tv Washington Journal CSPAN October 25, 2015 7:45am-10:01am EDT
for this country. host: rate is next. good morning from massachusetts. who is your candidate in this race? caller: i'm not sure, but i agree that i was should not be so important. in listening and watching the program for the last hour, it is really scary. it makes you realize how uninformed the american people have become. i think it is the worst in history. one person is going to elect hillary clinton because she is presidential. the other person is going to elect hillary clinton because she understands the people. it is called google, do a little research. she is by far corrupts. her scandals, and how she got where she is -- if she were a republican, this country would be going berserk to make sure she does not become the
president. it is called hypocrisy 101. host: ok. corey says, just because someone sits in front of a hearing does not make them potus worthy, she lied, and sold arms to the rebels. . busy week on the hill the highway bill, the deadline is later this week. that is our topic on the "newsmakers" program. we talked about the pending deadline. [video clip] >> you have been in congress for 30 years now. >> 29, not 30 yet. , 29. i'm wondering about your level of frustration now compared to
that past, is it at an all-time high? most this the functional congress that anyone has seen. some historians say that congress was as dysfunctional in the lead up to the civil war. our system depends on compromise. when you make compromise a dirty let the system fail. we are stuck in our system. this is a very, very dangerous time for the republic. say, why do you keep doing it? i say, intermittent reinforcement. it is very addictive. yesterday, we put together a good policy for a bill, and i will continue to fight for good
funding. that is an accomplishment. port set aside. shocking, in washington, d.c., we are going to take the taxes collected for harvard maintenance, and spend them on that. rate through. it took us 20 years to get there. we have to phase it in because it is too much of a shock to the system around here. we are getting some stuff done, at least in my little corner of the world of transportation. the rest is a wasteland. our signature feature of booktv is coverage of festivals around the country with top authors. be will be in nashville for the southern festival of books. at the start of november, we are back on the east coast for the
boston book festival. in the middle of the month, it is the louisiana book festival in baton rouge. at the end of november, we have live for the 18th year in a row from florida for the miami book festival international. at the national book awards from new york city. just some of the fairs and festivals this fall on c-span 2's booktv. host: we want to welcome linda feldmann of "the christian science monitor," a long time white house and political reporter. first, the benghazi hearing, 11 plus hours, hillary clinton, was that a turning point for her candidacy? guest: it was. she had done very well at the debate the week before, which in thea boost and he polls for her, and then she saw three opponents leave the scene.
a three-way race, and she ishe favorite to win. shehazi came along, and did very well. she did not produce any overt goal, she did not lose her . what struck me about the hearing is if you listen to republicans versus democrats reacting, you would think there were two separate hearings. listening to cease at the following morning, and listening to republicans calling in, serious about her lying, there were a few minutes that i think conservatives picked up on. for example, the issue of what she said about the night of the attack, saying in public that the protest in front of the u.s.
mission in benghazi was a result of a video, and 45 minutes later, she is e-mailing her daughter chelsea and saying it is an al qaeda attack. democrats are playing that up, conservatives are not at all. i do not think that hearing dinged her at all. in fact, i would say, what does not kill you makes you stronger. she celebrated after the hearing and her home with aids -- in her home with aides. host: did it change the perception that people have with hillary clinton, or are they stone well set in after 20 years in the public eye? guest: i think people's perceptions of her are pretty much set in stone. no one who watch that will say now, hillary is the light, the one.
it is not a question of convincing the undecided in the middle. host: you write from your website, hillary clinton's challenge, sexism or clintonism? host i'm fascinate by the issuef women in politics. -- guesthillary clinton obviouss the best shot of becoming the first woman president. she is obviously running as a woman. she is emphasizing her gender more than she did eight years ago. i was in new hampshire, sort of testing why hillary have lost so much support among women. she is to have the strong advantage among women, and i had declined dramatically. what i found, in talking to women, bernie sanders supporters at the new hampshire
convention two weeks ago was that they are concerned about her character, in a lot of ways. them, they would love to see a woman president, but is not the first -- it is not the first and foremost thing in their minds. they think she is calculating, they think she is not authentic, they think she has positioning, and maybe they don't like her positions going all the way back to 2002, when she voted for the iraq war. that shelly the fact is a clinton, and not the fact that she is a woman, that i think is her biggest challenge. that ifuck todd said you look of the past 10 days, from her appearance on "saturday night live," to benghazi, to the jefferson jackson dinner, when they write the books on the 2016 cap thing this was a turning point for her. guest: it was.
the fact that joe biden is not running is huge. as a reporter, i'm disappointed that he is not running. it would have made a very interesting three-way contest. now, it is just the two of them, with all due respect to martin o'malley, i'm not sure he can get the oxygen and attention to beat against those two. this is a. i do not think there are enough solid progressives and the democratic party to beat her. this is not to say that she is 100% locked. there is nothing certain, as we have learned and is very unusual presidential cycle. if there is no huge smoking gun in the e-mails that will continue to come out over the next month, i do not see how she cannot get the nomination. host: remarks from bill clinton outside the jefferson jackson dinner last night -- our viewers
went nuts when we show this, katy perry performing for hillary clinton, and then hillary clinton coming out and hugging her. what is your impression? what does she bring to the candidacy? guest: what does katy perry bring? she brings youth, glamour, excitement. this jj dinner was important for hillary. barack obama did really, really well. this was his breakout moment eight years ago. hillary pulled up the stops. guest,rry is the big bringing out her husband. she is better in small, group sessions. host: katy perry complete with the flag. .uest: i love to her outfit it is a wonder woman, captain america look.
on the needs help excitement factor, and this, i think, was exciting for her. host: our guest is linda feldmann of the "christian science monitor ago our phone minds are open. let's go to nikki from georgia. good morning. caller: how is c-span this morning juggle i love the show -- c-span this morning? i love the show. i want to talk a little bit about the hearing. the hearing was a political witch hunt for hillary. reading between the lines, i aink the benghazi mission was cia mission, and the people in benghazi at the time knew that there was a high risk because it cia. i think the reason it was attacked is because the rebels -- they thought they were
hitting a cia target. guest: there was a cia facility there. it was a diplomatic mission, and an annex, that was cia. i do not think that is an dispute. host: frank from fort lauderdale, florida, independent line. caller: i like the "christian science monitor," i have been aware of it for years since i took international relations classes 40 years ago, or so. me thing that is bothering about hillary clinton now is the issue over whether it was a terrorist attack or spontaneous demonstration. i lived in downtown miami in 1975. there were a lot of bombings in the area. of police -- i lived in back consulate.an the night before i was moving
in, i drove down there to see what it was like in downtown miami at night. i noticed, there were cop cars all around, and smoke coming from the building. i did not even want to touch it back then. it was terrifying. i found out years later that was in fact a terrorist attack, and was done with dynamite. the police report said that. when she came out with that, i looked at people like stokely carmichael, a black militant 1960's -- now, you take someone in miami, like orlando who fired a bazooka, that is an act of terrorism. it is pretty clear, even though both talk about violence, one action came through with it -- one actually came through with
it. guest: the use of the word "terrorism" is interesting, and has to be used carefully. i remember when an editor told me to be careful with the word terrorism. it means violence with a message. if they are trying to put forth a larger message, then it is terrorism. i guess that is what i will say on that. vice to go back to president joe biden, so much speculation as the month began, and of course, the back-and-forth between his conversations with campaign staffers, and this announcement from the rose garden this past wednesday. [video clip] unfortunately, i think we are out of time, the time necessary to mount a winning campaign for the nomination. while i will not be a candidate, i will not be silent. i intend to speak out clearly and forcefully to influence as
much as i can, where we stand as a party, and where we need to go as a nation. this is what i. this is what i believe. i believe that president obama has lead this nation from crisis to recovery and we are now on the cusp of resurgence. i am proud to have played a part in that. this party, our nation, willie making its tragic mistake if we walk away or attempt to undo the obama legacy. the american people have worked too hard and we have come too far for that. democrat should not only defend this record and protect this record, they should run on the record. host: as you heard the vice president this past wednesday, like jeb and hillary clinton? beforepeople had said
that he was going after hillary. he says what he thinks. garden,ech in the rose it was very moving, i thought, this was his swan song, his big moment in the spotlight. of him ending his political career. it will end when the obama presidency ends. i think that he believes, firmly, as an old-time legislator elected in the 1970's that working across the aisle is the way to go. some people say that the shows why he would have been a bad candidate here you he's from a bygone era when republicans and democrats worked together. so, you know, it's a new day. being very combative towards the republicans, isn't talking much about common ground or working together, but again this is the primary where she needs to get democrats excited about her candidacy, including sanders voters who might well be
called upon to vote for her next november. host: clearly for the vice president this is a personal decision. the loss of his son to bring cancer last may. but did it come down to a simple question guest:, he felt he could not win? question, he felt he could not win? guest: yes. i think that when the chatter of yen, he was thinking about it a few months ago and that was sort of his invisible primary. how much excitement was there? how much did the polls show? although i discounted those because he was not announced candidate. what kind of money could he bring in fast? what kind of organization could he get together? day clicked by, the chances that he could run a credible campaign diminished. , the pain of losing by son was so profound that
the time he and his family were ready to do this, it really was too late. he could have gotten in, some people thought that until the morning he said he was not running that he would get in because he was sending these very, very mixed signals, up one day, down the next. he would have had to thread the needle so precisely to pull it off, i think he just -- as he put it, didn't have the emotional energy to do that. host: the headline here, shock poll. donald that drum -- trump was slipping in the iowa caucuses in the then carson is up by nine points in the latest des moines register iowa survey. really interesting. for a number of reasons. one, ben carson really is a better fit for iowa republican caucus goers. persona ise -- his
more about values in families. he's been married only once to the same woman. his soft-spoken manner is very appealing. i think that trump is losing evangelicals. women don't like trump as much as men do. another thing that makes this interesting is that trump is all about winning. he's obsessed with winning and with being ahead in the polls. this is a real test for his willingness to stick this out. if he is consistently losing in on the eve ofowa, the iowa caucuses this ego through with this and come out a , as he talks so derisively about? go into the des moines register survey and the results. "the new yorker" has a backing of 18% --
guest: yes, no, this is huge. what is interesting about iowa in the last two cycles, the winner of the republican caucuses has not caught on as a candidate nationally and not won the nomination. santorum, ago rick eight years ago mike huckabee. let's say that ben carson wins the iowa caucuses. the new hampshire, that's a very different state in some ways in terms of the profiles and the electorate. can trump come back? trump is still ahead new hampshire. the evangelical profile is not strong in new hampshire. so, if trump is willing to lose in iowa and then win in new hampshire, we could have a big fight on our hands. but then there is also the
establishment republicans who are duking it out in their own wing of the party. time is still a lot of between now and the iowa caucuses. who knows? in the meantime, ben carson continues his book tour this week in colorado on cnbc. the
carson campaign is out with a new ad in washington, d.c.. christ did you know that washington is built on a swamp? massive government debt? stifling regulations? special interest politics? partisan dysfunction. now it all makes sense. washington is broken. class is broken. together we can drain the swamp and protect our children's future. i'm ben carson and i approve this message. host: as you look at that ad from ben carson and look at the
polls showing that half the -- half the voters are favoring the outsiders among republicans as we had well into the fall. is absolutelyson fascinating. when i watch them in that ad, i watch his manner. his hands, right? .he very gifted neurosurgeon in his book is all about the calm demeanor of a physician. the fact that so many republicans love him -- even people that say they will not necessarily vote for him in the primary, he has such high ratings for likability that it's just interesting that he is so strong is a presidential candidate at this point. i mean, he raise $20 million in hard money in the third quarter of this year, better than any other candidate. is cutting his campaign costs, the story from "politico."
slashing salaries as a way to save money, putting more of an effort into new hampshire, indicating it may be make or break for him in that state. host: the fact that he is -- guest: the fact that he is struggling so much as interesting. shocking but not shocking. shocking because a lot of people thought going in that he would be the prohibitive favorite, the establishment guy. the bush name would cut into directions, but certainly in terms of his ability to raise money you have got the big bush family giant rolodex. that the super pac that supports them came in with $100 million. his campaign style is not really where needs to be. he's not exciting. trump's charges of low energy have really hurt bush. the story today in "the new york times" about the bush family watching this and being really pained by it, it is a poignant story, bush senior is watching
at what'sorrified being done to the bush family name. people attacking jeb bush, george w. bush. i think that his defense of his think, couldso, i cut two ways. for some people i think it really hurts him. republicans are still angry about the bush years, about the iraqi war, the state of the economy when he left office. jeb is not allowing any daylight between him and his brother. that is probably another harmful point for him. host: george w. bush referring to ted cruz -- i just am like the guy. "iowa has proven to be useless at picking winners." comment? guest: some people in iowa are bemoaning the fact that their status as the first gate in the race for the republican -- for
both nominations, has diminished. we did not have a straw poll this year. the republican party every four years for the past few decades would have this straw poll. the last winners in previous cycles proved to be fringe candidates. it proved to be bad for the image of the party, so they decided to skip it. and new hampshire always be the first to to go? the chairman of the party is not guaranteeing that. againk that if iowa yet goes with a candidate who does not go on to win the nomination, there will be some soul-searching about the role of iowa as the first decider. host: our guest is linda feldman, she spent the last 20 years serving as the chief political correspondent on the white house beat and we welcome our listeners on c-span radio, including those listening on serious xm, the potus channel
that carries this program, and our viewers across the atlantic on the bbc parliament channel. ron is joining us from pittsburgh. good morning, ron. morning.ood two separate comments. one, the republicans have been making so much noise, yelling and screaming on the air in some cases for months and months, if not a year or more, about hillary clinton. as she gets up on the stand they have her in this hearing and for over nine hours they don't get anything on her at all. they are wasting taxpayer money on that. if you cannot find anything in nine hours, there's nothing there. i think that the republicans should be held accountable to the taxpayers for this fiasco. you for the call. your colleague at the washington post has this piece -- the benghazi committee reflects a
broader breakdown of the republican party. your thoughts? guest: the optics of that hearing were terrible for the republicans. hillary clinton did not crack. she said it was 11 hours with a few breaks. her time in the chair was about nine hours. she was poised. she was calm. there was some body language there, looking annoyed, looking bored. i think that was irritating to some people, but the larger view of republicans going on and on about sidney blumenthal and how he had her private e-mail ambassador the killed in the attack did not have her private e-mail address whoeople -- any american hasn't followed this doggedly would look at this and go -- who the heck is sidney blumenthal, why should we care, what does he have to do with ming ghazi?
at the end of it i think the trey gowdy knew that it was not a good moment for the party when he was asked by reporters if they learned anything he said that hillary did not say anything new, i will have to go back and raised -- read the transcript. there was more than what she said. there was information that came out in those e-mails, but i think that the media has given his victory to hillary and that's really what counts. john, republican line, good morning. caller: thank you so much, this is a good problem -- the program. i hate to interrupt with a question. with all the candidates fighting , i have asked this question for years now -- why is it that no one is going to purdue university and talking to mitch daniels? despite the book "run, mitch, run." is a reluctant candidate and
i feel at this point that is what we need. do you think that it's too late for someone like him to stand for president and let us elect someone that we needed this time? have you seen the interview that we had with the authors of those book -- that book? caller: i saw it, it was great. host: it's on my website -- our website. caller: it goes back to my question. it --a reluctant cam reluctant candidate. washington did not want to be president either, but he did what was asked for the country. is now the daniels president of purdue university. guest: i think there is zero chance he gets into this race. i think he's done with politics. very smart man. not very charismatic. this business of reluctant candidates is interesting. some people act reluctant
because they want to be asked to get in and want people to be tron to them, but in this case he really doesn't want to run. the next call is from michigan. bob, good morning. caller: good morning. frankly, the type of truth, i don't any republican gets elected to anything. the way the media is so biased, it's just outrageous. does anyone even know that hillary is under investigation? it is hillary they are investigating. it's not something out there in the ether. you would not know it, you'd never know it. everyone's gushing about how well she did at that stupid aaring and she's nothing but congenital pathological liar and it's proven. and she gets away with all this stuff and it's driving me crazy. she should be under the jail, not in jail. guest: do you have a candidate host: -- do you have a candidate -- host: do you have candidate? caller: i love donald trump.
host: who did you vote for in 2012? caller: i tell you what, i have held my nose and voted for a the elections.ll i wanted alan keyes when he was running and everyone laughed at him. i'm sick of all of these games being played. we are moving the deck chairs on the titanic here. we need big change. trump is the one to do it. host: this is a total hypothetical but, let me put it on the table. jeb bush is the nominee, would you vote for him? to hold myould have nose and vote for him to keep hillary out. like i said, hillary clinton belongs in a square box, not an oval office. host: can donald trump win the nomination? caller: i hope so. i love that guy. i saw him when he came to birds run.
he gave a stemwinder. everybody loved him. it was great. host: thanks for your call. we'll get a response. guest: funny issue of the media and how they cover hillary, i think that mainstream media is not gettingl about ahead of where things are with these investigations of hillary clinton and her e-mail and her private server. i think it would come as news to "the new york times" that they are in the tank for hillary, whouse they are the ones broke the story in march about the private e-mail server, reporting initially incorrectly that they were under -- she was under criminal investigation. there has been this bashing ever since between the clinton campaign and "the new york times." there is plenty of conservative , the out there -- foxnews op-ed page of the wall street
places forenty of conservatives to go to get an alternate view of the news. i would not say the media are 100% covering up for hillary in some fashion. robert says -- erie go again "hillary being called a liar with no proof." response? guest: the two hearings that we had, the wonder hillary was brilliant and sailed above it unscathed, thet other hearing where she was lying to her teeth and getting just yet it, this is another demonstration of how polarized this country is. host: another viewer saying -- host: share your thoughts, send us a tweet.
independent line, andy, good morning. caller: hillary, which you have been elected senator? probably not. i will hang up and listen. give me three qualifications of hillary. not jobs she's held, but things she has accomplished in her life. i will hang up and take the answer on air. host: thank you. guest: i don't think you can separate her accomplishments held.he jobs she's she was elected to the senate. i take your point on how her last name has helped her. youyour last name can get in the door, but it does not win you the job. plenty of people with famous last names have run for office and failed miserably. the fact that she won that senate seat, yes, she is a clinton and i think the people in new york voted for her because they thought that she could effectively represent them in washington and by all accounts she worked very hard as a senator -- you know, secretary
of state, barack obama nominated wouldcause he thought she do a good job, not because her last name was hillary clinton. did she do a good job? that's another element of her that is very much open to discussion and debate. it will be on the table between now and election day let -- election day next year. resume, it'st her quite strong. host: the work of linda feldman is available online at cs monitor.com. democratic line, good morning. caller: good morning. i want to talk about hillary for a minute. i have been for her for a long time, since 2007. i think she is the best candidate out there that is running. as for her and the fbi still investigating her? i think they're looking at
something and how to improve the security of e-mail and servers. the state department said that she broke no laws. the department of justice said that she broke no laws. there are no charges out there against hillary. hillary knows how to get things done. that is the democratic argument for hillary in a nutshell. e-mails --ss of the what they are investigating is whether national security was endangered by the trafficking of classifying -- classified information on an unsecured server. what they find? if she is home for a after that , i think that would be around feeling. the e-mail story is by far not over.
it is looking ok. is fromr next caller des moines, iowa, where it all begins. philip, republican line, good morning. caller: thanks for taking my call. i also caught your interview with jan michelson, which was very good. if anyone wants to listen. i wanted to comment on the iowa straw poll and the republican establishment. --hink that it's i have obvious, even if people choose not to recognize it and avoid recognizing it, the republican establishment is simply not honoring the intentions of the republicans they say they represent. i tend to be and describe myself more as a sharp edged conservative libertarian,
somewhere in the middle between principled republican and not quite to the same extent as a lot of these evangelicals, but even though i would find myself in the same place, the republican party establishment themselves, the candidates that they continue to promote a something out representing us and that's why they never win. i don't think that the republican establishment wants to see themselves as ineffective. , also observed on the hearing the benghazi hearing, it appears panel wasthe democrat asking questions, they appear to be reading the questions and hillary appeared to be reading her answers. everything have been scripted way ahead of time and this was just a big circus show.
that was my observation. thank you. host: thank you. guest: on the issue of reading , typicallynd answers some members will have questions written out for them by staff. to make sure that they ask the question in precisely the right way. as for hillary, i don't think she was reading her answers. she did have a few aides sitting behind her, but i think she was doing this largely from memory. on your other point about the republican establishment, this election is a really interesting test for them. the establishment is an amorphous concept of inside the beltway crowds around the country who want people who are broadly acceptable to the populace into are going to play 40 art lines politically. we are seeing a party that has several wings and they are trying to sew them together.
the establishment is not as powerful as they would seem. they would especially like to see donald trump go away because they are terrified that he is ruining the republican brand and that no matter who is nominated to run next november, they won't have a shot because he said such awful things about say -- minorities and women. have lost a lot of financial clout. the rise of the super pac's, the money in the campaigns, that makes it easier for candidates to ignore the rnc of washington and do their own thing. host: another poll here from "bloomberg politics." bywing that a heavy ad by the jeb bush campaign failed to list his numbers in new hampshire. earlier they said this was a state that is turning out to be a must win for jeb bush based on his redoubling in miami.
host: -- guest: when john mccain ran into thousand eight, he was out of money, he did not drop out, but he retooled. a candidate, a kind of gets out of their way in terms of staffing and organization and setting up offices all over the country and maybe they don't do so good in the debates or maybe they are not the most electric campaigner. i think that is the problem of jeb bush. i think that money trickles backwards in terms of how much is coming in, so they have to recalibrate. struggle and his 40% cutback is definitely a dire he may be in serious trouble, but i do not think it is the end for him. host: this past week from politico, reference to jeb bush
and marco rubio. "among establishment donors, -- story is available online at politico.com. let's go to john in north, florida, on the republican line. caller: good morning. my name is john. i have to disagree with linda. i was at the jacksonville campaign yesterday in jacksonville. i spoke to numerous amounts of women. how can you go on national tv like donald women, trump doesn't like women? i spoke to a numerous amount of women.
plus i speak from pennsylvania thehe state of florida, all states in between, i speak to a numerous amount of people, democrats, independents, and republicans. you do have some that don't like -- trump, butome most of them like what they hear. host: you say that you are at the jacksonville rally yesterday with donald trump? host: correct, i was -- caller: correct, i was. host: how many people were there? caller: i think it could be around 10,000. it was completely full. it was unbelievable. it was packed. the media does not show how many people were there. they focus on donald trump does the media is not want to let him -- let the american people know how many people are coming. when they do all the other candidates, they show how many people were there, which is not fair. wet: watch our coverage,
have been showing the crowds in richmond, virginia, and when we caught up with him in florida. all of our coverage on our website has crowds as we cover these candidates in their events. guest: i would not say that donald trump has no female support. but i was watching a focus group of republican primary voters in indiana last tuesday. host: the peter hart focus group? guest: yes, there were women there that love him. they said yes, they thought he was bombastic and does things he shouldn't say, but that he's strong, forceful, a leader. they are willing to put up with some of the negatives of donald .rump that he can bring good advisors to his side to run the country. there are women that don't like the way that he treated megyn kelly after the first debate. and see a certain sexism there. from indianapolis, greg is next. good morning.
good morning,er: thank you for taking my call. my comment centers around republicans in general. specifically, paul ryan and the speakership or soon-to-be speakership. and the benghazi hearings. my question or comment i would say is this -- there are folks who are surprised with the republicans when they have been saying all of these controversial things. all of these fringe candidates. these folks don't want to govern. they never came in with an intention to govern. for the call.u he mentioned paul ryan. this is a cover of "cq weekly." his biggest challenge is keeping the party behind him. we had to extract concessions to thethe freedom caucus tea party oriented members of
who chased john boehner out of the speakership and also made it clear that kevin mccarthy wasn't going to succeed the speaker. .aul ryan is a smart man can he pull together? he will have a honeymoon and then what? this will be the test of his lifetime as a politician. host: to the caller upon point that the republicans are not interested in governing? guest: i don't think that's fair to the candidates. with arepublican field bunch of men and one woman saying they will do a good job as president. you have people who run with other goals in mind with speaker fees and to boost their public profile for other reasons. i like to give people the benefit of the doubt.
if they think they would be a good president and that's why the running. host: let me ask you about senator bernie sanders because he did take aim at hillary clinton on a number of policy issues including her vote to go ahead with the troops in the rock -- in iraq. here's what the senator said last night. [video clip] these republicans prefer to take super pac contributions from the koch brothers and fossil fuel industry rather than to protect the planet for our kids and grandchildren. if you agree with me about the need to adjust climate change you know what to do about the keystone pipeline. [applause] >> this was not a complicated
.ssue should we support the construction of a pipeline across america? the transportation of some of the dirtiest fossil fuel in the world? to me, that was a no-brainer and that's why i've opposed the keystone pipeline from day one. host: he did not mention her name, but clearly a reference to hillary clinton. a two this is essentially way democratic race for the nomination and bernie sanders has got to keep people excited. he went after her in a very legitimate way on policy. he says, who cares about the e-mail, let's talk about the issues. this is what gets people excited . the challenge for her would be if she gets the nomination to voters to sanders' vote for her and turn out and donate more for. host: joining us for michigan,
the line for independents. caller: caller: good morning. this big brouhaha they are trying to make about the telephone calls hillary clinton , i'mto different people how many people have telephones. very commonplace. there was a movie that people saw. some people were angry by it. some were incited. if you are the mind of a person who is looking for something to stir things up, perfect thing. , hillary makes three phone calls and i can't remember them verbatim but one call she made to her family and
said it was al qaeda. another call she said it was the terrorists. i can't remember the third call. if i make three phone calls right in a row and i'm talking about the very same thing, i doubt very much that everything i say would be verbatim. this is probably for the republicans the big get in terms of a news nugget on hillary clinton out of that hearing on ben ghazi. that she was giving different explanations to different people within a short period of time suggesting that she was being political. this is why this matters. this is why this attack happened before the november election of 2012. the obama administration was concerned that a terrorist attack on u.s. soil overseas
would look bad. they did not -- they were not on top of the issue. apparently said different things to different people. it was in a series of phone -- she- it was in a s gave a long explanation as to why she said and wrote what she did. it was fog of war, we did not know what was going on, fast-moving situation. i think most americans don't really follow every speck of the story. i think most people have a gut that isthat is good or bad. for some people, these e-mails are it, she is terrible, for others it is like, who cares. host: republican party circles.
the third debate on cnbc focusing on jobs and the economy. guest: i'm going to be watching the dynamic between ben carson and donald trump. is now threatened by carson and that's why he went after carson at that event in jacksonville. i love the contrast between the two. bombastic trump versus the quiet calling ben carson. ben carson is not really go after people he is who he is. donald trump is now calling ben carson low-energy. me, it -- ben carson to is not low-energy he's just very calm. that.of people like it's not -- it is different from the allegation of low energy against jeb bush. host: linda feldmann, thank you for stopping by.
we will take a short break it will become back we will turn our attention to the alarming rise of drug abuse and heroin use in this country. something the president talked about this weekend in west virginia. dr. andrew kolodny will be joining us, chief medical officer of phoenix house. later, canadians of electing a liberal prime minister with a familiar last name. learn more about justin trudeau with laura dawson of the wilson .enter for canada institute you are watching and listening to c-span's washington journal this sunday morning, october 25. ♪ all persons having business before the honorable supreme court of the united states, draw near give their attention. >> we have not seen a court overturn a law that was passed by congress on an economic issue like health care since lochner.
a the case is whether majority rule, a state legislature can take away your life and liberty without due process. the court ruled no. at the gets a wonderful decision. >> this week, we look at lockerbie new york. in 1895, the new york legislature passed the bakeshop hours foricting employees to 10 hours a day or six the hours per week. joseph lochner violated that law and was fined $50, refusing to pay he took his case all the way to the supreme court. find out why lochner is known as one of the most controversial decisions the supreme court's history as we explore this with randy barnett. and paul cans, political science professor at texas state university.
landmark cases. live monday at nine clock p.m. eastern. -- 9:00 p.m. eastern. >> i stay in the wings so this is quite unusual to me. i want to thank all of you for your friendship, loyal support and for planning this wonderful evening for me. i shall remember it always. thanks to the young people for this great welcome. >> pat nixon was the first republican first lady to address the national convection -- national convention. she made volunteerism her issue, chief supporter to her husband richard nixon and behind-the-scenes, political advisor.
tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern. first ladies, influence in image. ask -- exploring the public and private lives of women who have filled the role of worst lady. tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern on american history tv on c-span three -- c-span 3. host: drug abuse in this country . joining us from new york is dr. andrew kolodny, the chief medical officer for phoenix house. thank you for being with us. guest: thanks for having me. ast: i want to share with you headline from the washington post as president obama travel to west virginia unveiling a fight opioid abuse. he talked about the rising use of heroin in this country and the resulting death. this is a portion of what the president said this past week.
[video clip] >> more americans now die every year from drug overdoses than they do from motor vehicle crashes. more than they do from car accidents. the majority of those overdoses involve legal prescription drugs . in 2013 alone, overdoses from prescription pain medications killed more than 16,000 people -- 16,000 americans. one year. this is a terrible toll. the numbers are big but behind those numbers are incredible pain for families. host: let's talk about the payment is families are facing and what were seeing such an alarming increase. inst: the united states is the midst of a severe epidemic
of opioid addiction and overdose deaths. when i use the term opioid, i'm referring to both heroin as well as drugs that come from opium like hydrocodone and oxycodone that are prescribed for pain. according to the cdc, the guinea in the late 1990's, doctors late -- beginning in the 1990's, doctors begin prescribing opioids more aggressively than previously. it led to parallel increases in addiction and overdose deaths. people two groups of that are become opioid addicted over the past 15 years. older group and the younger group. in the younger group, people in their 20's and 30's, many of them have become addicted to opioids either through medical use or recreational use. when that young group gets addicted and they need to
maintain their supply once you are addicted otherwise you will start to feel very ill, that group tends to have a hard time getting enough pills from doctors. they can wind up addicted through medical treatment but once addicted, doctors can feel uncomfortable giving a 25-year-old who is healthy lots of pills. that group turns the black market. , heroin movingn into nonurban areas to meet the demand by these young people who are addicted -- who first became addicted to prescription opioids. this other group, their people in their 40's, 50's, 60's, 70's, 80's. who of mostly become addicted to prescription opioids through medical treatment. they started taking pills as prescribed.
that older group does not need to turn to the black market. that group doesn't need to switch to heroin. we are seeing far more overdose deaths in that older group that is easily able to get pills from doctors. host: we are dividing phone lines regionally as we talk about this issue. 202 is the area code in washington dc. if you live in eastern time zones, (202) 748-8000. for those in mountain and pacific, (202) 748-8001. what is the source of this heroin? as we look at this headline from the washington post. guest: heroin deaths of gone up quickly in the past few years that heroin use has actually been climbing pretty steadily since the beginning of the opioid addiction epidemic.
i would argue that the epidemic begins around 1996. from the beginning of the epidemic, young people who are opioid addicted, if you're young and healthy, doctors don't want to give you lots of pills unless the doctor is a drug tiller. that -- a grunt -- age rug dealer. that group ended up on the black market. you saw that young group switching. heroin has moved into more areas that become available. the use has increased steadily. what is happened over the past few years is that the heroin supply has become more dangerous. increasingly, a drug called fentanyl that is a synthetic illicitlycan be made and mixed into the heroin to make it stronger. oath the heroin and the fentanyl that's being mixed into it, the
dea believes most of it is coming in from mexico. host: the director of a organization of -- that leads to this question from becky who says, ask the doctor why physicians started prescribing those drugs more in the late 1990's. is, in the happened mid-1990's, with the release of , with called oxycontin the release of that drug a campaign was launched to an curis -- to encourage the medical community to prescribe opioids much more aggressively. toyou could go back in time 1995 before the release of the , if you werecontin
to speak to doctors at that time and asked them if they would treat low -- patient's low back pain with a drug like vicodin or would you treat chronic headaches with an opioid, back then most doctors understood using opioids long-term for these common chronic problems was a bad idea. they understood that if you expose a patient long-term to a highly addictive drug, many patients will become addicted. with the large -- with the --nch of oxycontin, reinterpreting reasons to be cautious. the medical community began to hear that we had been under prescribing opioids and allowing patients to suffer needlessly because of an overblown fear of addiction. we were told we have this gift from mother nature of opioids
and that we could improve the quality of life in patients who are suffering from chronic intractable pain. that we could help them by prescribing opioids more liberally. the medical community did not just hear this directly from the pharmaceutical company. there was very little direct from the company. they heard it from pain specialists who were imminent in the field. they heard it from professional societies, from their hospitals, the joint commission. they heard it from medical boards. they begin to hear from every direction that the compassionate way to treat just about any complaint of pain was with an opioid. othergh her do pharma and manufacturers were underwriting this campaign, there were many people involved in the movement
who genuinely fell for it. they truly believed we could be more compassionate in our treatment of pain. communityical responded to this marketing campaign and as the prescriptions begin to soar, it ushered in this public health crisis were dealing with. host: dr. andrew kolodny is joining us from new york. serves on the faculty at brandeis university and is the director of the heller school for social policy and management at that university. jason is joining us from jeffrey, west virginia. caller: good morning. i have a question. i got shot in iraq when i was in the middle terry -- in the military. the doctor kept me on painkillers for five years, pushing them on me.
it went from oxycontin to percocet. i got my stuff addicted to them. i blame the doctor some but when still wenturting, i and got pain medication. why can't the doctors do more here? our president was just here in west virginia on wednesday talking about how he wants to put more drug rehabs in west virginia. why can't the doctors understand , this guy has been on painkillers for eight years, he should not be hurting anymore. they cut me straight off. i had to go through four treatment centers to get clean. for two years i have been straight and sober and i've done it myself. response.ill get a thank you for sharing your story with us. guest: coming off yourself is a difficult thing. millionabout 10 to 12
-- 10 million to 12 million americans who have been put on long-term opioids for chronic pain conditions. the best available evidence is telling us that the vast majority of them are not doing well. the we look at where we see greatest number of opioid overdose deaths, it is individuals who are receiving legitimate prescriptions from doctors for chronic pain. it is difficult for many of these individuals to come off. there are many people who have been put on long-term opioids or chronic pain problems who are convinced that the opioid is helping them. you had a sense it was not helping you and you needed to come often you were able to do that there are many individuals who up and put on these medications who think the opioid is helping them because when they don't take a dose or when they wake up in the morning,
they are feeling agonizing discomfort. they take the opioid and that discomfort goes away. they become convinced the opioid is treating the pain. what may be happening is that the opioid is treating withdrawal pain. they may not be getting pain relief when you are on a consistent dose over a long time. foro need a better answer the 10 million to 12 million americans who are already on opioids. many of whom may never be up to do what you did and come completely off. we will need a compassionate way of helping that population. i think what might be easier to do is to prevent what i would call new starts. we need to get the medical community to understand that for most patients with chronic pain, long-term opioids are not safe -- may not be safe or effective.
if you're interested in getting more information, the washington post has a look at where the death rate is among the highest. charts showing the drug overdose deaths, you can see in the midwest in the eased coast along pennsylvania, west virginia, kentucky. also west in nevada, arizona. among the states with the highest death rate. the darker the color, the higher the rate. haiti is joining us from merrick, new york. caller: i really feel for all the people that are affected by this. i personally don't have experience with it but i know lots of people who have struggled with this. my question is, if the doctor knows of any new developments. i saw a program a few years ago that was talking about painkillers that were being
derived from poisonous animals. i remember puffer fish was the one -- i figure was japan. poison intoing the writing a painkiller from it. any developments that kill the brainut don't affect the or addiction receptors. thanks. guest: that is a good question. i don't know that there is any brand-new medication to be released is effective for pain and not addictive. i would say that we do have effective drugs that can relieve pain that are not addictive that are available on the market. these are medications like advil and a leave. we would called -- call them anti-steroidal anti-inflammatory
drugs. tylenol is another example. it's not as though those non-opioid pain medicines don't have any side effects but they are safer. they are sold over-the-counter for a reason. campaign to encourage doctors to prescribe opioids more aggressively, some of the teacher reads -- some of the teachings involved -- doctors begin to hear if you prescribed drug lead led advil to a patient with pain that their risk of bleeding from their stomach was very high. it is certainly true that there are risks some of those risks were exaggerated. this is not the first time the united states has had an epidemic of opioid addiction caused by the way in which the medical community was prescribing. there was a severe opioid addiction epidemic in the later
half of the 19th century. the late 1800s. doctors were prescribing morphine products aggressively. many americans became addicted at that time and it was not until the beginning of the 20th century and early 1900s that we saw improvements. it was around that time that aspirin was released. have a nonaddictive pain reliever that was effective that they could prescribe. some historians believe it was the introduction of aspirin that help bring that opioid addiction epidemic under control. int: three in 1000 americans the leading magazine. why 80% of addicts cannot get treatment. the u.s. is in the grips of an opioid addiction epidemic yet 80% of those people who are
dependent on painkillers not getting treatment according to a new research letter published by the journal of the american medical association. lisa, joining us from shreveport, louisiana. caller: good morning. my son is a graduate student in chemistry. he has smoked marijuana for a long time. now he's addicted at a role because he was so over whelmed by his job. eth.he has turned to m i'm scared to death. i do not know whether to give him tough love, support him. i have had it. host: how long has he been taking the harder drugs? he has been taking the adderall for a year and a half and now the last two weeks he started taking meth. host: is he functioning at work
ok? caller: yes. host: i want to ask dr. kolodny about meth. that not only damages the body but can damage the face and skin, correct? guest: yes it can. people who are addicted to methamphetamine, which is not an opioid. we would classify that as a stimulant. it's in the same category as cocaine. people addicted to methamphetamine was sometimes pick at their skin and have a variety of problem's associated .ith their methamphetamine use we have a serious methamphetamine problem in some parts of the country, particularly in the southwest. there is some evidence that the methamphetamine problem may be improving. it is something we have been struggling with in the country for a while. related to closely
methamphetamine. adderall is prescribed to people with attention deficit disorder. i believe it is being overprescribed, not just to children who may have adhd but overprescribed to college students and adults. there are many people who can read about the symptoms of adhd. they go and visit a doctor. the doctors are writing the prescriptions. we have seen prescriptions for stimulants just like with opioids skyrocketing over the past 10 years. inhave a serious problem prescription stimulants like adderall as well as illicitly manufactured stimulants like methamphetamine. host: let's go to lisa. did that answer your question? caller: you are right on, dr..
adderallcribed in the when they found he had adhd. he has no will to do anything. i don't know whether to talk to him or what. i am at my wits end. it can be difficult and there are many people in your situation where a loved one struggling with addiction to alcohol or hard drugs. it can be a struggle if the person you love is not interested in treatment or is refusing to get help. what you can do is get help for yourself. you learn how to cope with the situation better and how possibly to try and help them. there are groups for families. one of them is called al-anon. there are many people who might attend who have a loved one with an addiction to hard drugs. i would recommend that you do it you can to help yourself. you may learn tools and get
advice on how you can better help your son. host: let's go to thomas. thank you for waiting. caller: i'm a west virginia coal miner. mr. obama came to west virginia and made a speech and kind of scared me to death. i've had 17 or 18 injuries. i've had my legs broke, knee surgery, shoulder surgery, a chronic strain, bonus version in my back. version int -- bonus my back. broken wrists. i've worked 33 years and it is tough. i finally found a doctor to help me. this is like a miracle drug to me. it changed my life.
i picked a place to take my life in the woods. i told my son if i ever come up missing, you come and get me. they give me this medicine, i don't want to take my life. i can get out of bed myself under this medication. i'm one of the baby boomers who worked his whole life, hard labor. my major tools was a 16 pound hammer and a five pound slate bar. i was a welder. i worked like a dog and injured myself so bad. host: how old are you if i may ask? caller: 70. host: thank you for phoning in. guest: when we talk about opioid pain medications, drugs like hydrocodone and oxycodone, we're talking about drugs that are in the same way
that heroin is made from opium. the effect that hydrocodone and oxycodone produce in the brain are indistinguishable from the effects that are produced by heroin. we talk about opioid pain medicines, we are essentially talking about heroin pills. to say that they are essentially heroin pills does not mean we should never prescribe them. these are very important medicines for easing suffering at the end of life. they also play an important role when used on a short-term basis. someone who is just had major surgery or a serious accident and they are taking opioids for a few days. the prescription of opioids in the united states is not for end-of-life care, people
who suffer chronic conditions. i understand you felt that you feel that the opioids are giving you pain relief and they probably do at the outset but the vast majority of people who are taking opioids long-term for chronic pain, the best evidence is telling us they are not doing well. what happens when you take an opioid every oil -- every day around the clock is, after a short time you develop a tolerance to the pain relieving effects which means that to continue to get pain relief patients will meet higher and higher doses. as the doses get higher, what you will often see is people's functioning begins to decline. the dose can become very dangerous when someone is on a high dose.
if they accidentally doubled or does it could be enough to cause an overdose death. it can feel very good to get pain relief when you first start taking these medications over ame patients tend to have decline in their functioning and many of the patients put on these medications wind up addicted. a significant number will ultimately die of overdose deaths. there might be a role for some people like yourself who have serious chronic intractable pain . there might be a way in which they can use opioids. it is generally not the way they are prescribed by the medical community. people with pain conditions like rheumatoid arthritis workout. .- or get out it may be an opportunity to use a low dose of an opioid during a flareup. on most days to get by with
medicines like advil and tylenol . when you take opioids around-the-clock, these extended-release -- extended relief, high-dose products, it appears over time many patients wind up doing poorly yet can be -- yet can have a difficult time coming off. host: i want to thank those listening on c-span radio. this program is also carried on sirius xm. our guest is dr. andrew kolodny as we talk about the alarming increase of drug abuse in this country, something the president highlighted when he traveled to west virginia. sam is joining us from hillsdale, michigan. caller: i want to say that i had a near-death experience with improperly using aspirin at one time. i don't take it at all anymore. anys wondering if there was
possibility that the advertising of prescription drugs on television might have had anything to do with the spike in prescription drug overuse. host: thank you, sam. guest: when it comes to direct advertising of a controlled substance or narcotics like pain medications, there was very little of that. i think there has been a self-imposed moratorium where the manufacturers of opioid pain medicines have not really put the ads on television, ask your doctor for arctic on. -- ask your doctor for oxycontin. they are marketing a medication to treat constipation caused by being on chronic opioids.
i think the reason you are seeing these ads is because there are millions of americans now who are on chronic opioids which is concerning. the campaign that led to this sharp increase in overprescribing of opioid pain medicines was not so much focused on the patients as it was on the prescribers. when purdue pharma was releasing oxycontin, what they were interested in was a block after drug. -- a blockbuster drug. oxycodone is inappropriate medicine to be prescribed to people at the end-of-life, for example with cancer pain. it is hard to have a blockbuster drug if it's going to be taken by people with cancer pain at the end-of-life. the patients will not be on the
drug for very long if they are at the end-of-life. the way you get a blockbuster drug is if you can get the medical community to prescribe it for chronic conditions like lower back pain, fryeburg myalgia -- fibromyalgia. it is prescribed for chronic conditions. you have got the magic formula for a blockbuster. when they were releasing auntie cocked and -- oxycontin. patients would get tolerant to the pain relieving effect and meet higher doses. it would be difficult for people to come off because of the .ependence the campaign that was launched was focused very much on getting
the medical community to see these good reasons for not using opioids as barriers to compassionate pain care. the medical community was led to believe that the risk of addiction was very low. the statistic that doctors were presented with was that much less than 1% of your patients whatever get addicted. we were led to believe that the drugs were more effective than they really are when used long-term. what you really want our doctors who can weigh risks versus benefits of any medicine when considering whether or not they should prescribe it. minimized thethat risks, we let the commute we left -- we left the medical -- the scale was really tipped in favor of prescribing aggressively.
host: i want to share with you one story. carrie dixon joined the president in west virginia. her son, addicted to drugs, now in jail. [video clip] confused as to the cause of the personality changes we see and love ones. we are shocked when we hear of that first dui and we are fearful when our loved ones are taken to jail for the first time. we are embarrassed when holidays approach. family members are coming in from out of town and loved ones can't interact because they're under the influence of drugs. we dread the next phone call. we can't sleep because we have not received a phone call. we don't take vacations for fear of the next crisis. we come back from vacation because there is a crisis. whene sad and angry
valuable and sentimental items are missing from our home only to find out they are at a pawnshop or in the hands of drug dealers. we are relieved when our loved ones acknowledge that they have a serious problem and understand they need help. we are devastated when we help them seek treatment only to find out that there is a month-long wait or there is no insurance coverage or there is a big requirement for money up front for treatment. sad and uncomfortable when acquaintances access -- ask us about our loved ones and more sad when they ask us about other members of our family and don't mention her loved one. , we'veect marriages neglect other children who are thriving. all of our attention is focused
on addiction and substance abuse. host: carrie dixon explaining a story that is familiar to many families. the rise of drug abuse and drug-related deaths in this country, something the president focused on this past week. this is the headline from "the washington post." will go to steve, joining us from missouri. caller: thanks for taking my call. . can't speak for every problem i was in the marines in the 70's -- in the 1970's. our captain used to raid the barracks. he would take the pot, put it in a bucket and burn it and linus up and get your last with. nobody went to jail. this was before the republican -- that's why the shooting is going on because they're so much money in it. the cops to want to stop it because half the cops would be laid off.
money -- change it to rehab instead of jail. host: we will get a response. what we were hearing at town hall meeting president obama attended in west virginia on the epidemic and what we heard from that individual expressing the pain that families are experiencing. i think she did a nice job of articulating the devastating impact this disease has not just on the individuals but on the whole family. , itild with this disease affects you. if it's apparent -- if it is a parent, it affects the children. there is a tremendous amount of
suffering that is experienced. severe in many communities across the country. you saw some states that were shaded in darker for having higher rates of overdose deaths. country hasin the counties within it that have a severe problem. there is not a state in the country not experiencing this somewhere. problemthink about this , sometimes it's described as a prescription drug abuse crisis or heroin abuse crisis. the proper way to frame the problem, as an epidemic of addiction. if you understand this as a disease epidemic, what you need to do for this epidemic is the
same thing you would do for any disease epidemic, whether you are talking about ebola, measles, hiv. what you bring disease epidemics to an end is by accomplishing two things. the first thing you have to do is prevent new cases of the disease. you have to contain it so that new people don't, in this case, become addicted to opioids. the other thing you have to do is for the people who already have the disease, you have to see that they receive effective treatment so that the disease does not kill them. for the opioid addiction epidemic, to prevent new cases of the disease, that really boils down to getting the medical community, including dentists, to prescribe more cautiously so that we don't directly addict our patients and so that we do not indirectly cause addiction by stocking people's homes with a highly addictive drug their teenagers
might be curious about experimenting with. i was pleased to hear the president talk about the tremendous number of prescriptions that it been written. a enough prescriptions to supply every adult in the united states with a pill bottle fill of opioids. i was pleased to hear him talk about how these drugs are in the same class as heroin. that's an important message to get across. we do have to do a much better job of seeing that people who become overly good addicted are able to -- become opioid addicted are able to access treatment. without ensuring access to treatment, we are going to see overdose deaths remain high and we will see heroin continue to flood in to meet the demand by people with addiction.
most effective medications for opioid addiction is a drug called you can offer limitshere are federal on the number of patients a doctor can treat with this medicine. what we are seeing is in parts of the country like west virginia and communities that have been hit very hard, you have doctors who have mapped out -- maxed out on the number of patients they can treat, a maximum of 100. there are patients on waiting list for this medication who are dying of overdoses while waiting on this list. host: you mentioned a president in his budget requesting another $133 million to deal with this this and overtreatment of medication. you can get more details at
whitehouse.com. deborah is on the line. caller: good morning. i am on medication. i have been taking it faithfully. i don't like what's happening to me with this medication. i have arthritis. this medication has been making me so aggressive. -- i made an appointment for pain medication. if i stop taking this medication , and i addicted to it now? guest: someone who takes an opioid pain medication every day a few times a day for even a week, their body becomes physiologically dependent on it.
the longer you are on it and the higher the dose, the more physiological dependence that sets and. physiological dependence is not exactly the same thing as addiction. addiction is different, but one of the reasons opioids are highly addictive is that physiological dependence. people can feel very ill when they try and come off. and negative reinforcement for stopping which is why many people stay on the drug. is -- ifl, if someone you're calling me and you are asking me about this medication as a physician might include nation would be to tell you to listen to your doctor and trust your doctor. unfortunately when it comes to opioids we are in a situation where many of the prescribers are -- have very bad information about these drugs. they are underestimating how addictive and risky they are and overestimating how helpful they can be.
i wish i could tell you that you should trust your doctor and talk to your doctor about this but that may not be the case. this is a really difficult situation. we have doctors even prescribing to teenagers and parents not recognizing that the doctor has essentially prescribed the teenager the equivalent of a heroin pill. these are great medicines for end-of-life care. or when used for a few days after major surgery. for weeksm every day and months and years often winds of hurting people. host: for patients dealing with this addiction or families trying to do with loved ones who are addicted to this medication, what are some good resources? where can people go for help? ested: if people are inter in learning more, i would
encourage you to visit support .org. that is the website for positions for responsible opioid prescribing. if you're looking for addiction treatment for a loved one who is addicted to prescription opioids or heroin, the federal samsa website has information. unfortunately there are many where it is difficult to access treatment so people have to work hard at finding appropriate resources. host: dr. andrew kolodny, senior scientist for the heller school for social policy and management at the brandeis university. chief medical officer for phoenix house, joining us from new york.
thank you for your time and insights. we appreciate it. guest: thank you for having me. host: in 1972, president richard nixon, his only trip to canada, said -- what is next for canadian politics. our topic with laura dawson who is with the wilson center canada institute as the washington journal continues sunday morning , october 25. we are back in a moment. ♪ >> tonight on q and a, amy chose shares her experiences from hillary clinton's presidential
campaign and compares what it is like now to back in 2008. >> i was a lot younger. the traveling person. i was not in a senior role. when you are traveling all the time, i got to know the people who traveled with her. i feel like i got to know her pretty well. at the same time, i did not have the same sort of sources that i have now. whether that is a function of being at the times or just being in a more senior role. >> tonight at 8:00 eastern and pacific on c-span's q and a. communicators, republican senator from tennessee, marsha blackburn, talks about cyber security and data reach legislation. she is joined by john mackinnon, technology reporter for the wall street journal. >> as individuals become suggested -- subjected to
breaches, they have come to realize it is not if you have your data breached, it is when is your data going to be breached. having a federal standard and exercising some prevention. companies haveat to conduct that information. then, to inform consumers and set penalties for enforcement. those are appropriate steps that should be taken and a artist steps that are covered -- and they are the steps that are covered. >> monday night at 8:00 eastern on "the communicators," on c-span 2. host: our focus, canadian politics and canada's new prime minister. laura dawson, born in ontario,
canada. she is the director of the canada institute, wilson center. toastingixon in 1972, four month old justin trudeau, the son of than prime minister pierre trudeau. 43 years later, he is now the prime minister. guest: who knew nixon had such powers of forecasting predictions? host: explain justin trudeau's rise to power. thet: he is an icon in canadian landscape. his father was pierre trudeau, canada's longest-serving prime minister. pierre trudeau was a game changer for canada. he ushered canada into a modern international, trendy, cool world. he had a wife who was dancing at studio 54 with the rolling stones. she was 30 years his junior.
trudeau senior was a remarkable character. trudeau junior grew up in five our eyes. his first home was the prime minister residence in canada. we all watched this young man grow up. we thought it was interesting. thing. carter type of he disappeared from view only to return in 2000 to really catch attention. host: pierre trudeau serving as prime minister in the 1960's and 1970's. many refer to him as canada's john kennedy. guest: there are definitely parallels. canada does not do the legacy families. we don't have the bushes, the kennedys. it's surprising that we have this trudeau senior trudeau junior. there are definite parallels to john f. kennedy. at the same time, trudeau was more about establishing an identity for canada, bringing
canada into the modern age as a country that was open to immigration. ,hat was diverse, multicultural that had a lot less influence over personal behavior. i believe it was trudeau senior who said government has no is this in the bedroom of the nations -- bedrooms of the nation. he helped to change canadian identity. i think this new trudeau is having an effect on canadian identity. i think it is a reaction to the -- almost mean-spirited we had with stephen harper. host: it stephen harper and the conservatives concede early on that he and his party were going to lose? guest: no concession whatsoever. host: you could see a different tone in the campaign. guest: internally to tell they were hanging on with their fingernails. internally they knew that stephen harper was not well-liked.
there really was not a lot to take on the harper government at a policies level. his economic policies were pretty good. he got canada through an economic and financial crisis. he stared the ship of state pretty well. but at a personal level, he just wasn't well-liked. people were, i don't know, headed up to here with stephen harper, even the conservatives. the conservatives were in this position where their governance was pretty good. their powers, especially in alberta and saskatchewan, were especially strong. but at the same time, people were tired of stephen harper. justintrudeau -- host: to set axpected pragmatic, not partisan, course in canada. he spoke to reporters in ottawa. [video clip]
>> i indicated to mr. obama that i felt that it was important a candidate demonstrate a level of positive and gauge meant on the environmental file -- of engagement on the environmental file, on the international stage. i look forward to demonstrating that we have a canadian government now that understands that the way to build a strong economy is to protect and defend our environment. that was the general tone of the conversation we had. i think one of the things that has been a challenge in the relationship between canada and the united states is it has come in many cases, been focused on a single point of disagreement. a single potential point of disagreement. a single pipeline. and i made the point of saying much broader of the importance and the work we have to do
together on issues of shared interests and issues we perhaps have disagreements on. host: as you hear canada's new prime minister, what changes between our two countries? guest: first i am going to say what you see in that clip is a very restrained, button-down justin trudeau. which is not the justin trudeau we have seen to the campaign. you have seen him on the yoga floor, you have seen him kissing babies. so what you see in front of you is a very button-down statesmanlike presentation. host: mr. trudeau's associates insist he is pragmatic above all else. guest: that is very interesting. so, pragmatism is the one thing i, as a canadian, worry about what this new government because he has seemed to make a lot of promises to a lot of people. very first sort of
pollen -- sort of foreign policy speech. he called the canada-u.s. relationship not just important, but for canada definitional. so he really gets the important of the canada-u.s. relations, and they need to have a very engaged, very integrated, very collaborative relationship with the united states. i think unfortunately under harper, there was a lot of chest bumping, a lot of we won't take no for an answer. that may be important to get a particular interest across, but it wasn't comfortable. i don't think it was comfortable for the american interlocutors. around town, i hear a lot of people say we are glad that this new trudeau is back. we weren't comfortable with the previous posture of harbor. we really think we can work with
this guy. isn't he good-looking? can you tell us more about it? canada has never been more interesting than washington than it has been this week. left, nowanada turns a chance for justin trudeau and the liberals to see if they can run the canadian economy. full storyof story -- available online at wsj.com. (202) 748-0003 for canadians. our guest is laura dawson, director of the wilson international center. caller: hi. i just want to make the comment i am glad to do was elected. harper was not a good leader, in my opinion. canada really needs to drop that. it undermines the fight against global warming. it is one of the most dirty sources of oil on the planet,
and trudeau, as i understand it, has supported the keystone, which is troubling. i know he is really into the green movement. i am hoping canada moves in that direction. but i think that -- i was really upset the green party couldn't have got in because i think they are even better than trudeau on the environment. i would like your comment. trudeau has supported the keystone, so could you please comment on that? and don't you think that canada should drop the keystone? host: thank you, brian. we'll get a respond. guest: thank you for bringing up that issue, which really has been a touchstone for canada-u.s. relations. one ofstone pipeline is a bunch of pipelines that run between canada and united states. and i can't really argue the science and whether or not oil from canada's oilsands has a
greater affect on the ozone layer then oil extracted -- than oil extracted from other places, but i think to do was more pragmatic in his recognition that whatever the u.s. decides to do about the keystone pipeline is a matter of u.s. domestic politics. it is a matter of what the president and the state department and the people of the united states think about their energy and environmental future. it is not a slap in the face for canada. so while i think a majority of canadians support the -- the transportation of oil, the expectation of oil -- because that is the main thing of our economy -- a number of people of the recognize that this is a decision the united states has to make. host: a reference to richard nixon, when he predicted justin trudeau would become the next prime minister. a photograph of trudeau and his young wife holding young justin
trudeau, four months of age. though, because we carry the nixon tapes. and one of the nixon tapes, he is in a conversation with john conley and he refers to your trudeau as -- refers to year -- pierre trudeau as, quote, that sob. caller: with all respect to ms. dawson, i think her description of pierre trudeau is rather biased, and perhaps applies in some parts to eastern canada. in western canada, pierre trudeau is not a hero. i thought her description of our prime minister, harper, was also biased. many people throughout the world think canada was one of the best run economies.
and i think it was a bit unfair to summarily dispense with him in my view and many people's views. perhaps something like 30% of canadians -- [indiscernible] stephen harper was the best prime minister in our lifetime. so i just wanted to provide a bit of a different perspective. ms. dawson those not reflect a complete view of this election. the young trudeau is very bright and very probably confident, rather green in another sense, but i thought it was very unfair, ms. dawson, the way you characterized our former pierre trudeau and former stephen harper. guest: i am going to take another chance to bet that here and try to redirect -- chance at bat here and try to redirect those comments. i did say that his governance was ray strong.
he steered canada through a global financial crisis, and no one can take that away from him. i didn't say that pierre trudeau was the best prime minister canada ever had. he represented an important burning -- turning point. he really did put canada on the world stage. as somebody who was raised in alberta, i understand there is a lot of into the be towards that prime minister, especially towards the later stages. and that, you know, it was definitely time for a change. i also recognize the conservatives kept 99 seats in canada, which is no small thing. most of those seats are concentrated in alberta and saskatchewan. so it was a surprising victory, a surprising majority for -- for trudeau and the liberals, but that doesn't discount the important role the conservative
still play in canada. want to get more information and background on the life and career of justin trudeau, you can check it out online at cnn.com. we will go to john joining us from beaverton, oregon. good morning. caller: good morning, laura. i was originally born in halifax, nova scotia. guest: that is great. caller: i guess you could call me a blue nose or. guest: i definitely could. [laughter] caller: i had a question. we were talking about stephen harper's best run economics, in terms of steering canada through the economic crisis. but wasn't that done with a little bit of austerity way of economics? and wasn't there a little bit of game playing with, you know, how he was getting canada through the economics? i can: well, i will say --
tell you are from canada because you still say "about" like i do. i think stephen harper was really good at steering the canadian economy through the financial crisis. i'm still going to give him that. but was canada already on a pretty good track as a result of previous governance decisions? absolutely. one of the reasons canada did well was because we had very conservatively governed and managed banks. as you know, we only have a very small number of banks in canada and they play by very strict rules. so we didn't have the kind of withis with a different -- different times of financial products that the united states did. so harper's job was to steer. he didn't have to reinvent the financial and economic governance. host: what is a bluenoser?
guest: someone who comes from nova scotia. if you look on the back of the canadian dime, you'll see a beautiful sailing ship, called the bluenose. host: and this is from rick. the urban centers went with the liberal. guest: yes. absolutely. i think he represented a very younger, maybe hiper approach to governance. there were new voters who came out who did not can mount -- come out in previous elections. more young people came out. as i mentioned earlier, one of our previous callers thinks i am a cheerleader for justin trudeau. i think it is an important change for canada, but i'm not wholly convinced he is going to be able to do everything that his supporters believe he is going to be able to do. some people really think that he
is, you know, a panacea for everything in canada. the bureaucrats, the civil service expects he is going to be giving them the respect that they deserve that they never -- that they feel they didn't get from harper. they are going to bring back the -- [indiscernible] they are going to legalize marijuana. they are going to cut taxes for the poor, raise taxes on the rich. they are going to invest in infrastructure. they are going to start a more human rights focused foreign defense policy for canada. there is a lot of stuff on the trudeau table. and this is a relatively green government. they had 34 members of parliament in the last election, so they don't have a lot of experience as members of parliament or members of cabinet. host: from troy, montana, georgia is next to caller: yes.
-- next. caller: yes. how big of an impact did obama's organizers have in getting to know elected? guest: [laughter] canadians watched the obama of election very, very closely. they say it is like a telescope. you all watch us through a telescope from a distance and say, hey, how is it going up there? we watch you through that telescope reversed, so we looking in minute detail. we watch c-span every night. so we are really tuesday to what is going on in the u.s. canadians watched what happened with barack obama and the "yes we can" campaign. i think that canadians were really charged up by that sense that big changes were possible. that if you didn't like the status quo, you could get out there and knock on doors and change it. and no matter what party you
support in canada, i think that hope for a change and tomorrow can be a new day is a very important messages wherever you live. host: our guest is lauren dawson of the wilson center. we have a line for canadian 0003.ents at (202) 748-0003 fo they are stacked up at the u.s. border. that is where most of the population lives. if you pockets of north in cities like edmonton -- if you pockets up north in cities like edmonton -- a few pockets up north in cities like edmonton. host: let me ask you about the canadian currency. guest: as someone who really
took advantage of the shop border -- cross-border shopping, i liked it when the dollar was high. when the canadian dollar was just about par or even higher than the u.s. dollar. but as a canadian manufacturer, somebody who is trying to sell products to the united states, it is much better when our dollar is valued lower, when our dollar comes in at about $.75. which is where it is about now. it is challenging for us when the u.s. has an economic crisis because the canadian currency follows the u.s. like a roller coaster. except when you guys go down, we go out. so we kind of go in opposite directions. likeyes, canadians cross-border shopping. canadians love visiting the united states. almost every canadian visits of the united states. we, canadians, or like to get americans visiting canada more often. since 9/11 and the passport
requirements america has, tourism numbers have fallen off sharply. let's go to -- host: let's go to tony in sioux falls. caller: i would like to know if she thinks that they would be able to get those progressive programs done up there. will they be able to afford fixing everything and education? guest: yet. that is a great question, tony. as i said, they have a lot on their plate. i think they are going to have to be really selective. they are talking about doing deficit spending on stimulus programs because it is true, with the price of oil so low right now, the canadian economy has been hurting. so it really is important to find ways to prop people up on a temporary basis, but also to
give middle-class folks a bit of a break. as you probably know, canada is a little bit different in its social policy anyway. like it or not, i think they've got pretty good health care and that we have the universal health care. i've got pretty good education. pretty good opportunities for canadians. but trudeau is, i think, going to try to pull canada into the next century, into the next generation through investment in infrastructure, innovation, education, high tech. really trying to position canada for what the economy will look like in the future. i think he is looking at where the puck is going, not where the puck has been. host: and this is from stella. tell us about the queen's influence. guest: [laughter] well, the queen has a relatively limited influence on canadian
politics. the queen's representative is the governor general in canada, and the governor general is responsible for deciding whether or not there is sufficient support for the members of canada so or party in that we can open parliament. the governor general decides whether -- in consultation -- whether there is enough support for the prime minister's party to go ahead and govern. or if not, he decides to pull the plug and say, you guys go back, the parliament is not viable, go back and try this again. in a couple of areas, the opening and closing of parliament, the governor general, and therefore the queen, very important. but other times, the queen in canada is mostly a ceremonial figurehead. of herortance
relationship with europe during world war ii was a very big deal. my grandmother, my aunts and uncles, they really hold the queen in very high regard. the younger generation is not as attentive. host: and a comment on your earlier point about canadian politics, canadians are following america's lead, moving progressive. bravo, canada! you can send us a tweet, @cspanwj. the republican line, good morning. caller: good morning. host: you are on the air, go ahead. guest: hi, alex. caller: thank you. my question is, from my understanding, the canadian social security is scheduled to because of them investing money and investing the social security money properly versus the united states. our politicians use the social
security deposit as a piggy bank whenever they need money. and then they always cry that there is not enough money in social security. why don't they stop stealing from us? guest: [laughter] i can't comment on the u.s. social security system, but what i can comment on is canada, like the united states, has an aging population. all these baby boomers that we have, but we love them. i am close to being a baby boomer myself. they are all entering retirement. they are needing more support, more care, and they are also wanting the payouts for the investments that they have made into social security all of their lives. so that is the challenge for all of our governments. and the way that canada has been trying to do with that has been through immigration policy. we haven't had enough of our own young people, so you need to import some young people, import
some workers to support the social security system. canada has had a pretty open system of immigration and it has served as well, but the problem i think recently is that canada's doors are going open and close, open and close. sometimes we have things to learn from the u.s. about immigration, about managing social capital. so i think there is reason for our two countries to be talking about managing folks coming in from other countries. host: canada has a new government and a new prime minister. that is our topic with laura dawson. from arlington, virginia, good morning. caller: good morning. i am on the other line. i'm a canadian living in america, and i am probably a little bit older than your guest. historically, i remember some things that actually she is deceptive to your viewers. when justin's father was in office, our first care is a,
pierre trudeau was count -- prime minister when -- [indiscernible] -- found strangled in his own car by his own cross. and that is something that has not been a conversation in the current trudeau conversation. in terms of immigration, mr. trudeau was very much for open immigration, which actually changed canada. we had an important of immigrants from the -- import of immigrants from the philippines. many came over as domestics and nannies, and they formed unions, which has created a new impact that of america has yet to accept. our unions again to demand days off. i'm not saying that there is anything wrong with that, but i think it is important for your inst to be factually correct clarifying that she does not
speak for every canadian, nor is she enough of an expert to know much much -- what went on during my time. guest: you are quite right, i don't speak for every canadian. there is 34 million, more or less, canadians. which is more -- about the size of california. so canadians have also to different opinions and different lives. and i could never presume to speak for all of them. i do want to point out, human a good point with what we call the slq crisis in canada, when there were acts of domestic terrorism where there were explosions and where there were kidnappings. and this had to do with the independence movement in quebec. and pierre trudeau, i think, did a pretty good job of first of all having a conversation about the need for french and quebec
identity to become equal, to be not subservient to canada anymore. and we can see in justin trudeau syncretism, ash merger that reflects very much how that conversation has evolved in canada. we still, of course, have issues between french and english. one of the official parties of canada is a separatist party, but i think the difference between key or trudeau -- pierre trudeau's time and justin trudeau's time reflects canada. host: a quick question. caller: good morning. it doesn't surprise me that candidate is going to the i think the whole world is going to the left and a bunch of crepe, like same-sex marriage. i am 72 years old and i have
never seen so much cap in my life. -- crap in my life. thanks, bye. guest: you are in minnesota so you are practically canadian. these are a couple of important distinctions. also relative to some slight differences. the liberal party of canada is not a left leaning party in the sort of u.s. definition of left leaning. it is really much more a centrist party on its economic and rights issues. private property, individual rights. where it is more what americans would call liberal, or left leaning, would be in terms of social issues. rights, of individual religious rights, and same-sex marriage, and no discrimination on the basis of various things that one could discriminate about.
so the liberal party and canada is socially liberal, but fairly centrist on other issues. host: you did touch on this earlier, but a tweet that says, will canada's legalization make it on this program? trudeau did say- he wanted to legalize marijuana. guest: marijuana has been functionally decriminalized and most restrictions in canada for years and years. folks are just not prosecuted for carrying small amounts of marijuana in canada. so what this would do would be to sort of formalized the practices that have already been going on. but what is really funny is i remember 10, 15 years ago, the policy around marijuana in canada was, like, well, we are going to tolerate marijuana use, but we do want to go on front and legalize it because the
americans would get really upset about that. and it would be seen as a slippery slope to worse things, so we do want to irritate the americans. but then you guys got ahead of us. so this is sort of canada catching up formally what it has probably already been doing informally. host: laura dawson, the director for the wilson center, a native of canada. thank you very much for adding your perspective. guest: thank you. this was fun. host: we will continue the conversation at a 7:00 a.m. eastern time, 4:00 for those of you on the west coast, as we get underway tomorrow morning. the debt limit is the big issues lawmakers will be taking up this week, along with the transportation bill. macguineas.ess -- and we will talk about efforts
to reform the criminal justice system. the budget focus on debate and military weapons programs. that is tomorrow morning at 7:00 a.m. eastern time. a reminder, "american history reagan in iowa. the 1968 elections. you can check it out online. thank you for joining us on this sunday. hope you enjoy the rest of your weekend. "newsmakers" is next. have a great weekend. [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] announcer: coming up this morning on c-span, and look at the state of funding for highway and transportation projects with congressman peter defazio of
oregon. he is the top democrat on the house transportation and infrastructure committee. that is followed by a discussion on the syrian refugee conference and global response. and at noon, we will re-air the second half of former secretary of state hillary clinton's testimony before the house benghazi committee this past week. our guest on "newsmakers" this week is congressman peter defazio. the committee this week successfully passed out a bipartisan piece of legislation, a six-year highway funding bill. he is here to tell us more about it. let me introduce our to reporters. heather caygle covers transportation for "politico," and billy house is with "bloomberg." ms. caygle: yesterday you guys di