Skip to main content

tv   Washington Journal  CSPAN  January 19, 2016 7:00am-10:01am EST

7:00 am
on recruiting a progressive donors for elections. and it 9:15 a.m., ryan lovelace looks at donald trump's speech at liberty university. ♪ >> the new york clinton campaign is putting 90% of its resources into winning iowa. into the headquarter operations in new york. in the united kingdom a three-our debate with no ban on keeping him out of the united kingdom. you can see that debate on january 18. his state of the union where he announced his moonshot effort of curing cancer.
7:01 am
we will look at details on the administration on cancer. we want to hear from you about what you think the government should be doing on fighting cancer, and the efforts should employee to do so. in the eastern and central time zones, (202) 748-8000. mountain and pacific, (202) 748-8001. cancer survivors, (202) 748-8002 . you can post on our social media channels, our twitter page, @cspanwj.-8001 -- let's take you back to the speech with the president made the announcement either white house on cancer. here's what he had to say. [video clip] last year vice
7:02 am
president biden said the new moonshot should be curing cancer. the strongest resources they have had in over a decade. [applause] tonight, i am announcing a new national effort to get it done. because he is gone to the mat for many of us over the last 40 years, i am putting joe in charge of mission control. for the loved ones we have all lost. for the families we can still save. let's make america the country that cures cancer once and for all. from thet is a little president from the state of the
7:03 am
union speech, giving some details as far as joe biden's role in fighting cancer. want to get your thoughts on the initiative and the overall topic of cancer. (202) 748-8000 in the eastern and central time zones. (202) 748-8001 for the mountain and pacific time zones. (202) 748-8002 if you are a cancer survivor. you composed on our facebook and twitter page. off of twitter, this is added to the conversation saying a cure for cancer will have to be a worldwide effort and cooperation between rival pharmaceutical companies. the u.s. cannot do it alone. you can make your thoughts known . on the white house website, some details on the effort. this is a memo from the vice president's office saying several cutting-edge efforts such as there be, and combination therapy could be revolutionary with renovations research advances and
7:04 am
improved care delivery. the results are trapped in silos preventing faster progress and reach to parents. i plan to do two things, says the vice president, increasing .esources, private and public and one of the goals he has is to break down silos to bring cancer fighters together to work together, and share information in an effort that would and cancer as we know it. the numbers will be on your screen. eastern and central, (202) 748-8000. and pacific, (202) 748-8001. .ancer survivors (202) 748-8002 anthony, good morning. what you think about the effort by the white house? futile.i think it is
7:05 am
it has been publicized. i learned the only cure for cancer is your own immune system. on c-span there was a hearing on politicians on cancer. called "theshow emperor of disease: cancer." you heard about how different chemo's, chemicals, and radiation were used. at the end of the three-our program, they admitted the only cure for cancer is your own immune system. which i learned 12 years ago. i have no cancer. they took me to the va hospital and i'm fine. the only cure for cancer is your own immune system. anthony, with that in
7:06 am
mind, the white house and government cannot do anything to further that research? laughing.cuse me for pill that has lots of side effects. it is not necessary. the only thing that will cure your cancer is your own immune system. host: let's hear from charles in new york. you are next. what do you think? caller: i believe the only thing we can do is legalize medical cocaine. int: next to john california. a cancer survivor. hello. good morning. thank you for c-span. i just started treatment for cancer. i do not know what it will take
7:07 am
to create a treatment to cure cancer, but i applaud obama's as importante it as the apollo moonshot. if i did not have obamacare, i could not get treatment. i would not have qualified. i have a pre-existing condition. got my gold marker to have radiation for my prostate cancer. i would not have had that. the republican candidates who repeal obama to care, you cannot do that to the american public. if you are going to do that, you have to replace it with affordable health care. that is what obamacare is. host: aside from the affordable care act, what would you tell the government as far as things
7:08 am
to look for in finding a cure for cancer? caller: a broader scope of investigation, perhaps. effort, theworld u.s. cannot do it alone -- the e-mail that was sent over. obviously, that is important. working with everybody on this thing. not putting money first, but results first. are dropping like flies with this stuff, you know? ust: that is john, giving his view. the cost could reach $156 billion in 2020. in 2015 on the there were one 1.7 million new cases diagnosed.
7:09 am
in 2014, 16,000 children were diagnosed. the highest mortality rate is among african-american men. people living beyond the diagnosis will rise from 14 million to 19 million by 2024. approximately 405 men and women will be diagnosed during their lifetime. those are some statistics from the national institute of health . if you want to give your thoughts on the efforts by the administration to cure cancer, (202) 748-8000 for the eastern and central. mountain and pacific, (202) 748-8001. cancer survivors, (202) 748-8002 . the vice president, shortly after receiving this mission from the president, spoke at the university of pennsylvania -- kicking off the moonshot effort. here is a little of his thoughts on what the administration plans
7:10 am
on doing. [video clip] you, ande so many of may be members of the press and their families -- my family has been touched by cancer. some family members have survived, some have not. my mother, god love her, had an expression. joey, a little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing. are engaged with someone you love who is fighting for their life, you become acquainted with at least the parameters of what they are dealing with. do everything in your power to be able to learn as much about the fight that is underway as you can.
7:11 am
it clear. to make when the president said up, what , i indicated in the rose garden when i announced that i would not run for president, had i been president, one thing i would have devoted my administration to is a .anhattan project, a moonshot over my exposure of two years, fighting, i became acquainted enough with the brilliant minds around this table and others to realize that we are on the cusp of phenomenal breakthroughs. not your medical
7:12 am
terms, we are at an inflection point in the fight against cancer. host: robert, what do you think? caller: good morning. thank you for giving me the opportunity. i was inrs back, marine biology and marine science. chosen with a special program with the coast guard. we went to the air force base. it was unbeknownst to us that we tdd andosed to radioactive waste. a few years later, i came down the different types of tumors. i went through different treatments. new mexico,from oklahoma, and back to d.c. i found out later there were
7:13 am
three major methodologies of medicine. what we have nowadays is called the, -- home i went to an alternative treatment. the alternative treatments did not work the way i thought. later on, i decided to get back into the naturalpathic and homeopathic. it took seven years through exposure to chemicals. nowadays, our environment is so many differentso evidences the rest upon us, we don't know what to do. host: as far as the efforts the administration wants to make, they do you advise them to pursue homeopathy?
7:14 am
caller: universal health care should include all three so a person can make their own choice. if you do not allow too much on doctor-- if i go to a and a particular of the dollar g seems to invasive -- too invas ive, there should be an alternative to what i am being treated for. i should be able to try a more compassionate methodology of treatment. another cancer survivor joins us on the phone. hello. caller: how are you? host: fine, thank you. caller: i want to say that i worked at a nuclear power plant in oak ridge. i got cancer in my nasal cavity
7:15 am
brain. my thank god to the wonderful people in vanderbilt in nashville. they have come so far. the best hospital i know. my father and grandfather died of it. both of them worked at oak ridge powerplant. i mean that oak ridge nuclear facility, i'm sorry. what i don't understand is the patriot act. i go to every meeting. they're supposed to give you so much if you catch cancer from that place. host: do think the better effort is made from private industry, research hospitals like vanderbilt? is that a better way to look at
7:16 am
curing cancer and a government effort? caller: absolutely. the government isn't going to do anything. your private people are wonderful. vanderbilt is a great university. the survival rate is astronomical. look at the statistics. host: darrell, you are next. hello. you are on, go ahead. caller: yes. can you hear me? host: you are on the air. go ahead. i was watching a show. this lady was a doctor. the team that they are put together has already found human cells touchedned by certain types of cancer. retraining them and sending them
7:17 am
back in to take care of it. cured 2 typesady of cancer, and they are working on more. have 2 typeshey already fixed. host: we are asking you about the effort by the administration to work on cancer. the moonshot project as it has been described by the obama administration. (202) 748-8000 for the eastern and central time zones. (202) 748-8001 for the mountain and pacific time zones. (202) 748-8002 for cancer survivors in the audience. from the "business insider" publication, an article saying there is a worrisome problem "moonshot for
7:18 am
cancer" goal. that it is a noble goal, but over-optimistic. few it is not linked to a specific identifiable genes. of a wholeesult bunch of mutations that are consistently changing and evolving -- becoming resistant to our drugs. genetics is not the only cure. environmental and behavioral factors matter. she goes on to say in this piece , adding that it does not mean doctors and scientists aren't progress, but cancer will probably never completely disappear -- and that is a reality of which we should be aware. morning.ood i think it is wonderful the president put out this initiative. i hope between the private sector and government that they
7:19 am
can make some progress. whether or not they will be able to be 100% successful, i don't know about that. my point, one thing they should address is some of the causes of .ancer -- the origins i think environmental factors like pollution in the air, water, and soil should be taken into consideration. what i would like to see is that they would address environmental pollution. i think that is underestimated on how much it actually does cause cancer across the country. i live in maryland. maryland has the highest cancer .ate my next-door neighbor's 18-year-old son was diagnosed with precancerous polyps in his colon. one thing they talked about was filtering drinking water.
7:20 am
i hope that that could be a number one priority for the administration. host: a cancer survivor. good morning. caller: ima cancer survivor. i had prostate. i went through the treatment program. i am all clear. -- about 10 years there is a telethon. .hey spent all that money they made a lot of money off this stuff. they were on tv talking about it or they found a cure for it here they took him off the air. it was gone and over with. about it hear nothing no more. they made a lot of money and shut it down to keep the american people stupid and ignorant. around --uff going
7:21 am
the truth is check out the jerry lewis telethon on tv. they shut it down. that's all i have to say. host: go ahead, you are on. caller: ima cancer survivor. quite a few years ago i had cancer. the hospital i am associated from they had lectures different doctors. i went to all of them -- talking about cancer. one of the people in the audience stood up and said, if i go through radiation, how much does that improve my chances it won't return? the doctor says, we don't know. maybe nothing. we don't know if it does anything at all. maybe a couple of years after that, i don't know if it is only
7:22 am
but theyd or europe, did studies and discovered the people that did have radiation, the people that did not have radiation, they got the same results. what you think about the government's efforts on the idea of stopping or curing cancer? caller: it is our policy to throw money. do seem to come up with anything on their own -- if you are getting paid a lot of something,scover when you discover it your money will be stopped. why do you want to find a cure? host: here is larry. good morning, go ahead. years: go back to the
7:23 am
1910 to 1920 and look up a doctor named royal raymond ryfe who is caring cancer using tesla 's technology. the american medical association threatened to throw him out of the medical association. all of you people with computers, look up royal raymond .yfe you'll find out it was being done without surgeries, radiation, or anything. times looksw york at the clinton campaign leading up to the iowa caucuses. the headline is clinton get set against bernie sanders. ist bernie sanders' campaign
7:24 am
chipping away at clinton's once formidable lead. even though the clinton team has fought to convey a our national operation, they have invested much of its resources in the february 1 caucuses, hoping a mr.ory could marginalize sanders and set ms. clinton on the path to the nomination. of the campaign's resources are now split between iowa and brooklyn headquarters. the campaign denied that figure. side,g at mr. sanders' saying that he has closed the gap with ms. clinton in iowa and is leading in new hampshire. he has struck a chord with the invoking bothe by
7:25 am
their aspirations and disappointments that the obama years have not delivered what they had hoped. people are tired of being dominated a big money interests. bernie sanders expresses that in noty that we need to be afraid of bold ideas. one of the boldest of those is a health care system that sanders describes is better for all. liberals believe the only way that is the way we will reach their chairs to goal of medical coverage for everyone. survivor. what you think about the efforts iv administration? caller: -- by the administration. caller: i appreciated that speech more when rob lowe gave it on "the west wing." i have a question to ask america. how many times has someone why
7:26 am
to you before you call them a liar and refused to listen anymore? host: what is wrong with this effort, as you see it? caller: it is typical. he is running his mouth. when you have to take lines from "theay night lights" and west wing" to inspire someone, he is a plagiarist. host: good morning, go ahead. caller: good morning. i would like to point out one thing. i am not a cancer survivor, but my wife is. she had high skins lymphoma. livere fortunate enough to 35-miles from rochester clinic. she had a wonderful doctor and team of people that truly cared. i've met a lot of people fighting for their lives.
7:27 am
have had every kind of cancer you can think of. a lot of these people are in the same room on the days they get their chemotherapy. i understand what it is like when you might lose someone you might love, and i cannot imagine what it is like for them. i applaud any effort, by the government or anyone else, to go after cancer. if they are truly serious they have to go against companies like monsanto, who has a lot of corporate people who used to be in congress and the senate. country. farm we have one of the highest cancer rates. when you spread millions of gallons of roundup into the farm fields, that has to go somewhere. it does not dissipate.
7:28 am
now they have come out with the fact that these chemicals go into our aquifers. people are drinking and eating them. if it goes into the ground, it will go into the food that gets its nutrients from the soil. we are feeding cancer to people. we have to recognize that cared we have to go after it at that level, to start with. i think that is extremely important. if anyone is serious about this, they will come up with programs for farmers to make it worth their while so we are not poisoning our population. it goes into aquifers, the rivers, the animals that eat the food supply. we are eating cancer. host: talking about the environmental efforts. one of the people joining the on stage for the
7:29 am
event at the university of pennsylvania was the nih dr. francis collins. he talked about the areas that look the most promising. [video clip] >> having had the privilege of leading the human genome project, i cannot help but mention that one. it is the case since cancer is a disease of the genome, and we have the technology to read out why a good cell goes bad. we have been recently able to do that at scale. is the area that shows the most remarkable promise at the present time. the people credit to at this table, institution, and others. host: you are next, good morning. caller: good morning. good morning. i'm pleased to hear francis collins is on board. one of my objections has been
7:30 am
removed. cancer is not one disease. it is a number of diseases. for many years, tuberculosis was lumped into cancer until the causative agent, which was a small micro was identified -- a small microbe was identified. my father was diagnosed and it was -- it ended up that my father had some physicians came in and he explained to him that there are things that you eat that will change the results of your test and give you a false positive. the doctors never did that, so i think we are looking at a lot of different issues in the scientists, especially people like francis collis -- francis collins. he is an honest man. is ahead of this,
7:31 am
but i feel that the public's right, it is a combination of our individual and genetic -- genetics, the environment and environmental causes that we have yet to identify, thank you for giving me this opportunity to speak. host: in 2014, the polling company asked americans about the worst diseases facing americans at the time. 40% said it was cancer as far as the worst diseases facing the u.s., public by heart disease, diabetes, alzheimer's, and other types of diseases. that was done in 2014. we are talking about what it will take to cure cancer. this is because the white house announcement of their efforts. for the eastern and central time zones, (202) 748-8001 for the non-eastern and
7:32 am
central time zones and cancer survivors, (202) 748-8002. cancer survivor from georgia, go ahead. caller: i am not a cancer survivor, i currently have it and i want to say that i don't the doctors are really in it for the money because my to ar actually sent me university in atlanta and all i can say is the doctors are just phenomenal. even though they can't cure my cancer, i went through chemo and all that stuff, i sure feel better today than i did when i went to them. it is about the research and i think that they are doing everything they can and that is the department i go
7:33 am
to is cancer and i want to say kudos to all the doctors. they really are trying to find a cure. eat,talked about what we it will take a long time to turn -- that around, but there is there are people out there who are trying to cure this. i'm a first-time caller, thank you for letting me in and that is what i have to say. host: linda from connecticut. is to: what a pleasure it follow the previous caller because when i was going to talk about -- touch upon was that the government has funded through grants in research, universities , many of the studies and successful research for cancer and i applaud a targeted effort for reasons exactly like the caller before me. childhood leukemia as a 98% cure
7:34 am
rate -- has a 98% cure rate. these are because of universities and grants of the government has put forward. i applaud any effort. host: a follow-up story in the washington post. the man held by a run and talked about the conditions he faced welfare, saying it was on monday that he described months of extraordinarily limited human interaction. rooms put into a 15 by 20 with no cost or mattresses. -- orld walk to -- cots ores -- no mattresses. he said he was held by their powerful revolutionary guard corps, a military force aligned
7:35 am
with hard-liners in the government that answers to the and askedader independently of the presidency. health suffered, he was taken to facilities run by the revolutionary guard. iran plans to put oil into the market. a market glut is expected to result of that. that is the story this morning, saying that the organization what are the deputy oil manager saying they were ready to add 500,000 barrels a day to its output. iraniansysts doubt the can produce as much of a promise. -- as much as they promised.
7:36 am
harold is in alabama, a cancer survivor. caller: good morning. think it was a very caring and nice of the president -- of the -- i have ant to incer survivor from 2014 and think that the gastric bypass years ago,d -- technology change, i had an god that ind i thank am still around.
7:37 am
i don't think the attitude should be that way for someone who is sick like we are, i did not ask for this cancer but i have to deal with it on a day-to-day basis. i appreciate anybody. i don't think doctors are trying to make money, i think we are just trying to make a cure. andrked with a lot of them i had a bacteria and my stomach and i don't know how long it was there, but i was still passing blood and they did not know what the situation was. haven't -- that we that we have someone doing enough for us. host: another oil story, talking about if prices -- oil prices in was as low as it $.47 a gallon in michigan, but saying that gas prices have trended steadily downward to
7:38 am
$1.89 a gallon in a nationwide survey. the national crude oil price dropped below $30 a barrel. not every state sharing the low prices, the cost of regular gas was $2.63 in hawaii, $2.34 in alaska. california is where we hear from next. men well joins us on the phone joins usll -- manuel on the phone. i applaud the president and the vice president for their balance effort to try -- for their valiant effort. 70's when wen the were reporting the rate of at that time, they
7:39 am
were saying something in terms of maybe one out of every hundred people would get cancer in their lifetime. that was then reduced down to one in every 50 and so on and so forth and we got down to one out of 10 and now one in two of every family. i had an experience with a family member that has died from cancer, my father had colon cancer. i know there was information out there regarding the pesticides that were being heavily used in the 50's on the crops to increase the food production. thats like 20 years later there was a spike in cancer, so i'm sure there is enough research out there that has been done to identify some of these toxins in the air, including the direct consumption of it. ist has not been identified
7:40 am
some of the products we use on a daily basis, like deodorants and things like that that we directly put on our bodies. with that said, i think there should be more education regarding what is in these products, the toxins and the danger, just equally as we do with cigarette warnings, that the use of these products can poisons andincrease toxins in your blood. from twitter, this is steve saying there is no one cure and no one is holding it back, we need a thorough understanding of cell biology. morning, and when christensen said the medical community is starting to make inroads for curing cancer, all we need is a continued effort of support -- to support research funding. walter up next from louisiana. caller: good morning.
7:41 am
thank you to c-span for giving us this platform. multi-myeloma, a form of line or bone cancer. that withctor tell me this, whenever i die or wherever i died, i would still have it. i give thanks to god because i was diagnosed in 2009 in i have been at various stages of cancer free mostly because of the stem cell transplants. i attend anderson and they do my follow-up and it is unbelievable the number of people you run varying forms of
7:42 am
cancer and i don't think it is a one thing or one type of cancer cure that is ever going to be developed. host: with that in mind, what do you think of this new effort? i think it is ambitious and will result in some cures, but i don't think there will ever be a silver bullet are all forms of cancer. differentn too many faces. i talked to a lot of people. conversations -- everybody is there for cancer. the subject is always cancer and what type they have. some people survive a long time and i met a lot of people who had just given up. they are not willing to continue the treatments because it is
7:43 am
harsh. it takes a toll on your body and your stamina. host: that is walter in new orleans. from wisconsin, this is ronnie. caller: good morning, thank you for c-span. i don't think $400 million is enough. cancer, thet of the genome testing and stuff, people have to fight for it and it's expensive and insurance companies won't cover it. i am a cancer survivor twice i have had some rare cancers, but certainly no genome testing. i think these pharmaceutical companies own that and that the regular, common person won't get the treatment they should.
7:44 am
the president talking about sharing this -- curing this. it is many different kinds of things. it is a multiplicity of different things and without the genome testing and with insurance companies denying that testing, you -- the regular person won't get the help. host: the front page of the washington post this morning takes a look at the deportation efforts recently announced by the obama administration, the headline on the story, obama faces iroe. the white house is working to quell outrage with latino leaders who feel they were betrayed by a series of launched by the
7:45 am
administration, mostly against women and children from central america. vice president biden travel to the region last week to meet with presidents of honduras, guatemala and el salvador. the decision to launch the race has reopen old wounds between the white house and many latino communities and has compromised the president's efforts to create an election year contrast with republicans on immigration. the operations are aimed at sifting -- sending a strong message of the terrance against central american families -- of deterrence against central american families. -- one moreic on call on this topic of curing theer, and let of announcement by these recent efforts by the administration, amy in virginia. caller: hello. for taking my
7:46 am
that there are so many different types of cancers caused by so many different things, i really don't think there is any way you could cure all types. the current attempt to cure cancer is especially good for genetic cancers such as colon.and one thing that needs to be looked into is the causes of cancer such as pesticides, diet, obesity. the chemical companies make millions of dollars in profits and its well-known that many of the pesticides are linked to all types of cancers. the rates of cancer among agricultural workers is much more than people who do not work in agriculture and also people that live around these farms that are sprayed with all these
7:47 am
pesticides have much higher rates of cancer than people who don't. host: that is amy, the last call on this topic. weing up on the program, will hear from american enterprises, their expert to talk about why the labor force participation rate, how many people in the u.s. are working, is low and how to get more people into the work or's. democracysident of alliance and partnership a liberal donors across the country, will join us to talk about the role his group host to play in the campaign of 2016. washington journal continues after this. ♪ >> as i've been watching the campaign this year, it is interesting to look at the
7:48 am
republicans more than the democratic side and that may have something to do with why there is more interest in these candidates and their boasts. non-dictionght, a -- a nonfiction book credit discusses the 2016 president of candidates. >> everyone of them has interesting stories in their lives and politicians are so single-minded in this pursuit of power and ideology. memoirs, put out these they are sanitized, they are vetted. they are there for a minimum controversy. >> sunday night on c-span skew and day. c-span's q and a. year, our students and
7:49 am
documentary contest asks students to tell us what issues they want to hear from the presidential candidate. theow c-span's road to white house coverage and get all the details about our students have contest at >> washington journal continues. host: our first guest of the morning is robert dorn, with the american enterprise institute. good morning to you. guest: good morning. host: we invited you want because a recent piece of years take a look at the labor participation rate of the headlight says -- but the headline says there is a hidden problem, tell us about it. guest: the unemployment rate has been dropping, but the number of people outside the labor force who are not counted in that unemployment rate has also been rising. labor force participation, the number of
7:50 am
people who are actually in the labor force. it is a distressing problem that is masked by the fact that the unemployment rate has dropped down to 5%. host: what is the labor participation rate? guest: it is the percentage of all people who could work who are actually looking for work or are employed. it is the number of people in the labor force, looking for work or are working and it's now at about 52% and in past years it was closer to 70%. the percentage of people not working is a significant drag on the american economy. rate?what happened to the guest: there are all kinds of rape -- reasons and one is the aging of the american population, among working age populations, it is dropping and some of it might be due to education, people are staying in school longer but i think it has ouro to the extent to which
7:51 am
welfare programs are not encouraging looking for work as strongly as it could. when you apply for public assistance, there is not an automatic referral to public work programs. there might not be a requirement to work. neither does the medicaid program, the other back at happened to public assistance is people feel more comfortable or that the gap between what they can have a government welfare programs and what they can earn make it narrow in than to say they are fine at home until they find that perfect job. is ok, sometimes but often, it is a problem because the extent to which people are in work and working, they are generally better off. host: these programs you describe seem to be more work replacements that work support. can use -- can you expand on that? focus on had a strong supplementing full-time work
7:52 am
with public assistance that could make wages go further, that was a good idea. thosemes, as we promote programs and made them easier to get on, it turned out to be work replacement, so an increasing were sick --ple were coming in and saying they had no earnings but they still wanted benefits. there was no effort on our part and i have some guilt about this, the former welfare commissioner, that we weren't doing enough to help people get into employment. host: you served in the bloomberg administration. guest: that is right. we ran the public welfare program and the food stamp program and i believe in arms of public assistance that can supplement low wages and help them go further and help people stay in work and make work pay, but i don't believe in replacing work and making people feel as if they don't have to work or are working because they are more likely to be poor and well off and they are still come to
7:53 am
degrade. things go in a bad direction for families and communities. host: as much of the time spent in skills, training, education and classroom scenarios or are they actually looking for jobs? guest: some of these programs don't have either. some of them are transactional, they find out what your income is, then they get you the benefits you are seeking, then you are on your own until you come back in for certification. that is a problem, i would have -- i would rather have programs that will help you get assistance but also hope you get a job. our guest is with us to talk about the labor participation rate, programs that supplement work. and his concerns if you want to ask questions, (202) 748-8000 for democrats. (202) 748-8001 four republicans. (202) 748-8002 for independents.
7:54 am
if you was a tell us about your experiences -- if you want to tell us about your experiences, (202) 748-8003 is the number you can call. the president spoke about the economy and the work for dissipation rate at the state of the union. i want to play a little bit of what he said. >> let the start with the economy and a basic fact. the united states of america, right now has the strongest, most durable economy in the world. [applause] we are in the middle of the longest streak of private-sector job creation in history. [applause] more than 14 million new jobs,
7:55 am
the strongest two years of job growth since the 1990's, unemployment rate cut in half. auto industry just had its best year, ever. [applause] that is part of a manufacturing surge that created nearly 500,000 new jobs in the past six years. we get all of this while cutting deficits by almost three quarters. [applause] anyone claiming that america's economy is in decline is peddling fiction. [applause] , and the reason that a lot of americans feel anxious, is that the economy has
7:56 am
been changing in profound ways. changes that started long before the great recession hit. changes that have not let up. today, technology does not just replace jobs on the assembly line. any job where work can be automated. companies in the global economy can locate anywhere and they face tougher competition. as a result, workers have less leverage for a raise. companies have less loyalty to their communities and more and more wealth and income is concentrated at the very top. host: a painting of the economy, talking about how technology could affect jobs. what would you take as far as workers. guest: he did not talk about how there are 8 million fewer workers.
7:57 am
he ignored that issue, that is why i call it a hidden issue. a lot of people are not working on the sidelines and that is a problem for the american economy. host: before we go to calls, one of the things you draw contrast to is how we deal with worker programs in the u.s. and how the u.k. deals with it. you say with the u.k. programs, you see more people getting back into work. focus of the camera administration has been much more on reforming welfare programs so that they push people into work. whererease the extent to they make reviews of disability insurance, a require job search for public assistance in a much more aggressive way. their entire rhetoric from the prime minister to the chief administrator is focused on employer -- employment and not on entitlement. my view is going back to the book administration, there was more of a focus on getting
7:58 am
people signed up and not enough on employment. i think that is a problem, not because i want to hurt people but because people are better off if they are working and program should be more focused on employment. host: what are the charts included shows the trending downward of at least participation rates. guest: that is a shocking chart. the blue line is the u.k. and a labor force dissipation is going up while the u.s. rate is dropping starkly. one of the causes is that -- one of the causes of that, i think is a different approach on welfare. robert -- host: robert doran, our guest from aei. our guest,with republican line. caller: good morning. i just want to ask a few
7:59 am
questions. what do you think we should do to get the labor participation going up? my personal idea is that i think , and i'm tax the rich a lifelong republican, but we should definitely tax the rich, take the money and give it to the poor and we should do this and pay them to go to work. if the rich don't want to pay the taxes, we should expel them from the u.s. policymy principle of recommendation is public assistance programs that we extend a greater focus on women placement, helping people get into work and that means that states are required to much more aggressively engage applicants or recipients in job training, job search and job places -- job placement and activity. that will help us get more people into work. that is the number one thing i think is important and in some
8:00 am
of our programs that i think are lower than what i call barriers to assistance, if someone can get on assistance and not be engaged by a caseworker, for a long period of time and that is not helping the person we are trying to that is my number one. when it comes to the rich, tax policy is not my expertise. i am a. i'm concerned the extent to which businesses are able to grow and expand. startups, new businesses formed, has dropped thanss than -- less 400,000. that is significant. we have got to get people confident about the business environment. onnumber one focus is welfare programs and how we can make them more focused on helping them get earnings, which is, and jobs.
8:01 am
houston, texas. independent line. caller: good morning. king's came off of dr. holiday. he had a war on poverty. he was helping the sanitation workers get their wages up. if we were to pick up where he left off and give a $15 minimum raise that up, you would be able to take care of a lot of people have where to decide whether to be on welfare because of day care and uper things, able to match with eight dollars an hour, working in poverty type of situation, welfare benefits because the job is not able to sustain. would say those entitlements, if america would stop spending so much on military, cut social
8:02 am
services. the pentagon money and we take from the poor, we did not even get social security raise this year. obama has done this three times since eating in office. that is what we are doing. it is not a noble thing he is doing. you and obama, taking care of the poor. i appreciate the call and i agree concern and focus on the lowest among us is one of the most important objects of public. about publicy policy. i'm a little concerned about raising the minimum wage to the extent you say. skilled aree low bound to lose jobs.
8:03 am
are the most dependent on those jobs. recent studies came out showing it is a significant impact on low skill workers when minimum wages rise. we have to be careful about imposing additional burdens on employers that make them less likely to hire people who really need employment. that would be my answer on minimum wage. an awful lot on social policy in the united states, especially on medicaid. it all goes to the health care industry. we can find savings there that we can use more focus on helping training, employment, and assistants to help those in poverty move up and out of poverty and into the middle-class. host: from maryland, republican line. caller: good morning. how does the government know that people have given up looking for work? guest: good question.
8:04 am
it is the results of surveys. annually or periodically, people call and ask. if they answer those questions to the extent they are not looking and not working, they are considered out of the labor force. it is all about government surveys of individuals, that they do all the time, asking people what is happening with them and the labor market. our guests was -- department of social services under mayor mike bloomberg. also served as the commission of new york state temporary and disability assistance from 2003-2006. robert doar joining us. disabilities. guest: the disabilities program over many years has grown dramatically as ashley among men over the ages of 45. especially among men over the
8:05 am
age of 45. there is no effort made to reengage and reassess people. , i wantho are disabled to help them and support them. but there are levels. the extent we have taken people out of the labor force who and isse could be in it, making no effort to bring them back, that is a serious problem. also difficult because politically, it is not easy to change. a lot of anger and turmoil. it is a significant contributor to the problem and something we need to tackle as a country. we ran a program that said two people who had a fiscal -- what you can do, and what you might be able to do, and find
8:06 am
the right spot between assistance or with regard to your disability, and work, that would really allow you a greater sense of your own well-being. -- : there is never enough staff? .uest: i have concerns state and local and not-for-profit entities could do that in a more effective way. we do in many other welfare programs. i think there could be a pushing down of the engagement responsibility away from the federal government, including couldr-profit's, that engage people in a way to but you have to change the rules so people are allowed to work and that we are also asking people the extent to which we can see whether their disability prevents them from doing any kind of work. host: is there a line you draw as to which disabilities are covered in which are not? guest: there is a line which has
8:07 am
moved quite far to the extent to which we are not alone a lot of people who might be able to work to work. the rules that prevent them from working and we do not engage them. we do not ask people. i'm not sure it should be done by the federal government. set aside a line for those of you who have stopped looking for a job. -- ron in brooklyn, maryland, independent line. licensed'm a electrician. i have been in the industry for over 20 years. i have probably traveled to the united states extensively in regards to all of the bubbles going on from military spending to the dot com industry, ethanol plants, across the country. i have seen amazing rings in the
8:08 am
industry. it is getting to the point that wages, in just the industry, is starting to change. i was able to maintain a household 20 years ago at a certain pay rate. as you go through, you are supposed to get license in order to move forward. what is happening is i am seeing the wages at the top end, i am 47, and the wages for a kid coming into the industry at 22 or 20 three, there is no difference. a person has more responsibilities as he gets older. more children, households, cars, insurance, whereas a younger kid responsibilities. the wages have stagnated. a kid will be making $20 or whatever it is and then expect an older guy to pay $22 an hour. the industry is also being replaced with temporary agencies.
8:09 am
temporarythrough a the, you lose all your benefits and do not get a 401(k) plan or medical insurance. you do not have vacation or holiday pay. the paychecksday, that's. the industry itself has been terrible. we will let our guest respond. those are very good questions and there is truth to that. -- haveve state stagnated in certain parts of the economy and it is difficult. challenging a little bit of rhetoric we show with the president of the united states, i do not inc. things are really that great out there in the general economy and part of the middle-classause wages are not rising. i have to be honest and tell you i do not know what the answer is. i definitely believe one answer is not that we run public assistance programs that do not
8:10 am
engage people in getting into employment. than the benefits are still very low and you will not be able to support a family. and the longer you are out of the more your skills and ability to work become undermined. i completely agree there are policies and issues and problems out there in the blue-collar world of wages in the united case. and i think it would be nice if our businesses and our road could grow. i do not think the answer to the problem is caller just gave it is more public assistance programs that do not encourage people to work. charlotte, knoxville, tennessee, independent line. caller: how is it they can get subsidies but nobody takes them after they get them? i know people who get them, but they sell them. nobody ever goes back and makes these people account for what they do with their money. thank you. guest: that is a question i was
8:11 am
talking about earlier, the scent to which our transfer payment programs from the government to a person are about transactions. let's get you assistance and then out of sight, out of mind, we are not concerned about you. i think we have gone too far in that direction. i would like to see more engagement of people. we are finding out what is doing on the household. the food stamp program in new york city, it would bother me when people came in and said all i want is food stamps and i do not want to be put into the welfare program where i will getting gauged in work. i will take food stamps. it was not so much that i was concerned they were ripping off soft but because i knew a family cannot survive on just that. i wanted to find out, how can we help you. i have noticed usda and the food stamp around at the federal level has begun to take work
8:12 am
more seriously. i was the cochair of the national hunger emission, and we ran a unanimous report and one of them was there needs to be more focus on employment in these programs. snap program is undergoing changes as far as job training centers eating a part of it? a part of it? they're making changes. pilot programs going around the country. twitter doesr on not give specifics but says they are required to make a job contact a week to keep on drawing employment. is that typically the requirement as far as what they have to improve? unemployment insurance is another program i am not as as i am aboutt these other programs.
8:13 am
but that is the kind of requirement i like. i would like to know a recipient of public assistance is being oned, and being followed up with regard to their effort to get back in. host: democrat line, florida, thank you for hanging on with our guest. go-ahead. click thank you for taking my call. i am one of those long-term unemployed folks that everybody just wants to shove under a rug. say, for lack of not trying, i have tried everything i've ever known to get on my feet in the state of florida. i am 64 years of age. i had to file for early social security, otherwise i would have been out on the street. yes, i was on food stamps and i just reapply to them, and i do qualify for medicare and medicaid. because i've lost my job in 2008. once i lost my job in 2008, the
8:14 am
state of new york, where i had to relocate from to florida, send me to school to become a -- in medical business and administration. there was not a job to be had. the jobs out there today, more particularly in the state of florida, pay you the minimum wage. pay you a salary that would even compensate an electric bill. thinksly, do you actually , having had two careers, and then i went for a third, do you really think i wanted to go for a food stamp? now,r still, to qualify for medicaid along with medicare and i ask you that. i am one of those, in this country, who really want to was so pushed under a rug, what are we supposed to do? thank you for your.
8:15 am
this morning and i will wait for your comments off-line. guest: thank you for the question. i honor and respect the efforts you have made. i think the kinds of efforts you have made are the kind of thing we need our programs to continue to encourage as they did with you. who not begrudge anybody needs assistance, from getting assistance p or i worked in public assistance programs for 15 years. i know the benefit of supporting people who are struggling and facing difficulty. i am for that but also for helping people get into employment. is not your situation something i am talking about. clearly, you have made an effort. you are looking for the right job. you are getting assistance. all good as far as i'm concerned. the issue is the extent to which people are being allowed over a long time to not have the state or any provider or providing entity, look out and say, what is happening, how can we help you get into employment. host: on our republican line,
8:16 am
chris, illinois. good morning. caller: thank you for taking my call. my question is on the opposite side of what the gentleman was talking about. he was saying the state is not encouraging people to look for a job. what do you think about data that shows there is a structural change in the economy and , jobs moving overseas, people aging, are really having a more significant fact that, just the you know, people are not looking for a job? what is the effort on the other side for cooperation and other entities like that to bring jobs back here and not just move them out? a very good question.
8:17 am
off shoring and changes in technology have contributed to a structural change in the economy. i do not deny that is part of the story. policy solutions are broader than just welfare policy. regard, i would like to see corporate tax reform so dollars parked overseas could be brought back to the united states here. but i also feel part of the issue is the extent to which our public assistance programs are not engaging people. i am not saying the entire problem. i am saying that is part of the problem. that is the area where i have worked in these programs. the questions and issues you are raising are very clear. i should also point out, if we go to a higher minimum wage, is that might do automation are even more likely to do automation. businesses considering off shoring are taking their
8:18 am
operations somewhere away from a place where there is a high minimum wage. they will do that even more. be careful whatever policy prescriptions we put in place, that we do not discourage employment or hiring while trying to raise wages. host: an editorial in the washington post talking about poverty programs, that perhaps president obama and speaker ryan can agree on. saying there could also would be an expansion pair what is the program and what do you think about the efforts on poverty? guest: it has been around for a long time to i was a big proponent for it in new york city when we worked with mayor bloomberg. i brought the proposal to washington 10 years ago. the earned income tax credit by promoting a refundable tax credit to people who have low wages. show they did work up to a certain amount. it makes work pay. a classic reward work program in the united states government.
8:19 am
it is really focused on households with children in them. single moms benefit from the program. a childless adult, a man or female, in the workforce with the same wage, it is almost nothing. less than $800. and president obama have talked about increasing that as a way to make his work for these workers. i think it is a good idea. only one issue. the earned income tax credit now has a high error rate of almost 20% of all the dollars that go out, a really $70 billion program, go out inappropriately. it is not necessarily fraud. it is the way in which the irs evaluation the return and then sends out the refund. it is not exact and they are getting it wrong in a significant way. if we could solve that problem and make americans feel confident that a program is working the way it should, we should then consider expanding it to the group of workers left out of it so those people who
8:20 am
are working can have a .upplement to their wages it encourages people to work and also keeps them in work because they know they will get a little more from work. host: another proposal you have ,eard is make it a block grant and let the state figure out how to deal of the money. what do you think of that? guest: we have big federal programs, food stamps, medicaid. 80 federal programs of various sizes. i think local control of these programs is better, but i think we should test it first and think of ways we can find states that really want to do this, give them a block grant that allows them greater flexibility, helping people get employment, evaluate the results, and see whether it should go national. i am a former state and city administrator.
8:21 am
i am more comfortable administrating a local level than here in washington figuring out what is true for i -- idaho and also true for new york. it is not always the same. i am forgiving more control but i think we have to test it first. michigan, you're on with our guest, robert doar. go ahead. from dearborn? let's move to anthony in flint, michigan. democrats line. caller: good morning. i want to ask the gentleman with you right now. situation in flint everybody knows about with the water crisis and infrastructure. host: go ahead. sorry about that. i think our caller dropped.
8:22 am
in dearborn, michigan. hello. caller: good morning. we have an aging workforce and that workforce is having a hard time at this time to find replacements for a job they had in the past. they have the qualification, education, experience, but it looks like the employers are not willing to pay for their experience. they are looking at those particular employees as a burden on them, without considering them with a long-term experience. the federalulted in government trying to close the , buty providing assistance
8:23 am
the money has gone in to those assistance programs. then the money goes back to corporations and they put the cash in the bank and play the market. replacement of power -- of manpower by technology should not increase employment. make,ed people to manufacture, [indiscernible] and people to maintain them. idea that automation is bad for the economy, it is not true. host: thank you. guest: i was reminded listening to your action of something that
8:24 am
governor kasich is saying on the campaign trail here it is often use an example of 50 feet -- of a 51-year-old arson who loses a job. i think that is a significant issue. people develop skills and get a reputation and what -- raise wages. rich but they are doing fine, and then because of andges, they lose their job have to reenter the workforce at that point in their lives. i think that is a difficult situation and we have to find ways to reach rain corporations and businesses to be more aggressive. people who have a certain level of skills to be shifted to other skills. doingot think we are enough of that and i also think it is not helpful we continue subpar growth potential and we are not growing, businesses are less likely to take on responsibilities or do that kind of thing. that is the problem.
8:25 am
we have a weak economy. it is not strong. it really is not the way people feel the world is out there right now. i think it is because we are not growing fast enough and not allowing differences to feel comfortable making the kinds of retraining activities. host: pennsylvania on the line, this is chris. he has stopped looking for a job here go ahead. i think he is exactly right about that. i have two brothers also who lost their jobs and they were good paying. -- was a union worker roofer, and he had medical problems and they basically replaced him with a young guy because it was cheaper. he was at a rate of pay where he got high pay. another brother worked for an army base and they laid him off. of the problem is pride. you could get any job for eight
8:26 am
dollars an hour. there are tons of that. they cannot get the pay they once did and the pride is a part of it. one brother works part-time helping a friend doing construction and the other one is kind of living off my mother to be honest. i think welfare is a crutch and not a way of life. it or nine dollars an hour, you can find a million of those jobs . the one thing i wanted to say about the minimum wage is they never try it. keep saying i think it could be cured for eight dollars an hour for high school is, and maybe 10 for college kids and maybe 12 for adults back in the workforce because they have no choice. could try that and that would be beneficial. i have a friend who works at a major operation. company, and the now they just hired temp staff. instead of hiring full-time employees. they are doing a lot of that and eventually, they will try to get it down to one employee who
8:27 am
works just for the corporation and the rest will be temp staff. they just basically work it for 90 days and then rotate you out and that is what is going on. also immigration has been a big part of it i believe. there are just no good paying jobs unless you work for the government. a cop, a government worker. host: thank you. guest: those are good observations about the difficulties faced out there. it raises issues about retraining older workers. i have often talked about, if we will do a minimum wage, we could tear it. he is right. a lot of people talk about that. it has never been tried. these are significant issues. our labor force is changing and facing difficulties. it is not helpful that we are not growing. the business is not growing at a rate i think is more conducive
8:28 am
to better job prospects in the economy. the issue of older work is -- wagess facing trapping and then looking at the public assistance or disability programs as ways in which they can -- it is a legitimate issue and it reminds me of governor k-6, going around the country and one of his leading lines is, i have an answer for that person. i do not know if his answer fits but i do know what is definitely true coming back to my article, is we do not want to have very large public welfare programs not be focused on unemployment. if they only focus on giving the benefits and not on helping people get back to employment or training, i think we will have the problem even longer. host: are there others on the presidential field? guest: i would never say they are not addressing it.
8:29 am
inaker rino hosted an event south carolina talking about poverty and opportunity in which six of the republican candidates came. they all talked about these issues, whether about greater focus on unemployment, the extent to which public assistance programs serve as a way to keep people out of the labor force, certainly bernie sanders and hillary clinton are talking about this as well. i think the choice is between greatero focus on entitlement, greater benefit programs, and those who focus on getting the economy going and helping people get into employment as rapidly as possible. and then there is the inequality issue. americans listen to this and i think they should think about, are they talking about poverty and opportunity and job growth, or are they talking about taking from the rich and giving to the poor. i would rather focus on the first than the second. that is what i think is the debate in the country. republican line, you are
8:30 am
on. go ahead. with robert doar . i watched for two hours on c-span last weekend on the program about reducing poverty feeding the the center for neighborhood work. they are using -- as a matter of fact, he introduced grassroot leaders who worked with people one on one. it was absolutely wonderful. said there is no correlation between what we spend and a good outcome. make thein order to person, when you're working with people, making them feel worthwhile, and giving them hope , that they will want to seek jobs.
8:31 am
likebody wants to feel they are worth something and contributing. it was a wonderful program. c-span becauseor it absolutely gives all sides. thank you for what you do. you, robert doar, i have enjoyed the program so much this morning. good sign that republican candidates spent all day last week talking about poverty. sometimes republicans do not pay enough attention to these issues. governors certainly have records on these issues. there was certainly an example of, if they do not ask those questions in a regular debate, let's have our own debate and talk about the issues in a way that shows some depth.
8:32 am
whether the american people like the solutions are not, that is a different question. his recent thoughts on this topic in the op-ed, the big but hidden u.s. jobs growth problem. robert doar joining us. thank you for your time. coming up, we will talk with gara lamarche, the president of the partnership of liberal donors across the country. we will talk about campaign 2016. later in the program, political ovelace. ryan l we will talk about donald trump's speech in liberty university, and his outreach to evangelical voters. ♪ >> as i have been watching the campaign this year, it is more interesting to look at the republicans than on the democratic side. withy have something to do why there is more interest in
8:33 am
these candidates and their books. >> sunday night, carlos, nonfiction book critic, discusses the 2016 presidential candidates. >> everyone has interesting stories and their lives and politicians are so single-minded in this pursuit of power and ideology. it could have particularly interesting ones. but when they put out these memoirs, they are sanitized. vetted, therefore minimum controversy. >> sunday night at 8:00 eastern. >> c-span takes you on the road to the white house and into the classroom. documentaryur contest asks students to tell us
8:34 am
what issues they want to hear from presidential candidates. follow c-span's wrote to the white house coverage and get the details about our student camera contest at >> washington journal continues. host: joining us from new york is gara lamarche, the president of democracy alliance, here to talk about world in campaign 2016. good morning. start by describing the democracy alliance? how do you describe it to other people? organization of donor's, active in politics and social change and institutions like labor unions who came together about 10 years ago to counter what they believed the right had done over a number of years in building of institutions like think tanks and policy centers that shape the landscape in which we all live. 2005, our founder
8:35 am
and a bunch of initial donors felt it was time for progressives to organize in the same way and build a lasting infrastructure to advance values. host: as far as the way you described it, taking a look at this, you reach out to wealthy .onors as far as groups you work with or donors you work with, who do you align yourself with and how much money do you plan to raise for the upcoming cycle? democracy alliance is really more and organization of like-minded people who share information about causes and institutions they think are important. over the years, our donors have tried to help build up institutions like media matters for america, or the center for american progress, or the center for budget and policy priorities, that play critical roles in progressive policy infrastructure. we have a small staff that provides advice to donors and
8:36 am
what kinds of organizations do a good job advancing progressive values, the donors give money directly. foundation. the donors do not give money for the most part to us. we try to track what they give. far as the efforts we talked a little bit about going back to 2004, talk about their history. was that a certain series of incidents that cause you to bring the group together? i think the incidents were the fact progressives were losing, and i think the bush reelection in 2004, despite some efforts to come together to try to change that, was sobering to a lot of people. the sense that progressives were living in a country where conservatives dominated many parts of the , itrnment and public debate needed a response from progressives. i say this with some admiration even though i do not agree with most of the right's policies, i
8:37 am
think the right, beginning in 1970's, 1960 and early the person who became a supreme court justice, laying out what conservatives needed to do after the goldwater -- 1954, to rebuild their power and rebuild institutions that could challenge what they believed at the time, for the liberal dominance in american public life, they did that successfully so by the reagan administration, you have a heritage foundation and the american constitution society. a lot of conservative media, institutions that actually had a great impact laying out policies that the reagan in -- reagan administration then implemented. and that the giuliani administration implemented. i think progressives have been behind the curve on those kinds of things and the argument was made by our founders that laying out the money coming from the conservative side required a
8:38 am
response from the progressive side. a coordinated response pair we tried to do that and try to lay out an agenda and also, it instead of investments donors could make that could even the score a little bit. obviously, we have a long way to go. particularly in the states, the right has made enormous gains. in general, we have some institutions on the progressive side like the american constitution society, or the center for american progress, that are actually playing important roles advancing progressive values that did not exist 10 years ago. host: our guest is gara lamarche , of democracy alliance, talking about his organization. if you want to ask questions, -- and if you want to tweet some thoughts, or
8:39 am you know you are making influence with all the donations you make and the support you give to these groups, how do you know you are making a difference? thet: we look around country today at some of the progressive policy gains and economics. you look at the fight for 15 and fast food workers and what is happening locally on the economic level, you can see it in the obama administration's actions, a new overtime rule, that reflects the investments made in organizing and in policy work by groups that have been advancing these goals for a long time, whether it is the center for american progress, or the roosevelt institute, or the economic those aretitute, groups we urge our donors to support who have played a theical role in reframing debate around economics in this
8:40 am
country and suggesting the right policy. those have been picked up an advanced by organizing groups like the sanity -- center for community change, or the working families organization, groups we are proud to have in our network to try to get our donors to support. alone, weat one area obviously have a long way to go. inequality andnd specific policies for dealing with it, we oh a great deal of infrastructure to policy reorganizing. as far as campaign 2016, are we looking at nationwide rates for president and are you seeing direct influence in your groups for that? what is the breakdown of how much effort you will make him those fronts? democracy alliance is not a pack and does not support candidates in elections. range across the
8:41 am
progressive spectrum. we have supporters of all candidates and causes. there is no direct involvement in elections. we are more concerned with the infrastructure of civic engagement. we have funds devoted to it t know and african-american and youth turnout to make sure donors in the progressive base are registered, mobilized, and able to participate in the election. we are also fighting really hard to the groups we support to make sure voting rights are as strong as possible. one regrettable thing about conservative control of many of the states in recent years is that in one state after the other, they have done their best to curb access to the polls, voter id, things like that, changing election day policies to make it easier for people to vote, those are things our donors are working on. will beur donors participating as individuals in the presidential election and i
8:42 am
am sure they will do what they can to make sure they turn out for their candidates. when the general election is at stake, i think all of them will be voting for progressive candidates. our basic approach at this point is to take a look at what the writer does in recent years and try to build there. we have a 2020 vision plan, trying to mobilize donors to organize around investments at the state level to make sure we can make gains there. the fact is conservatives control most of the state houses state legislatures in this country. progressives control all three branches, really a handful, seven or eight states. that has resulted in terrible policies. progressives where rule a organ, minnesota, you see progressive immigration and economic and women's rights and labor policies. in places where conservatives have a lock on everything, you see progression and all of those
8:43 am
areas. what we need to do in the next several cycles, we have to have a long-term view. by 2020, we need to take back power in many places to be positioned for the next decade to have a fair distribution of power in this country. redistricting in 2010, really favor conservatives. we have been living in that landscape. by the early part of the next decade, progressives can translate into district line the actual power they have. the house of representatives is gerrymandered so even though democrats got a majority vote in the last midterm election, republicans i a lopsided margin control the house. it is all about redistricting and we are of the belief that the most important thing progressives can do over the next several cycles is focus on the state. host: gara lamarche of democracy alliance. go to the website and find out a little more about the organization. if you want to ask questions, --
8:44 am
we will start off this morning with diane, pennsylvania. live for our guest. republican. good morning. caller: i just have a very simple question for you and that rich, at 100%,he how long would we be able to keep our government going? i will go off-line to hear your answer. thank you. sounds like a math question and i do not have a calculator with me. i do not know anybody talking about passing the rich at 100% to what we need is a fairer tax system in this country, and president obama in the last number of years has been able to tilt that a little back in a
8:45 am
more progressive direction. typically in this country, we have had a progressive tax system where the rich pay a fairer share of the burden. it has ears the been out of whack in the last 20 years and all we are trying to do is balance that a little bit. no one is talking about 100%. we would have a fairer economy of wealthy people were tax at the rates they were taxed under the reagan administration. host: as far as the groups you support, are the ones that deal specifically with progressive tax policy? guest: there is the center on budget and policy priorities, the economic policies institute, a number of progressive groups that deal with tax policy and social welfare benefits policy. there is the deal with wages and work and emerging issues around the country like minimum wage, paid sick leave, childcare. the affordable care act was a terrific advance, despite the criticisms of it, in the social
8:46 am
safety net in this country. everything, it is working to make sure fewer people are not insured for health care coverage. seen over the long-term as a significant social policy. we have a long way to go in this country toward helping working neede get the support they to be productive in society, whether that is a stronger childcare system nationwide and in the state, or stronger protections for paid sick leave, stronger over time protections, stronger our protections, all of those things where we see some incremental progress. the president is seeing what he can do by executive order in the face of a hostile congress, in some states that direct action
8:47 am
by legislators and progressive by a ballotr initiative to whatever you put the stuff directly to the voters , they supported and we need to have a political system in the country which more closely asches what citizens want, big money over our ability to climate changen and economic inequality, a whole host of issues americans want to see action on, they are stymied because of the nature of our politics. host: this is rita from tennessee, independent line. go ahead. caller: you say you are progressive. are you advocating that as a nation, we progress, too? thank you for your question. progressive is a term that has been around for over 100 years in american politics. it was a term in the 1912 presidential election that all
8:48 am
three major candidates claimed, woodrow wilson, taft, the republican incumbent, and teddy roosevelt, running on the progressive party ticket. there is a long and distinguished history in this country. we are trying to aggress toward a country where there is economic opportunity for all , a country where civil liberties and civil rights are protected across the board, a country where women are paid the same for the work they do, as opportunitiesave across society, a society where all individual rights are protected, a society that has a capacity to deal with social challenges of our time and the public challenges of our time, whether they are trying to save the planet from man-made lowell warming and climate change, or to deal with the epidemic of gun violence in this country. we're trying to progress toward a country where all of those
8:49 am
things are dealt with and everybody plays an equal and vigorous role in society. that is what i think. host: our guest was a senior fellow of new york university and also a vice president and director of the program for the open society foundation. of democracy alliance. our next call, democrats line, illinois. good morning. caller: good morning. i have a statement. i think some of the problems we have in the way our country is run is because citizens have not taken responsibility to make sure we put the right political people in office. america, i am sorry to say, we have got some people who are really smart in office but we are not following along to make as a 21st-century nation. that is why we have fallen behind.
8:50 am
we have got china and all these big countries at our doorstep. and we have got a problem with immigration. we are falling behind because we just don't want everybody to succeed. we are hurting each other because we will not work together. when we work together and try to , thethis country going world will be much better off. well, thanks for the statement. i think much of what the caller said makes a lot of sense. there is a lot of anger in this country. it is appropriate anger. you see it manifested in both the peoplesome of drawn to donald trump and some of the people drawn to bernie sanders.
8:51 am
there is the anger that says wealthy corporations have control the country for too long and we need to have a democracy in which the citizens have more of a say. i take that to be the essentials spirit ofessential the caller. and there are people you want to keep out and tried to point the finger down the socioeconomic ladder to folks somehow getting what they do not deserve, or taking jobs americans take, all of which is really false. we have a crossroads about what to do to channel that kind of legitimate anger many people feel. made a lot of gains in the last seven years under a toward ave president fairer society, whether it is marriage equality or the affordable care act or improvement in the economy and a lowered unemployment rate.
8:52 am
but nobody on any side of the political spectrum believes enough progress has been made. i heard a caller in the early segment talking about how difficult it is to get a job after a long time. it was poignant and painful. you get a political system where people are more responsive to let working people in this country need, we would be a lot that are off. the challenge is to take anger over injustice, to take anger over stalled opportunity, and turn it into policies and practices that will actually do something for the majority of working people in the country who can write that picture. it is really a crossroads for the country. election, looking at rhetoric on both sides of the debate, we will see where we are in the summertime. it will pose a starker choice about the future of the country
8:53 am
that we have had in a long time. you have probably heard the idea of getting big money out of politics. from the organization you represent, what do you think especially for what you do? i think what you're getting at is, isn't it a little strange that a bunch of very rich people active in elections and who make significant investments in candidates and organizations trying to affect social policy come are trying to get money out of politics. is our donors feel very strongly about that. fundamentally the issue underlying all the other issues. we have a politic that is polarized. a politic that is dysfunctional in large part because of the way money functions in the particle system. if you look at the two sides,
8:54 am
the two principal sides, there a wealthy donors on the right and on the left side. right,lthy donors on the in general, certainly out of ideology in most cases, favor a system with very few controls over what money can be spent in elections. the others behind citizens united, were corporations are able to spend unlimited amounts of money. side, yougressive have donors who participate heavily in elections. in the current system we have, unilateral disarmament by progressives would be suicidal. money actually does come in our current system. it is important people have progressive values and step up and participate in the political process. ideally what you would have is average people coming together to use hard-earned dollars to
8:55 am
support the candidates of their choice. you saw that in the obama election of 2008 and in the sanders campaign of 2016. that is important. thisong-term solution to is things like in maine, the clean elections act, seattle, where the city council passed a voucher system to give ordinary people 20 dollars to contribute to candidates. theave to democratize campaign finance system so there is a power of big money that is cracked. if we do not do that, we will not get the policy change we need on nonviolence or immigration reform or childcare or a host of other issues in this country. there is a little irony involved in a bunch of wealthy donors trying to get money out of the political system. but i can tell you the donors i represent and the donors who come together in democracy alliance, would like their wealth to have less influence in the political process.
8:56 am
that is the difference between the right and the left in this debate. peopleright, you have only too happy, wealthy people calling the shots are on the progressive side, people like george soros, who i used to work for, they want money out of politics so their voice does not count as much as everybody else. the policies that are often their immediate, real and perceived economic interest. there is a difference between the two sides in the political debate. we are trying to do what we can to make it a priority to get a system in which wealth counsel for less. karen lives in oklahoma, republican line, good morning. caller: i was calling like the other lady did. butess he sort of answered, what does the progressive wing want to do? do they want to take the money from the rich and give to other .eople
8:57 am
they are not going to keep working. you just complain all the time about republicans. there are more republicans. you know what the citizens want. you have what citizens want. who voted always republicans in? republicans. really, you kind of look rich to me. i will stay off-line and give me an address and you can send me 90% of your money. i am not rich and 90% of my money would probably not represent what you think it would. but thank you for your question and your concern. republicans in office? voters did. and there are ebbs and flows in the american political life. it is important to know that the way district lines are john, -- by people whorawn
8:58 am
have the power already. we have more democrats and progressives registered in this country than is reflected in the composition of the u.s. congress and the way many state legislatures are organized. if that were organize more fairly, you would see more progressives and democrats in office. also i think republicans, when they have achieved power in almost every state they have done so, have moved as much as possible to make it more difficult or people to vote. i believe everybody in this country should find it easy to vote. and that we should have ballot practices that allow people to vote on the same day, to mail in their ballots, to have voting not on a weekday. there are all kinds of things itt could be done to make easier for people, particularly working people, to vote. if we did that, i would be pleased with the results. let me go back to the question
8:59 am
of tax policy, which some seem to think of as complication. we crossed the bridge that almost every civilized country , whichworld has crossed is that if we are going to have support for infrastructure like roads, education, up with benefits, or the military, all the kinds of things a civilized society has, you're going to have to have taxation to do that. a fair system of taxation imposes taxation more heavily on than who are well off those who work very hard for a living. a better tax system. that is not a new thing. i do not know anybody who is arguing right now for a return to tax policies that tax the did more heavily than they under the republican administrations like the
9:00 am
eisenhower administration or do we live with that kind of tax system. but a steady john beat of right-wing policy work -- drum right-wing policy work has put that seriously out of lack so we have a hard time in this country supporting the needs of working we need to get back to a situation where we can do that. progressive policies as i are meant tolier be fairer to all citizens of this country, protect rights, give more access to the political process. left or the's a right thing, i think it's an american thing. took a if you actually deep look at it and thought about it, you would find that we probably agree. we would probably agree on a lot of things need to make a fair and just society. think the current media environment and the political environment with away money
9:01 am
works in politics and the way the system of television debates and political advertising drives polarization is a whole number of things. it's pulling people apart in this country more than they ought to be a part. there's broad public support for a lot of policies i am describing as progressive. host: william, you're up next. caller: i like to ask your guest if he can give me three or four of the biggest differences between a progressive and a socialist. i watched the democratic debate between a progressive, hillary clinton, and bernie sanders, a socialist. i really did not see any difference. also, i'm sure he is aware that president kennedy signed a law for equal pay for equal work. it's not happening now. it's not being prosecuted.
9:02 am
mccain-feingold was supposed a fixed the campaign-finance laws could -- to fix the campaign-finance laws. could you helping with this? guest: thanks for the questions that cover a couple of topics. was actually a significant advance in trying to deal with the problem of money in politics p the problem is that wealthy donors and corporations on the right have been trying to do their best to get that for the last couple of decades. there's the citizens united ruling that was a big blow to that. we have a supreme court in the country with a 5-4 majority that is almost routinely siding with the needs of big business and corporations. one of the key priorities of those groups has been to enhance the role of money in politics and suffocate mccain feingold. we have made progress in the past and the post-watergate area. until we get either a constitutional amendment or state-by-state reform or a
9:03 am
difference of in court, which is one of the reasons the next election is so critical, because a lot is at stake of the composition of the supreme court and the next president will certainly make it a conservative majority on the supreme court or maybe tilt that balance in the other direction. that is the answer on mccain-feingold. -- it'sy for equal work a long time since the kennedy administration. it is still the case in this country that women on the urge 70% -- on average $.70 for every dollar a man earns. the fair pay act was on the first things the president signed when he came to office in 2009. it was a step in the right direction. we need vigorous enforcement and new legislation where necessary. in terms of the differences between progressives and socialists, i'm not sure i'm a political scientist.
9:04 am
sanders,k that bernie though a self-described socialist, most of the policies that he advocates dealing with economic inequality are well --hin maine's dream mainstream progressive thought in the country. it does not surprise me that he and hillary clinton house and -- have some significant differences in opinion. somebody more expert than me and socialist doctrine would have to sketch out some of those differences for you. there is ao say that significant alignment on the progressive side on some of the values that i talked about earlier. but i do not want to give the thatssion to anybody anymore on the proposed inside, where there is a huge family feud going on or maybe a schism. that is something that i am sure a lot of republicans, and i have a lot of friends who are republicans that i respect a lot
9:05 am
even though i don't agree with them a lot, they feel that do not range -- represent mainstream conservatism. because huge problem this country needs to responsible article parties and one of them is an dangers of going off the rails. i do not need to suggest that on the democratic side there is a monolith. i'm not sitting here as somebody who has a catechism of what is progressive and is telling what to think. i think there is a basic broad donors thathere are we support. we have differences of opinion on the progressive side, as well we should on public policy issues, national security, and free trade. not represent organizations and donors that move in lockstep on this. they have differences and debate them an air them. that is very healthy. ideology that thinks that everything is decided for all
9:06 am
time and that there are no strands of opinion and you cannot have debates, that is not a healthy society. i think progressives are not monolithic by any means. springs,om russell kentucky. say some kind to of requirements. jon tester, make them -- drug tested, make them responsible for the children. the fed should also be responsible. think if they work, they'd have more pride in themselves and they have better citizens and their counties were states. -- or states. guest: thank you very much for that intervention. i think it proves since it came on the democrat line that we have a difference of opinion on the progressive side as well as on the other side of the spectrum.
9:07 am
what --ake the koran is that work is important and provide statement the as well as a means of supporting yourself and your family. the policies that we favor of china make sure that all americans -- are trying to make sure that all americans have meaningful work and can support themselves. some of the conditions that the caller attach themselves with i do not agree with. i do not think there is any denying that the most fundamental thing that they want this country is meaningful work. everybody wants that. we have had a problem in this country providing that. the unemployment rate is improving steadily, but for too many people, work is out of reach or the work that they can get is really poorly compensated and lacks the social safety net
9:08 am
protections and basic amount of money they need to support a family in the society. that's got to be at the core of this election campaign and what every progressive stands for. lamarche isest gara the president. our next caller is from tallahassee, florida. c-span andd morning, mr. gara lamarche. i wish i was half as articulate as you are. you are very good at expressing yourself and your point of view. a little lacking in that court a category could i le . i like to start off with a quote from ronald reagan. it's not that liberals are stupid it's the just what they think is wrong. bye you ever read a book
9:09 am
" the road tot, serfdom?" guest: i've not read it, but i know it's had a lot of influence on conservative thinking and politicians. i've not read it though. caller: i would highly recommend that you read it because you seem to be an honest person. i would like for you to become familiar with his writing. man, the fallen nature of i do not think your political --losophy will other result ever result in an improved society. host: thanks, caller. guest: i'm sorry to be outed as not having read that on national television, but i know that his ease have a lot of -- the views
9:10 am
have a lot of weight on the republican side. i thought the caller was articulate and expressing his own views and do not really need to apologize for that in any way. there is a clash of philosophies a very,country between what i would say, brutal individual individual unlike iran -- like i and rand would represent. well, --u can relate accumulate wealth and the rich get richer, everyone else would be lifted up. we tried that policy in the reagan and bush administrations. it is not workday well. that it and i understand it's an unsuccessful flossie. liberals and progressives had mistakes over the years as well. we are not perfect. the core progressive view the world is that we are in this
9:11 am
together. it's about community. whether that reflects itself in the tax system more public education system, the idea that in the 21st century united states in a world in which every other country we like to think of as comparable provides health care for its citizens that the single most vigorous and intense argument that we have been happening over the last eight or nine years is whether people ought to have access to health care, it just seems crazy to me. i think it's fundamental. it's very hard to be successful in society if you have to worry about health security for yourself and your family. there is a class of philosophies that passes extremes that are very starts -- that at its extremes are very stark. the last caller was trying to engage on the level ideas and invective that usually see in political debate.
9:12 am
i continue to believe that if we do things like we're doing now and if we have dialogues and discussions among people who are ostensibly of different political viewpoints, whether calling in on a republican line or democratic line, most people in this country do not sort themselves and to those kinds of boxes. i think the 2016 election is scrambling that up a bit. i happen to be a very about progressive. i have always voted democrat. in the past when i first started -- to voteears ago 40 years ago, there were moderate or liberal republicans that i would be happy to vote for. the way that the party has aligned itself in recent years, it is hard to look over at the other side of the aisle and see many people if any people that i would feel couples comfortable supporting. i would like to see a country that has more diversity that people have used across the
9:13 am
political spectrum. some of them may be considered traditionally progressive or conservative. i do not think it's a level where most people living in this country think of ideology. they think of how to make lives better for themselves and for their families. host: one more call and this will be ashley in florida on the independent line. caller: good morning. thanks for c-span. mr. lamarche, i've heard previously that you were associated with the open society, which is the foundation that began and started with george soros. i like to get your opinion on george soros. the man actually has never really done a whole lot of good for america. with my brief knowledge of him, he doesn't have a whole lot of good things to say about america. one of the things that you mentioned that really kind of got to me -- because i used to bureau pumpkin and now i'm an independent -- be a republican and now i'm an independent, is
9:14 am
that the only way to a true happiness is to have complete life, liberty, and the pursuit of that. with all freedoms given to everybody and to their god-given talent. i don't think people need handouts. i don't believe in that sort of thing. i think the word progressive is a code word for let us control you. let us give you what we think you should have. woodrow wilson, and my opinion, was one of the worst presidents we had. he was a discriminatory. he did not like a lot of people. of races i do not see how the progressives have a lot of good in this country. host: we are running out of time. let us get his response. mr. lamarche? guest: woodrow wilson as we have all learned was a highly flawed president. he did good things, but he was also a racist. are complicated. it was 100 years ago.
9:15 am
i'm not here to defend woodrow wilson's racism or his reinstitution of segregation and federal government. say that i do not think progressives are all about control. i do not know where that comes from. i would say that some people on the conservative side of the spectrum try to control a lot of aspects of people's lives, including women's reproductive lives. that is the control i'm most concerned about. when we get to george soros -- let me get to george soros for a minute because i think he was unfairly maligned there. george soros has done a lot of good things in this country. he has critiques of this country. , thereten to the debate were a lot of critiques of what is wrong with united states of america. that is not unpatriotic. people on the left and right side of the political spectrum, true patriots hold their country to the highest values or standards, whether it is george soros or someone on the other side of the spectrum. as to the good that george soros
9:16 am
has done, it would be very hard to find someone of his means who is given as much of it away and supported democracy around the world and the revolution in , and in almost every continent, george soros has the for the side of liberty and it open society. while people focus more on his public like to the, the changes we have seen in the criminal justice system, which right and left have come around on, george soros was there before others. the fact that we never been debate programs and after school of georgeecause soros, that is a record everyone should be proud of. i think it was a very important figure in both philanthropy and civic life. lamarche is our guest to talk about progressives and what they're looking for in the upcoming election.
9:17 am
mr. lamarche, thanks for your time this morning. guest: thank you. it's been a pleasure. host: coming up, we will be joined by "the washington lovelace andyan the speech donald trump gave at liberty university and his outreach to evangelical voters. also, the topic of donald trump was mentioned in the united kingdom most members of parliament, taking a look at the issue of whether he should even be permitted and the united kingdom. you may have missed that that they on c-span, but we want to show you a portion of that on of banning question donald trump into the kerry because of his controversial comments on muslims. [video clip] >> liberty is not something we can take in portion are part. it's something that comes as a whole. as the first amendment of the u.s. constitution makes clear, that freedom of expression is for a free people.
9:18 am
that is why although i may not like it and although i can be absolutely sure that i would not support it, it is no place for criticize aouse to man running for elected office and a foreign country. we may not wish them here, we may not like them here, we may not vote against his ability to speak. we to value the same rights of liberty. trump'ses donald presence in our country so dangerous is that in the current , isis needs donald trump and donald trump needs isis. isis needs to say on the one hand that muslims, you're under attack. donald trump needs to say on the other hand, u.s., you're under attack by muslims. that is why i strongly believe that he should not be allowed to come to our country. just think what would happen in the current climate if you came
9:19 am
to birmingham, london, glasgow, and preach that message of divisive hate. it would be damaging. it would be dangerous. it would be deeply divisive. the gentleman is making interesting points. more surely, about donald trump being a big get rather than hatred, britain is pretty good at roasting beef. you not think it is better that we just roast trump? >> i do not think a debate like this calls for quips at a time like this. host: if you want more information about that debate in united kingdom over donald trump, you can go to you can see that debate in its entirety. the website is we will continue on in our conversation about donald trump with ryan lovelace. he is with "the washington
9:20 am
examiner." he is their campaign reporter. donald trump at liberty university, what was he trying to achieve? guest: he was trying to make inroads with a group that he has neglected on the campaign trail so far. he is not so much and acted with people that are outside of his base of support already. this is an attempt by him ahead of the eye with -- i will caucus is to weeks away to make inroads with a group, evangelicals especially, who could become crucial in swinging the caucus between ted cruz and donald trump. host: to give you a sense of what donald trump said yesterday, here's a bit of it from yesterday. [video clip] >> and we are going to protect christianity and i can say that. i do not have to be politically correct. we are going to protect it. [applause] >> i asked jerry and i asked some of the folks because i hear this is a major theme right , 3:17,ut two corinthians
9:21 am
that's the whole ballgame. lord, the spirit of the there is liberty." here is liberty college, liberty university. it is so true. is that the one that you like? i think that's the one you like because i love it. it is so representative of what has taken place. what we are going to protect christianity. if you look at what is going on what's going on throughout the world, in syria, if you're christian, they are chopping off heads. you look at different places and christianity is under siege. i'm a protestant, very proud of it. presbyterian to be exact, but very proud of it. we have got to protect it because bad things are happening, very bad things are happening. we don't -- i don't know what it is. we do not ban together. aree other religions banding together and using it. if you look at this country, it
9:22 am
5%, some be 70%-70 people say even more, the power we have, we have to unify and band together. we have to do in a really large version what they have done at liberty. liberty university has done that. he abandoned together and created one of the great universities, colleges anywhere in the country and the world. our country has to do that around christianity. host: ryan lovelace, a couple things came out of the speech. first of all, the two corinthians reference. why was the subject matter of news today? guest: donald trump's familiarity with the bible -- when he said two corinthians, he is referring to second corinthians as it is commonly understood. that is something that gave listeners and insight to how familiar he is with the actual text. it is also interesting to note that the big thing that came out of that speech and listening to it especially is the way in
9:23 am
which he attempts to connect with evangelical voters is different from how other candidates do. he is not going on about his own personal religious experience. he says he is presbyterian, but he did not talk about it too much. when he has coming is gotten into trouble. on, he said he had wineittle crackler and at communion which rankled christians. that was around the same time he said john mccain was not a war hero. when he had islands in the room saying both of those things, the one that stood out to them was his comment about christianity and not needing to ask god for forgiveness. those things have gotten him in trouble in the past. now is trying to connect in different ways as opposed to talking about his own expense because it is not worked for someone like him as opposed to ted cruz. host: and you hear his comment about christianity in the u.s. and in the world as well. guest: a lot of other candidates
9:24 am
talk about that more so. he is talked quite a bit about combating islamic extremism and all those sorts of things, but it was interesting to hear donald trump try to expound upon that and away he is not quite so much in the last two months on the campaign trail. a matteryou alluded to of getting these types of voters, where does he stand generally amongst these types of voters? guest: right now nationally, use up huge with the even joke -- evangelical voters. he had 42% to ted cruz's .5%. evangelical voters are not saying necessarily that they agree with him from a theological perspective. they do not say he's an expert on christianity, but they are proving of his conviction. he's coming to the table with a set of principles, saying i'm going to win and make deals and you will not have to worry when i'm there because you can trust me and be assured that i will make the best deals of all-time. guest: as much as we throughout the term evangelical, technically what does this mean? guest: we are talking about
9:25 am
christian voters, who are specially social conservative. why they do not always make as much noise, they are a crucial voting block in iowa because they are groups in the past that have delivered states for other republican primary candidates. you think about rick santorum and other candidates have come to iowa have played into this group. when it comes time on caucus day, these are the people who really show up and vote. host: our guest is with us until 10:00 to talk about the speech by donald trump and the larger issue of evangelicals as where they stand as far as 2016 is concerned. here's how you can give us a call. (202) 748-8000 four democrats. (202) 748-8001 for republicans. or02) 748-8002 f independents. and if you identify as a good joke will, you can call (202)
9:26 am
748-8003. our first calls from maryland on the democrats line. go ahead. caller: i'm looking at this guy donald trump. to talk to the average citizen about why things are happening. he has no clue. he has no answers to anything. he appears to be a victim of circumstances just like the average american. we are going to elect him as a leader? people in england have the common sense. we should be doing the same thing. we should be banning him from the political platform because he's divisive. he does not bring people together. his platform a separation and confusion. americans are confused right now. things are not the way they hoped it would be. it's a world economy that's not doing very well. a lot of americans cannot understand that place in the world and the world economy today. host: thank you. aside from the talk about
9:27 am
religion, what is it that donald trump is saying that might be attractive to those who identify themselves as evangelical? the collectse hear pressing frustration, donald trump is a very polarizing figure could -- caller expressing frustration, donald trump is a very polarizing figure. he is standing on conviction and making the best deals. that is really what he is doing. he is not necessarily going forth with detailed policy platforms the weight you see other candidates will try to do that. jeb bush rolled out a plan yesterday. donald trump is approaching it differently. he is doing it more flamboyantly. he is loud and not afraid to say things. he make the point of identifying for the listeners when he is saying something that might be perceived as politically incorrect to let them know that his audience hears him. that is how he attempt to connect with them. host: independent line from florida, here's ron. caller: good morning. how are y'all doing? host: good. go ahead. caller: i was going to ask your
9:28 am
desk guest their why he does not know why the muslims are mad? compensatedhey billions of dollars. he said, why we giving money to iran? we owed them?, don't we? guest: i think that's an interesting point. donald trump espouses a completely different view. audience of gop primary voters are obviously opposed to the obama administrations nuclear deal with iran. that is something that donald trump will not shy away from. something that we saw him come here to washington, d.c. and stand outside of d.c. and talk about his opposition to the iran deal. i think that is something all reports and are going to be doing and donald trump is no exception. host: a person who identifies
9:29 am
themselves as evangelical, this is from ohio. patsy, you're up next. caller: hi. host: you are on. go ahead. caller: i was wanted to make a comment about donald trump. i will be voting for donald trump, not because he's a christian. an evangelical christian is actually a person who has accepted the lord as their savior and they look to the lord for the things that they need. donald trump does not understand that. i know that. donald trump understands business. this is a big business. this country is a big business and it needs to be run like a big business and it needs to have guidelines in it. i've watched jerry falwell, junior on hannity last night. he talked about donald trump's heart and how he is a giver. said his father voted republican rather than voted for
9:30 am
carter because carter was christian. it was because you don't necessarily need a sunday school teacher to be running your country. you need someone who can actually run your country and i believe donald trump could do that. that is why i will vote for donald trump. guest: i think that, makes an interesting point representative of a lot of evangelical voters c. donald trump has two certain extent reached the prosperity gospel. that's a sort of thing that if you support him and even money, andr return, he wants them to be wealthy. he says he will make america great again, better than ever before. he also says he wants to make the american people richer. this idea of trump has a businessman who can deliver things for evangelicals that no other candidate cam plays into that prosperity gospel to a
9:31 am
certain extent. it combines the religious aspects and business aspects of what he is bringing to the table by bolstering that support with his base crowd that he is trying to grow. host: is he getting the type { this time around that mitt romney who spoke at liberty university did? guest: it was different. evening listening to his speech and comparing and other candidates have gone through there, donald trump would say that his book, "the art of the deal," was second only to the bible. he asked if anyone had read it. and there was a different relationship between the people in that room yesterday and people in the room when ted cruz was making his campaign announcement several months ago. host: from houston, texas, brenda is next to go ahead. . go ahead. caller: hi, pedro, and things for taking my call. that sounds to
9:32 am
me like evangelicals are really china coppermine is god. let me pose this to you. -- really kind of compromise god. let me pose this to. evangelicals supported romney. going to pray to and a situation with crisis happening in america? talking aboutow throwing support about donald trump, and outright racists. -- and outright racist. jesus will not hears prayers because he is not a man of god. two corinthians? oh my gosh. people, wake up please. guest: i think that the something that people have come to expect that a lot of voters are feeling, and a lot of
9:33 am
christian voters are thinking when they listen to donald trump talk about two corinthians as opposed to second corinthians. i think that is something a lot of voters are feeling, too. in terms of coppermine in god and supporting -- compromising god and supporting donald trump because of his is his convictions, that is something that voters will have to think about. it is something that donald trump will have to be aware of them watching. if it is something that bubbles up and becomes a problem for him, it could really spell the difference in a state like iowa and usenet connect with ted cruz. host: at the same time this is happening, russell moore of the southern baptist convention is so tweeting the speech. he sent out a couple tweets along the line of this. a goldenicals can love calf, as long as and promises to make mexico pay for it."
9:34 am
what does this indicate to you as far as the southern baptist, but as far as pushback from evangelical voters? is a: i think donald trump very polarizing figure, a very divisive figure. within the candy of religious leaders tried to make their voices heard when americans will be going to the polls and make an important choice for the future, there's not as much support necessarily with the leaders of this community as they are with individuals themselves. if something very interesting to watch that dynamic -- it's something very interesting to watch and that dynamic. the leaders usually come out and support ted cruz, but when it comes to the individuals made up of those organizations, they are often going towards donald trump. i'm not sure exactly whether or not we will see that stay the same or it will become more fluid as these first state start voting. that will be something to keep an eye on -- whether or not these leaders are in step with their followers as much of the happened in the past. host: maryland on the democrats
9:35 am
line, identifies himself as orthodox. good morning. to supportust want donald trump because i know i came from two different religions. my mom is a muslim, but she has converted to christianity when she married my father. i'm orthodox. i'm a christian. the point is that i wanted to point out that i understand what he says that even though he is not politically correct, the point, as i see it in my anthem uncles, they also do not support christians, which is they do not really like it to be a christian. the bottom line is they do not goingo be christianity on in the future. they want to be only muslims.
9:36 am
i understand it. i have a family member and i've seen it. even though he is not politically correct, how we can protect the christian family outside the world, which is cutting the head off and all that stuff, but how do we as americans protect that people outside of the world and the muslim area? host: thank you. guest: i think that college is given to a very important point, which is the difference between the republican presence of candidates are saying and what democratic presence. ditial -- presidential candidates are saying. donald trump says democrats have been to weaken the way they approach this. he is gone and step farther by proposing a ban on all muslims coming into the united states coul.
9:37 am
the sets him apart from the republican field as well. this is something that has not only rankled islamic voters and people, but it's also something that has angered christians. it is angered people of all face -- faiths. to see if interesting you forever all these things that have sent them off when it comes to donald trump or that there been so many that it's hard to keep up with, so when they go to the polls that it will make a difference. which things will be sticking with them or if any at all with? ill? host: mike identifies as an evangelical. caller: good morning. from the christian perspective, as a believer, one of the things that we have felt is that over the last four or maybe eight years that christian values, christian beliefs, and also legislating -- it's a very political correct
9:38 am
environment these days and ministers feel like they are on a very slippery slope. i think when you hear donald trump and he was speaking yesterday at liberty university, it's not so much that you think this is the greatest christian man on the planet. i think what we are looking at -- i know personally myself, i need someone that will not meddle in my faith as what i have felt is happening in this administration where people have been meddling in taking away things that christian believers have been used to having the freedom for the last how many years. basically i'm not looking at donald trump as some super christian. i just like someone who may be will take care of the government business and protect my rights and not meddle in my christianity if you understand what i'm saying. guest: i believe i do and i think the caller makes an
9:39 am
interesting point in terms of the context of this discussion about christianity and the 2016 presence of race -- present a race as it regards to donald trump. the republican party is trying to raise voters to the polls that they believe have not been there. oftentimes social conservatism is not something repulsive party has put out as a platform in recent directions. the gop has a new director of faith engagement. time, he isrs visiting at 38 states and talk to tens of thousands of pastors. reach toart of his pastors who feel slighted by the obama administration. it will be interesting to see if that effort of getting christian but are still polls and using ministers to reach different groups they may not have in the past pays off or if it is all for not. host: aside from the liberty university appearance, has any significant religious leader given support to donald trump? guest: when the caller was
9:40 am
talking much a follow, junior on hannity -- jerry falwell, junior on hannity talking about donald trump, that was not an endorsement. we heard later on tuesday he would have a surprise guest making an endorsement. that could be someone who is in an evangelical leader. a lot of evangelical leaders out there already have lined up behind ted cruz. that is a big play in iowa. that could come into play and be very influential voters for their who look to him as a conservative who is challenge the status quo in that state. host: let's hear from that in baltimore, maryland on the independent line. caller: thank you for taking my call. to --wonderful to speak on c-span and speak to somebody is thehe examiner," who
9:41 am
only honest source of information in washington. anyway, my question to the someone is -- i know who has dealt with donald trump. he says he is abrasive and has a lot of faults. how does he feel about this fellow statement that donald trump is probably the best people picker that has ever lived and that is what we need in a president? guest: all these different presence of candidates are saying that their judgment is better than the respective opponents and for those reasons that they will have the best people surrounding them doing deals with them. what are much of his business experience is that he has worked with democrats in ways that republicans happen. you'll see various were public and present for candidates, even ted cruz, talking about donald trump's relations with democratic leaders, having given money to different candidates
9:42 am
like chuck schumer's and others. this is where donald trump believes his relationships as a business anman will come to his favor where other republicans shy away from interpol can process. -- the revoking process. host: of you are on twitter says cruz has been trump and i what the -- of you are on twitter says cruz has beaten trump in iowa. guest: you said in other places now that he does apologize. his apology is only an apology of sorts. his apology is an apology of people not to live under liberal policies in new york under mayor buildable aussie appeared in this is attempt to try to pivot and turn. donald trump makes the gas about two corinthians as opposed the second corinthians.
9:43 am
if it has not turned to ted cruz's favor, it is inching his way and may not have been the blow that trump has landed on other candidates. host: ted cruz took the airwaves and then add about the new york value situation. [video clip] >> do you think gays should be allowed to be married? >> i live in new york city and there's a tremendous movement to allow gay marriage. it is too premature for me to comment on. >> how about gays serving in the military? >> it would not disturb me. i lived in new york city and manhattan all my life. my views are little bit different than if i lived in iowa perhaps. it is not something that would disturb me. >> partial-birth abortion? the elimination of abortion in the third trimester is a big issue in washington. what president trump ban partial-birth abortion? >> i am very pro-choice. it is maybe a little bit of a
9:44 am
new york background. i was raised in new york and i grew up and worked in new york city. >> but you would not ban it? >> no. i would not. i'm pro-choice in every respect as far as it goes. i just hate it. host: this interview goes back to 1999. guest: what is really important about this is that it allows donald trump to explain what ted cruz met by new york values. ted cruz can say, look, this is donald trump explain what it means i'm just using his words. not me a attacking this is me explaining what he said in the past. een ted cruz s and donald trump start to heat up, ted cruz can say he is not the aggressor and that those are donald trump's words not mine. host: jan, thanks for calling. go ahead. caller: thank you so much for
9:45 am
allowing us who do not use the internet to call. i appreciated. i want to say that i definitely agree with many things that mr. trump has said even though i may not agree with the way he says it. evangelicals have been kicked to the curb. the laws are becoming very biased against christians, all christians. he has the fact that become a billionaire as a businessman shows that he knows a lot about what goes on the country. the last segment but you just have about him saying pro-choice -- he is now recently said he is pro-life and he does hate abortion. i just think that in my opinion the things that he says, even though they are not set correctly, support the christian values. he's a humanitarian. i want to add this.
9:46 am
mozul has been taken over by isis. it was originally a christian city. it used to be the biblical city of narrow the and now it is all -- ninevah and it is now all isis. it's historical. it goes back to the ottoman empire. he is not speaking about things that are happening right now only to he knows about things that have happened in the past. host: thanks. guest: to the caller's point that donald trump's recent statements embody christian values, that is representative of the connection that donald trump has built in quite short time with his voters and supporters and christians heading to the polls. is a connection that other candidates have not had. a strongs had such connection in such a short time,
9:47 am
especially on issues that they anded about a different way have supported an opposite position in the past. but somethingsual that donald trump has used to his advantage. host: durham, north carolina, democrats line. you are on with our guest ryan lovelace with "the washington examiner." go ahead please. caller: good morning. i was listening to a comment that was recently made about how divisive donald trump is. of course, i'm christian. warn theust like to american people that suggest there was in the mitchell -- individual at one point in time in the world that was very divisive and we ended up in world war. check their history. hitler. is this into donald trump and his rhetoric. he is very divisive.
9:48 am
does he say and very little does he say, even listening to him at liberty, he never completed a complete thought. that is what i would just like to say. wake up, america. guest: but certainly in inflammatory statement, but that is not one far off from what other supporters of different candidates in this race have said. we have seen supporters of john kasich put forth that donald trump is like another leader people have animosity for and that is vladimir putin of russia. there are comparisons being made to other world figures that have been very, very hostile in the past, very, very problematic and the pastor -- in the past. it's inflammatory, but because of donald trump and the different things that he has proposed, this is the thing that will continue to be raised. they were not go away in the way for other candidates might. growing support
9:49 am
for evangelical voters in southern states? guest: you seem to recent polls come out yesterday in georgia and florida and he is up in double digits and or publican field, not just among evangelicals but everyone. after these early nominating states, it could be crucial to taking who the gop nominee is this time around, especially there is a prolonged fight. host: from covington, georgia, bob is up next for our guests right lovelace. campaign current reporter for "the washington examiner." go ahead. caller: i would just like to say i was an independent yesterday. since i think i saw that thing in yesterday in england, i am a trip referred trump run-up. -- trooper for trump right now. gemini is taking them without firing a shot.
9:50 am
everything that chancellor merkel says. [no audio] u.k. debating donald trump. is something that of donald trump were elected president of the united states, it would certainly become more problematic for them than it is now. the fact that they are having this debate fuels donald trump narrative and allows him to dominate the conversation analyze any topics related to donald trump remain the main focal point on cable news. people are coming in and i have to settle and who i'm really voting for here in iowa or answer. it plays into donald trump's hands. even if it's not positive news, all news and all attention for donald trump can be good news because he knows how to spin it. host: free advertising.
9:51 am
from north connecticut, you're on the democrat line. caller: i would just have to say that i was incredibly offended by mr. falwell, junior equating donald trump to the character of jesus. this event was about martin luther king. donald trump referred to martin luther king, junior as a great man. he is doing nothing but instead of honoring truthfully the late dr. king. it's rather offensive because what he has been espousing as a gop front-runner for the last several months is nothing more in line with someone like david duke. i don't understand how donald trump can call martin luther king a great man the kind of policies and the entertainment
9:52 am
and non-evangelical views he has been putting forward. it's mind blowing and i am highly offended. i really am. view is not one limited to democrats but one that republicans have shared. we have seen other candidates and super pac's come forward and make the same points. we have seen people like jeb bush and his supporters come forward to try to combat donald trump on similar points. they say they have the best policies to lift people out of poverty in a way that donald trump is not approaching in the same way at all. i think it is interesting that this time around that those points being made about donald trump are not limited to democratic voters. there are a wide swath of republican voters making the same points and not just establishment or moderate republicans, but also conservatives. host: from salisbury, north carolina, republican line, this is carol. hi there. caller: you might possibly want
9:53 am
to think about the fact that somebody who is running for president or being qualified for president needs to be able to take care of america's business. he is not update to whisper sweet little nothings in your up there to whisper sweet little nothings in your ear and tell you i'm going to give you this and i'm going to give you that if you vote for me. somebody who is going to give, give, give. we need somebody to take care of the united states to where we have plenty and we don't need somebody to hand out. when other countries start trying to tell you who americans should vote for, people should remember why we left the great place of england and what they stand for. the fact is people need to realize that is why we have a
9:54 am
constitution. we need people in the white house that will not -- people don't get it to why people are turning to trump. it is not all the stuff that you are bringing up this morning. it is rebellion. we are saying that we would rather have a muslim sitting up there in the white house then we would to continue having the same things that we would have been having year after year. these people up there in congress and in the white house, they are not listening to the people. they are not for the people, by the people. they are not for the people. host: carol, thank you. guest: what we are hearing that is typical not just of republican voters but voters on the whole. you see on the democratic side of the aisle bernie sanders outside the democratic establishment, a socialist come in and gain traction and be very close with hillary clinton in the polls.
9:55 am
the same is true on the republican side of the aisle where donald trump is leading. ben carson was formally leading. i think what the caller is getting at is that this year more than ever before, she is representative of others who are angry. it is not just some anti-incumbent year, but an anti-status quo your. that means the candidates who may not be an incumbent but perceived to be perpetuating the status quo, their candidacy will be and just as much jeopardy as those who have been contributing to what is perceived to be part of the problem can washington, d.c.. host: here's howard in muscle shoals, alabama. caller: hello? host: you are on. go ahead. caller: i want to talk about the security of the united states. trump is all about security and protecting us. if you look at our government, both democrats and the plug-ins took the oficans the office to uphold the constitution and protect the american people.
9:56 am
and they have failed. the truth of it is that everybody is buying a gun to protect themselves. why would we want to hire somebody met government to run it? thefed up with both republicans and democrats leadership. the people in this country are afraid. they are not afraid about what is going on over in iraq and syria. they are afraid because of the killers that's walking around our streets. guest: that is something we have seen become a more important part the desk topic as the race has gone on. donald trump said yesterday that after the paris attacks, national security is something that he is raised as a more important point on the campaign trail. donald trump has always talked about securing the border and building a wall. all those issues relate to home as but he is evident in making foreign policy a bigger issue
9:57 am
for him on the childhood i think -- on the trail. i think it's because republican voters are growing more concerned of the obama administration and he realizes that will be a motivating factor. host: how does donald trump look in iowa? guest: if you look at the average of polls, he is just within the margin of error with ted cruz. he is ahead by 1%. but in a recent poll from "the des moines register," ted cruz is up three points there. it is not connected -- and that. the two of them will be fighting in the home stretch. at this .4 years ago, ron paul was right up there out front in 2012. once the axis started casting votes, he came in third. host: what is the strategy of donald trump right now leading up to the caucuses? guest: we see donald trump heading back to iowa today. is not done much retail politicking as other candidates have. if you has organization that he
9:58 am
claims to have a people that are willing to go brave the cold and stand in line for him all caps the country at big events, this is the time when he actually has to teach these people how to caucus. they are first-time voters or may be new to this process entirely. host: we are joined by ryan lovelace. karen from indianapolis. caller: thank you for accepting my call this morning. just like a herd the other gentlemen say, the security of the united states -- they have failed to protect us. they have failed to do the things that they said they were going to do for us. and keep raising up this raising up that, but there is no more extra money coming in. anyway, if donald trump is such a man of god or a christian type man, would he run this universe as god would run it? when he followed things in the bible -- what he followed things in the bible?
9:59 am
guest: it is hard to know whether or not donald trump would govern his presence will candidacy as the republican nominee according to christian values thing beyond what you sad publicly. republican voters will have to either take him on his word about connecting with voters yesterday and that is a decision borne out on the campaign trail. host: let's hear from eric on the report can line. caller: good morning and thank you for taking my call. i was listening to the conversation today. although i'm personally , i am ang mr. ted cruz born-again christian. i don't think that's necessarily a litmus test for the presidency. despite the fact that i'm supporting mr. ted cruz, i took umbrage with what you're just said about mr. trump. i believe it paints him with two
10:00 am
white of a brush. i believe your guest should have said that mr. trump proposed banning the entry of muslims and to our country until we can get this figured out relative to how we should let them. i believe that is a crucial distinction with what he said. daesh guest: i recognize your point. that is not providing a finite add to that band. as donald trump talks about it, until we get it talk -- figure that could be years down the line in a trump administration and could be longer than that. we don't really know because donald trump has not given direct answers to this and has talked about this more openly and left it
10:39 am
does not have those


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on