tv Washington Journal CSPAN August 21, 2016 7:00am-10:01am EDT
presidential nominee. will take your calls and you can join the conversation on facebook and twitter. washington journal is next. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2016]] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] ♪ host: well, good morning from what is still a pretty quiet capitol hill but when congress does return in two weeks, they'll get busy pretty quickly, fill out government spending bills, funding zika virus and tear back on september 6 and president obama is now wrapping up his family vacation on martha's vineyard and on tuesday, he heads to baton rouge, louisiana to survey the flood damage there. also tomorrow marks the 20th anniversary of the signing of the 1996 welfare laws. our question for you on this sunday -- would welfare reform at 20, are changes needed? how is the program doing in your
interpretation 20 years later? republicans call this number -- 202-748-8000 democrats, 202-748-8001. i-n-t, your number, 202-748-8002. if you have experience with welfare programs, call this number. e would love to hear from you. we thought we would start this morning with a piece of tape from bill clinton. >> what we are trying to do today is to overcome the flaws of the welfare system for the people who are trapped on it. we all know that it's a typical family owned welfare today is
different than the ones 60 years ago. we all know that there are a lot of good people on welfare who just get off of it in the ordinary course of business but that a significant number of people are trapped on welfare or a very long time. exiling them from the community of work that give structure to our lives. nearly 30 years ago, robert kennedy said work is the meaning of what this country is all about. we needed as individuals, we need to sense it as our fellow citizens and we need it as a society and as a people. he was right then and he's right now. from now on, our nation's answer to this great social challenge will no longer be a never-ending cycle of welfare. it will be the dignity, the power and the ethic of work. today, we are taking a historic chance to make welfare what it
was meant to be, a second chance, not a way of life. the "chicago tribune" had this editorial. 20 years ago on monday, president clinton signed welfare bill that he held as the fulfillment of his campaign promise to "end welfare as we know it." at the heart of it, recipients were required to seek work and they were subject to time limit to reduce poverty and associated ills by averting long-term dependency. the personal responsibility and work, opportunity, reconciliation act. could be seens an effort to save money. more important though was the fostering of self-respect and inns to go with -- independence with holding a job. the old welfare system didn't do
those. one reason, it was widely deplored. the "tribune" goes on to say that welfare reform has been a success. this new called temporary assistance for needy families exceeded the most optimistic hopes. the number of people getting welfare dropped by two thirds and the majority of women leaving the roles were able to find jobs. critics hear a million people would fall into poverty but the poverty rate fell particularly among blacks and children. the "tribune" goes on to say welfare reform was an admirable attempt to combine two ideas that americans have an obligation to help women and children who fall into poverty and that those they help have a duty to help themselves. it struck the right balance then and it still does. in addition to the "chicago tribune," who is the economist' take on it. a patchy record at 20. bill clinton's welfare reform got more people into work but it
good morning to you. caller: hi, good morning. host: what would you like to say if are further changes needed to the welfare reform laws 20 years ago and do you think it's been working? caller: so i think that further changes are needed. i just got finished being nickeled -- reading nickeled and op-ed from the "new york times." and she pretty much said that the welfare reform laws created a lot of paperwork and bureaucracy in the welfare system that wasn't there before and the end result of that has pretty much been sort of criminalized the welfare system and made the poorest sort of feel bad about being poor. and i think that paperwork and bureaucracy is what sort of has to go. host: ok. thank you, ian, for calling. johnny from woodbridge,
virginia. johnny, on the democratic line. you have experience with the welfare system. is that right? caller: oh, yeah. i experienced with the welfare system. they don't have any -- i mean, any program that really help the elderly out. they got an area agency on aging. all you learn to do is have lunch and square dance or -- i and i got my house water run from the roof and they don't care about helping me. host: what kind of specific help do you want? are you looking for a certain -- caller: no. if they're going to help someone -- let me tell you. i'm going to say something y'all won't like.
the spanish people don't have any problem getting welfare. n fact, i used to work for the county of prince williams county of west virginia. i retired from there. these people go get boxes of food stamps and bring them out. they would be in an envelope and these were stamps years ago. it wasn't what they got now, a card. of the anager department in woodbridge i'll be darned if she was going to get this one. it was $800 and something dollars and she said they were getting welfare from woodbridge, virginia, d.c. and maryland. and come to find out, but they won't say anything about it that that's what most of them do. that's why they can ride big cars now and buy fixed up houses, and, you know, have money. host: all right, johnny, going
to let you go and get sue on the line from pennsylvania also on the democrats line. what do you think about the wealweal at the -- welfare reform at the age of 20? caller: i think it was shameful of bill clinton to get rid of welfare or revise it so it becomes a lot more difficult to get right before he passed nafta and sent all the jobs out of this country. host: so what do you see specifically, sue, that needs changing with the welfare program? caller: well for one thing, there are a lot of people out there who can't get started in the new economy. they go out, they try to get a job. it's not successful. they live in their parents' basement.
maybe their parents don't allow them to get in their basement and they're off on their own someplace. i think we're letting people fall through the cracks and it shouldn't be that way. i mean the thing where they were saying with bernie sanders about maybe if it's only even a two-year college, let's get these people some help. host: thanks for calling, sue. a little bit of background from "time" magazine on the welfare reform bill and how it came to be 20 years ago. they write here at the "times"-cnn survey found that 81% of respondents wanted fundamental response and a higher percentage believe that the system already in place discourage need li people from -- needy people from finding work. -
more at time.com on the history of the bill and lori has been waiting on the line from midway, georgia. ood morning, lori. caller: the thing that i find that they don't give the poor people a raise. my son has been on the food welfare with several children making't get off because $12 an hour is not enough to support. the minimum wage is definitely the thing that needs to go up. because i believe he could get off of it. host: so the minimum wage discussion while relevant to your family, lori, obviously a separate conversation from the welfare program itself. but what changes would you -- what other changes would you advocate in the welfare program? caller: well, i'm happy with the
education that the new policy is doing for the grandchildren. i'm happy about that. and not happy that my grand -- happy that my grandkids are not hungry. i have a problem with the money is just not enough to get them off. you know? because i work over 40 hours a week. host: all right, lori. thank you for calling. lots of folks calling in now. normal, illinois. leslie, you have experience in the program as well? caller: yes, i do. host: tell us your situation. caller: well my situation now has changed, but when i was getting welfare, it was because i have two children. my ex-husband was not paying child support. he was court order today pay and in fact, he was compla indicted from texas, courtesy of governor
nn richards. he owed $140,000 in back due colder. he paid $5,000. went back to texas and that was it. he never paid again. and they're not going to pay more money to get him extradited again. to that was that. and there i was, stuck and i was unable to work a full time job doing anything because i had advanced multiple sclerosis. and of course now, i've been in a nursing home. o that takes care of that. thank god for that program because if it had not been for
that program when my ex stopped paying child support, then i would have been literally out on the street. host: that being said, leslie, and thank you for sharing your situation, what changes, if any, should happen from this point forward? caller: need to have more people working in the local welfare offices so they could more readily check into people's stories and what is actually happening with them. and get people off of that role if they're able to go back to work. and in fact, they should have stipulations that they have to -- and i think they do already, actually, have to check in with get peopleroups that jobs and make sure that that is happening.
and then you have to look at the actual need in the community for people to work. a lot of times in the communities, which is the case i'm living in, and they don't need a lot of new workers. so it's a very complex problem. host: leslie, thank you for calling. moving down to chris in massachusetts, also with experience in the welfare program. hi, chris. caller: hi. good morning. host: good morning. tell us your story. caller: so many things that bother me about welfare i could talk to you for a week, you know. there are two things that really struck me that maybe going to -- made me going to call. two callers ago, talked about not going after the fathers. i think this should be a criminal offense if you don't pay your child support. i know many, many, many men that owe thousands and thousands of dollars and have started new
families success more kids and they still owe all these astronomical amounts of money. they just abandon their kids financially. you know, and they don't go after them at all. that bothers me. it should be a criminal offense. that's the first thing that came to my mind. host: ok. what else? caller: then the second one is they're not really getting off welfare because when they implement these programs because they pay for their daycare, the kids' daycare, and the daycare costs more than what the person is getting in the first place. if you have two children, it's almost twice as much as what hey were getting on welfare. so that's another thing that i never understood, you know. host: chris, thank you for calling and sharing your thoughts. we are now going to hear from then senator and late senator paul wellstone of minnesota. during this 1996 senate debate
over welfare reform, he made the case against the cuts that these reforms would impose. >> slashing close to $60 billion in low income assistance is not reform, colleagues. it is punitive. it is harsh. and it is extreme. mr. president, we have been focusing in this congress on the budget different. i think today what we see in the united states senate is a spiritual deficit. because mr. president, i know some of my colleagues don't want to look at this. they turn their gaze away from unpleasant facts. and an unpleasant reality. sometimes people don't want to know what they don't want to know. but mr. president, the evidence is irrefutable and iruse
hello, little. -- will. caller: good morning, sir. host: good morning. caller: i have a problem with the question as a whole. host: ok. caller: i mean, we're always talking about personal welfare but we're never talking about the real crooks in this society, is corporate welfare. everyone knows that's where all the big money goes. host: one of our viewers just mentioned that at facebook but keep going will. tell us more. caller: i'm at a point where i really -- i'm losing faith of america. when we talk about trickled-down economics, welfare is being used to say wait, we're given a few pennies to needy families when corporate america, the big wigs are running away with a house. that's what we have in this disparity in income now. the little guys are getting worse and the big guys are getting better. and hell, we're sitting here
quibbling over a few mothers get a few extra pennies to feed their kids. it's almost getting to the point that it's ridiculous for me to have these arguments because they're not socially equal arguments. i mean, we're arguing on different planets. if we're going to have this ridiculous argument about welfare reform, why don't we look at the real, real -- umm, umm -- money grabbers who are really taking the funds away from society. host: will, thank you for calling. david is on the line from alabama, independent caller. good morning to you, david. caller: good morning. i just want to say that the bill that bill clinton did sign was monumental. it did help a lot of people. i have a niece that was on welfare and it seemed like it ot her out of the never-ending
ride of welfare and she even took more pride in her work and all. and i got a question who plemented wick and is it attached to welfare? host: tell us about your interest in wick. why do you ask? caller: well it really helped out some of the people that were on welfare and a lower income and it seemed like it really did help those families. and i don't know much about it but if you do, i'd like to hear about it. host: back to the welfare program, david, you talked about the success at least in the area that you are close to, the folks that you're close to. any changes after 20 years that you would recommend? caller: oh, really? the program it seems to be working pretty good right now. i don't know of anybody i'm close to. i just knew my niece at the time
that was on it and it seemed like it really helped her after the bill was signed. host: thank you for calling. let's hear from rachel now. she lives in ohio, experience with the welfare system. i, rachel. caller: i've been on disability due to an accident and i've been receiving food stamps. my comment is the fact that it just blows my mind that everybody talks about welfare reform and yet they talk about the child obesity and obesity in general in america and yet when you're on food stamps, you can buy all the cakes and the cookseys and the pop, etc., the sodas that you -- as much as you want as long as you got the food stamps for them but you can't buy soaps and shampoo and stuff like that. and it just kind of blows me away.
and the other comment i had, i know just like the guy from alabama just said, you know there, are lots of people that welfare is just a step until they get on their feet and can actually get a good job but there are others who are just depending on the welfare system and it's like the more children --y have, you know, the more i do know a couple of cases of that. -- they wonder what have about those people being trained for a job and forced to work, in other words. and the drug testing thing is great. host: thank you for calling, rachel. you might be interested in this story and others. it comes from maine. it's from the press herald. they spoke recently about maine's compromised welfare reform bill taking effect. and championed by republicans and democratics, they say as a way to restore credibility of
the state's administration. a federal administration coming into effect. -- host: they point out here that maine joins kansas, new york, and massachusetts and other states that have also restricted the use of public assistance funds since the recession. anna is calling from georgia. anne has experience with the welfare system. good morning. caller: i've had relatives who have taken welfare and i know the kinds of things that they went through and they've had food stamps. i think that -- my concern with welfare is it really needs to be more comprehensive. i know you mentioned that we were really just talking about the welfare program earlier in
the program. i think we can consider it an isolation. it has to be considered with other things such as the minimum wage and such as the comprehensive return to work program where we really need to have people maybe people who are actually getting welfare checks being trained to do jobs they can do and actually doing those jobs while they're on welfare. as sort of a cooperative program along with the welfare. to me, it just can't exist in isolation. there has to be trained to get a job. and i know many people start on welfare and then wind up getting -- and i've had this happen in families as well where somebody has actually started on welfare and later gotten into disability insurance. and then they've collected disability insurance and then stayed on that for many, many years. and at some point, i think there has to be a program that will
just incorporate all of these aspects into one program. we can't isolate it. host: and clara is on the republican line. sarah what, do you make of welfare reform at 20? caller: well, we're always going to have a need for welfare and it's not perfect. but until we start changing things, we need to make sure that we can get it fixed. i hear people talk about drug testing these people that are already down on their luck. we don't drug test the middle eastern countries when we send them aid to essentially welfare for their people. but some of the comments about welfare being linked to other programs, i agree with that. they have to be fixed first. but the solution that i would offer with regards to this is
that get congress out of it. go to the people. have representatives that are actually on the program from each county, each state in our country. bring those people together. give them airfare. bring them to washington, d.c. interview the people that are actually using it. ask for their opinions on what can be done, how the system is. not working -- how the system is working. because we can complain all day long about what's wrong with the system. but it's saving a lot of people's lives. and parenting. i hear people talking about getting these people back to working train them to work. a lot of these people have depression. that's not an illness that you can see. will have to have empathy here somewhere. give them parenting classes. i mean, i don't really know what the answers are going to be, but i don't think we can just throw the program away and if we're going to complain about what's
bad about it, we also need to recognize what's good about it. and it's saving lives. host: clara, thank you for calling. we'll do this for about 15 more minutes, taking your calls on the welfare reform bill at 20 years. it was signed in 1996. are changes needed? here's a broad overview from the census bureau on government assistance programs. some statistics. they report that 21% of people in the u.s. -- 43% of the people stayed in the ogram -- host: and mike has been hanging on in atkinson, north carolina, independent caller. hey, mike. caller: good morning.
i'm aware that there's a lot of moochers on the system but there's some people out there that are really trying. and if that be the case, i think if we were to allow them to work overtime untaxed, it would go a long way to helping them out. host: ok. let's hear from becky now. becky this greenwood, south carolina. becky, you have experience with welfare programs? caller: yes. but it was in ohio and it was back when i first started. host: got it. what was life back then? caller: obviously. -- horrible. when i was finally get enough money to get a divorce because i was working seven days a week two jobs, i finally got a divorce. when we were sitting in front of the courthouse in front of the judge, i was given assistance at that time because my youngest son just got out of the hospital and i wasn't able to keep a job.
and the judge gave me child support of $100 a month because it was getting assistance. and then i was -- i did graduate from college. i was able to go back to substitute teaching but there was no one to be able to go through the whole, you know, getting the assistance on the second shift. they close at 4:00. i had to miss a day of work. they counted that day against me like i would get money. i wasn't able to go back to work that day because i had to take the whole day off. you know, and miss those two appointments. and they need somebody to -- if you're going to make everybody work, you need to have somebody many there second shift in case people are lucky enough to have a first shift job. host: so becky, bring this up to present day, could you see changes being made to the program 20 years later? caller: there should be.
host: anything specific? caller: yes. they should not just have the office close at 4:00. they should have people working second shift. if you expect everybody to work, you should be able to make it work. there are somebody there that if you're lucky enough to have a first shift job, you can go and still make an appointment and that you can -- i had to fight and fight and fight to finally get somebody to meet me after my work hours. the gentleman that met me made more in two hours than i would make the whole day because they paid him so much overtime to meet with me. host: becky, thank you for calling. we'll have several events on this topic tomorrow on the network. tomorrow, august 22, marks the 20th anniversary of the welfare laws. so monday at 9:00 p.m., tomorrow at 9:00 p.m., we'll take a look back at the archives. so we'll go back to this bill that was passed by a republican congress. signed by president bill
clinton. the law that changed the existing welfare programs by creating programs and imposing time limits. this starts at 9:00 tomorrow on c-span. we also have a couple of events during the day. one of them is on c-span2 at 9:00 in the morning at the cato institute and the other one is tomorrow at 3:00 p.m. at the american enterprise institute. and the one over at a.e.i. will include john angler and tommy thompson of wisconsin. they were very much involved along with senator jim talent in creation of this law. so that's tomorrow at 3:00 p.m. here is a look at heritage foundation event from last week. we hear in this piece, this clip, who crafted several key components of this law. he talked about the goal back in 1996 and where the federal government is fallen short. >> the goals that we had back then, i think are valid goals. they were not to cut welfare
spending. they were not to boot people on to the street, but rather to say that welfare should not be a one-way handout, that welfare should assist people who need assistance, but it should also encourage and essentially demand work and more importantly, i think where welfare reform has fallen short is we were very concerned 20 years ago about the percentage of people who were born outside of marriage which has continued to go up and which is the root cosmonaut only of poverty, but many, many other social problems. we need to do something to address that. i think the next stage in that is very clearly that we need to change these welfare programs starting with the eitc that currently penalize low income mothers and fathers when they get married. that's an absolutely crazy thing to do. i mean, if you were just to sit down in abstract and invent what should we really not do in
welfare? it would be let's put a financial penalty on every low income mother and father when they decide to marry. host: you can watch that heritage event and others related to welfare reform at c-span.org. just type in welfare reform and you'll see a lot of stuff there. and maya us on the line now from phoenix, a democrat. good morning. caller: good morning. i just think it's unfair that when people that receive welfare, when they find a job, they automatically receive child care assistance. i make $13 an hour. i pay $800 a month for daycare. i applied for child care assistance through the state and i was put on a waiting list. it already has 2,000 people on there. but if you're on the welfare and you get a job, you automatically receive child care assistance. i think that is very unfair. host: anything else, maya?
i think she's gone. anna from new castle, delaware, republican. good morning to, you anna. changes needed to the welfare program? caller: it's a bad time. we should stop all this free stuff. i say you know, we have the people are -- the girls are quitting school about 15 or 16 years old, having babies. they don't even know who their fathers. and they sit there on wick, hich i never went on wick. i never went on food stamps. i raised my three children. i said none of this food stamps and welfare and the subsidized housing, child care. snap, the chips. you know, the government was never meant to keep us. but out there -- go out there and work. and if you have a husband that leaves you, then make him pay.
but don't continue to have one baby after another and expect the taxpayers to pay for them. host: thanks for calling, anna. we'll get to more of your calls. the "washington post" editorialized this a short time ago. they write that up on the hill, the ways and means key has passed a half dozen minor tweaks to the program this year, talking about the temporary assistance for needy families, including a tightening of the rules about state spending.
host: the free support for child care to help parent who is hold low wage jobs with unpredictable schedules, and a mechanism for increasing funding during recessions. welfare reform has serve third poor and the country as a whole, better than its many critics predicted but not as wales it might, writes the "post." after 20 years, welfare reform needs reformed. we have bob on the line now from boston, independent caller. good morning, bob. caller: hello? host: yes, sir. you're on the air. caller: oh, hi. i'm a baby boomer. i grew up in the projects at the 1950's and 1960's. and like -- to me, it doesn't seem like nothing is changing. i know people that lived in the projects all their lives, collecting welfare, generation after generation and going on and on and on. and i think that the main to -- thes for people
parent or guardian should have at least $25,000 in the bank. otherwise, the federal government takes that child and educates it. is se the only way change going to happen is just got to -- you got break the system the way it is. but the federal government and the child should benefit from the overall investment. and i think that -- host: all right. thank you for calling, bob, from boston. let's hear from bud from texas. what's the name of your town, bud? caller: sacksy. -- sachse. host: you grew up in the welfare system? caller: no, i grew up on it. i saw a lot of abuse from it. host: what did see? caller: well, you just see people trading into their
elfare stamps in for cash. a shop will take a welfare check or welfare payment, food stamps. it's the same thing that's going on today. host: so what's the answer? caller: well i don't know what the answer is. maybe we need to put i.d. cards on these things. i don't know exactly what's happening state to state. but here's what i do know. somebody mentioned earlier about whether welfare recipient should be drug tested or not. they should be because as for a good percentage of our money is going. and veterans are being drug tested every day. every day across america, vets are getting tested just to receive the right they earned.
host: bud, thank you for calling this morning. we'll get a couple of other calls in. one tweet from a viewer says welfare is from a different era. with internet and technology, we can now think wealth. think wealth, not welfare. here's the "washington times" editorializing on this. unfortunately, they write, the 1996 reform was limited to only one welfare program. the federal government runs more than 80 such means tested programs. -
host: let's hear from jim from halifax, p.a., republican caller. caller: hey, thank you allowing me to voice my opinions. host: of course. caller: we're always attacking the poor people. obviously, there is always going to be abuse in any type of system. and those people that abuse it should be penalized. but my question is what about all this corporate welfare? how about the politicians that n deserts in texas getting paid not to farm it. something that's impossible to
farm are getting paid. paying people not to grow crops. that's how ludicrous. but then we have a government that says they can take our jobs overseas, give them away. what is that? that's welfare for the whole world? is this what we're doing? i'm a little agitated and i'm getting nervous and stuff. that's the thing. why do we always pick on the poor people? the ones that need it the most when the millionaires of yesterday are billionaires today? host: thank you, jim, despite your nervousness, you did get your point in. we appreciate you taking part in the program. jody writes at twitter. that welfare for the last 20 years, it has made the cracks that people fall through a bit smaller. but the cracks are still plenty big. kathy from michigan is on the line. good morning to you. so you have experience with the welfare system?
caller: well my first two children or my former spouse and i paid the midwives and the doctor for all of our bills in cash. nobody suggested that perhaps i look to medicaid. and i've had to do it over again, i would have. i have received food stamps when i had a job loss. and had i not receive them, we wouldn't have eaten. i've gone to food banks. it's difficult. but what i'd like to speak to is every government employee and we can start down there in washington, receives welfare. they receive welfare in the form of subsidy for their health care. they receive welfare in their pensions. and that is never spoken to. they point their fingers. they admonish people. but they receive, really, so much more than the poor receive.
host: should that be changed? caller: oh, i would change it. i would really get rid of the majority of government pensions, state, local and federal. people need to pay into their own. if i'm expected to do it as a hospital worker, then i expect the government workers to do the same. otherwise, the government should be paying into my pension at the hospital that i work in along with all my coworkers. ost: thank you, kathy. abu from liberty, south carolina, democratic caller. go ahead, abu. caller: yes, good morning. i had experience on the paying that is a are system father paying child support. but my situation was somewhat unique because i bought my first me from h.u.d. in 1973 for
$200. paid in full. and i took seven years renovating that house. so i by passed the whole mortgage and became self-employed, fixing these houses. i started buying more. but the price started going up. when everybody else found out about the program. well come to find out somebody told their wife where did you get the welfare? before i knew it, they had given this woman $6,000. she started using her maiden name and started collecting checks and i didn't know anything about it. and they started giving the government the -- and it turned out that she wasn't even eligible for welfare. it does need reform and one of the best ways they could start is say well, if you have this
rocky relationship when your child turns 5, give the mother every other weekend and one night a week and you'll watch how fast you'll see marriages will reform welfare because the lady knows that he's going to lose the children at the age of 5 and he's going to pay child support, i bet the marriage will stick together much stronger. host: the word of abu in south carolina. if you did not get in during this first 45 minutes, we're going to do this again on the back end of the program. we'll talk about the welfare reform at 20, signed by bill clinton. look for us at about 9:25 or so this morning. we'll carry on with more calls on this topic. but in the meantime, we do have a couple of guests to tell you about. coming up in a couple of minutes, we'll look at the hillary clinton approach to foreign policy with brian
katulis of the center for american progress. and a bit later, walid phares will join us. he is a donald trump presidential advisor also on the topic of foreign affairs. but also want to let you know about "newsmakers," our program today at 10:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. eastern time features roger stone, a longtime friend of donald trump. and during this interview, we comment on what to expect from mr. trump in the fall's presidential debate with hillary clinton. that first debate is set for september 26. >> you don't know where he's going to come at hillary. you don't know whether it's going to be in regard to bill clinton's telling military secrets, missile guidance secrets to the chinese in return for campaign contributions or whether it will be the 1994 crime bill that has incarcerated entire generation of black men, african-americans for
non-violent crimes including the possession of small amounts of drugs. a bill that hillary said was necessary because blacks were super predators who needed to be brought to heal or perhaps he will focus on the clinton foundation or perhaps he will focus on benghazi and the various lives that hillary told in her testimony before congress , or perhaps it will be this new round of lies that she apparently told to the congress regarding her e-mail. you never know where donald trump might come. but he's a brawler and if she tacks him as a song -- misogynist, she will be opening the door to the full story of oderick, lily, jones, dowdy, brown, greyson, wellstone -- shall i continue? >> would you advise donald trump to bring up bill clinton's past
in this debate? would you advise him to bring up the lewinsky scandal or paula jones or anything like that? >> only with this relevance, bill clinton is not running for president but rather than supporting the president, hillary clinton led the campaign to intimidate fully and threaten those women into silence. that's a provable fact and i expect in the fall that many of these women will be speaking out . now i know that the thugs around clinton will seek to discredit them. oh, they're liars, they're trash, they're being paid. all of that is false. anybody who's been through rape or sexual assault does not want to relive it, particularly on the front pages of the country, of the newspapers. host: and you can watch "newsmakers" with roger stone today, sunday. 10:00 a.m. eastern time after this program with a repeat at 6:00 p.m. eastern time. joining us at the table now is
brian katulis. he's a national security senior fellow at the center for american progress action fund. thanks for joining us. guest: good to be with you, paul. host: we're here to talk about the foreign policy plans and agenda of hillary clinton and donald trump. what do you see is the difference between the two of them? hillary clinton and donald trump in the foreign policy area. guest: this is a stark contrast here. for the first time in several generations, we actually have a real divide where donald trump has a much less optimistic and very negative view of america and where we are. in the world whereas secretary clinton projects a view of confidence, of engagement, of strength. donald trump has a fixation, a strange fixation with autocrats like vladimir putin and russia whereas secretary clinton places a premium on our allys and our values and working with countries that are also
democratic. there really is both in terms of tone and substance a stark contrast and the biggest emphasize is just her experience and knowledge compared to his lack of experience and his poor judgment. i think he's demonstrated that sfrl times in the last few weeks on a number of issues and i think there's a real choice here for america when it comes to foreign policy. host: as a national security fellow for center for american progress, what do you see as the biggest threats facing the u.s. right now? guest: right now, obviously the threats that many of us think about from the islamic state and isis and terrorism are at the forefront. but there are other issues, frankly, paul, that we're not talking about in this election as much. in part because donald trump has downgraded the quality of our election. you know, instead of debating whether president obama created isis or hillary clinton, we should be talking about what's the next step in the fight against that. but some of the other threats
that we're not talking about include cyber security, with the hack of the democratic national committee that we've seen over the last couple of years on a regular basis, hacks done by state sponsored entities or individuals. that's one. second and quite obviously, global climate change. why was the hottest month on record that we've ever seen and it comes from the heels of a detected of very high temperatures. and i think president obama and secretary clinton has recognized this to the factor. donald trump denies that it's even a factor. that's another challenge that we're not having a debate about what to do next. host: phone number is at the bottom of the screen for our guests. we are with brian katulis, a national security senior fellow for the center for american progress. we look forward to your phone calls in just a couple of
minutes. and we'll take a look at a piece of tape here from donald trump speaking about hillary clinton's foreign policy. donald trump: in short, hillary clinton wants to be america's angela merkel. and you know what a disaster this massive immigration has been to germany and the people of germany. crime has risen to a level that no one thought they would ever see. it is a catastrophe. we have enough problems in our country. we don't need more. host: donald trump hitting hillary clinton on there with refugee policy. what's your reaction? guest: this is a great example of how donald trump offers some sort of vague criticism without any reference at all to what her actual policy would be on immigration and refugees. and then he doesn't offer an alternative.
it's similar to what we've seen on other fronts. he has secret plan to defeat isis but he never tells you what it is. so again, when i talk about downgrading the quality of our debate and. of of my friends are republicans agree with this is that we have some real issues of keeping america safe. we're just not debating them because donald trump offers a bunch of conspiracy theories or vague criticisms. host: having you here gives us the chance to dig into the details of hillary clinton's policy on refugees. what's her policy? guest: i think she recognizes that from an interest standpoint and a value standpoint that there's something we need to do to help refugees either from syria or other places, but it shouldn't solely be about us. i think her position would be how do we look at this period of time that we're in in the world and find some sort of way where
americans can accept a limited number of people who are vetted to come here. people who are experiencing threats to their lives. and i would highlight people lining the -- like the translators who work in afghanistan who are at risk. and she would have a much more measured approach would certainly abide by strong vetting of those individuals. but the emphasis would be about getting partners and allies to accept some of these. and i think the last thing i would say is that when you hear her talk about foreign policy questions, the biggest resolution, i think, to this crisis is to solve these conflicts whether it's syria or libya or other places where people are coming from. and i think working with our partners and allies to make those places more stable so they don't feel like they need to flee those places would be key on it. host: our guest has a master's degree in princeton in international affairs and brian
katulis is advised u.s. policymakers on foreign policy. he worked at the national security council at the state defense depept during the bill clinton administration and he is here to take your call. first one from arthur. by the way, do you have a direct role in the clinton campaign? guest: i am one of many informal advisors who offer her views but i'm here speaking in my own capacity with the center for american progress action fund. so and what we've seen over the last few months is because he is such a strong record knowledge, there are a lot of people that want to join whether it's democratic and republican. a lot of people are concerned about trump but i'm just an informal advisor in what i say here and not for the campaign. host: got it. arthur, you're on with brian katulis. caller: yes. more lling about who is qualified for -- to be our president as far as foreign
policies are concerned. i think hillary clinton is more qualified. she has the experience. she's been there. donald trump has never even handled a -- and never even been in the service period. and other thing i would like to say, as far as him telling all african-americans to vote for him, this man is a racist and a bigot and he want us to vote for him? and the people that he's got in his campaign running his said gn are racist and he point black on live tv that african-americans were inferior and they were superior and we were nothing but -- and he is trump's an as far as campaign. i think any african-americans that vote for donald trump got
to be sick in the head. host: all right, arthur. going to hear from our guest, brian katulis. anything you want to react there? guest: what arthur says is really an important part of how we project our image around the world. and a lot of the things that donald trump has said about various communities and how people from those communities feel about that in america is a part of our engagement with the world. i travel maybe once or twice a month overseas to the middle east to europe, to other places and people have been watching closely how donald trump has talked about us as a nation. and one thing that i think secretary clinton has been strong is is talking on the value of pluralism that our greatness america comes from the diversity that we represent and projecting that and how we engage with other countries. i think it is essential and donald trump, when he vilifies certain communities like muslim-american communities, he undermibes our abilities to keep
americans safe, our law enforcement agencies and others have been working for years. and it's nearly 15 years after the 9/11 attack. to detect threats and work with these communities closely and when donald trump vilifies some of them, it actually undermines our ability to keep americans safe. host: let's try another republican caller from oklahoma, karen. caller: yes, talk about racist, that last man talking about blacks that want to have a better life is an uncle tom. wow. and he says trump's a racist. you know, they -- i don't know -- they claim that trump doesn't have a plan on the refugees. he has a plan. and that's the -- to make sure when they come in that they'll go according to the american way. you are wanting to bring more people in more $20 million in debt and you're bringing these and you are bringing these people with no jobs and no homes
and no food, let's take care that went 22 of them a day are committing suicide. or old people, let's take care of them so they are not deciding between eating or taking their medicine. on the ground in syria, how does phillies things? the only thing she can teach us is how to lie and be corrected and steel out of the white house when they leave. a man at a fundraiser, where is the media on that? democrats and their beating up old people. calling.nk you for other priorities other than refugees. guest: i think a lot of those priorities if you look carefully at secretary clinton passes agenda, the whole campaign, a
speech about the economy, and a top priority is creating jobs for americans and rebuilding our infrastructure and doing these sorts of things that i think is essential to make america strong. we need to be strong at home to be strong abroad. a couple of things karen said are very important, needing to honor our veterans. how we talk about our veterans, who i think many are facing a difficult situation at home, and have lost their lives, honoring their sacrifices, no matter their background like we saw with donald trump, we did not see the level of respect to a soldier who had fallen in our sos over the last month or in comments by donald trump. ae last thing i will say at what karen said overall, it points to a challenge we have as a country and if hillary clinton
is elected president, no matter what, i think america needs to try to come together and build a consensus at home about what is the right way to strike our balance in foreign policy. when do we send troops and when do we not? please to have this in different something i personally try to do is work with some of my friends who are more conservative think tanks and institutions, trying to rebuild an argument of a common sense and purpose for reaping a safe at home. host: let me get your reaction in thee lead story washington post today. immigration overhaul is one parts -- one policy goal. one area where i think immigration is important is some of our economic strength here at home, some of the more skilled technical workers we have had in our high -- in our industry,
have come in on specialized recess. reminding ourselves that a lot and others in the world, they created many jobs by individuals who came to america because they saw america as a begin of innovation. i understand why people feel the way we do and how they are linked politically and fears and concerns, i think we're in a different era, we need to manage it wisely and take care of our people here at home, but we need to be open to the idea that we need to reform the system. is not clear it the practicality of it, even some of his foreign policy advisers say his ideas, is not clear you could actually implement them. hillary clinton has an idea to keep america connected to the but in a way that keeps
america safe. a more detailed proposal on how you strike that balance. democratic caller. morning.ood thank you for c-span. i'm 89 years old and i have been in two wars. i served all over the pacific four times. i hear people calling it to you. not one of them, the black sea or the mediterranean. right into the beast, the persian gulf. , where ist to say
donald trump talking about $400 million? the guy pays taxes, you pay taxes, the people calling in pay taxes. and we have a man talking about $400 million of our money, iranian money, and banks in europe. says that everything will be .ine my good friends in america, donald trump does not pay taxes. you are paying taxes. he is really neat -- leading you down over a ditch. the ditch is getting bigger, not smaller. he went down to louisiana, did he bring toys? they had nowhere to put the toys on.
thank you for your service and the wars and again come we need to recognize and honor people like you who served our country in such a way. what i was saying earlier about has reallytrump brought our level of debate about foreign policy issues to a much lower level than i think we would've had if there were a different nominee for the republican party, i think your party helped crystallize that, that we have serious issues in the persian gulf and very serious challenges with iran despite a nuclear deal that i think was one of the most important accomplishments of the inma administration preventing another war in the middle east and preventing iran from getting a nuclear weapon. iran still place a role in other parts of the middle east where civil war in yemen
and in syria these days. i think secretary clinton has outlined a pragmatic vision where we would push back against the negative role that iran has terroristn funding groups and we kind of structure .n the middle east we need to build partnerships to solve these issues. secretary clinton is better poised to be able to do that. talk with brian ka tulis for another 20 minutes or so. work on only foreign-policy issues. i know we have a range of foundations that provide support, but the key is there is a mix. been there for 11 years and
never once felt like anyone could say to me this is what your issue should be on a certain issue. we interview people and offers -- offer our own analysis, give or take. and i think it is an important question and you can go to our website to see who is offering our support. host: david, independent caller. fascinated by brian's comments on the think tanks and institutions coming together to find common purpose. do not think about common purpose once there is a candidate in office. thecommon purpose in national security environment is provided by intelligence. this is david, good to see you, brian. i am curious what your thoughts are on the use of intelligence
in the election campaign. how each candidate will use intelligence even in the campaign briefings themselves and how do you think that might play out during the campaign and during the transition itself? this is coming from a man like you who just has written a book about this and who would this willabout how impact or shape our dialogue. i think there are obvious concerns given his express affinity for russia, given many advisors making millions of dollars working with russia and ukraine and other places, about how he would use the classified intelligence briefings he just started getting last week. it -- he is getting something that i think helped what is going on
in the world. it is on par with what secretary clinton receives as well. i think the biggest concern many people have is that donald trump seems to be operating at such a deficit of knowledge and a base of knowledge about what is happening in particular quarters of the world, he has a lot more homework to do then secretary clinton. unfortunate that the intelligence community works very hard to get the best information possible to the commander-in-chief, the president of the united states and members of congress, and i think many times be issues get caught up in our politics. it is risky, trying to preserve their neutrality in their independence. it is essential to help our current leaders and possible future leaders make the best decision available to them. tell us more about what you are writing? theer: i wrote a book about
history of the presidential intelligence, the president's look of secrets. by think it was interesting the take on political aspects of , during the campaign beyond the intelligence, which cannot be talked about its silly but the fact that the candidates are even talk in about the intelligence briefings is unusual. guest: during the campaign beyod the intelligence, which cannot be talked about its silly but the and that is one of the things i was trying to say, any time there were these sensitive -- it is not a good thing for the broader interest of trying to keep all of our -- all americans of different -- it is essential it strong. host: let's talk about hillary clinton's plans for dealing with isis.
mrs. clinton: over the past year, i have laid out my plan for defeating isis. they need to take out strongholds in iraq in syria by intensifying the air campaign and stepping up support on the ground. we need to keep pursuing diplomacy to and syria's civil war and a sectarian divide because those conference are keeping isis alive. lash up with our allies and ensure intelligence services are working hand in hand to dismantle a global network that supplies money, arms, propaganda, to the terrorists. we need to win the battle in cyberspace. [applause] of course we need to strengthen our defenses here at home. that in a nutshell is my plan for defeating isis. we are seeing it already
work. that is cut from the same cloth of the strategy that president obama has outlined and then reiterated just earlier this after he got his briefing from national security officials. hear fromnk you secretary clinton is a sophisticated, multilayered that is not solely about how many boots on the ground or what americans can do, but is at it -- at its core the alliances. i know this for my work in the middle east and travels there quite regularly is when we have , jordan, egypt, countries like this that are on the front lines like this, we see in northern syria some progress because of the partnerships we built with the kurds.
quite clearly, every time an administration changes hand and a new president comes in, they write off and build policies on what the predecessor did, even when you had the party change from george -- george w. bush from brock up -- to barack obama, he picked up where bush left off and i think secretary clinton will do that. her strategy is quite similar. a little bit of a more robust view of what they might do insert certain areas like syria, fly zone, for a no but made it clear would not just the and american no-fly zone. it would be one that is to be built in partnership with a coalition. .e cannot do it ourselves she is emphasized and no-fly zone in syria would not he in the entire entry. keep syriactually safe, going back to the immigration question, so you do
not have a flood of millions of refugees. is lesson americans learned we cannot do it all. we need to have partners. we need to reinforce the partnerships with some of our traditional allies, whether it is israel or egypt or jordan. that is an essential part of the game plan going forward. host: i want to get our guest's reaction to this washington post piece. they write that donald trump is not the only front runner whose foreign policy views are sparking anger around the rest of the world. because of the four-year record, , the level ofn vitriol does not match the comments regarding the potential republican rival or her republican rival. the critiques are not always consistent. a continuation of the obama foreign policy that has foreign debts fallen short.
he will break markedly with mr. obama. while trump passes foreign policy seems random and unpredictable, and he actually bragged about this, it is hard to see how clinton's approach towards much better. any reaction? my first reaction is it is not a surprise that what the next'-- president's's looks like is a major source of debate. people in the america, including donald trump, saying america is weaker or does not matter, all the people overseas who say america has seen a power decline, i have seen this all the time and when we travel abroad. people are deeply concerned about what the current and next president might do. we are seen as the unrivaled global power despite china's rise and despite russia in the last year or two.
seen as the standardbearer of all of this. it is not surprising to me and not having the benefit of hearing specific criticism, that people are raising concerns whatever president clinton's foreign policy might look like. of the debate and that demonstrates american foreign-policy matters for all of those including donald trump who says we're weak, or not as strong, i think he key is how do we use that to build partnerships around the world. ohio, independent caller, thank you for holding on. caller: i am just calling to say , shery clinton's policies cannot even take care of the united p or she makes deals and you all just let her go on and go on. she is making deals around the world and we don't know nothing. you all keep everything in secret. y'all won't tell anybody.
used to have cats running around and you do not even see cats running around hardly anymore. why is that? heredon't bring them in yelled don't assimilate them, yet you want to go take care of they country. our country is falling apart. i hear your concerns and your inside it. i think many people feel the same way. athink if you look carefully what hillary clinton has been saying about our role in the world, it is to try to get others around the world to pull their weight. that the united states is a key to all of this, but our allies need to take care of a lot of these challenges. i think what you are saying desk felt by americans all around saying what about the burden at home? if you look carefully at the agenda you get from hillary , you have an approach
that is complete, it puts the forefront strong here at home continuing the process of soing to expand prosperity more people into thousand eight and 2009, we have a revival. i mentioned what she given michigan earlier this summer, they she has a template that is not about solving the world's problems. stronger and safer when engaged in the world. what i said about continuity between the two administrations, she left her position as secretary of state in 2013 and a
lot has happened with russia and russia's dangerous actions. pragmatist, she is a trying to work with russia when and where we can. as i was trying to explain with the isis fight, she probably would have a more robust response, whether in the crimea peninsula in the ukraine, her response in syria would be .lightly different one thing i am besides especially the summer, i talk about this being a big issue. many analysts trace that back to moscow and russia and we have seen what happened right in advance of the democratic , i thinkn this summer one of the biggest issues globally is going to be cyber security and clearly, evidence demonstrates the trail to a lot
of problems we see here at home and in the world with cyber sick ready come from russia and a little bit from china as well. thehas learned from experience of sitting across the table from russian negotiators to negotiate a nuclear arms agreement that led to a arms, she knows how to deal with these guys in a way that i think her opponent clearly does not demonstrate. host: from charlotte, north carolina, democratic caller for brian katulis. hi, steve. caller: hillary's foreign policy is the reason i am not voting for her. i want to emphasize a lot of us out here are quite disappointed. kissinger, we can go on and on and on, seeing the neil realpolitik. what particular issue or part of the world or country, what are you seeing?
continuede intimidation of both the chinese and the russians, you know, i understand they're trying to itp the excuses, try to keep open for commerce, it feels like it is complete intimidation. .utting the missiles in poland we can go on and on down the list. strong arming, real, neil realpolitik. we're basically we just say one thing and then beef up the military. it is getting pretty old for a lot of us out here. host: thank you for calling. guest: i know a lot of democrats share that view and we heard that especially in the primary fight. again, my personal view is i don't think hillary clinton is into the category of neoconservative. especially in the last
couple of years and if you look at her record as secretary of state, her record has been trying to elevate diplomacy first. we saw that with iran. i think it is the best example where there are a number of voices, including within the democratic party, that were saying we might have to go to war with iran. she was the chief diplomat that initiated the diplomacy and not only the diplomacy with iran but importantly, with global partners like china and russia to oppose a sanctions regime that got iran to make a deal. so, the other thing i would say is when you compare the alternative, hillary clinton as as donald trump, progressive, someone who is a liberal who believes diplomacy should be first, and the other tool of national power, i think you have got a better choice
when you compare to donald trump , his close alignment with dictators, and others. you know, i understand a lot of the mistakes made under the bush administration and even some of the moves under the obama administration. hillary clinton, you have got a potential candidate who could strike the right balance. host: let me add two that the voice of reuters commentary appeared must not revert back to the u.s. foreign-policy status quo grounded in the theory that military force in intervention hold the key to prosperity and has brought later -- little in the way of either peer the u.s. forces have been engaged in military action in the middle east, militancy and instability have increased, not decreased. with the word hawk apply to hillary clinton? guest: these labels, i think, are a little archaic and outdated. even liberal interventionist or neocon, things used to describe
the foreign-policy camp. we are in a different political moment and the best demonstration of this in the classroom republican party on national security, fragmentation just did not occur with donald trump winning his nomination. it began earlier and i think it started with mistakes of the iraq war and the different caps that emerged even in the bush administration. i do not know what people mean when they say hawk. i think they are implying something about the use of military force that does not apply to what i understand hillary clinton as a president would operate. her speeches and statements. in the iran case when she was secretary of state, she quite clearly was hawkish about diplomacy as the first tool. quite clearly, if you look at other cases, in some cases succeeded and in some cases did not, with diplomacy first. when i talked about the need to
build a new global consensus, and also a consensus at home about u.s. engagement in the world, we need to have a much more considered debate and dialogue that i think we have been able to have as donald -- with donald trump as an opponent. host: jerry, democratic line. caller: thank you for taking my call. i do not think steve is a democrat. my comment was, and my question is, does he think -- what does he think europe would look like without nato? again rid ofonce nato and hillary clinton wants to strengthen it. i cannot imagine what europe would look like with donald trump and putin in control. and the trump and so forth, they want to say they want to take their country back and make america great again, but what they really want to do is oppressed people again. the gop is the new kkk in my
opinion. that is my comment. host: first of all, what the you hear from donald trump in terms of nato? guest: i see a voicing again of a very vague criticism and a ties with allies like nato in a way that has rattled them, that has actually made them nervous. events of the last couple of years, russia's action in the ukraine, support for far right wing political parties in some of the countries of europe, they are really disconcerted a lot of our nato allies. i do not think donald trump has offered a clear formula the lot -- beyond we might not stand by you. that is what his alignment with putin israeli a very dangerous thing for american interests
because for decades -- during the cold war and after, the u.s. worked, whether it was a republican or democratic president to strengthen the transatlantic relationship with our european allies. areeuropean allies today under severe strain, first economic and now refugee and now russia under putin, that is anding the buttons presenting new security challenges. to have donald trump come in as president and even a candidate, ine damage has been done terms of the heads, the nominee of a major party of the united states aligning himself with russia and putin and basically degrading our allies who have an with us for decades. different moment and that is why anyone on the fence , one concern i have a lot of my friends in the republican party who have
written letters, signed letters, and said donald trump is actually dangerous, and yet they are sitting on the answer now. that is bad in the long run even if hillary is in is elected president because we need to build the fabric of internationalism here at home in not a militaristic way. if those people sit on the fence, and we have seen, paul ryan, speaker of the house, issued his own national security plan. it is an attempt to distance themselves from donald trump, and from their own record on certain issues. i think what needs to happen is to try to figure out, to rebuild at the center of why partisan support. guest: -- host: brandon, good morning to you. caller: what i'm interested in hearing from you about is the strategy for iraq after isis is defeated.
that seems like a more critical role and i have not heard hillary or donald trump's solution for what will happen after isis is defeated. guest: that is a great question and we have been looking at it. i know a lot of think tanks have, one of my colleagues issued a report that you can find on our website based on research in the region and also with our military. we look at these factors because it is clear to me and a few you look at the facts of the last year, blows,s been -- military a big problem will be in the northwest city of mosul, but the main point of the report that my colleagues but out was to look what happens after the military campaign and i think a key part of it is how you actually help iraqis feel stable
in their own communities so they are not running in europe, and that entails working with iraqi partners, in their government to make people feel like they are safe. did not succeed under george w. bush, cannot do that at gunpoint. it is trying to get parties there either in iraq and those right around it, those countries that are engaged in a syria, toin iraq or in essence use their resources not to destroy but to try to build and make the country itself more stable. sadie from silver spring, maryland, independent caller. go ahead. think: yes, i don't aslary clinton would be good
president. i do not think she was good as secretary of state. guest: how come? caller: bad judgment and having that server in her basement and using a separate e-mail. i to be a contractor for the federal government. even i had to go to a cyber security training and a record -- record-keeping training. everyone does, whether you are a contractor or a government employee. so i know she did. judgmentnk she has bad and i think she will continue with the same foreign policy zest for -- as president obama. i think on trade, donald trump would be better and would at least renegotiate the trade agreements, whether it is nafta or the transpacific partnership and on illegal immigration, i think donald trump would be better.
would bring back jobs to america. i do not think he is dark and dangerous, ok? i don't believe that it i'm african-american. i am independent. and my vote is for donald trump. we need real change. host: thank you for calling. she began with that ad judgment line, the same one donald trump uses. what is your defense of that? record is the her best defense. when she sat in the situation room with president obama and the other members of the national security team and they about what decision to do with osama bin laden, she made the right call. you'll get asia and the policy to attempt to rebound the u.s. priorities, away from other parts of the world, i think she
has got the right template. you look at the fact, the transpacific partnership trade deal, you look at the details of core, she wants to keep america strong at home, create jobs here, and again, she wants to figure out if there is a better way to help america's workers first before we expose them to a lot of the challenges that might come with the asian trade agreement there. obviously entitled to our own field but i respectfully disagree. whatever you think about together aspects of the e-mail or other things that people bring up, if you look at the big picture, i think she has demonstrated strong judgment and a really great record as secretary of state. lynn, republican from texas or good morning. caller: a few things to say.
i noticed your gentlemen their new pretty much where he thought trumps money was coming from and how troubles getting money from russia and all his advisers were getting money from russia. but he did not know where his own money was coming from. seems to have a stumble when you asked about that. second thing, president obama and clinton had messed up the middle east beyond all comprehension. -- as ifabout iran and this were something to be proud of. it was never a good idea even when reagan was a republican. they will continue. you just call it a different name. it still thinks no matter what you call it. everyone is so trait -- afraid of donald trump and what he may or may not do and all of that. i'm old enough to remember
,ainly peace and prosperity which ike eisenhower and ronald reagan. whenever the russians would rattle too much, he would threaten them with nukes. in the world we in it is sometimes good to have people well armed andre about half crazy. it makes some sense. thank you so much. i disagree with that perspective. donald trump has been so far out of the mainstream, you have seen so many republicans that -- to effective from the party. when i hear the comparison between donald trump and white eisenhower and ronald reagan, it is not even a comparison between apples and oranges. it is apples and bicycles. it is so far outside the
mainstream way comes to support for russia, downgrading our close allies, and then the lack of consistent good judgment. we have a real choice in this election and we have not had generations,n where you have a candidate essentially saying we need to strong in thend world with restraint and you have another one that says we in essence need to turn our back on our closest partners and allies and cozy up to dictators. think the choice is clear and i think we will see in november what happened and after november, that is when the work really begins. our guest has been brian katulis pair you can read more at american progress.org. thank you for being with us on this sunday to share your thoughts. a little more than halfway through the sunday edition of the washington journal. more on foreign policy when we come back from the perspective
of the donald trump campaign to we will continue our discussion advisor tophares, the trump campaign. we will be right back. ♪ >> today, the c-span cities tour revisits some of the historical sites as they celebrate their 100th anniversary this month. spike and golden utah, or the golden spike was struck in 1869, completing the construction of the transcontinental railroad here it st. louis, we tour the tallest monuments of the nation. a memorial. located close by is one of the city passes most prominent landmarks. finally, we tour president harry s truman's white house, time here as he worked and relaxed. watch the cities tour today at
on c-spaneastern three. the c-span cities tour working with our cable affiliates and visiting cities across the country. >> book tv is live beginning at ,:00 p.m. eastern in washington a panel discussion with authors and educators about race relations is aiming the relationship between police and the african-american unity. aprilgton bureau chief ryan and offer -- author of the presidency of the presidency in black and white moderates that is russian. other panelists include a national correspondent, author , barack obama, the clintons, and the racial divide. clinton plessy center for african american studies chair, --
victoria christopher murray, author of stand your ground and university of baltimore school ,f law interim dean michael author of ghosts of jim crow, ending race -- watch live tuesday 7:00 p.m. eastern on c-span two. >> washington journal continues. ,ost: our guest is walid phares policy adviser to the trump campaign. how does donald trump see the world and the role of america? guest: as we heard from his speeches, he wants to see an america that is strengthened and defininged in terms of where the threat is coming, and of course, he would want to engage -- in the track of coalitions at partnership with them. he does not want the america
involved in every single case alone. he wants to be with coalitions and the last point is to have a consensus by the american public if we want to intervene or not. no principle of isolationism or interventionism, but to make consulting on these issues. i was involved in the romney campaign in 2011 and 2012. we had that experience and a number of republican candidates called on the previous experts and that is how i met mr. trump. he called on me only in march of the year to serve as policy advisor. one of the chum foreign-policy advisers, walid phares. our last guest said it is not a lot of detail in donald trump's foreign policy. let's start by talking about isis. aboutas donald trump said
his plan to defeat isis? more generalare directions in mr. trump's approach to defeating isis then and secretary clinton's, which said we would continue more of the same. basically the most important point is to end isis as an organization, not just as it is now, but end it as a future organization, meaning fighting the fight as well. as important on the ground, what is key in the right against isis is not just a military defeat of isis. it is who will take over after isis? isis came as a result of mistakes made in the way we left iraq in 2011 whereby we had defeated al qaeda but because of the political equation, isis was able to come back. asnking post isis is
important as how we will dismantle isis. you spoke about how trump talked about screening methods. here's what he had to say. mr. trump: we should only admit to our country those who share our values and respect our people. in the cold war, we had an ideological meaning test. -- screening test. the time is overdue to develop a new screening test for the threats we face today. i call it extreme vetting. extreme, extreme vetting. our country has enough problems. we do not need more. these are problems like we have never had before. [applause] [cheering] trump: in addition to screening out all members of the
sympathizers of terrorist groups, we must also screen out any who have hostile attitudes or whoour country believe that sharia law should supplant american law. [applause] mr. trump: those who do not believe in our constitution or hatred, will and not be admitted for immigration into our country. what does extreme vetting mean? guest: making sure the persons coming here are not connected to any other organization aiming at the united states. versus light vetting, and let me explain other points that are important. individuals who come to the united states to apply for immigration that is, when we do not have a war insert in areas, what is important our two things here at 22 years, i have been an
expert in immigration cases. hadfended them when they cases across the nation. of the country, you have a special case. where we should begin is to see if we would solve the issue. before we leave. in syria, there is a whole area ,n the northeastern part millions of syrian refugees. if you ask children, and many have asked them, where would you rather go, they say home. one policy is to make sure we should have basis for the syrian immigrants. the other would be to make sure the- it is not about -- arab countries themselves have a lot to teach us on the issue. call, dane, ohio, raymond. i had a couple of comments. i spent 18 months in turkey back
when president kennedy was killed and i could not have joined it anymore here they were wonderful people. jimmy carter had the hostages and his whole life was spent in the military and reagan comes in ,nd he worked some quid pro quo in 24 hours, whatever happened there? i asked karl rove that in a book signing here in dayton and he did not have an answer. he did not know. what goes on behind these doors, it is like cheney and mr. trump himself, they never served. i want people who served in our military. i cannot stand this. reagan never served. granted, mr. obama and clinton did not serve. it is trying -- time to end that here and there should be a law that requires that they had served. they do not have a clue, the mr.f they come up with,
trump, his comments about our military and our heroes, it is unbelievable that anyone would consider this man for president. it just cannot stand her and sorry. thank you sir. i understand where he coming from, of course, all citizens would like to see their commander in chief actually have experience, in the battlefield or service and not all of our presidents have had the privilege to do so. he named in number of presidents who do not serve, the fact that they are well advised. the fact that they have served in a private or public sector that would make them available, not just in the agencies now, but also those he for. i hope we will be able to future
to have more candidates -- host: howard, independent caller. caller: i am not really a political person and never have in. arising that been of john me in knee-deep and krapp. trump, with all the options we have, trump is the only option we do have because he does want to put america first. i believe in helping anybody. i believe if you are in another country, and it is that there and you want a better life, by all means, yes i open the door person border for that to come over and better their life. i do not welcome that person to come over here and start trying to change the way we live to the .ay they live we have so many problems and so many people from other countries and in our whole
development all the way up to the president, you know what i'm saying? so many people trying to change the way we live. onald trump, i believe, is the right track to put america back to the way it is supposed to be. i do not know, but i think i am right. host: that was howard from florida. let me talk about the critique of donald trump out there. headline recently with this letter with national they say heures, would be a dangerous president and what is your reaction? of them, iow some afford with them, we are from the same circle. as dangerousim because he will not apply their,
is not said about mrs. clinton that she is dangerous. basically, when he was start acting as a president, a chief diplomat or chief executive, i would anticipate many among them , i know what the agenda is and what the thinking is, when it comes to the practical issues in the region, even with the difficult issue of russia or the middle east, let alone asia, then they would come along in my view. host: hillary clinton said mr. trump is soft on russia, your reaction? guest: she was soft. the reset that in and after that, russia was expanding mostly under her and of course after she left the state department here let me talk more about mr. trump's vision. he is not about cutting a deal with mr. putin around the world.
this is not what many critics are talking about. he is about being clear with where our national interests are with the united states. president obama and secretary clinton tried to go to russia and deal with those issues, such as fighting jihadists send terrorist, such as all of the problems we are having. you have to have a strong leadership here perceived by peer when young put the redline in syria and then you stop, what that means or the russian leadership, is they would see us as weak. this would have to change under a trump presidency. donald trump received a national security briefing this week. what does that mean for a candidate at this stage in the race and with that impact his policies moving toward? -- forward? guest: any candidate.
these are very important because they will give the candidate reality on the ground here the facts on the ground on which he could shape his own policy. that same day he met with his national security council. he is going in the direction of getting ready to be in the white house. host: back to calls, dave, georgia. caller: good morning. guest: can you hit the mute button on your tv? we will be able to hear you much better. caller: ok. host: go ahead, please. caller: i would not vote for hillary clinton because she has done so many things that are terrible, that has harmed the people in this country. for years and years, could not have done no more dirty work over what she had done, or when , unseeded libya over that,
she got thousands of folks killed. that is the reason i would vote for donald trump year he is a man of his word here the eight. ally. he tells the truth. thanks for calling. mary is a democratic caller. hi. good morning. i have some questions, not comments. i do not see the point in allowing people to continue to disseminate misinformation. here is my first question. what is the current vetting policy for refugees who want to come into the country to apply for refugee status. howse give an example of you think the federal laws that exist now should be changed.
at the senate, the house, the president, who? what country should you come religion, is your should you -- would you be allowed into the country, and please give three examples of one lie that hillary clinton has told that has affected u.s. foreign policy or domestic policy. thanks for your question spared why don't you start with your background? guest: born in the united states since -- december of 1990. been here for years now. of course being a professor later at university. i have servedt, years as an 22 expert. that is vetting.
for political asylum, the vetting process, which first begins with the administration theythe executive branch, want to make sure the case is strong. that is the key, that person cannot the -- and therefore has for political asylum. the questions are very strong. the government would ask, if you go to another area of the country, would you be safe? there isonclude that no other place, vietnam war the soviet union, these are clear cases that when you're coming from the civil war area, you will make that determination. bob is calling from philadelphia, an independent caller.
i am a little disturbed about people speaking on the , but the first guy from the center for progress, american also leading the hillary campaign. i have the opportunity to go to their website and there was nothing on their but slams against donald trump. res.same way with mr. pha i do not see a political connection with him which makes me think he looks better than the other guy. whosh c-span would put out is paying these people that you have on as guests because it helps form an opinion on how valid the opinions are. any foreign policy or national security questions for our guest, walid phares? caller: i believe he is right
that the united states has to be strong, that we will not take it anymore. being so policy of nice is not working. we have to find a different when -- a different way. i am a american first guy. i believe strong military prevents this kind of stuff going on around the world. we need a strong leader. thank you for calling, bob. more on hillary clinton her speech back in june much he talked about donald trump's abilities. let's take a look. mrs. clinton: he is not just unprepared. he is temperamentally unfit to hold office that requires immense responsibility. [applause] mrs. clinton: this is not someone who should ever have the it is notdes because
hard to imagine donald trump leading us into a war just because somebody got under his very thin skin. applause]and mrs. clinton: we cannot put the security of our children and grandchildren in donald trump of his hands, we cannot let him roll the dice with america. this is a man who said more have nuclearuld weapons, including saudi arabia. this is someone who has alliesned to abandon our at nato, the countries that work with us to root out terrorists abroad before they strike us at home. critique.arp what is your reaction? guest: the preparedness of the american national -- public policy.
mrs. clinton first says when she was the life of the governor and then first lady, let's compare that with mr. trump, the head ceo of a multinational corporation with many leaders and public figures around the world. more of aobama was local politician, not with a lot of connection. we would judge on one thing, which is the speeches. arethat is a product, you an incumbent. you have more experiences versus the person who has not served before. but beyond that what mrs. clinton is talking about, he does not consider situations as -- she wasyria secretary of state when these crises began. poor hiring in the face of donald trump. host: what has donald trump specifically said on nato? .e gets knocked a lot
what is his official position? walid: lots of things have been said, but very you correctly. i meet -- very few correctly. i meet with a lot of people. he stands with europe. they are concerned about democracy in brussels. others are concerned about the russian future, the migrants. each one is concerned about one issue. it is not that perfect nato. but he does not want to end it. he want to reorganize nato. nato,t to renegotiate talk to leaders of brussels at the defense level and to all of us across the atlantic and mediterranean, bring nato to
start helping us against jihadists in syria and libya. this is what he would like. host: we go to seaside, california. thanks for joining us. caller: good morning. thanks for having me. , was and donald dunc? family named his name was changed because of his family's connection with the nazi party when they first came here? host: where have you first read that? caller: i haven't read it. it was discussed at a meeting i was at. they said the reason donald trump's father changed their was that dunc to trump
he was an officer in hitler's administration. host: let me ask you to hold. have you heard that story? walid: never. but we hear any story coming from citizens. host: why do you bring it up why is it important? caller: because he has really, really been connected with racial and some of the x communist type of situations that are happening right now within the world. that trump will be allowed to represent the united states -- all his 's references and things -- he is really unfit. hopefully we can find out about
his family now. host: thank you. walid: i answered the question about russia. looking at those who are pulling names like newt gingrich and part of thisy were big push back. i don't think you would be interested for the culture of the campaign would be one of putting mr. putin over our allies. host: mr. rose from ohio. go ahead, please. caller: ok, our country is in a mess. and like i said before, i have been a democrat voter for many, many years. , i am goingound straight republican. i trust more than what they say that what i do of the democrats. having hillary clinton as our president, our country will be
in more disaster. thank you. walid: i agree with the caller. ,any democrats and independents there is a general feeling over the past eight years specifically since the arab spring, there is a feeling that the administration and mrs. clinton will be a stretch of this administration is not doing right in terms of strategic choices. one of the choices they have not mentioned yet is the iran deal. best deal they have been engaged in. we have a completely different view. we should have had allies in the region part of the deal we sit down the country that is deployed in syria, iraq, yemen. those countries like egypt and jordan and israel. this has to be done again. many of the directions taken by president obama needs to be changed, and i think mr. trump
would do so. libya to isis,g because we know some bombing has begun, u.s. bombing, how would donald trump handle the situation? walid: how is libya connected with syria is very simple. theacked the beginning of campaign in libya against mr. qaddafi. the thing was not to prepare posed to qaddafi. qaddafi. these organizations and volunteers to syria, those became a part of isis. that is the chain of events now. how we handle libya, we look at regional alliances. we have two very strong allies the united states who have experiences in fighting isis. that would be egypt and tunisia. we have upgraded tunisia as an associate of nato.
we need to have a plan for libya, not just to defeat isis. it is the same model everywhere else. we need to work with civil societies and democratically elected governments. host: how about asia, china, north korea? walid: we have speak into many south koreans and japanese, and we have expressed concerns because they heard many statements by mr. trump about, you have to share more. the reality is on strategic level. there is no way the united states will lead if any of the allies if they are under attack, but we need to prevent that. one of the things we need to do is fix that relationship. but you have to go to china and sit down. china has to keep north korea. me south koreans have told it is not about restraining
north korea, so we have to change it. host: moving on milwaukee, independent collar. c-span.good morning, i just got a quick question here. i was wondering if syria and become the unit -- new united nations for the middle east? i know is a big question, but it is just my thought. i take my answer off-line. what he meant could lead to another question is what is in the sense syria that now we realize with the civil war five years, over 100,000 people killed, there are areas where we come back to a central party, complete central party. the kurds, what would be the future of the kurds? the aloe lights, and even the sunnis. es ande white -- alloit
even the sunnis. has esther trump spoken on the future of mr. assad? walid: he doesn't think the priority is to lead a military campaign against ethnic regimes. it is because it is late. mr. obama have the opportunity in 2013 when the chemical weapons were used. now the russians are there. it would be a competition for russia and the west. what he is talking about is number one, taking care of isis first. that martyrs are back, and everybody should go under the international office of geneva and discuss the future of syria. host: is donald trump and isolationist or interventionist, or are those terms old?
walid: i will not talk about that anymore. there is one thing i am looking at which is functionist. function of american national interests and our lives. we look at each case and see, how can we deal with that case? we will not intervene everywhere we can or we should not. host: beside you, who else is on mr. trump's team? walid: i will not give you names, but they are public. he has five national security policy between generals and people who have served. now we have a former dia commander for director who was the general of defense. and not just people from the military people who have served as lawmakers and national security defense in congress are joining mr. trump. host: you advised mitt romney in
2012. comeromney has not only out against donald trump, he laid out into him quite severely earlier this year. have you spoken to him at all? spokenno, we have not with him. him he ran, i supported with all the strength because we had an intellectual connection. and i hope actually that he would have run again for mr. trump. now mr. trump is the candidate, is the nominee and i have committed to him, i do support the agenda. for the part of the agenda he is pushing now, what is wrong with romney -- the disagreement is political. host: let's go to dorothy in marianna, georgia. hello. dorothy, are you there? caller: hello. host: go right ahead.
caller: i wanted to actually ask a question. host: sure, you are on the air. caller: i want to ask a question. first of all, i want to say we are at this time, no one in america is from amerco no more than the indians that was here. at the time, there will always .e foreigners coming in who are the ones that are going to make the laws that people can sit down and say they are going to do harm? i think donald trump with a level head he has not had throughout the whole time is putting gasoline on a fire. so i don't think donald trump is the answer to everything today. back in the day, people really opened their eyes. back in the day when clinton, ie husband was in office,
don't think no one can actually disagree they didn't have a good life at that time. thinkt makes trump, who i is trying to get a dictatorship in america, the best candidate for america at this time? host: let's hear from our guest. walid: i understand the point she is raising, but it is probably opposite. donald trump wants more freedom for individuals, not just political economic. intervention. he is more for freedom. that would clash with ideas of his opponent, who was to see a greater role for government. for has been in existence many, many years. he wants americans to feel comfortable with each other, government. no aggression coming from government. at the same time, we need to
reform economically and politically. host: teresa, republican from florida. caller: good morning. you are an excellent communicator, and i have enjoyed the program so far. thank you for taking my call. i am a woman who is college-educated, and i am voting for donald trump. host: how come? caller: because i believe in smaller government. i believe in a more efficient government. even though nothing has really been progressing, i think we have been regressing in the last 15 years, what is clear is the government is grossly negligent. and as a woman, i have been so concerned about paternity since 911. to think our government has allowed millions of illegal immigrants to march into this
that, it isfter just unheard of. i am a daughter of immigrants. i am in favor of legal immigration. i think it is a very serious threat that we are so negligent. i am worried about my daughter's and my granddaughters and how they are going to be, how their safety is going to be. i know it is complicated. i think what mr. trump does that is so cool is that he says something very outrageous, and we are all talking about it in detail. like nato. for many years we have heard people are not paying their fair share, and the united states is in debt, $19 trillion, and we are paying all this money to protect everybody. it has got to be fixed. we have to address it. we cannot control people.
we have to talk about these issues, identify them, and fix them. this is america, we are great, we can do it. host: thanks. anything to add? walid: as immigrants, we are part of the policy. unusual because you had kissinger and others that came here at a younger age including andetaries of state, so on so forth. i look at it from three perspectives. .ou have the legal immigrant i work hard to become a citizen, i engage in the political, i like the society. then you have the illegal immigrant. they are an issue of social, economic issues that we need to solve. these are one. and those others are those trying to benefit using the immigration system. i am concerned about that part.
mr. trump is talking about that one. host: what do you see about the biggest difference in foreign policy? walid: foreign policy is not to look at the map and -- i mean is obama-clinton narrative college level, sophisticated. but when you ask about syria or libya or for that matter the iranian deal, what are the alternatives, if it goes wrong, we will see of the time. mr. trump tries to make a different school. you have to go back to your point. the more he gets national security briefings now hopefully in transition and after, the more he can answer questions. he says there are other alternatives. host: what is the biggest national security threat? walid: i think it is in ideology, not individuals. the more the ideologies can progress and influence the minds of individuals, the more we are
in danger. the continuation, the growth of homegrown jihadists. but you don't fight and ideology with one intelligence. you have to fight with ngos. those that would shut down the internet to stop isis, i was that you don't need. moreave to put in reformers. mr. trump said i will open my arms to muslim reformers. host: unto maryland. are you there? caller: i am here. go ahead, please. [indiscernible] he need
to push a little bit. they will be fine. and the thing for me [indiscernible] host: go ahead, please. caller: i have from africa. , thatntry is not working is what i am here. i want to take america for my children. i, i have to tell you because [indiscernible] people don't change. out if one time to find it is not good. , kenya, they vote for him -- if it doesn't work, you come back.
you can't do the same thing the second time. that is my point. you mentioned africa, give me an opportunity to speak about the continent. donald trump as much regard for africa because many of these countries that we see the worst are going to be in africa for example, the forgotten darfur. we did not see obama work on darfur. there are other areas in sudan, war in south sudan, so that is a problem even after eight years. not just obama, but the bush administration. nigeria, if the boko haram problem is not addressed, you have one third of the country going the way of syria. southe countries of the and somalia, africa needs to be
on the foreign policy of the next administration. host: we have joe on the line from massachusetts, independent caller. caller: i have two questions. from the start of the syrian one of thege policy, underlying issues was the gas pipeline from cutter to syria into syria into europe. what is donald trump's policy for the pipeline, and will be here any statement based on oil-natural gas in the politics concerning europe, russia, and china from the trump campaign? much orhank you very this question. about the pipeline politics. there is a lot of merit to understand that below the positioning of many players in syria, iraq, russia of course
with its huge energy, what is happening in ukraine, has also to do with the passage of oil or other forms of energy. it is always influential in making decisions. in trump first of all, it would act like an ambulance. first you have to face the situation and the competition from being destroyed as in the case of syria and iraq and other places. emphasis will be put on coming down the situation, so the situation of the future, this will be negotiated in the conference rooms of international diplomacy. toing a war, you first have and the main reason of a war. it is the presence of a terrorist organization. there are other than isis. i am concerned that those who are replacing isis are not moderates.
you have iranian controlled mosul. going into this is the next war. that is why the next president should be wise enough when solving one problem, he or she can of the next, and i hope it is he. host: battle creek, michigan, republican. caller: good morning, c-span. i was wondering if you were going to take a position on mr. trumps administration? i have seen you in a lot of speeches, and i think it would be good for his administration. thank you. walid: thank you very much or that. i am serving very happily as an advisor. there would be transition, hoping he will win. he has many talents, people in my field for national policy, foreign security. but thank you for your recommendation. host: what is donald trump's
method to pull in all of this foreign policy information? challenges, crises, how does he take it all in and absorb it, figure out an approach? happened i lived the previous cycle with the romney campaign. the world has changed. what we see today, it was the beginning of the arab spring. there was no mention of russia, and north korea was not as strong. we did not have half a million in syria.d we did not have a large number of homegrown jihadi attacks. so you can imagine what we call situation room with mr. trump, that is not just one specific place -- it is very busy. it is breeding him as it president. it is happening. that is why you see him sometimes making those statements not just in the speeches, addressing some of the
most evolving issues. he is being prepared to become a chief executive. melody,st call, ventura, california. democrat, good morning. caller: good morning, thank you. noproblem is mr. trump has information on foreign affairs at all. with what is going on with putin and his ties to them, i have a concern about them, about the safety of america. do you see where i am going with this? host: keep going, melanie. caller: i cannot wrap my arms around this man who has business ties, personal business ties with mr. putin. what is he going to do with the white house? he is our enemy, and get his family members are hanging out with his family. host: thank you.
we do get the point where he laid out a couple different points. walid: thank you, actually i hear this all the time. mr. trump does not have any massive interest in russia let alone with mr. putin himself. case, he hasis the been a businessman. he has interests around the world including the gulf and in the unitedly states. that is where he is coming from. he is the ceo of a major multinational operation. need bezens and viewers attention. he has acted for 20, 25 years in his capacity of the boss of this use network, meeting with many public policy persons. he has met monarchs, presidents, ministers of various assemblies. he had discussed with them politics way more than his opponents before they actually come to the position of candidacy of the united states.
he has the experience. he was not in government. president reagan was an actor. then you have the learner ship of california which brought him later on. bush theon to george first, he came to the white house knowing almost everything about the national crisis, and these are choices you are going to make. you have more exposure, but the judgments when it comes to be with the crisis as in libya and syria to give you food for thought. host: walid phares, thank you for coming along this morning and sharing your thoughts on the campaign. walid: thank you so much for having me. host: we are going to wrap up this edition of the washington journal in about an hour. we will go back to how we began, which is with the welfare reform bill. it was signed by president
clinton that can 1996. we will be back to take more on your calls on that legislation and whether things need to be changed. be right back. ♪ >> 100 years ago, president woodrow wilson signed the bill creating the national park service. thursday, we look back at the caretakers of america's natural and historic treasures. beginning at 10:00 eastern and throughout the day, we take you to national park service sites recorded by c-span. we are live from the most visited historic home, arlington house. join us with your phone calls as we talk with robert stanton, former park service director and
brandon by, who will upcoming see the over -- see the upcoming restoration. thursday, the 100 anniversary of the national park service areas live from arlington house on american history tv on c-span3. tonight on q and a, louisiana state history professor and his ,ssistant discusses her book white trash, the untold history of class in america. there were four white ghettos in places like indianapolis, chicago, and they were described in many of the same derogatory ways of poor blacks who were living in the city. that is part of our history that we don't talk about. we don't really want to face up to the fact of how important classes. >> tonight at 8:00 eastern on a
q and a. >> washington journal continues. host: i want to put the number on the screen for the viewers to tune in. thechanges needed by ? publican -- the welfare bill we will give you lots of writeups. the official anniversary is tomorrow. here are the photo verse. 202-758-8001, republican. 748-8000, democrats. 748-8002, independence. -- independents.
bill clinton: we are trying to overcome the flaws of the welfare system for the people who are trapped on it. we know the typical family on welfare is very different from one that welfare was designed to deal with 60 years ago. we all know there are a lot of good people on welfare who just get off of it in the ordinary course of business, but that a significant number are trapped on it for a long time. entire them from the community of work that gives structured to our lives. nearly 30 years ago, robert kennedy said, worked is the meaning of what this country is all about. we needed as individuals. we need to sense it and our fellow citizens, and we need it as a society and as a people. he was right then and is right now. from now on, our nations answer to this great social challenge will no longer be an never
ending cycle of welfare. it will be the dignity, the power and the ethics of work. today we are taking a historic chance to make welfare what it was meant to be, a second chance , not a way of life. host: that piece from president bill clinton will be a part of a larger special tomorrow. if you want more on the welfare 1996 law, it is tomorrow night at 9:00 in time. we will look at the history, archival video, bring it up to present day with that legislation. pat is hanging on in colburn, washington. republican, good morning. caller: good morning. hasoncern is our nation doubled its debt in the last seven years. my concern is, it seems like the money is going for illegals and refugees at this point. we are not taking care of our
own source. and i have noticed there have been people who have made welfare away of their life. i am all for giving someone a , but ito help themselves have some concerns with so many refugees coming into our country and depleting all the way forces. i love america, and i love the constitution and so many people that are coming here do not want to follow our constitution. they are offended by our flag, they are offended by our customs, and religions. and it hurts my heart to see our own people here in the united states are going without because they are living in a sanctuary city. i see in increasing climb -- crime. we are going to take a few more refugees. i do have a problem with refugees, and i ask why aren't
we taking any christian refugees, and they told me they were on a hold for three years. i am not understanding why we are not helping our more, our own people. whennk that every day there are home was the streets. it breaks my heart considering a lot of these men and women are without whims. they are not getting the help that they need. however, some of our enemy countries are coming here, and we are supporting them. that is my comment. i love america, and i like what it stands for. host: thank you for calling from the state of washington. from clinton, pennsylvania, it is rape. the welfare reform bill is 20 years old. our changes needed at this point? caller: changes are definitely needed. i would like to make one issue with welfare. the boston bombers, a native family that set the two bombs
off, it was reported by the major media at that time that they have been on welfare and they weren't even citizens yet. governor patrick was asked about this in massachusetts, and he refrained from commenting about it. he would not give a comment. so would the obama administration, they would not comment. all these people who are belying trump about the association, it was clinton and his people that and the government obama government that secretary clinton was in, he and the older brother had been at a training camp and they said, you better keep an eye on this guy because he has done it with the terrorists. did we keep an eye on him? no. they killed americans with these bombs they set off, and these people were on welfare. yet the for liberal government will tell you no such thing exists.
that was on the national media. it was short-lived, and that was it. i did not here anymore. i would like to see you have a program on this. host: things for collingwood the suggestions. rudy, sun city california. you are on the air. caller: let's start off with, i am a 60-year-old black male. i have seen people on welfare for such a long time. when president clinton did that, i think it was the best thing he did for everybody. and the biggest thing of this all is if people would just get out of their head, certain people, that it is only black ,eople or minorities on welfare which the statistics showed it is mostly white people on welfare, the republicans maintain a level or votes from black people if they do that out a little bit more instead of
wanting to always take your gate minorities -- denigrate minorities for being on welfare. for calling. at time magazine, clinton signed the welfare reform bill as explained in 1996. much of the u.s. took this for granted there would be welfare reform of some sort, but the question was what it looks like. ,he answer came august 2s 1996. --22, 1996. promised as much, and it led to a 33% increase for households receiving with independent -- with dependent children. 81% who responded to the time survey wanted fundamental reform for the welfare system. several proposals emerged out of
discussions. the most out there plan rights writes time noted women out of wedlock with children. the others varied, but many argued people could not make an active choice to be on welfare where the van not working. many on the left hoped change would come in the form of more support for families. not a system that they saw -- as a word that barbara used to, an attack on the identity and personhood of any person. 1996, writes time, especially after the government moved to the right, with the election approaching and the two vetoes of previous republican bills under his belt, clinton was out of options. he remarked it was a decent
welfare bill wrapped in a sack of a four letter word beginning with s, but as time reported, he went to hide and signed it. -- he went ahead and signed it. today,omorrow 20 years or tomorrow, the welfare reform bill. wanda in michigan. hello. caller: hi, how are you? host: good. caller: i want to make a comment about welfare. it angers me for people that get on social media and put people down that are on welfare. a lot of people need the help because you have corporations like walmart and other big corporations who will only hire part-time help so they don't have to give them any benefits. they won't give them a living wage, so you don't have enough meet all their applications like home, rent, electricity bill. they need help, because we don't
force these big corporations to take some of the profits they have put in their pockets and help out their own workers. where can they turn for help? if you are going to welfare, you see people starving. i just don't understand people who have are the ones who are against people being on welfare, and the ones that are on welfare , they don't have a voice. we need to be a more compassionate country when it comes to our own people who are poor and cannot make a living on a part-time job. i hope that things change that way. host: let's hear from clyde now in aiken, minnesota. caller: aiken, minnesota, yes. thank you so much. i would like to draw attention to something i think people should take the time to watch. frontline did a documentary on the clinton welfare reform bill. i don't think anyone can question frontline's integrity.
a lot of people were left out, wondering by themselves alone, trying to figure out. , not all of them, but a lot of them ended up on disabilities because that was the avenue the ended up having to take. the lady such as called his --that just called is right. people that needed it got it, but some got hurt. frontline did the great documentary. they made it so compelling to people when they watch this. people forget about stuff like this. one of the things i want to say about clinton -- he was not called slick willie for anything, but the sign that he -- this is not about welfare, but i have got to say this. to taketime for that hold.
but mr. bill clinton is far more responsible for hurting a lot of people in this country than he is for helping them. that frontline documentary is absolutely compelling. i don't think anyone can question its integrity. host: thank you for calling. working the welfare reform. he is a shot of newt gingrich, speaker of the house, accompanied by then senate majority leader trent lott fleet. -- trent lott. here is clinton hugging a former welfare recipient, lily hardin of white rock. it is 20 years ago tomorrow when he signed that legislation. here is bob dole. this was 1996. listening here to michigan governor john angler, who was taking part in a multi-, or a
roundtable discussion in dearborn, faces involved. stories involved back then. beth is hanging on in schenectady, new york. you have experienced the welfare system? caller: i grew up, i spend -- my mother was working in the cannery. as it may, we spent millions with new york state taxpayer money on nanotechnology employment and their records are abysmal. people complaining about welfare, look at the jobs that are not being created by tax dollars. i work with kids in extreme dire poverty within five miles of people who are making at least $100,000 a year. host: thanks for calling. clinton is in saint augustine, florida. caller: i just wanted to preface
i had a good job and every two weeks i look at my check and see how much is taken out by government. so it is not a happy thing, but it happens. i get my social security account every november, and i have never had a break. it is 15 years i have never collected anything. raised a family. having said that, i believe americans should help americans. i am one of those of the believes that. and we probably have lots and lots of waste all over the place. it is a classic thing to always hit the poor people. i can see right now with $18 trillion debt, the total payout of welfare is not even a blip on the radar. for all the talk about abuses, it is minimal compared to what manufacturers of arms, the over budgets, they
need to look elsewhere. americans should help americans. host: thanks for calling. more from usa today, a shot of john kasich, who was a big player in all of this as a member of the house budget committee, chairman of the time. he is on the right accompanied by clay shaw from florida. they are talking about welfare reform. congressman shaw had a key role in writing that. reverend jesse jackson here featured with the feminist majority, and he had an organization. patricia island, trying to veto. mrs. 1996. here is paul wilson, a senator , now deceased.
this is during 1996 during the debate of welfare reform, making cases against those involved. [video clip] >> slashing to $60 billion in low income assistance is not reform. .t is punitive it is harsh, and is extreme. , we have been talking about the budget deficit. i think today what we see in the united states senate is a spiritual deficit. because mr. president, i know some of my colleagues don't want to look at this. they turn their gaze away from unpleasant facts and unpleasant reality. sometimes people don't want to know what they don't want to know. president, the evidence
is irrefutable and irreversible. this legislation once enacted into law will you more poverty and hunger amongst children in america, and that it is not reform. calls,ack to your carolyn from illinois. statementhave a brief concerning the welfare reform. i think if you are going to take welfare reform and use that, use that money and put it somewhere, it needs to be in the school system. it needs to be somewhere where it can do some good. i have seen chicago school system go bound so bad -- down so bad they cannot even afford the teachers. if you cannot advance that money into the education of those people, how can you expect them to get off of welfare when it is much easier to do that than to try to find education and
training that will give you a decent paying job? host: thanks for calling. joyce is on the line from missouri. republican caller. caller: good morning. the welfare rolls have grown exponentially since all of this started. here in my own community, if you have a child, not married or if your husband isn't working or won't work, and you have a child and he asked for government help , why do you keep having children? i have seen these children that are a year apart. and then the illegal immigrants who, in, when they have children and they are working in jobs they can't afford to live, they immediately go on welfare work as well as the syrian
refugees and all of these refugees they are taking in. we are taking care of them 100%. whoever's process that welfare was a blip in the -- whoever said welfare was a blip in the radar is wrong. the social services is taking up a third of the national budget. we cannot afford it. if you are so irresponsible that you can't work -- excuse me, won't work. i don't mind helping people who cannot work, but if you continually draw money and produce children or refused to take any sort of a job, if you take a part-time job for instance at walmart, you can get welfare to help out. but at least you are getting a work ethic. and we cannot afford to pay these people that sit on their butts. cable tv.ave they all have cars. they all have clothing. i have watched people use
medicaid cards and food stamps of the most outrageous things. they use them in casinos, the cards. it has grown into this horrible weight that we cannot afford. joyce, thanks for calling this morning. editorial in the chicago tribune talks about the welfare reform, a bill to be seen as an effort to save money. more importantly, they write it was fostering success with holding down a job and economic value. it aided families with children but did not do that. one reason it was widely deplored as the chicago tribune editorial says, they put it this way. apache record at 20. bill clinton got more people into work but failed to produce
-- reduce poverty. we have barbara from west haven connecticut. caller: thank you for hearing my call. i was actually on welfare when this policy was enacted. i have seen both sides of the story. host: let me ask you, what was the change for you when the law came into play in 1996? you already on welfare, and the situation changed? caller: it did change. i had been working previously so i ended up on welfare. i got a job, and i was no longer on welfare. since that time, i went on to get a bachelors degree and masters degree. so the welfare reform, it was very helpful because it stopped people from living on welfare for their entire lives. the sad part of it was those who were older who had been living in that system on welfare for
their lifetime, they had no skills. they had no place to really go. i think to improve the current welfare reform system, then it to make sure there are problems -- programs out there that want to help people transition from being a welfare recipient to being poverty stricken, uneducated or disenfranchised and elevate them to the next level so they can be taxpaying citizens and not just welfare recipients. host: thanks for calling. stanley is in north carolina. caller: this is john. host: go ahead, sir. tv? r: my talking on host: you are talking. we can all hear you. caller: i just want to talk about the letter that was sent to the social security department in the 1960's after .bj became the president
when he find out what the letter had in it of the social security department, so much money going of 55, age retirement the social security department had so much money even after the baby boomers coming, it was still going to have too much money. so lbj got the congress to give him a approval to borrow money for this welfare program that he started and it has been [indiscernible] worked at a job, and they kept raising the volume that you was paid on. raising the years, what year you can retire at. all of this is not prior to the this outeople to take
of their social security payments. for welfare, which the federal government was supposed to be the money we pay in taxes was paying not out of a social security part. host: things for taking part. this is robert rector of the heritage foundation talking this week about the bill and where he thinks the federal government has fallen short. he helped write the role of the key components. let's take a look. [video clip] >> the goals that we had back then i think are valid goals. they were not to cut welfare spending or boot people onto the street but rather to say welfare should not be a one-way handout, that welfare should assist people who need assistance, but it should also encourage and essentially demand work. and more importantly where welfare reform has fallen short, we are very concerned 20 years
ago about the percentage of children who were born outside of marriage, which has continued to go up and which is the root cause not only of poverty but many other social problems. we need to do something to address that. i think the next stage and that is very clearly that we need to change these welfare programs starting with eitc that currently penalize mothers and --hers when they get mother mary. that is crazy. if you were to sit down and abstract, what should we really be,do in welfare, it would let's put a financial penalty on every low income mother and father who decide to marry. another editorial page, time to revisit bill clinton's reform. the house committee meeting on the hill, past a half-dozen minor tweaks to the program. they are talking specifically
assistanceemporary cash payment program. if is overdue. , and is one expired based on short-term legislation. property would encourage states to spend more money for purposes, more flexibility with , the needs ofnts today's labor market, education, work, addiction treatment, unpredictable schedules and a mechanism for increased funding during recession. last couple calls. janet in oklahoma. he were on the air. caller: this is a very difficult subject. i have listened to a lot of people.
it is kind of confusing. the one woman who called, i know america is an open arm country, but it is not fair all of these little aliens are coming in and they are getting free health care. their children are getting free schooling. on the other hand, some people i asw have been on welfare -- the one lady said, then they went into disability. now i am retired, some of these people are getting as much money am, social i security. talks aboutnt always a senior citizen programs. over up making $100 or so the limit to be eligible for some of these programs. i have been working since i was 15 years old. i don't know. somebody who is legitimately yes, helpeeds help,
them. but the illegal aliens, i think they are taking too much of america. i have known people who have moved from state to state, and when they move to the new state, they have gotten welfare there. .t is ongoing someone needs to do something. i wish i had an answer, but i don't. thanks to everyone who called this morning. more on welfare reform tomorrow. what couple of live events on .he networks, and a special here is the guests. he will talk to us about hillary clinton's state department e-mails. we will also talk to kei kaw ashima-ginsberg. she is involved in a group called circle which deals with engagement. and we will meet evan mcmullen, independent candidate for
president of the united states. we will talk about what he would do as president. us, and weor joining will see you back here at 7:00 for another edition of the journal. enjoy your weekend. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2016] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] ♪ ♪ >> next coma newsmakers with republican strategist roger stone. after that, a discussion on the antigovernment unrest in zimbabwe.
joining us from new york to talk about donald trump's campaign is his friend and political consultant, roger stone. monica have with us langley and alex isenstadt. a national political reporter with politico. mr. stone, tell our viewers how often you talk to mr. trump and are you advising him on his campaign? roger: i have known donald for 39 years. almost 40. we talk from time to time. i decline to characterize the content of those conversations because they are personal and private. i am a veteran of nine republican campaigns for president of the united states. i have great affection for donald trump and his family and i am a strong supporter.