honor to the heritage of the south, and honor to the south way of life, and certainly, not as a racist thing against any group. when you give to one group and
take from another, then there is something wrong with that. that's exactly what is happening here. i think a lot of the reasons for this conversation are made up and i think it is a slippery slope to deny history. that is exactly what is happening. i have friends that went to gettysburg earlier this summer and they told me that all the references to the confederacy are removed from gettysburg and from the museum. who fought there? did the yankees fight each other, no. there was a confederate army the fought there and that is part of our history and we should be able to see it and talk about it and look at it and then know from that history that we went on to other things. host: thank you. from usa today -- some other
james in whittier, north carolina, good morning. what do you think about the confederate flag and symbol displays but mark caller: i support our southern history. it's not racist or anything to do with that. it's a group of people that got together and they flew the american flag and the confederate flag. look what the federal government did to the native americans east of the mississippi. they may the cherokees move west to oklahoma.
the confederacy did not do that, that was the federal government under the american flag. you can hold a flag righteous and he flag -- any flag, it's all the people and it took a good thing that is part of our history with my kids and grandkids -- they will not have any knowledge of that part of their history or their family history. it's about what they believe in. i think that is wrong to deprive our young and our descendents of our history and our knowledge. we are not passing nothing on. host: vicky is from california, she is next when it comes to the display of the american flag. caller: of course people can fly that lag in their private domain
but it should be taken down from public buildings. once again, i will say it again and i've said it before, white people don't think black people are human and the history behind that flag is murder, deceit, lies genocide. just like donald trump says that the mexicans are coming over here but mexicans have a flag in texas long before there was a united states. out of bad comes good and this is the country we have now. this country has been racist, deceitful and have murdered and lied and profited from it. this is how slavery started the industrial revolution and the industrial revolution, who did it and if it? it benefited white people who became railroad masters, steel,
shipping, all of that. this country is great because of murdering the lives and the deaths and enslavement of black people. that is my comment. host: in court today, a hearing is taking place, taking a look at the obama administration's the partition policy. you will remember it was halted because of a decision out of texas. it was temporarily blocked in february in it has effectively stalled and spent.
ed from clinton, michigan. good morning. caller: good morning and thank you for taking my call. i have no problem with the southern flag being flown. i think that for the most part, it is democrats trying to whitewash their history. the previous caller made a lot of comments about racism, slavery, genocide, and supposedly it was all the white men's problem. but when you see that flag, is it -- i mean, it reminds me of
the sacrifice my family made to help free the slaves. i think that for blacks who say it should be taken down because it signifies slavery to them i that they are playing into the political side of it. their party is trying to whitewash their history so that they will forget about jim crow that the democratic party instituted. they will forget about segregation that the democratic party was for. they will forget that most of the south, for the longest time after the civil war, was solid democrats. now, blacks in the democratic party would like all of these things there are out there for their children to see, they call it racist, but it is not. it is a part of history.
they should see it and remember it and stop blaming. host: one of the people on the floor of the house, john lewis adding his thoughts on the confederate flag delete - debate. [video clip] >> we need to bring down the flag. racism is deeply embedded in every corner of american society. i do not want to see our children, whether white, black latino, or asian seeing these signs of hate. as a nation, we can do better. we can lay down this heavy burden. hate is too heavy to bear. we need not continue to plant the seeds in the minds of our people.
when i was marching across that bridge in selma in 1965, i saw some of the law officers, sheriff's deputies, went on their helmet the confederate flag. i do not want to go back. as a country, we cannot go back. we must go forward and create a community that recognizes all of us as human beings. host: when it comes to the display of the confederate flag or symbols, where do you draw the line on where they should displayed? joy is from washington, d.c. caller: good morning and thank you for taking my call. i am a 67-year-old african-american from virginia. i watched as my dad went next door, when this guy moved in. my father god -- my father saw
the confederate flag in. he welcomed the guy into the neighborhood. my father could not sit still and sleep overnight with that flag flying on that guy's property. so he calmly knocked and asked the guy to take it down. the guy did not do it the first day. my father knocked again and explain things. the guy took the flag down. is my father had these feelings 50 years ago, why are we still discussing this? the flag should have been taken down a long time ago. the flag does represent racism. i remember marching with the naacp in petersburg. when i learned of the history of the flag and when i saw those people in south carolina being tortured, it brought tears to my eyes. i would like to commend governor haley and the other leadership
in the south carolina delegation , the ones on capitol hill. and i am a republican. and african-american republican. everybody does not have to be a democrat to learn that that flag to come down, no matter what your affiliation is. this brings a lot of tears to my eyes to see that flag coming down, because it does represent racism. i was among two of nine blacks that went to a school in virginia and had a reunion with that same class from the school i went to that was being desegregated. for a whole year, no one talked to me. some 300 people. i know racism. it brings tears to my eyes and i am glad to see it come down. host: the story you told, did the neighbor take down the flag? caller: yes, he did.
they became good friends. my father kindly explain what it felt like to him. i was about 20 years old, my dad must have been 47. he was in world war ii. but i learned then -- and i did not do a lot of reading about it in school -- but as an adult, i understand what my dad was saying. and with all this coming up, it hits home. i understand why represented if lewis was so tearful. he marched, was sent to jail. he knew the history of that flag. everyone should know the history of that flag. the people who still support it, shame on them. host: joyce from washington d.c.. we hear from randy and iowa. caller: you have had good callers hear. i hope i can hold my own. i think, personally, as a yankee
and somebody who believes in the great united states, not just in on the fourth of july and not just in a hollow words, that the fed -- that the confederate flag is a symbol of anarchy. it is a disgraced symbol of anarchy. those people and what that stood for, they did not stand for for humanity. -- the not stand for decency and for humanity. we have to look at how this sentiment has change the relationship of the u.s. congress and how they have failed miserably, to promote decent standards for humanity
across the world. i would like to identify corporatism as the new slavers. they have taken jobs, millions from americans with families and health care, and retirement plans. they have shipped these jobs, like the tpp, they will go to vietnam or china or wherever. and there is indecent treatment going on for people making goods cheap to sell to america. host: ready from iowa. in the "washington times," a report saying that one of the most outspoken liberal voices in congress will make a run for
florida's open u.s. senate seat, public gating the picture for democratic leaders should -- we recruited someone else. representative patrick murphy had declared his candidacy and had the baking -- the backing of the democratic establishment in the race for the seat being vacated by senator marco rubio. he won the seat in 2012 and was reelected in 2014. he got attention during the republican health care debate when he said that plan was for people to "die quickly." we hear from fred in winston-salem, north carolina. caller: good morning. i believe this issue highlights the fact that racism is still prevalent in our society.
i hear people talk about the flag represents honoring the heritage of the south, but my question is what is the heritage of the south? what is honorable about the heritage of the south, fighting to maintain the institution of slavery? when you look at this issue, it highlights white indifference to their fellow citizens. we are a nation that claims christian values. if you are a christian and are doing something that hurts your brother, you have an obligation to move away from that. this flag represents hate, racism -- host: so when it comes to the display, what do you think? caller: a means to be in a museum. we are past this point. if you want to look at history go to the museums. that is where it needs to be. it does not need to live over state capitals and in parts of
state flags in 2015. host: danis from illinois. good morning. caller: good morning. i think this whole thing is a case of more out of control political correctness. i think a lot of people think that by removing this flag, they are somehow defeating racism. i do not think that is the case. i think a lot of people think with their heart and not their mind. when a comes to the history of the flag and slavery in the south, if you do your research you can find that well after the civil war started, there were slaves in the north, specifically new jersey to be precise. i find there is a lot of misinformation out there. the civil war was started over state rights and not slavery. the implementation of centralized power in washington, d.c. telling the states what
they can and cannot do. each state has its own flag, its own constitution which makes them all sovereign nations unto themselves. that was the way the u.s. was set up originally. we have gotten away from that, unfortunately. i think that if people really do their research, they can find out there was a battle flag during the time of war. it was not to signify that the south was proud to own slaves or anything like that. i think that the removal of it while it may make some feel-good, if you look through history, will we remove the american flag because that was a symbol of the kkk, which were formed by the democratic party -- i think people forget that -- the republican party was issue mental in getting rid of slavery. people tend to forget that when they want to point fingers at either side of the political
aisle. i wish that people would do their research and find out the real history of this nation. there are bad things that happen, but we cannot just make them go away. host: dan from illinois. more details about the plan from the army to eliminate 40,000 from its ranks by 2018. the most significant cuts would be in georgia and in alaska. the third grade combat team, that the 25th infantry division would be targeted. each call that team has about 4000 soldiers. the battalion would be reduced to about 1050. this follows more than a decade of sustained, situations and in iraq and afghanistan. the army expanded to 570,000
soldiers and 45 per gate combat teams in 2011. under the army plan, service will fall to four to 75,000 by fall of 2016 and 450,000 by fall of 2018. they will be left with 30 brigade combat teams in the fee soldiers and about 75 years. darren has the last call of this topic on the display of the confederate flag. caller: good morning. i am here and confused arguments in defense of the flag. people think the flag will be snatched out of their hands and private homes, as if it has been made illegal full stop and set up not just flying it over the state capital. and people saying democrats were the slave owners, ignoring the southern strategy which switched clinical alignment. you do not have to go far back in history
to find that. i am wondering why people are still up tucson that. it was the conservatives who wanted to uphold slavery. it would be as if the german capital was flying the nazi flag and people are saying what is all the hubbub of the nazi flag, it is a symbol of my father's heritage and has nothing to do with racial animosity. let's just keep it up for history's sake. it is ridiculous. host: a two hour program today because congress comes in at 9:00. two legislators joining us to talk about what is going on and specific issues. we hear from virginia democrat bobby scott to discuss a house built to make changes to the no child left behind act. later, bruce westerman will talk about the recent ruling by the environmental protection agency and how they impact states and how they impact industry.
we hear from him later on in the program. several papers talking about secretary of state john kerry going before cameras that talk about the status of nuclear talks with iran. here is part of that statement from yesterday. [video clip] >> we would not be here continuing to negotiate just for the sake of negotiating. we are here because we believe we are making real progress towards a comprehensive deal. as i have said many times, and as i discussed with president obama last night we are not going to sit at the negotiating table forever. we also recognize that we should not get up and leave simply because the clock strikes midnight. i emphasize, given that the work here is incredibly technical and that the stakes are very high, we will not rush and we will not be rushed.
and we will not let ourselves be rushed through any aspect of this. all that we are focused on is the quality of the agreement. and that is what will continue to define our work. if, in the end we are able to reach a deal, it has to be one that can with dan the test -- withstand the test of time. it is not a matter of days or weeks or months, it is a test of decades. that is our goal. despite all of the progress we have made -- and it is real -- some of the tough issues remain unresolved. we know that difficult decisions do not become easier over time. one way or the other, those decisions must be taken soon. that is precisely why all of our
delegations remain hard at work in vienna and why a number of my counterparts returned last night and are here now so that we can continue to push through on the tough issues and ultimately see whether or not of the good deal we have been working for so hard is possible to achieve. >> "washington journal" continues. host: joining us is representative bobby scott democrat from virginia and ranking member of the education and workforce committee. good to see you. before we start discussions on no child left behind, you are thoughts about the display of the confederate flag and what went on. guest: it is bizarre. an amendment the same day south carolina decided to take the flag down, there was some amendment, a sponsored
amendment, that was backed off. i am not sure what was intended area it had the intent of reinstating sales of national flags -- of confederate flags in national parks. it is bizarre and a distraction. we have important business to do. resurrecting the confederate flag should not be part of it. host: do you think on public lands the flag should be displayed? guest: you have reenactments. there are, i guess, sometimes you have to see it. but i do not think people need to revisit the civil war. it is behind us. the flag history is clear. it is a symbol that many people, rightfully, conclude is hateful. you just do not need it. host: house is playing out in virginia? -- how is this playing out in virginia? guest: we have not been waving
the flag. you have freedom of speech. a lot of people have confederate flag's, but it is not anything we lose sleep over or try to celebrate. i think it is generally viewed in virginia, in its historical context. it was dormant until 1954, when around v board of education -- brown v. board of education was decided and was resurrected in that context. history is clear. it is time to move on. host: as a ranking member of the education and workforce committee, what do you think is the total effect of the no child left behind act? guest: you have to start with the purpose of the elementary and secondary education act. the reauthorization in the early 2000's was no child left behind. it started in 1965 -- back to
brown v. board of education, the court decided education was important that any child should reasonably be expected to be educated and such an opportunity should be made available to all and equal terms. we do not have equal education. it is funded by the real estate tax. it was dealt in 1965, on dealing with the problems of low income areas trying to provide equal educational opportunity. there is a formula puts income into low income areas. one good thing no child left behind is is that it upgraded that act to do something about achievement gaps across the country. low income earners, disabled evidence, there are achievement
gaps across the country. no child left behind force you to ascertain if the gaps were there and do something about it. the problem with no child left behind and doing that was restricted into what you had to do, whether it helps the situation or not. the tests, the federal ones, combined with state ones became overbearing. people were mad at the testing. that is the problem we have to fix. ascertaining whether there is an achievement gap in doing something about it were the good parts of no child left behind. we have to go forward and make sure the test are as few as possible to ascertain the information you need. you have to have some effort to reduce the achievement gap. that is the discussion. because people are mad at test people are trying to get rid of all the tests. that is a way to get rid of the achievement gap. do not determine you have an achievement gap.
it sweeps it under the rug and gets us back to where we were before no child left behind. or you can -- ascertain if there is a gap but not do anything about it. that is not an educational opportunity. some groups are getting a ninth grade education and others are getting 12 grade educations. everyone ought to get a 12th grade education. we expect some meaningful strategy to close the achievement gaps. host: that strategy is a house bill that would change -- guest: the house bill goes backwards. we want to change the formula into one where received the money goes into the low income areas. they change the funding formula. it takes money from low income areas and gives it to wealthy areas. los angeles has 70% poverty in the school system. they lose a quarter of its funding. beverly hills has virtually no
poverty, expect -- and get 25% funding. that is a republican bill that decided that. then they scaled back the ability to ascertain whether or not there is an achievement gap. then they do not require anything meaningful to be done about it. there are problems, block grant money, so stomach and some other things will not get the focus the presidential law requires. when you cut the funding, you change the formula make it harder to find in the achievement gaps and then do not do anything about it when you find them, that is not going in the right direction. the senate bill makes improvements. they put the formula back with the focus where it is supposed to be. they require an assessment for the achievement gap. but the senate bill needs more
work on what do you do after you have found an achievement gap. that is where the debate is. the civil rights community is very interested in what do you do after you determine an achievement gap? your future trajectory is pretty much decided by your level of education. your wealth, your jobs, your economic status. education. if your denied that opportunity on a systematic basis of some groups, it is not fair. host: we have our guest in until 8:20. we will take your questions on this issues. (202) 748-8000 for democrats. (202) 748-8001 four republicans. independence at (202) 748-8002. we start with don for the ranking member of the education and workforce committee. caller: good morning.
my daughter is a fifth-grade teacher in south carolina. she is part of an experiment on charter school. what she discerned to me was that two big factors are local control, the school board and that sort of thing with no federal interference, it is not necessarily a good thing. it is good to have a national standard and that local board sometimes hard too concentrated on their individual child and they are not looking out for the general population. federal control and standards is necessary. the second thing is that her biggest problem is that children , after the third grade that are not on their c almost impossible to get them to catch up. the amount of effort that has to go into that child to bring them up beat is incredible.
we could greatly improve the system by ensuring that everyone, by the third grade has a races in reading and we should concentrate on preschool and first and second grade. i was wondering what the representative, who i admire greatly, has to say about all that. guest: thank you for your points. they are excellent. we like local control, but as you pointed out, local control was at a had before 1954. you need some standards. the national standards that people referred to, common core, are actually state standards. we asked states to develop meaningful standards. we want -- someone who graduates from high school on to be able to qualify for state college admissions without remediation.
or to the job ready. we asked states to provide their own standards. there is no national standard in terms -- and in terms of what to do about achievement gaps in schools not performing, we asked states -- we asked states to come up with a response. one of the problems of no child left behind was you had to do exactly that are a b, c and that sometimes did not make sense. we ask states to come up with their own assessment. there is still local control but they are guideposts that you have to -- minimum standards you have to, up to. but the standards are set up by the states. third grade, that is an excellent point. you learn to read up to the third grade. after that, you read to learn. if you cannot read third grade
you will not learn to read after. and once you get behind and cannot read, catching up is problematic. if goods you on a trajectory to dropping out of school, which has all kinds of complications. employment, criminal justice teen pregnancy. a lot of personages -- percentages of going off track increase intricately. host: charles on the republican line. good morning. caller: good morning. i was listening to what mr. scott said. it was interesting he mentioned the events of 1954. i was in high school in 1955. people always looked at segregated schools and black schools as being inferior. we were given schoolbooks from thomas dale, who i'm certain mr.
scott knows about. they were old books. we did not have new books. but we had the best group of teachers. they were segregated schools, but it was local control. when you have local control, you always have people who know what is happening in the area. i guess you would say, federal government knows best. but the federal government knows what is going on in maine and l.a. in florida, but we live in virginia. i always believe that with enough money and enough educated people, good teachers, do not forget that we had segregated schools. they were coming out of segregated colleges.
you know what i'm talking about. the only way you can deal with educated people -- people don't dwell on that. the teachers were sent there and run the meeting. the parents just had to sit there and listen. you know what i'm talking about. host: we will let our guest respond. guest: teachers in the community are more likely to know the students and more likely to have parental involvement. the problem enrichment in my hometown of newport news and throughout the south and some northern areas was that the schools are racially segregated the suffering court -- were racially segregated the supreme court decided that it
would establish that as the official policy. it inflicts upon schoolchildren a feeling of inferiority for the rest of their life. i do not think charles wants to go back to segregated schools that we had before 1954. we need to take advantage of all the advantages of local. some localities are not going to do right. we need some standards, some assistance. some localities do not have the resources. that is what this is all about. he makes some good points, but i think we have to work within an integrated framework. we live in an integrated society. you're not going to be able to function as well unless you have an education from the integrated situation. host: doug is our next call.
doug, go ahead. caller: hello, mr. scott, it is a pleasure to talk to you. i'm very curious to hear you talk about the funding for schools now, no child left behind, and also the current administration's school programs. they basically fine you for being impoverished. if your's will district -- school district has a lot of poverty, and a lot of schools will be closed. to address that, there has to be another way of funding schools beside real state property taxes. they may be a hybrid way. the has to be some other way to even up the school system -- there has to be some other way to even up the school system where you can have a good side
and other schools like in hampton. there has to be a way to equalize those schools based on funding so things can be more equal. also, overall reform of the schools and education itself -- i personally think that kids stay in school too long in terms of years for i was 18 and a half years old when i graduated. that is kind of old. i think it 16th, -- at 16, when you start to lose kids anyway the last two years should be college prep for those who want to go to college and vocational school for those who want to do bricklaying or machine and mechanic work. overall reforms of the good, to -- would be good, too, but there's got to be a way to address inequality in the school system. host: thanks, doug. guest: after the 10th grade, you
still need of additional education. studies show to get a decent job in american society that you need an education pass the high school level. 12 is not enough. you need additional training past that level. that is why we are proposing to years of free community college so you can get either vocational education or the academic all the way to a four year degree. that ought to be available to everyone. one of the problems with going to a vocational track in the fifth grade is that you may not get all the academic training you may need. i think all the experts are saying that if you're going to go into the masonry or something like that that you ought to get the basic education whether it be communication skills or the stem education. you can get that in a vocational seven, but you still need that
if you're going to function. whatever vocation you're going to, it shows that you're not going to get one job like he used to 50 years ago. no, you're going to have many jobs. if you lose that job, you need the basic educational background to learn the next job. a fundamental basic education is extremely important. 12 years frankly, according to most studies is not enough. you need education and training after the 12th grade. you mentioned the funding. when you find schools look real state taxes, you're guaranteed to have unequal funding. you will have very wealthy areas to put more money in education that lower income areas. -- then lower income areas. it is much higher in nearby suppers. they still do not have the amount of money.
they do not have the resources needed. more equitable funding mechanisms are necessary. you may have statewide rather than local real estate taxes. maybe if you had a state income tax funding the schools, that would give better treatment. host: harrisburg, pennsylvania. rob, you're up next. caller: good morning. i have several comments. first of all, you talk about funding schools. he slipped two charts up -- put two charts up in the last 40 years ago. the united states for years ago, the students were number one or two or three in the world in math and science. now they are 20 and 35th. now you toss all this money into the black called education. our kids are declining.
the reason is discipline. first off, he made the comment a while ago -- you don't get an education. you get a haircut. you sit in the barber's chair, you can fall asleep and get a haircut. you don't get an education. you earn it. do homework, research in the library. you have to pay attention in school and do your homework. you don't get an education. you earn it. you have to pay attention in school. guest: when you talk about getting an education, and some schools where virtually all the students are a low grade level other schools are in much better grade level. if you are talking about an individual student, sure. they have responsibilities. nobody is achieving that it is the school system's problems.
we need to improve education for everybody. host: if the senate bill passes could it be reconciled with the house bill? and is it something the president can sign? guest: i think there are some improvements. they have to get the funding straight in the assessment straight. we need to tighten up what they do after they determine there is an achievement gap. i think we may have to reconcile that in conference. but there is no reason why we should not be able to get a decent bill. host: there is a story in "the washington post" about changes to states under the proposed title i amendment about where people can use the money. is that how it works? guest: depending on what is ultimately accepted, it is a block grant and you can use it how you want. some versions can use it for vouchers, which gets it out of
the public school system. the whole point of title i is to put money in public schools where it is most needed. if you diverge it to block grants, it will be spent the way it has been spent. that is what we are trying to get away from. we are tried to focus money because low income areas have traditionally been underfunded. we recognize this. it takes more effort to get them up to the 12th grade level. when you diverge money out of title i, you're taking money from where it's really needed. host: in pennsylvania on the independent line for our guest bobby scott. go ahead. caller: thank you for taking my call. for the representative, my comments are -- as you are a ranking member of the workforce committee, if you are call and look back at history as the great depression, fdr along with
cooperation with congress created what is known as the wpa, the works project administration. and also the ccc. those two programs, which my grandfather was participating in prior to world war ii, or programs designed to get the unemployed and the struggling with the help of the nation and congress to rebuild, to build roads, infrastructure whether it be turning a dirt road along 6/11 in pennsylvania or the poconos from a wagon trail to a wider transportation route. they built parks. they rebuilt the park system. they built national parks. there were all different programs in the country that these people would go to these
basically work camps. not a work camp as we know them today, but camps where these men and women would go out and be paid and they would send the money home to their families. now with the way this country is today, with our infrastructure crumbling, with people losing their jobs, having to be returned and with the younger generation coming out of high school with no hope for college why can't we as a country and you in congress have a little imagination and actually work to get to this problem with infrastructure? i've in pennsylvania in our roads are worse than some farm roads. -- i'm in pennsylvania and our roads are worse than some farm roads. you train these people and the department of transportation.
you have a workforce. if someone is on unemployment for extended time, that person should be forced to join and serve on the wpa or the ccc where they are learning a trade, whether it be brick building a road resurfacing. host: we have to move on because we are running short of time. guest: frankly, you do not need much imagination. the experts have ascertained that we have three dolly -- $3 trillion unfortunately dollars -- or $4 trillion. you do not need to separate programs. you need to fund transportation. where are you going to get the money? that number in identified needs is almost exactly what we passed the tax cut extensions three years ago. we had the money but if you spent it all on tax cuts, you don't have it for transportation.
you do not need much imagination to put people back to work. we had trillions of dollars in needs. we can invest more in research and education. education not only gives us a better educated workforce and more productivity, but in the meanwhile, you have to hire teachers to provide the education. the professors that the community colleges need and things like that. to invest in infrastructure, you can put a lot of people back to work, but not if you are spending it all on tax cuts. give or take, there are around 10 million people on unemployment today, looking for jobs and can't find jobs. one half of $1 trillion to hire everybody at $50,000 -- half $1 trillion. that is a tenure figure. it is $3.9 trillion in tax cut expenditures. we have the money. but if you spend it all in tax
cuts, you will not have it for infrastructure. there's no imagination needed. its allocation of the resources we have. host: we will have one more call and that is thomas in louisiana. caller: congressman bobby scott what i was looking that is that if you have kids that are in school and are starting at the 11th grade level, and companies would hire them during the summer to give them an idea as to where they want to go, do you understand what i'm saying? guest: i know exactly what you mean and summer jobs are an important component of a person's life cycle. when the have summer jobs in the summer growing up, they are more likely to have jobs later on.
they learn the job skills. some of the job skills are things like knowing how to take orders and how to show up and how to work in a team. these are skills that you learned that serve you for the rest of your life. as opposed to sitting around and doing nothing all summer. that is what experts call a summer slide. many students when they are doing nothing during the summer forget what they learn. they leave in june and come back sometimes as much as two months behind what they were to begin with. some activity can go a long way. -- summer activity can go a long way in keeping people acted. if you are not losing time during the summer, you'll be better off after 12 years. host: when does the reactivation of take place -- have to take place? guest: about three years ago.
we passed it in late 2001 and early 2002. it should have been reauthorized in 2006 or 2007. it's about eight years overdue. host: and it will not happen anytime soon in your mind? guest: what has happened is that we have gone along. if problems have occurred, states have been given waivers. funding has continued. functionally, it is working not well. we need to upgrade and get rid of the mistakes and we need to get the funding straight. in terms of what it should have been done, eight years ago. host: representative bobby scott are virginia, thanks for your time. coming up, one more number of congress before congress comes in at 9:00. bruce westerman, republican from arkansas, talking about the environmental protection agency.
you will hear from him as "washington journal" continues after this. >> here is some of our featured programs for this weekend on the c-span networks. with the upcoming release of harper lee's new novel, c-span's to book tv focuses on the pulitzer prize-winning novelist. we talk about the impact of "to kill a mockingbird," prelicensing publication, and the events and discoveries leading to her new novel. we will be aired these programs starting at 6:30 p.m. eastern. also, hugh hewitt on hillary clinton second run for president. on c-span saturday night starting at 8:00 eastern the 50th anniversary of the amount war with readings and remarks by members of congress. sunday evening at 6:30 p.m.,
carly key arena visits with new hampshire voters. on c-span3, on lectures in history, steve bogue it on the factors that led to the great depression and roosevelt action that led to the great economy. and then on sunday at 6:30 p.m., general sherman and white he is not the villain of popular legend. get the complete weekend schedule at c-span.org. >> conservative pollster and author on transit technology, the millennial generation, and how political parties are vying for this increasingly crucial voting block. >> if you are looking at eyeballs these days, folks were on the television.
political advertising was very focused on ads. technology has changed where now if you walk into a room, not just 20 years old but six-year-olds are looking at their phones. for folks who want to reach the next generation or region to the future and understand what the future of political advertising is going to look like, things like kimi crush or whatever the latest game is. candy crush may be fizzing and popularity, but there is always something new popping up. finding ways to get your message in front of people and where they pay attention is really important. >> sunday night at 8 p.m. eastern and pacific on c-span's q and a. announcer: "washington journal" continues. host: we are joined by bruce westerman, republican from arkansas, committee of the space, science, and technology committee. good morning. guest: good morning, pedro. host: i want to talk a little
bit about your background. your file says you are a for sure if i trade for -- your bio says you are a forrester for trade. guest: i went to graduate school for four straight. i designed and manufactured facilities that take biomass of the things with it. host: i think we all have a perception of what a forrester is. how would you define how works? guest: when i was in four street school, there was a doctor in the med school and he had a large piece of forest land and his family and he wanted to retire to that forced and he came over to the four street school to take classes to manage his force. he made a lot of analogies between medicine and four street.
he talks about how four orestry is like being a doctor for the four. -- forest. host: how do you treat the issues of climate change? what is your personal thought on that? guest: i consider myself very much an environmentalist. i'm a practical environmentalist. i like to use the word stewardship was that environmentalism. we need to conserve what we have got. as teddy roosevelt said, we need to use what we have got for the benefit of society. we need to conserve it and leave it for better for the future than what we got it. host: when it comes to big fight climate change, to you think it happens? guest: climate change happens, but what causes this it to happen?
volcanic eruptions put millions of tons of carbon in the air. when it happens, it is minute changes. you cannot deny the fact that climate change happens. the question is -- what causes climate change to happen? how much negative impact does it have? how much do we stop climate change by ending the activities we do? if we make changes, is it going to force things overseas for people who do not have the same regulations and they are manufacturing in a way that is less environmentally friendly that we do it here in the u.s.? and can we reduce the amount of co2 gases or do we increase it? it is a very complicated subject. you hear talked about a lot and platitudes -- and not in details of science. host: talk about recent proposals about power and water
and air. what are those proposals? what is the long-term impact in your mind as far as the epa working in those sectors? guest: i have a unique background working to decades been scary products -- in engineering projects in filling out forms and doing the math. to some extent, i think the epa is out of touch with what goes on in the real world a lot of times. they do not really understand the impact they have a local communities and businesses and families and americans when they make these rules that sound good when they are sitting in an office in d.c., but they have real permanent fx out in the heartland of the country. host: one of those rules getting a lot of criticism is the approach of power, especially later on this year. what is the proposal from the epa and what are your concerns about it? guest: it is multiple proposals,
but it has to do with energy efficiency and greenhouse gases. specifically in my district, i have coal-fired power plants that are very efficient. one of the most recent coal-fired power plants is a super hypercritical prices that was -- process that was only possible because the research found materials that could withstand the heat. this power plant is 10% more efficient than traditional coal-fired power plants. it has an enormous amount of pollution control on it. even that plant would not meet some the guidelines they are putting out. the older plants -- if these rules go into effect, they could possibly close. what that means in the real world is my constituents back home many on fixed incomes, are going to see their electric bills go up 20% or 40% because this one power plant closes.
listen, i've designed renewable power places -- plants, but we need to be smart about the way we do it. we need to use traditional fuels in a way that's responsible. we need to put research and technology into making our renewables more efficient in the future. host: our guest is bruce westerman of arkansas. he serves on the science, space and technology committee. if you have questions for him (202) 748-8000 four democrats (202) 748-8001 for republicans and (202) 748-8002 for independence. i want to hear her justification on it and ask your response. [video clip] >> the benefit immediately is that individuals who have kids that have asthma will know that
the air quality -- i'm sorry. let me put it another way. they can take a look at what the air quality is today on the weather channel that we help provide in they could decide whether their kids should go out and play. the biggest value is that individuals can protect themselves, their kids, their elderly parents, make decisions for themselves today while we give states lots of time to think about what other cost productive ways can achieve that over many years. some of these states will not even face these challenges for a very long time. but you do not worry about the implementation. if that means that you're not giving the public the information they need today to protect themselves and their kids. host: how would you react to that? guest: to start, i was in a bill markup in the national resources committee about the similar hearing. i had presence in that hearing
but i was unable to get over and asked questions. that all sounds good. it was almost grandmotherly. we're going to protect our children. who doesn't want to protect our children? i want to leave the environment cleaner than before. we are questioning what are you basing these comments on. what is the science behind this? if you dig deeper into that, she is talking about ozone levels. she is basic offer comments on one paper. but their other papers scientifically reviewed papers that dispute the things she was saying there. to put this in perspective, she is wanting to lower ozone levels . what does that mean? in yellowstone national park the ozone level is 70 parts per million. she is saying the air quality in yellowstone national park is not acceptable. there is no way to achieve these
goals that they are setting. it is totally unreasonable and not based on science. it is based on a political agenda of than it is on science. in my state, a local community called deer park arkansas. you can locate it on google maps. 68 parts per billion ozone. there is no industry there. there is nothing they can do to lower their ozone. these rules are unreasonable. they put hassles and burdens on real, living, breathing americans that get up every day who want to go to work and raise their families and build communities and have a productive life. these things are just outrageous to some extent. host: we have calls for you. our first one is from harrisburg personally --
pennsylvania. bruce, go ahead. caller: i want to ask you why you're not telling the people about the heart system up and election. -- in alaska. there is your climate change. there is no so sing as fossil fuels. you know that as well as i do. show me the dna evidence of any fossil remains. there is none. oil, natural gas, and coal are hydrocarbons. they reproduce themselves. you could it your computer and figure this for yourself. i wish you would quit calling it fossil fuels. we have been out of fuel since 1955. if all that coal is rotting twigs and stuff like that and put under pressure, that's all it is. guest: you make a great point. if basic signs. we know all of our energy comes from the sun.
sometimes it takes a long time to get that energy. i mentioned renewable energy and biomass. some of the research and biomass now is how to change those hydrocarbons from green biomass to make it a renewable liquid fuel and gaseous fuel. there are ways to do that chemically that speed up the process that takes these leaves and twigs and puts them through a chemical process, heat and pressure, and you produce a gas. you can actually make crude oil out of living trees. there are processes to do that, but that is to be more research and technology put into it so we can make that cost effective and do it on a large scale model. host: should government fund that? guest: absolutely. i'm more for the government providing funds for research. look at what happened with research through agriculture system. we have the best agricultural
production system in the world by far. a lot of it is due to the research we put into agriculture in this country over 100 years ago. still today, where making me work through's and agriculture. -- we are making new breakthroughs in agriculture. we knee needd -- we need new breakthroughs in medicine and research has shown it works overtime. host: in alabama. caller: i want to talk about the epa, but i also want to talk about the fda. the fda is just a graph or money and power -- grab for money and power. we need water settling in the landscape they can say it is imported water.
people do not even know how to run their farms anymore. it is just a big power grab. i tell you something else -- the big business is in with all the update. i do not care if you are republican or democrat. they have all these industries. they are borrowing or coal and everything we got. the other countries coming along, even china surpassing our military, they do not have to worry about coal or 50 more years. obama is putting such powerful pressure on our companies in appalachia. that is the pore space in the world. -- poorest place in the world. this do trade deal -- they want to put up money so when people lose their jobs, they can give them a little bit of reserve. my wife works for a textile mill. they offer two weeks unemployment in the have to
train people that come into other countries. their writing work fuses because our fuel is cheaper and we are getting a little bit of our work. now obama and his boys is signing a bunch of things to let people come into this country and all those places and make their people trained foreigners to do their work. host: rough, we've got. guest: i was going to as if he was role tide or war eagle from alabama. [laughter] he brought some interesting points up talking about the regulations out there. i think he referred to waters of the u.s., which is another way that the epa and corps of engineers are overreaching their boundaries. they're making rules that are just not practical. host: how so? guest: when you talk about anything where water can run off, you're literally talking
about the landmass of the united states and it is expanding jurisdiction wherever waterfalls. it runs off and eventually gets into a stream. the whole issue is what is a stream. that is what this was originally for, to monitor navigable streams. now we are talking about putting regulations in place that have effects on agriculture and for street in a variety of industries. the scariest part about it is that increases jurisdiction for the agencies. you never know what kind of harebrained rule they're going to come up with next. host: from arkansas, william is next. caller: mr. westermann, please shut your mouth and quit embarrassing me. where does all the money come from. the two nastiest coal plants are in the united states and in arkansas. they don't tons of mercury and
our water street you cannot eat the fish because they're full of mercury. tell me where your money comes from. guest: william, i would like to know where your data comes from. i know that every manufacturing facility in the state has a national water discharge permit that gets monitored. those levels of mercury are monitored and there. i do not know if you are talking about the murky levels in our refuge that were cryogenic or produced by nature. i like to see the data. it sounds like some of the same data that the epa and the administration puts out and they say these things and they do not really have any basis for it. host: from illinois, louis you're on with our guest. good morning. caller: i won to find out -- wanted to find out about the
flag and everything. and the jobs. they keep sending them out of the country. how many coal mines are out in illinois? nobody is working for now. guest: you spoke about something that is near and dear to me and that is jobs in putting people to work. when you put regulations on power plants or any other industry, it has affects all the way up to the chain. you lose called wanting jobs. you lose transportation jobs. what we need more in this country more than anything else our jobs. we need people to get back to work and not just have jobs, but have careers and raise their families where they can build speed of these. -- communications -- communities. these regulations kill careers
and families. i'm right there with you. host: when it comes to power plants, king congress rollback with the epa -- can congress rollback what the epa plans to do? guest: with this administration, it is hard to tell. he seem to keep making these rules. why should congress have to pass legislation that against a rule that an agency is making? there's a rule against co2 emissions off of gas grills. are we going to have monitoring equipment our backyard grills now? there is no end to this from an engineering standpoint. i have seen it go from parts per million ounce of parts per billion -- down to parts per million. you can make it smaller and make it that much more difficult. one of these power plants talked about my state, you are in a
catch-22 because there are rules on efficiency and there are rules on omissions. if you put omissions equipment on a -- e missions on a power play, the technician is not there. it decreases efficiency. i'll tell you examples of regulations. i worked in the wood products industry. when you dry wood, and it releases different kinds of compounds. you want to control these compounds. the reason the smoky accountants -- the smoky mountains are polluted the trees release these organic compounds. in order to control these, you put in several million dollar pieces of equipment that burns natural gas. when you burn natural gas you freeze it out. if you have nos with co2, it's a
complex process. you have to get down to the details. are there negative effects going on out there? host: bruce westerman is our guest, a republican from arkansas. you had legislation on the floor taking a look at the national forest service and talking about areas that may be prone to force fires. was your legislation? -- what is your legislation? guest: i got my first bill passed through the house. it is a great piece of legislation. he had only one democrat that voted with us. we had democrats testify for the bill. it is really about using science-based management practices so our national force can growth and we can leave them in better shape than they are
right now. what you understand about forestry is that trees are dynamic. we can make any rules and what to and trees do not care. there are outgrowing in the natural space. they grow and felt the growing space. there is competition. they get weeakened. they are susceptible to disease and insect. host: aaron fires -- and fires as well. guest: healthy force are good for everything. no matter what you think about global warming, trees are the answer for that. with photosynthesis, they taking carbon dioxide and release oxygen. they store the carbon in the tree. when you cut a tree down, the carbon is stored in the house. it pulls more carbon of the atmosphere. we have more force cover in this country now that we had in 1900.
and a lot of people do not realize that. trees are the answer. when we see them for going down like in the video right here there are tons of carbon's that are released in the atmosphere. there are better for more than just the carbon cycle. they improved air quality and water quality. if there managed properly, you get better while life habitat. our service has been able to manage these practices like a resilient federal force bill -- forest bill. they did it to save the woodpecker, which was an endangered species. they looked at what kind of habitat it needed for the woodpecker. they they said you could ride a full gate to the watchdog national forest. if you try to do that, it would
kill you and the horse. they went and the use the fire management on a three to five-year cycle where they would go in and burn. the biodiversity what do the will -- went through the roof. with all these overstocked forests, you get the leaf matter on the ground and you get no greenery coming up. you cut that out and put the sunlight and and it's amazing that the seeds have been in the soil for decades. the flush of vegetation that came up -- they saw a number of trees. they saw wild turkeys. there are flat tailed deer. everything benefited. the trees are healthier. it would be the most impossible to burn them down. you'd have to take a name paul -- namepalm or fired thrower
to burn down. it's a win-win situation. i'm excited about it. with really got a pandora's box are hand because we love our to sit up. want to protect them, but we do not basin on science. we say it must be bad if you're cutting the trees down, but he knew the science. people say that was a time when we did not cut down trees, but we did not put out forced fires either. you have to find a balance with nature like that. what we have done is that we're cutting and putting fires out. the fuel load continues to grow and it becomes almost manageable. you get a fire that is so hot that it turns basilica basically it's the glass and it's difficult to get regeneration.
you are asking about this earlier, but the goal is to get regeneration and nutrients growing. the data is horrible for have had these catastrophic wildfires. we only get 3% regeneration. that is totally unacceptable. in the bill that i passed, and requires 75% regeneration within five years of the fire. i'm excited about it if you can't tell. host: your next. -- you are next. hello. caller: thank you for c-span. i sent this information to my congresswoman, my two senators, and my son in cemetery of who is an energy engineer. there is a plant being built right now in texas about 70 miles above dallas. the chinese and our engineers are working abouton it that is 90%
free of mercury and carbon. it is a gas-coal commendation. i wanted to put this out. it is a should not thrown away he has the information. i think our congressman are in favor of obama's plan to go nuclear, but this is a gas-fired coal commendation -- combination. china's engineers have been sent over to work with our engineers and that's in texas. i would scramble for my paperwork, but i couldn't find it. i wanted to point that out. guest: i've not heard about that, but there is a lot of exciting technology out there today. as research continues, we're going to see more energy. when i found that in internal combustion engine only catches 25% of the energy put into it,
and tells me there is a lot of room for improvement. you can see improved efficiencies and ways to capture the energy that is in the field that we've got. that is a real key to helping solve our energy needs in the future. i'm excited about all forms of energy. i've done projects with biomass. i've even done studies before and made presentations that looked at how much traditional fields you can replace with nontraditional feels. in my state of arkansas and my district, if we put in electrical generation plants using biomass, we do not have enough trees in arkansas. it is good to take a combination and mixture of these types of fuels. we should put in more effort of making traditional feels more efficient and more effective and
more environmentally friendly as well at the same time, researching how to put new technology into renewables and making those more economical in the future. i read an interesting article if you months back where they looked at the state of renewable energy. solar looks like it has got some promises if we move forward. there is great things being doubtless solar. -- being done with suolar but the technology is not they appeared -- is not done yet. a lot of the fuel that we are working with is based on old technology. once we started using other feels, there was not a lot of research done on how to use biomass more efficiently. only start to utilize biomass we went back to the pre-industrial revolution technology and started improving on that. the commendation of using
traditional feels will got to make those more efficient and researching and getting better renewable fuels that are more economical for the future, i think, is a great way of approaching our energy policy. host: here is florida. caller: good morning. praise be for c-span. good morning, congressman and pager. as republican, i want to ask two questions. could you support a high-speed train system built across the united states? a lot of people cannot afford cars and more with the high cost of car insurance. a high-speed train system -- could you support that? we could get france to build the eastern half in japan could help. they have good high-speed systems. we can get the french to build the eastern half. the japanese, the western half. could you support john kasich for president? i'm commencing him to be an
advocate for building a high-speed train system across the united states. could you support the high-speed train concept and can you support john kasich? guest: on the high-speed train i immediately put my engineering hat on. i looked at hundreds of projects when i was doing engineering work. i did project planning and development. the front end work on scoping out the project and putting a budget together and running economic analysis on it. if it was economically viable, i could support it. i do not know if it is economically viable or not. i have the problem with the way we build that. how about building an american high-speed train from coast-to-coast? i think we could build it better than the french or japanese if we set our minds to doing that. on john kasich, i've never met him. we have had several presidential candidates come through d.c. and i've met several of them. i've not made up my mind yet but i think we have a great field of folks to look at.
when my previous governors, mike huckabee, is in the race. we will have to see how it shakes out. host: sheila, hello. good morning. caller: hi, pager. please do not cut me off. i have important things to say and they all have to be said. thank you, pedro. we have to immediately start fighting the effects of pollution by reducing nitrogen into the water. i think the sea is the answer to start with. there is a lot to be found out from the sea. there's a book called "shepherding the sea." i forget the subtitle, but i would like everyone to get a copy. we cannot afford anymore rising sea levels. we have to start as of yesterday fixing our infrastructure to withstand the horrific storms we have been having. and we cannot sit around waiting for congress to make a decision.
all they do is banter back and forth like little kids and the couple's nothing. they throw around these terms and i do not understand. they waste so much time. it is very annoying. president obama has to crack the whip and put out an executive order to reduce climate change and we need to do it today. he has to get china involved as well as all the countries that are resistant to global warming. this is so crucial that we cannot wait for even a year to get things going in the right direction. the u.s. has to be the leader and try to persuade the other countries and band together with us in a global effort to save our planet before it's too late to thank god the pope is coming. i hope you can get the point across because we cannot put money ahead of survival. survival is the key. mr. westermann, i'm glad you brought up the trees because
what has been bothering me is that all these parking lots have taken away the trees for business. you get more cars to go shopping, but we have to suffer. our cars have to get steamy hot and we have to be uncomfortable. the trees -- i love trees. i love all the trees. i pull into a place and i look for a shady spot. host: sorry to interrupt, but only because we are running short on time. you asked a lot of questions and i will let argus respond. guest: i live in connecticut for graduate school of you have the beautiful trees there. people do not realize how low will they are in new england. -- how beautiful they are in new england. the software gets hot, you see david flair there are trees in the parking lot and their innovative designs on how to make parking lots even more environmentally friendly. the issue of maxygen in the water -- i have not -- budgeted
in the water, i do not have information on that. there is issue with nitrogen in certain places where it leaks through a gets into the oil water, but we have to continue to do what is smart. you talk about the gridlock in congress. this is a deliberate process. our founding fathers were smart and inuit -- and they knew what they were doing. it's frustrating as a member of congress to want to get things done and it move so slowly. having passed this first bill to the house is like a great a couple schmidt. i'm proud of it. what now it has to go to the senate. maybe they will take it up and maybe they will pass it. then, the administration has to get on board for ever becomes law. things do happen slowly. there are a lot of bipartisan efforts that happened here. you cannot necessarily hear those on the vase, but weather
is a lot, makes this. host: speaking of that, what did you think of the confederate flag and the news about not displaying it? guest: i had a busy day. i was trying to get over to the science and technology here. i also had a bill that was good to be run on the floor. then all the sudden, both recalled in the middle of the day. i'm like, what's going on here? it's this whole deal over the controversy of the flag. and really through a wrinkle in the scheduling process yesterday -- it really through a political in the scheduling process yesterday. i read the bible a while back that was when jesus was talking to the pharisees. i thought about that for my service in congress. a lot of times, we really take
up issues that are very important, but on some levels, they are gnats compared to the camels. we have to adjust with the people of this country want to talk about. we have had a diversion. host: what do you think about the display of cuts that in public places -- the confederate flag in public places, being from the south? guest: i'm wearing that when you talk about fundamental first amendment rights. remember expression was put in place for political expression as much as anything. if you look at the california flag, and was speaker pelosi close to this resolution. a bear and the california flag was a symbol of secessionist in los angeles in san bernardino county. that's on the california flag.
host: the star above the word arkansas represents its membership in the confederacy . guest: the one of the top or the bottom? host: the top as i understand it. guest: this debate on this. you get on a slippery slope. when does the stop? when we debate this, we are $18 trillion in debt. we have appropriations bills that need to be passed. we have important legislation that needs to be debated. we have an economy that is not where it needs to be. and this will suck oxygen out of the air. and is something that obviously will be debated and we will see how the debate ends up. host: let us hear from donald in michigan. no ahead. caller: thanks for c-span. mr. westerman i'm in detroit
and there's a refinery smack dab . in michigan, there's a high percentage of people that gets cancer. look at beijing, china. i wonder if you would take your family and move next to that refinery. every day out in the backyard, you see and read it for a year. then, see what you think about servicing the craft industries that you represent. we are dying. don't you care about our children? thank you. guest: yes, donald i care about your children and my children. i care about the opportunities that they have. we have done a tremendous improvement on water quality and air quality in this country. we need to continue to protect air and water quality. we have to use reason in it as
well. we are getting to the point where we have got all the blood out of you turn it. we got a lot of it out and they're getting to the point of diminishing returns or we go from parts are per million to parts per billion. we are given to a point of diminishing returns only just continue to add these regulations that are destroying industry and business and jobs. at the same time, people want to see more people working in a better economy and they complain about jobs going overseas. we're putting religion companies -- regulations on companies you cannot have an economic model for business here. host: you pastor first bill. -- he passed the first bill. we are just about out of time. where do you see it going? guest: we got the bipartisan support on it.
this is a real issue that needs to be adjusted -- address. we are in the middle of five season. i think it will be passed. i think the president will educate himself and will sign it. host: thank you, mr. westerman. we now go to the house. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] us to use it well. we ask your blessing upon this assembly and upon all to whom the authority of government is given. help them to meet their responsibilities during these days to attend to the immediate needs and concerns of the moment while all the while enlightened by the majesty of your creation and eternal spirit. we give you thanks