tv Washington Journal CSPAN December 15, 2016 7:00am-10:01am EST
on the federal reserve decision to raise interest rates. later, a discussion on cyber hughes. with donna rice that is one of the issues that the first lady mrs. trump will focus on. host: good morning on this thesday, december 15, 2016, 225th anniversary of the bill of rights. the 10 amendments that were ratified in 1791 to protect individual rights in this country. the state of virginia became the last to ratify the amendments to the constitution. we want to begin this morning with your thoughts on the bill of rights and which one or ones are the most important to you. republicans, (202) 748-8001.
democrats, (202) 748-8000. independents, (202) 748-8002. you can also vote on twitter or facebook. we will get to your thoughts in just a minute. the first amendment as all of you know begins with congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof or bridging the freedom of speech or of the press or of the right of people peaceably to assemble and to petition the government for the redress of grievances. the bill of rights go on, the second amendment saying a well regulated election of being necessary to the security of the freeze date. the rate of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. the fourth amendment is another one people are aware of, the right for people to be secure
against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation and particularly describing the place to be searched and the items to be seized. the first tend amendments -- 10 amendments constitute the bill of rights. we are asking all of you this morning on this 225th anniversary to tell us which one is most important to you. we begin with a frequent caller in georgia, joe, a republican. caller: thank you. i love c-span. mine is the freedom of speech. to be able to speak, to be able to call in two great shows and
express my feelings, i am a conservative and think god for your network -- thank god for your network. i think donald trump will be the greatest president in history and i'm glad i have the freedom of speech to call into your wonderful network and say that. as a is interesting conservative that you would not first mentioned the second amendment. caller: the right to bear arms is also very important. i own a gun and have not had to use it. i have been involved in politics 54 years, and i'm the most fired up i have ever been. ie stock market under trump think will break every record in history so i am a fired up can service, but i love c-span. just do a race fantastic job. -- do a fantastic job.
host: bob in westminster, maryland, independent caller. good morning. tell us what you think about the 225th anniversary, which bill of right is the most important? caller: i would say without a doubt the second amendment of a grandes -- as a grandson of a man who escaped the bolshevik rise -- bolshevik resolution. i know what happens when you cannot defend yourself and without that one, the others would not matter because the government -- and you read the federalist papers and the rest -- he would not have any means to withhold this from a tyrant. that was their thinking to provide a counterbalance and this whole thing about a militia, all of us are the militia. without this we become just like any other country and we become very vulnerable.
and yet, you really do not have much because the restrictions in many states to have a gun on your person to defend yourself, it is totally useless if the attacker has a gun and he comes to you. wait a minute, i'm going to go to my house and get my gun. it does not work that way i think it helps us defend against all kinds of terrorism, crime, and other things. i understand there is a move to create universal reciprocity where if you have a permit in one state it should be honored in all others, like a drivers license. that alone would change the balance because the career criminals and terrorists just assume that most people are not armed, and they are correct. host: we are going to learn a little bit or about history. jeffrey rosen is joining us on
the phone. with what let's begin and who caused the bill of rights? guest: first of all, thank you so much for having me and happy bill of rights day. wonderful to mark the 225th anniversary. the principal drafter of the constitution initially resisted the bill of rights. he thought it would be unnecessary or dangerous because the constitution itself was a bill of rights because it constrained government power and gave congress no authority to bridge freedom of speech or take away the right of people to keep and bear arms. he thought it might be dangerous because if you wrote down certain rights in the future, people might wrongly assume if a right was not written down it was not protected. the key -- he changed his mind in the face of the opposition of the anti-federalist.
,here were three in particular and if you come to the national constitution center in philadelphia you can see statues of them insiders call standing at the back of the room because they refused to sign it since it contains no bill of rights. randolph,eorge mason, and eldridge gerry. basically they thought this newly empowered federal government to be too dangerous and as the last caller said, might take away the people's right to bear arms or infringe the right to speech. in the face of this opposition the ratifying conventions when they agreed to approve the bill of rights, recommended further amendment. madison changed his mind. he proposed a series of them. congress decided to propose 12 amendments for ratification, not 10. we have an original copy of the bill of rights at the national constitution center and you will
see that the first one was not the freedom of speech but there should be one representative of congress for every 4000 inhabitants. the second amendment said congress cannot raise it salary until an intervening election. our first amendment was their third in the first two were not ratified. today, the years ago first 10 amendments were ratified and became part of the constitution and came to be known as the bill of rights. host: when you look at the preamble to the bill of rights, some people say that is where you find the purpose. when they wrote the conventions of a number of the states having at the time of their adopting the constitution expressed a desire, where did that desire come from? guest: it came from amendments proposed by the state ratifying conventions.
some thought of them making their ratification of the constitution conditional on the adoption of further amendment. others just recommended the amendments. when they sent the ratification certificates to congress, they added a series of amendments that they recommended as better of the secure the safety inalienable natural rights of the people viewed they basically cut and pasted from their constitution. madison was not picking out of thin air, he was taking from ,irginia and massachusetts which was the closest analogue to our fourth amendment. the national constitution center interactive con titian, test constitution,-- you can go online and click on the original bill of rights and
see the original sources. you can see how much the massachusetts constitution of 1780 looks like our fourth amendment, or how much george mason's virginia bill of rights influenced madisons first amendment. the declaration of independence talked about people being endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights, life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. the framers believed these lights -- right came from god or nature. when madison had to write it down it did not take a long time because there was a broad consensus as to what these rights were. host: when you think about the tradition of individual rights in american culture, how does that apply them to today? will the bill of rights be around for centuries to come? guest: it well. i was so inspired by the first caller. what a great thing to say.
thank you for c-span and the , and of freedom of speech the right to talk about how enthusiastic he was about the next president. the bill of rights has affected our culture, and this was madison's hope. attackedle attached -- the bill of rights as parchment barriers, but they have become so central to our american identity that all of us come to expect them, and we will demand them whether they were written down or not. the constitution goes through many challenges in its design to withhold strain, but the bill of rights has come to be america's central contribution to constitutionalism, the idea that there are some basic rights that cannot be taken away. i think it is going to be around as long as america survives. host: jeffrey rosen, it is a lot
of history to talk about in a short amount of time, so as you alluded to, our viewers can find out more if you go to the constitution center.org website. visit the constitution center as well. how are you marking this anniversary? guest: we are having a great bill of rights day and we are thrilled c-span will broadcast it. we have four phenomenal books on the bill of rights including one by the great deal law professor professor, a wonderful series of books about the future of capital punishment, and a great book about lost documents and how some of the original copy of the bill of rights were sold -- stolen and returned to their with then some cases help of the constitution center. we are going to be celebrating a very happy to hundred 25th
birthday for the bill of rights. -- 225th birthday for the bill of rights. host: thank you, jeffrey rosen. lou, a republican. talk about the bill of rights, the most important one to you. caller: first of all, i'm a democrat. i called in to the wrong number. host: we will let you go this time. guest: to me, the most important me, the most important amendment is the ninth amendment because i guess the framers realized they are human beings and they could have made a mistake. and left out a very important right, so they put in the amendment that says that we have rights even though they are not enumerated in the constitution. we still have those rights, which i thought was a brilliant move on their part. host: we will apply that to today how do you think, what
does that mean? caller: i like reading the constitution, and the word "privacy" is not even in the constitution. there are some words that say privacy in a different way, but there is no right to privacy stated in the constitution. so for example, if a woman feels like she needs an abortion or wants an abortion, the ninth amendment gives her that right. i think it is true that she should have that right, even though it is -- there are many people in america that say no, it is murder. , andnk it protects her part of roe versus wade was based on the ninth amendment. host: that is little in highland
park,-- lou in highland -- lauren, you are on the air. are you with us? lawrence, are you there? caller: i am here. a great opportunity to speak to c-span. what makes the united states great is our constitution. the only country that was founded based upon codified law i think it is what we as americans all share in common. my last comment is to expand on the second amendment because a lot of people believe the word "militia" means military and they are different. militia includes using the citizen soldier and every citizen has a right to protect themselves, and in a moments notice in a crisis, be prepared to act on behalf of the
government if you are deputized. host: more calls coming up. first, the white house yesterday many presidential clock -- proclamation and said the bill of rights day 2016 would be today. after much debate and the liberation the proclamation says the first 10 amendments were written to reflect a compromise between preserving the rights of individual citizens and supporting a strong federal government. since ratification, the bill of rights have enshrined most of our liberties, including the freedom of speech, the trial -- the right of trial by jury, and the protection from unusual -- unreasonable search and seizure. shaped our rights as nation and served our citizens to form a we strive
more perfect union. created, theally bill of rights safeguarded rights for many but not for all. followed,turies that courageous americans sacrificed to afford these rights to other people. saying, i,ation and barack obama, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the constitution and the laws of the united states we hereby proclaim december 15, 2016 as bill of rights day. i call upon the people of the united states to mark this observance with appropriate ceremonies and activities. stephen in connecticut, good morning. caller: i think the most important, especially at this
time in our history is the 15th amendment, which covers the 65 voting rights act. the civil rights department out of president obama's justice department is so under praised. they have been the greatest civil rights department, especially under eric holder and now loretta lynch. in the history of my memory ever, and they should be lauded. you cannot underestimate the humans work these people have work theseman's people have done. about thepeak enough justice department, they did great work. host: what do you think about the people's voting rights going forward? caller: jeff sessions from alabama, i follow c-span for 20 years so i have seen him speak a lot. alabama is not necessarily known
as the heart of civil rights outside of martin luther king's push. i do not know if jeff sessions grab the civil rights mantle and carry it proudly forward. i do not know if he is the man to carry that staff proudly forward. host: you may be interested that the attorney general will be at a politico playbook breakfast this morning at the top of the hour. she will be sitting down with politico playbooks co-authors dick schaap and and and a polymer talking about her 10 year, and president obama's legacy. coverage begins on c-span2, c-span. work, and c-span radio. in clarksburg, west virginia, and. -- ed.
share your thoughts on this anniversary. thoughts, the most important one and i'm not very much on this con duchenne because it seems like it is like the bible -- constitution, because it seems like it is like the bible. people can twisted how they want to. life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, i think that is the most important for one simple reason. it covers all the rest. you are guaranteed life, the pursuit of happiness, and liberty. host: if you want to learn more about the bill of rights and how they came about, the ratification, the national archives in washington is holding an anniversary event at 7:00 p.m. tonight eastern time. you can watch that on c-span2 or go to c-span.org. the radio app is a good way to
listen to our coverage here on c-span. gil in jamestown, -- jamestown, north carolina, a democrat. caller: the gentleman who just called in, he was referencing the declaration of independence. having said that, the founding fathers, george washington, james madison, monroe, and jefferson, they were all slaveholders. consequently, if you look at -- the first article on the bill of rights of section eight, it states that militias were to be formed to suppress insurrection. all the founding fathers were slave owners and they were extremely afraid because of what slave revolt.the
they were all afraid of a slave insurrection. having said that, that is why in the bill of rights we have militias. militias were organized in the states to hopefully prevent the so-called insurrections by enslaved people. let's talk about history and history as it is. my favorite amendment to the constitution, if you bear with me briefly, the first amendment and of course as stated by some of the previous callers, the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendment which respectively abolish slavery, gave us little rights -- gave us civil rights, and gave everyone the right to vote. when we talk about history, i think it is such a fallacy second amendment has been twisted regarding militias.
and gun owners holding onto that, saying that is my right to own a gun. the founding fathers, what they wanted to do was to have militias be armed to have an , and the army be armed notion that everyone should be able to purchase a gun is just a fallacy. that is my comment. host: mt. airy, maryland, steve, a republican. caller: good morning. the united states, we are the only country that is set up the way that it is with our founding document. the people have basically the nature to be -- that the government. when they wrote the constitution they realized it needed to be
explained a little bit further and that is why they did the bill of rights. there is not one right that oversees the rest of them, are more important than the rest of the. they are all equally important. that is what gives the united states the people, the power to choose its own government and how the people want the government to go. listening to comments earlier about the second amendment, the second amendment has three different parts. or basically two different parts, the collective and the individual. militia, the state has the rights of a militia, that is the collective. the individual right -- individual has the right to bear, and neither one can infringe. i have studied the second amendment a lot.
i am in the process of getting and we are going to be training on a lot of stuff, and it is a big deal. jefferson was a big part of the second amendment. host: you and others might be interested, the philadelphia inquirer is doing a series looking at the bill of rights at 225 years. the fourthting, amendment all too relevant in a digital age. this piece is written by jeffrey rosen, the sixth in a 12 part series on the 10 amendments. he writes at the national constitution center we love all the bill of rights earlier but if i had to pick one amendment that gave rise to the others it will be the fourth. piece goes on, that is because the controversy that gave rise to the fourth amendment sparked the american resolution -- revolution.
the controversy in question involved the hated rights of assistance that allowed king george's agents to break into the homes of colonists looking for evidence of failure to pay the taxes that led to the boston tea party. said it was the first scene of the first act of opposition to the arbitrary claims of break -- great britain. then and there the child independence was born. this is jeffrey rosen's piece, in the philadelphia inquirer. , when by thatrs former nra chairman who writes about the second amendment. the fourth amendment on the screen, the right of people to be secure in their houses -- persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures shall not be violated and no warrants
shall issue but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation and particularly describing the place to be searched and the person or things to be seized. go ahead. caller: thank you for having me on. i think all these amendments in the bill of rights, i could previous caller said, worked together. once they start to get week than the whole rights system goes away. n the whole rights system goes away. i am surprised about the calls of how great these amendments are. starting in 2000 and i'm sure before, these things have technically gone away because of executive orders and bills that have passed like the patriot act, for instance. these rights are not there. it is fiction.
we have tortured people. we say they are not americans so we can do whatever we want, they do not apply to our bill of rights. that is hogwash. i think it is a nation of how to treat human beings. illegal search and seizure, that is out the window. ditto, the bill of rights has the bill ofknow, rights has been eroded. things have happened that have eroded our bill of rights. i think these things, once that happens, it sets a new president for something even worse -- fordent -- precedent something even worse to happen. the boston bombing, people were told to get out of their houses because of this threat of two guys walking around. we are asleep at the wheel.
our government has been assuming too much control. we are not pushing back. data data,also applies to which is what jeffrey rosen is writing about in this piece i was referencing on philly.com. the president and ceo of the constitution center that we just spoke to, he writes saying in an inspiring and unanimous decision, justice roberts wrote the court cannot search a cell phone without a warrant because it contains private information. andited james otis' speech insisted that the fourth amendment had to be construed to protect our personal effects. it has not ruled squarely whether the government can track all of our movements and public places, for example following us with tiny drone mounted cameras.
down in the come most hotly contested questions involving digital privacy, it is inspiring that all of the justices of the supreme court intended to translate the fourth amendment so it protects as much privacy in the 21st century as americans demanded they ratified the bill of rights. sarah in woodland hills, a democrat. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. i just had a comment. being perhaps listened to, followed, or perhaps our emails. my question is, when are we what to literally find out are the main reasons, is it because of religion or race or
, butionship with overseas the surveillance and checking on ,alls and just being watched when will that really be broken down for people like myself? i am american from iran, persian american, and i have grown up here. i have family overseas but it puts me in a very uncomfortable situation where i just want to make sure that i as an american citizen and safe and i am basically covered under the constitution where it does not get overstepped as for my rights. and being as a persian american and being able to speak overseas without any fear or any concern. int: sarah's thoughts
california, a democrat. front-page news from the washington times, disgusted, democrats not russians are getting blamed for the wikileaks. got the inaims he bills from a disgusted democratic lawmaker as they continue to blame russia and says that donald trump was aware of their attempts on his account. a close associate of wikileaks founder julian assange said in the report are the daily mail that he flew to washington for a clandestine head off test handoff with one of the email sources to september -- handoff to one of the email sources in september. came from inside leaks, not hacks.
this on the front page, anti-trump activist sees the gop state affection. a harvard law school professor insisted he was closing in on enough republican defectors to upend president-elect trump. he said his group, electors and two other organizations advising electors behind the scenes have found 20 230 republicans who are considering withholding their votes for mr. trump at the monday ceremony. in exodus of 37 electors would put mr. trump at 300 -- 269 electoral votes, one shy of the 270 needed to make his win official. from the new york times is this piece about the situation in syria, and look at the pictures, the images of syrians, especially children. has not resonated as other
historic pictures have. many of these pictures familiar to you over the years, but also what has come out of syria. michael with the critics notebook says, they are bearing witness, and in this era of connectedness they are refusing to let us off the hook. these images spread via social that unmediated confirm the people making them are still alive in that moment anyway. a washington post editorial this morning, the meltdown in aleppo as the cease-fire has failed. a bloodbath that will haunt humanity and indelibly stained mr. obama's legacy. they write that the u.n. said the aleppo carnage would join the events of modern evil.
she excoriated the regime but offered no acknowledgment that the stain of aleppo extends -- extends also to her, the the american -- we will go to darcy, 12 years old in upper marlboro, maryland, an independent. what do you think about the bill of rights? it is not guns that kill people, it is people that kill people. you should have a right to own a gun because you should be able to protect yourself. if someone wants to kill you because it was like a weapon, you should be able to protect yourself or your family and friends. host: thank you so much for calling in.
what inspired you to pick up the phone, this conversation, or is this something that you and your family talk about? liked thejust conversation really. host: we welcome all ages to join, to participate in our conversations every morning, so thank you very much. cj in richfield, minnesota, a republican. what do you think about this anniversary, december 15, marking the 225 years of the bill of rights? caller: thank you very much for allowing me to get in on this topic. i have been listening to your show for years since back when it first started. my family is seven generations of military, so i have five uncles that served in world war ii and i can remember when they came back from the war. these are the stories they told that they could not get a job and they were treated real bad.
the fellow from massachusetts who called and was right on point when he said how the constitution and bill of rights has been compromised so bad that even right now with the tpp going on in north dakota, they are breaking a treaty that was ratified by congress in 1851. nobody is talking about that. there are so many violations of the 13th amendment and 14th and 15th amendment when it comes to civil rights. they were upheld separate but equal that was done by sidney poitier and burt lancaster, that movie inspired me to investigate more into the constitution and bill of rights. see that movie being represented at the schools like it should be, because it is educational. i do not even know who the marshall was. host: michael in little river,
south carolina, an independent. caller: the first amendment is the most important because it gives you freedom a family. host: tell us why. caller: you cannot go to your church and you would not be able to worship god, and that is the reason why. host: dena in fort myers, florida, an independent. what do you think? caller: i had to leave when i was living in california. they picked my lock, came inside my house and then first deny it and then tell me it was legal. when i try to get help, i just got a form letter saying they had too many cases and could not help me. i got nowhere with anything so to me it is just words on a piece of paper. host: are there, the front page of the washington post has a story about trump advisors sharing secrets inappropriately. an investigation determined that
michael flynn, tapped to serve as national security advisor, inappropriately shared classified information with foreign military officers in afghanistan according to new documents released. although he lacked the authorization to share the material he was not reprimanded, that he did not act knowingly and there was no damage to national security as a result. the investigation itself is classified but the washington post says the washing -- the documents provide the first evidence. this is a story many of you probably are ready heard about this morning, front story of usa today, yahoo! breach puts one billion to -- at risk. sensitive data, birth dates,
other information stolen in that hack. the wall street journal, the confident fed yesterday, janet yellen announcing it raised the rates a quarter point for the second time only in the last decade. she pointed to the economy as the reason why. we will talk about that more coming up on the washington journal. at trump tower yesterday, the president-elect sat down with titans of the tech industry, amazon ceo jeff bezos, facebook coo sheryl sandberg, and peter teel who organized the meeting. tim cook, those were just a few of the people that attended. the group agreed to meet with mr. trump every quarter to talk about the issues that they face. jeffrey in manassas, virginia, good morning. republican, go ahead.
caller: good morning, thank you. i just wanted to start off by disclosure, i am an active duty military officer and a half a firm and strong opinion of our constitution. what i would like to keep in mind for everybody is that the bill of rights is really the icing on the cake but is not really the whole cake of itself. the articles in their entirety are what give our country it's strength and power. that being said, first and foremost the amendments of the bill of rights, the first amendment is by far the big cheese. it protects really five fundamental freedoms of our society -- speech, the right to petition government, religion, assembly, and freedom of press. those basic ingredients are really in and of itself when a free democracy should really be all about, and by and large that
amendment is probably the building block to all of the rest of the constitution. the pen issaid, mightier than the sword and without the idea of the speech to go behind it, the sword has no true value in and of itself. if you separate that, the next two amendments that are truly important are a close tie between the fifth and the sixth. what they both really do is recognize that you as an individual have a due process, have a legal process, and if the government in and of itself cannot utilize any means necessary to go ahead and try to take your stuff or your life and liberty. having that jury by your peers in the sixth amendment is a supporting aspect. in a nutshell, that is where i stand. i thoroughly enjoyed this conversation and i love your
show. host: some state news for all of you out of new jersey, new $20 million ifr the bill passes to allow government to forgo budgets and --till post them exclusively instead. supporters online -- framed it as a cost saving measure for taxpayers in an age when digital news consumption is increasingly the norm. it was denounced by opponents as an assault on the states newspapers that would result in less investigative reporting, staffing cuts in newsrooms, and reduced governmental transparency. christies revenge from a new jersey newspaper, chris christie share abottle -- buddy disdain for the press and chris christie is taking his revenge.
the older boys in trenton are doing something dastardly. it is with this week's attempt in the newspaper industry on the bogus promise of saving money for local taxpayers. governor chris christie is pushing it hard. democratic leaders always ready to make a deal even a craven one, are going along with it. give state and local politicians free reign to do their dirty business in the .ark, this bill is a godsend if you want to hasten the decline of the press in the era of donald trump, this is for you. repair to rely on more fake news posted on facebook. carolina, the new york times with the story about how the republican led legislature is moving to curb the power of their new governor, a democrat,
in that hotly contested race that went on past election day. speciallling a surprise section, republican lawmakers introduced a measure to end the governor's control to require state approval of cabinet members and republicans also to cut theroposed number of state employees who serve at the governor's pleasure , giving civil-service protections to hundreds of managers in state agencies who have asked to q did -- who have executed the priorities of governor pat mccurry, a republican. this 225thll on anniversary of the bill of rights, george in virginia, democrat. go ahead. yes, it is for the
people and i think the legislators misuse it. they talk about the language that older people do not even know, and they make it sound good. in southwestance virginia, the have a right to work law. that sounds good. you should have rights to work when you want to. if you explain the whole thing, you find out it does not really mean all of that. think youhink -- i should explain to the people what they really are all about when they try to pass a law or something. host: we will leave it at that. you have to turn that tv down, just a reminder.
senatorbe talking with ben cardin of maryland about allegations of russian influence in the election, his push for more clarity, and president-elect trumps business ties. centerartisan policy will be here to talk about the decision by the federal reserve chair janet yellen to raise short-term interest rates, and what it means for markets and consumers. ♪ c-span, where history unfolds daily. in 1979 c-span was created as a public service by america's cable television companies and is brought to you today by her cable or satellite provider. -- by your cable or satellite provider. >> this weekend on american history tv, saturday evening just before 7:00 eastern,
providence college professor examines the life of nat turner, the slave rebellion he led, and they can skew -- confusion in the aftermath. >> the clash between the slave embodied,revolt -- including artists who decided to support the revolt while others elected to support the whites. >> at 8:00 on lectures and history, the university of maryland's catarina keane on marketing as a profession in the early 20th century and how consumer perceptions changed. >> instead of selling an automobile as a means of transportation, you can sell a car as crist each. -- pressed each. ge.presti
>> cartoonist bill malden was a cartoonist during the stars & stripes magazine. >> he never allowed partisan politics and his cartoons. back at home, he jumped into the political fray with both feet. >> sunday at 6:00 p.m. on american artifacts -- >> one of my favorite documents is a draft version of what became the bill of rights. we usually refer to this as the senate markup. the senate took the 17 amendments passed by the house and changed them into 12 amendments that after a conference committee, it was 12 amendments sent to the states for ratification. 10 of those 12 were ratified by the states. >> take a tour of the national archives exhibit marking the 225th anniversary of the ratification of the bill of 1791. on december 15,
for a complete american history tv schedule go to c-span.org. "washington journal" continues. host: joining us from baltimore is senator ben cardin, democrat of maryland year to talk about issues related to being the top democrat on the foreign relations committee. we will begin with you calling for an independent investigation into russia's interference in the election. how confident are you, what is the evidence that they did interfere in this election? guest: first, it is good to be with you again. we have made the determination, the intelligence community, they released in october that russia was engaged in a cyber attack against the united states. they have confirmed that it was involving at the highest levels of the russian government.
they used that information to try to compromise the integrity of our election. that has been the findings that have been released several months ago. that is a given. the question is -- what was their motivation? were they attempting to take a side on behalf of one candidate? was this part of a broader strategy to undermine our democratic system? they are extremely active in these types of activities and there are elections that will be taking place shortly in germany and france. are they actively engaged in similar conduct there? these are questions that involve america's national security and the protection of our homeland. when we were attacked on 9/11 we sent up an independent commission to find out what happened so we can protect ourselves and take appropriate action. i think we need to do the same thing in regards to what russia has done, whether they attack us
by mouth. the public needs to know and that is why are called for an independent commission similar to what we did after the attack on 9/11. host: have you heard from your republican colleagues about concurring with that, and what they go forward with that? could that be a bipartisan movement? guest: it has to be bipartisan. it actually should be nonpartisan. this should not have any partisan flavor to it at all. this is not the question of the legitimacy of an election in the united states. it is to protect us from what was done to our election system by a foreign government, and to protect ourselves moving forward. republicans have called for investigation, senator mccain and senator graham have called for investigations. senator mcconnell, the majority leader, has acknowledged we need to do an investigation.
i think it is clear we are going to do an investigation. congress needs to do its work. i work on the senate and foreign relations committee. we are going to have hearings in january and do our responsibility. that will be done in a bipartisan manner. it is important to have this independent commission so that the american people get a report on what happened. host: why couldn't the american people just -- do you think there would be reluctance to accept any investigation coming from congress? why the importance of an independent mission? if congress is going to do the investigation themselves anyway. guest: the independent commission will have a broader representation. a congressional representation will be limited to members of congress. an independent commission control experts from our nation who could help us put all of the pieces together so that there is ,ore confidence in the findings
and more confidence in how we can move forward. i think it worked very well after the attack on our country on 9/11. this is a very serious intrusion into america, and the american people deserve to have that type nationals investigation as to what happened. host: i do not know if you are familiar with the guardian's story, a disgusted democrat, not russia gets the blame. according to this, a wikileaks figure is claiming he leaked -- he received leaked clinton campaign emails from a disgusted democrat. the british ambassador to pakistan -- whose pakistan said he flew to washington -- whose uzbekistan --
guest: we have the premier professionals who do intelligence for our nation. we have the best in the world. this is not the white house determination, this is the intelligence community's conclusions. russia attacked us and made that information available in an attempt to discredit our election. that is not a partisan telling you that. professionals at the intelligence community and they made that finding public for the american people. host: as the top democrat on the foreign relations committee, what is your position or thoughts on rex tillerson serving as secretary of state? has a mr. tillerson record as ceo of exxon corporation and has been engaged in a lot of international transactions on behalf of his company. he has a very close tied to mr. putin and russia. what i need to know is how he perceives his responsibility as
secretary of state. can he divorce himself from his commercial interests and his personal relationships? what is his view as it relates to russia itself? russia is not our friend, they are not our partner. they have attacked us, tried to interfere with our election, invaded ukraine, are currently in malta over in georgia and are responsible for supporting the atrocities in syria. when they can make sure the secretary of state will put the american security interest as the only concern, and not the commercial interest. i have concern about his positions with results to climate change in the environment. these are issues that need to be dealt with during the confirmation process and i'm looking forward to the hearings and discussions we will have in january about mr. tillerson. i think that will give the american people a better understanding as to how he sees russia and his responsibilities
as secretary of state. would like the deputy of the state department to be mr. boll. -- bolton. that would be subject to a vote in the senate and it is not clear he would survive his confirmation hearing. do you agree? guest: mr. bolton has a well-known record, like mr. tellis and who does not have a record on government service and foreign policy. mr. bolton has made many statements that are very dangerous. that is not a democrat speaking. democrats and republicans both have serious reservations about him serving as the number two in the state department. i made a commitment i would not prejudge any of the nominations until we go through the conservator -- confirmation process but mr. bolton raises alarm bells. host: he remains under consideration for the job by the president-elect.
the new york times reports he enjoys a powerful ally. any reaction to that? guest: it is one thing if you do not hold a public position, what you want to say is fine. when you are in that position as the number two person in the state department, the number two diplomat in the united states worldwide and you have already said you are not in favor of diplomacy and we should be thaning bombs rather talking, that is not what a diplomat does. to have that person in the number two spot, it is hard to understand how he could change his positions and become a diplomat overnight. host: roy in charlotte, north carolina, a democrat. caller: it seems to me like the essence of the argument and all of the investigations, centers on emails that were leaked that were very embarrassing to the democratic party and the clinton
campaign. there were allegations of rigging with bernie sanders. all of these things came out. when he juxtapose that with hillary clinton being called by the fbi director extremely careless and how she handled her emails and that there was a high probability that they were hacked because she was using a private in all server, it just seems like -- you just said a minute ago that the security of the united states should be of utmost importance to the president. understand why, i feel like that should be investigated much more than the email hack. i would like to know if the russians that it, but it was not a national security issue. it was emails leaked to wikileaks. guest: the issue here is what is russia's motivation?
what are they trying to do? is not isolated just to the united states. they interfered with the parliamentary elections in montenegro in an effort to prevent the consideration into nato. the question is, are they really trying to undermine democratic governments throughout western europe and in the united states. that is the issue. it's not what information they leaked or how they did it. we don't have all the information that we need to know. that is one of the reasons we have to have an investigation. there are a lot of issues here about how russia behaved, and we need to know that and we need to know their motivation. this is a foreign government that is not our friend and we need to protect ourselves. i am not trying to rehash the election.
we are trying to find out what russia is trying to do to democratic countries around the world. host: teresa, republican, good morning. caller: good morning. i have three quick points. wast of all, i read that it -- russia did not attack to help trump, they attacked as a vendetta against hillary. it was to get back at hillary. second of all, will you be also investigating the foreign money from saudi arabia and china that was given to hillary clinton? my third point is, did not obama administration's hack angola merkel'ssta -- angela
phone calls? they pay millions of dollars to influence that election? guest: you asked a lot of questions. let me try to go through them. we are not naive. our intelligence agencies are trying to get as much information as they can globally in order to protect america. we don't that russia is very active. we know china is very active. we know north korea is very active. there are a lot of countries that are active in collecting information. what is different with russia is that they used that information our democraticct system of government, our elections. that is what is very disturbing, and that is what we need to get to the bottom of. no foreign government can give funds to a foreign election in
america. that is against our laws. that is not allowed under our legal system. evidence, believe me, it is investigated. what you are saying just not -- what you are saying just does not add up. as far as activities in israel, our government did not interfere with the elections. there is news that takes place all the time to election cycles. news, which wee saw in this election, that is a deliberate effort to mislead in order to influence an election. we have not done that. we think that was done by russia. host: moving on to john and montana, an independent. caller: senator ben cardin. great respect to you and your colleagues.
i know you have a very difficult job. the last caller's point. this a failure of the obama administration to come out with this after the election that the russians were hacking? my goodness, and the leaks going on with the cia, that is a huge failure on the obama administration. the investigation foundation, the 10% they only spent on foreign countries and the rest goes into their lavish lifestyle? i would like to see a democrat say that is wrong, even if it is skirted by the law, it is wrong. please address those two points. guest: these are different issues. what we are talking of how does
a foreign government trying to interfere with our democratic system. the clinton foundation is a private foundation. that is a separate issue. as having thesame type of concerns about what activities are being done to try to influence an election in a country. they are different issues. you have to draw distinction about a foreign government trying to interfere with our election system. i don't want to draw conclusions as to the motivation. carol is watching in georgia, a democrat. you are on the air, carol. caller: good morning, greta. give me an minutes i can express myself to the democrat. i am a democrat. for them and for the media to act like president obama did not
bring this up in october, that is the duty on your part. during this election, russia has had a thumbprint in on this. and, sir, with all due respect, do not elect mitch mcconnell -- do not let mitch mcconnell lead this investigation. they knew this was going on. so please, write this down, do not let mitch mcconnell cover no investigation. you need an independent investigation because of media is not helping you. this has been out there and longtime. this did not just come up. they get this and wikileaks leak this every week? we have dropped the ball, sir. host: ok, carol, we will have the senator respond. this point that was just
made, the intelligence community did release information prior to the elections that russia was engaged in cyber activities against the united states and responsible for leaking that causing an impact on the election system. don't blame president obama, but what president obama was trying to do was he did not want to become a part of a partisan election that close to election. he respected that. he asked for a full investigation. be madeestigation will prior to him leaving office. we will have the benefit of the internal's investigation by his administration and all the players of his administration. the president has the ability to respond prior to january 20 in regard to what that investigation shows. i think president obama has responded as i would want the president of united states to
respond, not in a partisan way to be interpreted as a partisan /political move, but look at the seriousness, and gathering on the information we have, and making them available to the global community as possible, and taking appropriate steps. host: ron, indiana, republican. caller: i just wanted to say to ben is all this is is a smokescreen. russia would not have ever wanted trump in there to start with. --anted to ask a question with all of the turmoil and everything going on, every time we put in a body up in these positions, i have never seen a democrat trying to back someone. successful, you
need to follow -- because it reset man is able to reach across the aisle. swamp" mentality has to be taken on. i hope trump remembers term limits. why doesn't everybody in the middle have that? the simplest thing we could do is two terms and you're gone. host: ok, ron. senator, what you think? guest: i am proud in a manner in which not only the senator, but ourselves onted the relations committee. we operate in a bipartisan
manner. we think we are stronger when we work together. i am proud of the relationship i have with republicans getting things done. i take exception to the tone of the comment because the do work together to try to get things done. when of your previous callers pointed out the brilliance of our constitution. the constitution sets of three independent branches of government. the senate has a responsibility to advise and consent on the nominations made by our president. it is an independent responsibility that we have. the american people expect us to use the confirmation process in order to make sure the people who are nominated to these critically important positions have gone through the appropriate screening. yes, i believe the president has a right to have his team in place. and i give difference to the recommendation of the president of united states. i will cast my vote recognizing the president needs to have a team in place. but when you have a person who
he appoints to the environmental protection agency who disagrees with science, that gives me a heartburn, to tell you the truth. we have so many signs deniers in the -- you have so many science deniers in the nominations he is making. factsl consider all the before we make our decisions who we vote for. i take exception because i think republicans feel the same way. they have expressed those concerns. we are an independent branch of government and we will act as an independent branch of government. cardin, are you leaning no to scott pruitt as administration heading up the energy department? i was listening to joe biden, who i deeply respect in interview he gave just recently as two how we should consider
nominations by any president coming in. is that you will support the nominations unless there is a reason not to any said one of the reasons you should consider not voting for a person is if he does not believe in the mission of the agency he is being appointed to. -- thee the epa nominee other case you have another person recommended abolition of the department of energy. these issues will be troublesome for members of the senate. host: margaret in delray beach, florida. caller: good morning. , senator, thepeak more i have to say it is interesting take exception to .nybody science isind you ongoing.
as far as the nomination process , i state news --fake news did not hear any of you stand up my majority of the media in this country try to sway election because of their personal preferences and personal politics. as far as barack obama doing anything in a bipartisan way, i had to sit down. barack obama had a super pac in israel to try to stop neta nyahu. ourary clinton -- 20% of uranium went to russia. now we have fake news. ? i am no fan of donald trump, but now the democrats bring --blame the bleeding because the democrats voted for somebody
that they did not agree with. it is interesting to me than now we have a major investigation. you skirted quickly away from what the fbi said about our presidential candidate being negligent in not handling her emails well, the we are supposed to be very impressed by the fact that she did not become president and there is something wrong with everyone. i take exception with you, sir. i used to be a democrat and i left the party of my parents for the very reason that when i listen to what comes at a your mouth. i have news for you, there are a lot of scientists. you are going to call them deniers? host: that's in the center a chance to respond.
guest: i am not a scientist. all i know is when we passed the clean air act, the clean water act, democrats and republicans working together said, we want to go where's finest takes us and we want to make sure we've the best science in order to keep people healthy in america. people were dying from dirty water and dirty air and i am proud that we came together as a nation and dealt with environmental issues. scientists are telling us we have a problem that we can do something about in climate change and there are certain steps we can take that can help protect our globe in the future. that is not what a politician is telling you, that is what science is telling you. there are things we can do that not only will help us and our environment, it will help us with jobs, and it will help us with our national security on energy. there are ways we can come together as a nation, using what science is telling us to help
our economy and help our security. that is what i am suggesting is the right path. i think democrats and republicans both agree this is a path we should go down together . in maryland, we have worked together. it is not a partisan issue. we are proud of the progress we have made the future generations on protecting the bay. we are judged by that science. i don't make the decisions as to how we will deal with land development, or wastewater, or farming activities. the scientists tell us what we can do in order to minimize the pollution going into the bay. and then we follow that path. that is what i think is the best way. but if you deny that it should be driven by science, then you have the politicians making those decisions. quite frankly, special interest rules out.
wins out. interest if host: let's talk about syria. the washington post editorial -- the aleppo cease-fire feeling. they write, the u.n. ambassador delivered at the nancy a share of the aleppo carnage and shared the assad regime, but offered no acknowledgment that sustainable -- with the strategy fail? guest: clearly, there were a lot of misjudgments when the civil war started. most of the people who analyzed it thought the opposition would be able to get rid of assad in a
short period of time. that there needed to be a different leader. that was on path until russia intervened. russia has allowed the assad regime to continue to power --in power. it will never be able to control the entire geography. no possible way that will be able to happen, but they are able to maintain their control of the strategic part of syria with russians support -- with russia's support, and aleppo is the latest strategy. civilians were used as articles of war. they were slaughtered. crimes against humanity have been committed and russia has been complicit this and this -- has been complicit in this.
the human tragedies that have occurred in syria are devastating. the civil war continues. as a result, we are not concentrating on isis development in syria. the famous are able to operate because we are fighting a civil war. there is no easy answer here. iran is also engaged in the saudi regime. there are multiple wars taking place, and the strategy that has developed has not worked, and we do need to engage the international community, look at strategies that can end the human disasters taking place. a subtle never have the credibility to be able to lead syria -- assad will never have the credibility to be able to lead syria. host: what is the first step? guest: the first step --you have to work with russia to get a meaningful, cease-fire so the
civil war bombings stop and shootings stop antimilitary assistance can get in there assistance top and can get in there to save lives. then, allow the forces to concentrate collectively against isis. assistance can get in there to save lives. you're on the air with the senator paren caller: hello, senator. pollsters have come out since the election and they clearly see a change in the numbers. clinton, that smug, old woman called half the country to -- that had nothing to do with wikileaks. her smug face. i think you all really need to realize that you have angered 100 million people and more in
this country. and your days are numbered. messageup and take that back to your lavish little places in washington. host: all right, senator. guest: you're bringing out a lot of partisan comments, and that is perfectly ok. i am more than happy to debate the partisan issues here. the reason i made my original comment is that i think you are going to find democrats and republicans coming together on this issue. and that is, we don't want any foreign government interfering with our elections. i have not done any conclusions about how effective they were in influencing the election. i have not done any conclusions about that. i do know that they were involved in trying to undermine the credibility of our free election system in our democratic form of government. that troubles me greatly and troubles republicans greatly and troubles americans.
what happens in this election, a lot of your callers have talked about it. that is a matter for a show we should talk about, but i am here as a right key democratic on the senate foreign relations committee to tell you behalf a serious issue with a foreign government trying to interfere with an american election. it is not unique. they have done it in europe. it is something we need to be prepared for because they can do it in a -- because they can do it in the future. it is aimed at undermining our system. host: jonas in maryland, independent. caller: good morning, c-span. thank you, senator. allow the united states government the start propagandizing american -- you about a bill to pass use of again against american citizens. let me get to the fake news as well. who is the culprit here? guest: i am not sure what you
are referring to. passed in was a bill the united states on july 2 that allowed united states government to use propaganda, american propaganda, against against state citizens. host: what language was in the bill, jonas? caller: um. i don't have time to google it. i am pretty sure the senator knows exactly what we are talking about. host: senator, you say you are not sure? guest: i don't recall what he is referring to as far as the government using propaganda for americans. i am not aware of any program we providing, or trying to influence american public opinion through propaganda on a political issue.
i am just not aware of it. this is one of my constituents calling in. make it available enable take a look. host: one action congress to take before leaving for the holiday break is on enron and the white house put out this statement saying the administration may clear an extension of the koran sanction is entirely consistent in the joint comprehensive plan of action. the extension of the sanctions act is becoming law without the president's signature. can you explain what this is to our viewers? guest: yes, and i understand the presidents position -- president's position. the iran sanctions act was passed by congress that let -- that gave the president additional authority to impose sanctions against iran because --their nuclear with elation
nuclear proliferation> the president use those sanctions. committeenternational supported our sanctions, that was responsible for iran coming to the negotiating table with an agreement that was reached over a year ago. i i think most people know, did not support that agreement, but an agreement was reached, and i now believe we have to strictly enforce that agreement. as part of that agreement, in ran -- if iran back -- it, we can snap
that is what the president is going to allow to become law. we could send back to those sanctions if iran violates the agreement. the president says he does not need it. has presidential authority, but it is stronger to have the .acking of the sanction regime that is why we extended it and that is why the president in allowing it to become law. int: we will go to ian maryland. caller: thank you for c-span. i got so much to say. i will try to blow it down. there is so much hate coming from the right. you just elected somebody -- i remember back in 2000 when president george w. bush was elected, and i said, oh boy,
this is going to be a mess. now i see this person is elected and i see the same rooster walking alone with the democrats from the right. someone called a pier 1 sense of the republicans are bad losers and worse winners, and they are proving it. all this hate coming from the right, all this anger. host: ok, let me end with as few about is and i like donald trump and concerns -- with president-elect donald trump. guest: the united states is pretty clear in a closet says ,ny person who holds an office
including the president, cannot accept any favors are gifts from foreign policies --foreign powers. without divesting his interest in his holdings, he would not be violating the constitution because foreign governments would want to do favors for his economic enterprises and order to curry favor with the president. we have already seen that and offers made to use trump towers by foreign embassies as a way to curry favor with the president-elect. that requires him to divest himself of his financial holdings. many members of congress on both sides of the island made that clear. we know that mr. trump was to make an announcement today after how he was going to handle his financial dealings. i'm disappointed that he is touring that announcement, but i am urging him to take steps to comply with the constitution and with the expectations of the american people that he will not prevent -- present conflicts of
issues on decision he has to make, whether it is to send our troops into harm's way, or enter into a trade deal. we don't want the president to have a conflict of interest that would call into question whether he is representing america's interests or his own interest. if he does not divest, then what power does congress have? what happens? guest: quite frankly, we want to avoid that decision. represents a constitutional challenge. no one wants to start the presidency, when he takes that swearinging to -- oath to protect america, we don't want to be put in that position. we don't want to have that cloud over his head. we want him to take the necessary steps. cardin,nator ben
appreciate the conversation with you, sir. thank you. federall talk about reserve chair janet yellen's announcement yesterday to increase short-term interest rates. steve bell, the bipartisan -- steve bell from the bipartisan policy center will be here. [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] >> follow the transition government on c-span as
president-elect donald trump selects his cabinet and the republicans and democrats prepare for the next congress, we will take you to key events as they happen without interruption. watch live on c-span. watch on-demand on www.c-span.org, or listen on our free c-span radio app. weekend, but tv bring to 40 hours of nonfiction books and authors and here are some of the programs coming up. saturday night, georgetown university professor jason brennan look at the failure of democratic political system to provide the best outcomes and calls for a change in how government is run in his book "against a moxie." "against democracy." >> why do people reject that system? they think it won't work very well in me to bad outcomes. they are probably right. that, you arey
onto my site and you have to start asking, how are you going to weigh fairness versus the quality of the outcome? ford columbus foundation presents the american book award that recognizes outstanding literary achievement from the literary community. 5:00 p.m. eastern, jonathan zimmerman, professor of education at the university of pennsylvania talks about the increasing pressure to curtail free speech on college campuses across the country. he talks about it in his book "campus politics." taboos ideas. not -- ty is >> go online for the complete
weekend schedule. >> washington journal continues. with stevee back bell flu is economic policy project senior director at the bipartisan policy center to talk about the federal reserve decision. viewers whatw our janet yellen had to say after she announced this increase. [video clip] >> today the committee decided to raise the target range for the federal funds rate by one quarter percentage point, bringing it to one half to three quarters percent. in doing so, my colleagues and i are recognizing the progress the economy has made toward our dual objectives of maximum employment and priced ability. year, 2.25 neutral jobs have been created.
inflation has moved closer to our longer run goal of 2%. we expect the economy will continue to perform well. with the job market strengthening further and inflation rising to 2% over the next couple of years. host: steve bell, confident that fed raises rates. that is the headline of the "wall street journal." guest: the economy is better. the economy is better and there are some pockets that might want to have a larger number of people working in the workforce, but we also have an aging population. for the first time, we can see, after six or seven years of waiting, that not only is he economy strengthening, but it president-elect trump's policies over the next couple of years going to affect, they will finally get on the federal
reserve board what they have wanted for so long, and that is help from the fiscal front. host: do you think that is what she was referring to when she said we think it will get better? with a new administration being sworn in in 36 days, it is interesting she made a projection about the future. guest: i think she is reflecting the overwhelming consensus on her board of governors, which is there are some things that the new president can do on his own. overturned some regulations, work with congress to review some things that have been passed in the last 60 legislative days. yeah, there are things that will start quickly. as far as the tax cuts, you are probably looking at a year from now with a start. but just like market, the fed has to look ahead. right now, america is looking pretty good. host: only the second time in
the last decade they have done this. where when they make this decision, specifically? the chair has always looked at what is happening inside the employment numbers. and what is happening to the consumer prices. at 2%,r prices are not which is where they would like for them to be, but the economy is picking up measurably. so they look at the reports from the various federal reserve banks around the country. they look at the data. they got some great economists and they look at that data. and i think they take into account what is happening overseas. you would not think they would, but they really have to in a global economy. what is happening in europe? what is happening with the strong dollar? what does that mean for our economy? a look at a whole host of things. what is happening to the labor force?
is it strengthening? our wages strengthening? they are. host: does the fed want to keep making increases? guest: she said they did. market show you that they believe there will be three or four more increases over the next 18 months to two years. remember where we were and i know you know it well. we were essentially at zero. around the world, we had major companies that were negative interest rates find it their economies started. this is really welcome news. -- neileil are when writes, will interest rates climb further in the trump era? don't count on it. writes --
good, butl is very wouldn't that be a wonderful problem to have after years of mediocre growth? that theowing so fast fed has to raise interest rates. i don't think we will see interest rates at 5%, 6%, or 7%. 15%, 16%. we really should not overreact .75%.from .5% to guest: what does it mean for consumers? things.t means two let's take retirees first. pension plans have been punished by low interest rates. portfolioetirement would have a bunch of united states treasury securities. they are the safest thing in the
world and you used to get 4% or 5% guaranteed. enough to be pretty solid for the rest of your retirement years. .5%, or when you 1.5%, there ist just no way a retiree can stay in those kinds of interest rates with pension funds. let's take a look at what is fourning in dallas or -- the police and fire fund. they realize they do not have enough money to pay their bills. and that is out, texas, one of the strongest places in the country. -- that is dallas, texas, one of the strongest places in the country. people never realized interest
rates would go this low. so they started to going to private equity and all kinds of risky things, and did not get the returns they needed. if this continues, it is good for contents, people getting ready for retirement. who is it bad for? you may see a slight increase in mortgage rates, but very site. -- but very slight. we may go from 3.4% to 3.6%. that shows things are getting better. host: let's get our viewers involved. i want to know if they are confident in the economy. what do all of you think? republicans, 202-748-8001. democrats, 202-748-8000.
independents, 202-748-8002. i want to show you, fed raises rates. don't raise, no, rates? guest: almost everyone in the market have said please raise the rates. why? because you don't have to price things. they are artificially low. what are things really worth? we need to have some mechanism to truly price what stocks are worth or what other things are worth. i think people who did not wanted our people who feared that this might, in some way, end, or start the growth be our -- or stunt the growth we are now experiencing and that she should not raise rates.
1929 to 1937, those eight years, we had a little bit of recovery after 1929, and then we did something really stupid, we decided that we would put terrorists on imports -- we would put tariffs on imports. i am a little more optimistic. probablyk to 15 or 12, we will because that is the way the markets are. but i felt more comfortable now about manufacturing stocks, or about people working in many factory, which actually, that drop has leveled off a little bit. host: larry summers sent outlined eats yesterday -- sent out nine beats yesterday. it could hurt manufacturing badly. guest: it could. larry is very brilliant.
say that is an assumption. my family is all from west virginia, and i can tell you when they decided when they were going to do fracking and get atural gas there, they were bunch of happy people because they are building steel and doing things. i look at it region by region. there is progress being made in the midwest. we ares time because going from a some kind of economy to a different kind. but i feel more comfortable. i do not take the strong dollar will last forever. we have a different worldview right now. viewer's's gauge our confidence. caller: good morning. i got some complex questions, but i will make it brief. signed, bill clinton some legislation to deregulate
the banks, and george bush let it fly all the way into 2006. has ratesn is, why been so long -- so low for so long? paid aber when cds decent premium and as favorite as treasury bills, and you could take some of the dividends or interest out of them, but since 2007 before the crash, everything has been monetized so low and all the interest rates. what the american public does not understand, there are middle-class people who depend on that, not the stock market, not all the risky investments, but the cds and money market mutual funds that were very safe at that time, and now they are not. worth putting your money in a bank. i will take your answer off air. ,uest: a very precise question
and i will try to give you an answer that may not be quiet is precise. thanks suffer greatly -- banks suffer greatly when interest rates are low and continue to be low, especially when you have a flat yield curve, a fancy word in aaying what you pay year for interest rate is what you pay for 30 years. they make money off of that .ield curve going upwards what happens is when interest rates went to zero, they cannot make money anymore, and they had to accommodate to reality, which was we are not making money and interest rates are not on our side, you are going to get a cd, and i'm sure the gentleman remembers this, when you are
getting 0.1% on money market funds, it really was a different world. i think you are now going to see cds, even short-term cds, pay more. and you will see money market funds being more comfortable. they won't do all sorts of nasty things like they did before. if you go -- a member what happened in 2000 and 2001? we have an incredible collapsing came out of it with tax cuts and other stuff. within the next decade, we have the great recession. so, i think things are beginning to normalize. berra says there is a real problem with protecting the future, it is not. . a democrat, welcome to the conversation.
my question is regarding interest rates itself and the impact that it has on the local economy. it is like a quarter of a percent that seems like it is kind of small in relation not be the news, but it is. i kind of need a little bit of a translation in a plane language type of manner of how does a quarter of a percent and tax me at the supermarket, or at the gas station, or something like that? guest: the honest answer is real simple --not very much. weon't see it with the crops are going to have this year with fruits and vegetable prices. interest rates don't have anything to do with that. energy prices, people are really excited about that.
i don't think the of going to spike. interest rates have nothing to do with that. you are touching a very important point -- there is a difference between interest rates going up because the economy is overheated in the 6% or 7%. -- interest rates going from going up from a tiny, tiny base when an economy is struggling to build on what the recent past is. when we begin to worry is when inflation is 16%, 7%. -- 6% or 7%. for the average person at the at the supermarket, i hate to say it, but it will be a nonevent. host: what was a danger of staying and zero? not performing. and it gets back to people needing more money. you saw stocks that normally would trade -- let me give you an example. timestrades at 12 to 13
its projected earnings. a company that has $200 billion in cash, ok? at the same time, duke energy, a solity, a regulated utility, it cannot go up. it is selling 18 times earnings. why? how could it be that apple is valued less than duke energy? because people want that yield, that 4.5% yield. they are not getting it from treasuries. they're not getting from my markets or cds. so, they go out of the risk curve, taking a bigger chance. consumers -- johnson & johnson pastry percent. pays-- johnson & johnson 2%.
all of a sudden, a bunch of people poured into that trade. we need to start buying stocks to pay high dividends. what you see now is a bubble, in my opinion, and the utility stocks. i think the are overvalued. those real estate investment trusts at 6%, they are very vulnerable to rising interest rates. and you will see great companies, johnson & johnson, those kind of companies, probably go down in value a little bit because there will be an alternative. host: do those bubbles burst? guest: absolutely, those levels burst. -- those bubbles burst. utilities have been unfavored by everyone. why? they don't have to take the risk
of a duke energy. and i don't mean to pick on duke , but it is never sold for 18 times earnings. host: it impacts the greater economy with a bubble bursting. not ati don't think so, all. i think it will be healthy because he will begin to value these things, as they should be. everyone has an opinion on whether these interest rates will heard or not. -- hurt or not. they think some of the trump agenda may -- the federal chair was asked about the impact on the markets and how the president-elect's plans may play out. here is what she had to say. [video clip] recognize there are -- there is considerable uncertainty about how economic
policies will change and what effect they will have on the economy. far, is that it will affect monetary policy. we will have to factor those policies along with many other things, including the global , andonment and oil prices other matters, we will have to factor that into our outlook, and figure out what is an appropriate response? . a cloudperating under of uncertainty, and we have time to wait and see what changes occur, and to factor those into our decision-making as "a clarity. decision-making as we gain greater clarity. what impact these policies are likely to have on the economy -- the financial market changes you
describe, particularly the increased and stop pricing, longer-term rates, and the strengthening of the dollar, suggest that many market participants-- suggests that it would raise interest rates somewhat in the united states relative to a broad and cause strengthening and the dollar. but market participants are uncertain and, and i would expect changes in our understanding of what is going to happen, and would also affect market prices in financial markets as a move forward. host: steve bell, what did she just say? -- he is falling back into greenspan speak. long sentences, lots of words. not she is saying is we have idea how much of the trump agenda is going to pass.
they are probably been overenthusiastic because they think it will happen immediately. -- those of usn in senior positions on capital hill do not believe that. in one sentence, we really don't know the future and we are watching carefully. host: louisville and pikesville, maryland, and independent. name -- have a sexier sexy name for a bond. theave a war finance by republican party. spin now, pay later. the problem is if they raise interest rates the government owes, then that would throw you a deficit. you have a guy saying no new
taxes, but if the definite -- definite is high -- deficit is tithing you would need them to pay taxes. let's run your idea off steve bell. guest: you raise two points. me take the first one. -- let me take the first one. if interest rates go up because of inflation, there is no doubt within 10 years what we will be paying on interest on the public debt, which right now is $20 trillion, we would be spending more money on the interest payments there may well for our entire defense budget. interest rates that are rising because of inflation, which is not what is happening here, those are devastating to the united states. no doubt about it. orfar as the safe bonds
other things, people have been talking about what do we do about $1.1 trillion in student debt? a lot of which, if we used the right word, are in default. what do we do about that? and the result of people who are not able to buy a car when they want to, or a house for me want to? we are going to have to do something to accommodate that reality more than we have done. bonds, we have done it before and there is no reason the cannot do it again. wantsituation that no one to talk about, i remember when i started as chief of staff in 1981, we were scared to death of deficit. -- she called me up on the phone and she said, the to tell senator baker, the majority leader at the time, that we make over $100 billion this year in the forecast and we are at a deficit.
i went to senator baker, and he said, no we are not. toldd, sir, i was just that we are. he said, no we are god. in reality, we were. -- he said, no we are not. in reality, we were. debt, which nong maybe theking about, hawks are out and winchester, but they are not in this town, and they have been remarkably quiet, and that is a problem because at some point, we are going to have huge interest payments on debt we already oh. owe, and welready have to paid. if you want to pay that much on national defense, you can just
see how stupid that is. you would not buy a company that way if it's biggest expense was paying off its that is a problem. new bonds may work. bonds.ou sell a lot her favorite word, of uncertainty in the future. host: vince from springfield, virginia. your question or comments on the economy? the -- isrst of all, interesting. the crash the developed in the early 1900s since the deregulation process and the thinking process in the 1970's are interesting when you compare them to the relative piece of the baking industry between 1930 in 1975.
not to mention that is kind of insane. suggest banksto make more money with rising interest rates is absolutely crazy. it's expanding based on that. 1973, getting off the gold standard. where do you come up with these insane ideas were propagating to the public, sir? host: let's give him a chance to respond. caller: that's the first time i've heard anyone say that rising interest rates hurt banks. it would have jamie dimon, it was highly respected jpmorgan, and ask if they're going to raise rates and you will get -- 30 years over 3%, one year is here, he would say thank goodness. now i can lend at 4%, but i only to pay 1% or 2% to get the money into the banks. my deposits are this much and i
had to pay 1% in some. now i'm able to lend them out at 4%. that is the old saying lease to say with my managers. goe in at 9:00, leader 3:00, to the golf course and make 3%. what i am saying is very conventional wisdom. banks do better when they are not in a zero bound interest rate environment. host: steve from robert saville, missouri. -- robertsville, missouri. , ther: with the tax cuts profits make george w. bush look like a sunday school teacher. republicans come in here and they think trump is going to do all this stuff for you. he is already reneged on every policy he kept that promise he kept. the is not going to straighten out the health care. if you want to make a bunch of
jobs, you straighten out the health care problem because that's one of the biggest expenses for small businesses. you have been scammed. you made your bed and you are going to lie in it. host: let's pick up two points. cuts, there is a debate going on right now than republican party over in the house and especially the senate. should the tax cut will be deficit neutral? i don't think they have decided on an answer and we will see whether the people like me who are deficit hawks finally wake up and start surrounding the capital. i think that will happen. when you talk about costs like the affordable care act, which people know is obamacare, there is no doubt that has had a huge impact on small businesses. it nowople who voted for realize we have to have reform
because of the kinds of impacts is having a people, especially smaller business. it also has led to all sorts of other things. young people are not joining, therefore you get this distorted participation. --re has to be performed there has to be reform. i will never be someone who knows how to reform it, and there are not many people here or half a mile from here on capitol hill who know how to do it either. i would caution everyone. all of this is very speculative. we don't know what trump is going to do. strongly since he is a deal maker he says over here is where i stand. the other guy who wants to sell him a building for less says, here is where i stand. i think you are going to see the
typical dealmaking process. mcconnell, paul ryan will say mr. president, you can get this much. well, i want a little more. i think we will end up with a little longer period of time omics comestrump-en true. we should not ignore the amount or overestimate the amount of money that can quite quickly go into the economy, weather from tax cuts or the infrastructure or from increased defense spending. if you write that together, you get an enormous new deficit. i don't think that is going to happen anytime soon. host: on health care, sign up for 2017 affordable care act plans are slightly greater than last year. caller brought up about deregulation, the wall street journal has an article
that killing regulations could take years. the republicans have their on do list. fiduciary role, clean power plants, the water rule, the myth a rule. -- methane rule. guest: there is only one in history, the congressional review act, tra. it has two peculiarities. we passed it once it was vetoed by president obama. now we have a president we think will sign something like that. if the house and senate passed, this congressional review act, they are allowed to look back over the last 60 legislative days, that would get you back into june, maybe some people think april or may. legislations getting rid of those regulations
that have been propagated in final form. majority in the house. it is not something that can be filibustered in the senate. descended to the president, he signs it and then you have those regulations -- i don't want to say killed because they will be every kind of lawsuit the magic begins that, but it can be done within 60 days. as far as executive orders, the president can issue executive orders that overturned previous executive orders. that can be done quickly. when the wall street journal says they have a list, they have a list. host: new rule bars pulling funds from planned parenthood. president obama delivered a generous parting gift to planned parenthood to prevent states from divesting millions of dollars from the largest abortion provider. in seattle, independent. hi ed.
caller: i have a question that i know little about these topics so please enlighten me anyway you can. if they increase the interest on a do they do that thursday and it is different or can increase it .005% once a week or once a month and make it more predictable? or is it just like ripping up a band-aid? guest: ripping off a band-aid. today, if you are a bank or financial institution that wants to put money safely in the federal reserve and hold it for you, you are going to pay a higher interest rate. that's between 0.5 and 0.75%. that money -- how does that affect people? if the banks have to pay a slightly higher rate in order to accommodate that, they may raise what they charge people for their loans a tiny bit.
that is why i think there has been this hysterical reaction to this. the market yesterday, there was no one i knew in the market that did not know this was coming. the market goes down 100 and whatever it was, and you say to yourself that cannot be because this was the most critical event in history. -- editable event history. -- predictable event in history. this will affect financial institutions. they will try to pass on what they can. somebody will undercut them. say there is a bank on the internet that says, wait a minute, and sit of turnkey we will charge you .9%. this is a highly competitive industry now. the margins after the bailout are pretty slim. no, this will not be something where you walk into the store and they will say on your credit card it is .25% higher.
that is not how it will work. rates,igher short-term cap the brakes, good move. that is what this viewer thinks. another one. bank savings, other savings rates are so negligible this rise will not even be much better. guest: i agree to that. that's why i tried to caution people from overreacting. it will be a little better and it is some competition. we are not going back to it anytime to the 4% or 5% yields we had on cds or if you bought a bond or even back in the old days at 10 year bond. we don't want to overreact to that. this is not a lamborghini we are driving. the nineot one of
lamborghinis. i drive an old toyota pickup truck. this is my old toyota pickup truck going from five miles an hour to eight. i will not cap on the brakes yet. i think this is really trying to st the market back emi-normal. host: energy prices will spite because their attention of world politics. guest: there are people that believe that. akstan, talk about kaz uncertainty in the middle east about isis funding itself through stolen oil. that is what they are doing. supply-demand, and i would yield to people at energy in the energy department, i don't think being from new mexico where we have part of the permian basin, along with less taxes, when i talk to people
about spikes it takes about 30 to 60 days to restart a fracking well. barrel, there70 a are people in the permian and elsewhere that at about $55 a barrel will start up again. you are going to have this $70,esting situation where these guys start producing any goes down to $60. ,ntil demand picks up europe and asia start blooming in latin people america get their act together and they start blooming, i don't see yet the demand pressure and the reality of fracking is that on the pricea cap of natural gas and oil.
that is just not going to go away anytime soon. host: karen in middletown, new hampshire. caller: good morning to you both. i have three quick questions. i am curious as to why we are worrying only have so much debt and we have so many other things to deal with. forege loan bailouts college students who have known over the years that obama and hillary are going to try to bail them out and they took as much money as they could not even having to have it. number two, i wondered how come who areho are on ssdi quite capable of working are not checked out. meanwhile i am on ssd i because working,huge body from because i know somebody people
on ssi, they keep adding to the list of why you can get it. you have anxiety, i believe that has been added to it. a toothache, you will be able to get it. that's an exaggeration but they don't check them out. i had to fill out a paper three months ago for social security with every ailment i have. host: i will jump in because we are running out of time. framework of entitlements and where we are heading with that. guest: she makes two great points. everybody is fearful we will have to bail out student loans. to some extent or the other. overnight $1d trillion to with the federal government has to pay into the debt.
the question of responsibility for that is next. clearly there has been a real overuse of that. as far as entitlements like social security, disability insurance, medicare, we have tried. i am not the only one so i don't pretend i am a leader. 1983 when we since have the so-called greenspan commission to save social security, which it did, we tried to get social security, pensions, medicare and medicaid under control. we have utterly failed. now -- pretend you went to a meeting and the guy running for congress sent to you, i am going to balance the budget when i get in there. what you would need to know is two thirds of the budget is spent before he takes office. it is spent on entitlements, including the one the lady been
mentioned, interest on the public debt and medicaid. two thirds of the budget is done. it is done every day, every year. you have no control over it unless you have the courage to go and reform the underlying medicare and social security thing. that is extremely controversial. if you try to do it, the far left all say those republicans want to push grandma off the cliff. the far right will say, are you crazy? i don't want to run back to my district having done that. in 1986, republicans lost the senate overwhelmingly. the main reason was there attempt to change entitlements minutely in 1984 and 1985. in 1986, the senate when democratic. grandma and every commercial was shown being pushed off a good with. yeah, we should do it.
everyone knows these programs will eventually be insolvent. whether it is 10 years from now or eight years or nine years. so far we have not been able to get anyone in the white house, anyone in the white house, for a majority of the republicans or democrats to go along with it. 10 years from now i'm not sure i will be in the senate, that is somebody else's problem. i'm sorry to be so blunt but that is the way it is. host: thank you very much for the conversation. the risk and learn more indicative bipartisanpolicy .org. the we come back, donna rice hughes with the ceo of enough is enough will be joining us to talk about her group's efforts to keep children safe on the internet. ♪
this weekend, c-span's cities tour an hour cox communications cables partners will explore the literary life and history of scottsdale, arizona. nicknamed the west's most western town. on big tv, here about life on route 66. known as america's mother road, it was one of the original highways between illinois and california. bellhe 66 kid," bob recalls his life in kingman, arizona, which is located on route 66 and the many things he observed while helping his father running gas station. >> about 10 years ago i got a call from a writer. he said i read an article about your father's gas station and i
like to interview you. i said sure. he goes, the very first question he asked me is, what was it like growing up in such a historic place? books,t guiden specializes in the civil war and americana. >> my father was a great c uster collector. they came up with guide on books. it fits the military. >> on c-span3, here about the founding of scottsdale from marshall trimble. he shares the story of one field scott, the civil war hero who saw potential in the arizona salt river valley. >> k just graduated from seminary school and was assigned to a church when the civil war broke out. lincoln called for volunteers and he really wanted to get into it. he went back to his hometown in new york, a little tiny town,
and he started recruiting and raising his own company of soldiers. i think it recruited about 33 of his own cousins and his bible study class. even recruited the town band. >> we will visit the winter home of architect frank lloyd wright. >> an example of how to live in the desert southwest. it was a building that frank lloyd wright used as the laboratory. he was creating a new kind of architecture for america. >> the c-span cities tour, saturday and in eastern on and sundaybook tv, afternoon on american history tv on c-span3. working with our cable affiliates and visiting cities across the country. washington journal continues. host: at our table is donna rice
hughes, president and ceo of enough is enough. what is your organization? guest: we make the internet safer for children and families. in 1994 with a focus on the internet before the world wide web was even actually online. it was being developed but it had not gone live yet. before email. which islania trump, why we have asked you to come on. she really liked this cyber bullying to be her platform. something she talked about as the first lady. when you heard that what did you think? guest: she can do a lot. it is wonderful to have that kind of a platform to be able to speak into this culture. she young mother herself, has already seen how kids can behave online and how damaging it is. i think she has a great platform. she is every graceful and
dignified and i think moms in particular are going to relate to her. and young girls will relate to her. they are primarily the ones, or at least a larger -- the larger percentage getting bullied. host: what can she do? what is your recommendation to her? guest: the first thing is to learn every thing she can about the issues. there are a lot of great efforts already going on. our philosophy is don't reinvent the wheel. we don't need websites. there is already a great government website. there are hundreds of websites. enough.org and internetsafety.org. then we will see where do we go from here. i recommend a few advisors to help walker through this and see where are the gaps, because there are gaps. we hear a lot about preventing cyber bullying, but what i love to see is someone involved in
the so long is to start to encourage a shift in the culture. a shift back to treating people with dignity and respect and kindness. i was just thinking about this last night. at christmas time people are naturally a little more merry and joyful and nice. wouldn't it be great if we could have that extended every day of the year? that becomes the real norm. in that bullying and things like that are unacceptable. it's like smoking in public anymore in a restaurant is not acceptable. and not wearing a seatbelt. i believe we can get prepared. host: what is cyber bullying? let's put up with the center for disease control has said occurs the technology.
electronic aggression and cyber bullying the cursor emails, chat instant messaging, websites, text messaging's, videos or pictures simply websites and cell phones. when you make of that number, 16%? guest: the numbers are all over the place. you can look at pew studies that are higher. it depends on how the study is done, with the age bracket was. icing studies as high as 43%. some much lower than the cdc's. i think the point is if you talk to kids and you ask them if they haven't believed, they will tell you. the parents need to think about what is going on with my child. what is going on with my child's here group and my child's atmosphere at church, at school, wherever my child is? parents andt
administrators, educators to be calling in as well as students. this is how we are dividing the lines. if you're a student, (202) 748-8000. a parent, (202) 748-8001. educators and administrators, (202) 748-8002. at others, you can call in (202) 748-8003. join the conversation about cyber bullying and give us your thoughts on it. is a federal government job to address this issue? guest: i think the federal government can certainly address it from the standpoint that this is not acceptable. that we need to look at public policy. right now there is not a federal public policy and that is fine because there are state policies. in fact that stopbullying.gov,
they have a map about policies and how they deal with cyber bullying and harassment. i think it would be hard for the federal government to address this and illegal fashion. a legaladdress this in fashion. this is happened in localities for the most part. it is better that the states deal with this. host: who is at risk? guest: anyone using technology is at risk. with any kind of danger online, it doesn't matter if it is cyber bullying or kids accessing pornography, sexual predators. it is not the technology. it is those who are abusing and exploiting technology. i think it is so important when parents start to allow their kids to have technology, start
those safety conversations at a very early age. talk to them about the fact that this laptop, tablet, this computer is a technology. it is not a right, it is a privilege. when you then allow them to go online, and i don't recommend that starts early quite frankly, then you need to talk about what is out there. i think parents and kids alike have a tendency to think they are safe behind the technology. that is simply not true because the internet opens you up to all the good, all the great information, all the great people, all the wonderful things you can do with it. it also opens you up to the bad and ugly and dangerous. it is up to the parent to be the first line of defense. there is a role for government and i want to talk about pornography for instance and the problem that is right now. and why there is so much of that going on.
one of the reasons is that many of our laws have not been aggressively enforced. we do have federal laws on the books to protect children from hard-core pornography, as well as adults. they are called the federal obscenity laws. they have not been enforced under the past administration at all. at all under the ashcroft administration when he was attorney general they didn't force the obscenity laws to a degree. not as much as we would've liked to have seen and prior to that not at all. it's a pandemic of hard-core material online. think andnk, kids adults think if it is there, it is legal. the majority is not protected speech. is a dangerinstance that the federal government needs to get more involved in enforcing the laws. and we have child pornography laws. that is getting worse, much
worse. those laws are being aggressively enforced, but there can be more oversight, greater resources for law enforcement to do the things. greater cooperation with law enforcement at the federal and state and local levels. one of the things we did this past year is we brought the first ever children's internet safety presidential pledge. what we did was we asked donald trump and secretary clinton to sign it. if you are elected, will you enforce the federal obscenity laws, the child for not if he laws, sex trafficking laws, the children's internet protection act. -- some ofthese laws these loss of nubbin aggressively -- some of these laws have not been aggressively enforced.
they are taking government money, they have to by law. that was passed in 1998. there needs to be greater oversight. donald trump sign the pledge and hillary clinton sent a letter of support. now hopefully we are working with the trumpet administration on -- trump administration by getting the next attorney general to aggressively enforce those laws, hopefully set up a commission to look at these in the digital world had come up with better solutions. and to also encourage greater public and private partnership with corporate america to do their part, do more than they are doing now. host: let's hear from an indicator first. jeff in maryland? caller: good morning. how are you? host:? comment -- question or comment? caller: parents have to take a greater role in this. i have been teaching for nearly 20 years and i have gone from no
cell phones in the classroom, you to in the classroom to completely digitalized classrooms. there needs to be education in the schools. perhaps 30 to the class is taught on proper internet.and digital use and additionally , parents have to take time to talk to their kids at an early age and talk to them about everything so they don't feel like they have to go into the digital world to be heard or seen or accepted. and lastly we are facing another major issue in terms of fake news. dealing with that issue with kids during the election. it's bad enough for adults. here we are with kids who are on the internet having to deal with bullying issues, but also spending a lot of their time online and gobbling up the garbage that is there and there are no educational facilities to
filter that. host: i would like for donna to respond to what she heard. guest: absolutely. i totally agree with you. you are so right. it certainly can't all be offloaded to the schools and to the teachers. i will say as far as cyber safety curriculum, there are some. but in many schools across the country i do think that should be part of curriculum. i believe that internet safety and cyber safety curriculum, digital citizenship and all that starts in the first great. by the time kids get to first-grade they are often already using their parent of the smartphone -- parents'smartphones. youtube videos, the internet becomes the instant babysitter. that is a key point. you are right.
kids are now in their devices into the school. that is something i believe each school district needs to deal with themselves. i do agree for parents to start that cyber safety education as young as they possibly can. the first time they let their kids use the internet or use technology, you need to talk about the fact it is a privilege and not a right. limit screen time. i have seen this with my grandkids. away,ke that technology especially if the are used to having it, there can be as scene. the other thing is he cannot have as a parent the internet safety conversation once or twice. just like you can't parent once or twice. parents need to understand in the digital world they have got to be a cyber parent all the
time. just like being a parent. incorporating their parenting into the cyber world. host: hall in virginia beach. good morning and welcome to the conversation. caller: thank you for taking my call. i have a quick question. my comment is i think it's an important issue. i think it is important we talk about cyber bullying. and not only amongst children, but a lot of them get it from their parents. isquestion is this, how melania trump being concerned about cyber bullying where her husband is the main perpetrator of this? you can't have her go on and make comments about cyber
bullying, i understand she is passionate about it, but two days later have her husband tweet something and calling somebody a dummy or immediate. -- or an idiot? host: there was an article in the new york times about this. why twitter should not suspend trump. they say it would be censorship. but to the callers point, after he used it last week that criticize chuck jones in indiana who represents workers at the carrier company. he received a series of threatening phone call from trump supporters. last week mr. trump used twitter to attack a college students who asked him a critical question at a rally. woman has been barraged by and seen and arranged threats ever sense. as a corporation, twitter is under no obligation to let mr. trump use the service. it gets to make its own sets of each rules. among those rules is a
prohibition on using the service to incite harassment. guest: it's very interesting and probably the reason twitter was not invited to the big tech counsel yesterday. understand the caller's question. i certainly cannot answer for melania trump. rightelieve she has the to choose the platform she must cares about. i saw an interview she did with her husband. they were asked about this. she was asked why cyber bullying and how are you dealing with your husband close use of oftter -- husband's use twitter and 4:00 a.m. tweets? she said we have conversations and i figured those will continue. i'm sure many have had this conversations with
president-elect trump. it is my hope, and i'm sure it is everyone's hope that while this serves him well to some degree in the election and the campaign and things can get ugly and better and they did for most of the candidates, for many of them things got -- they went down into the two drill fast. in ae the technology beneficial way. he does have a great opportunity to get his message out and to do it in a positive, constructive way. i hope we will see much more of that as we go on. i think probably we will definitely be seeing more that. host: the york, a parent. good morning. caller: good morning and merry christmas to all. i am going to make a statement and follow-up basically on what another caller said.
if you have your future leader as the academy of bullying -- the academy -- academy --what what kind of example are you spending? angst i hear a lot of after the election. not everyone is happy with the results. i understand that. trump ande melania the nude pictures. and away the media holding those up, things she did when she was much younger, when she was a european model, and i can tell you as a former model is very different in europe. you get to the beaches and women are topless. bringing this back up to
embarrass and humiliate her, i think she knows firsthand what it feels like. that is something she did when she was much younger. she still have to be embarrassed by that. i think he has a great opportunity to leverage that and careful about, be the decisions you make when you are younger. they can come back when you are an adult. when you are a mom or a dad yourself and the embarrassing. one of the things we teach kids and parents to teach their kids is self post can come back to hurt you. don't post with your grandparents are not be pleased about or that your worst enemy could use against you. if we start to help young people think about choices and think long-term, and it is hard because we live in an immediate gratification, is the message,
instant food, you name it the talk about long-term consequences. she has a great opportunity to do that. host: how did you come to this? guest: great question. i started in 1994, prior to the internet being commercial. i moved to washington to get married. i met the ceo of a company it was fighting child per not if he predatory in the internet world. my husband is an information technology and still is. right when i started we saw the beginnings of sexual predators using newsgroups to trade child pornography. old,very young, five years and it is still there. it is a booming business.
kids as young as infants. , we started to see hard-core black market up seen pornography that you could not find any triple x-rated bookstore. sitesns and millions of with that kind of material. those are now in place. we saw predators wanting to talk about how to molest kids. i went holy cow, this technology is already being exploited by the bad guy. had we get on top of this? we went to congress. i went to barbara walters. i said barbara, this is what is going on and i'm ready to start talking. internet safety is where it is that. she came back and said i talked to my producers and they said i can't say pornography on the air. we started.
we were early pioneers and it was an exciting time. understand how in my own life i have been hurt. sometimes you minimize those things in your life and i did. i realize how pornography played a role in a negative way my life. i felt like this was something i was most to do. that was 24 years ago now. host: emission barbara walters. he sat down with her recently. similar viewers know your name. why is this related to back in 1987, europe fair with gary hart? guest: allegedly. host: he talked with barbara walters about it. is this related to your work? guest: the reason i sat down with barbara walters and did this interview, the ones we did
in the past, except the first in 1987 when she became a friend that the ones we did subsequent to that were about where are we now inhabit a journey through that time and decide to take the high road. that was not easy. there were millions of dollars offered on the table. i made a choice then to return to my christian faith in my prayer was how can this be used for good? i think this is a message that is so orton formula that all these issues online. that is, in particularly when kids are getting bullied, how can i take the high road here? not lash back? not get into a twitter war or cyber bullying war and make things worse? and to treatt people hurting you with kindness. yeah, i went back to
the good book and the golden rule and all those things. it works. it really does work. this takes me back to what i was saying in the beginning. i would really like to see it because it's been almost a quarter of a century for me, our culture begin to change. this happens in other civilizations. like in england. they took on the slave trade, but at the same time he sought to restore manners and civility in england and they did it. get to go lifetime but there was a pendulum swing. overnk we are so far with brutality, police brutality, hate in the street and things like that. wait a minute. we are all human. let's switch back over and apply the golden rule. host: of elijah in tallahassee, florida.
and educator. caller: can you hear me? ok. i wanted to say thank you, hes forand ms. hug putting me on today. i listened to you guys are most every morning. but back to the focus, i am an educator. i'm after schoolteacher. i've been teaching for the boys and girls school. i focus on working with first-graders, second graders and third-graders. we can go all the way up the 15-year-old in the program. i deal with maybe every day countless amounts of cyber bullying. it israeli getting to a problem. what is going on is that these kids are getting technology, they are getting social media accounts, and they are getting absolute permission to say and do whatever they feel like doing online.
there is no parent guidance, especially with lower income families or families with less education. if you have parents who are poor and less educated, maybe not college-educated, they tend to allow their children to do pretty much whatever they want to do. that by the technology. the kids can get on social media and express whatever they feel. if there is stuff going on in the home, they tend to express that through social media. guest: that is such a great point. what you are speaking up as a broader systemic problem and the breakdown of the family. often times in the inner cities and what have you, especially for the lot of boys and girls our -- are operating. thank you for what you do. often times is kids need the parent. someone like you can provide
that, what they are not getting it home. we can't make an absentee parent or even a bad parent become a good cyber parent. that is not what we can do. but we can help concerned parents and concerned, caring adults like yourself become better equipped to help these kids. host: i wanted you to finish your point. guest: you are right. they are not getting the instruction at home and often times the technology has become a pacifier. the kids are off and running. and there are different kinds of homes, broken homes. teachers have to bear a bigger responsibility which is why teachers should be getting a lot more money. we are indebted to you. it is about our kids in the future and they are looking for guidance. i truly believe that they want
someone to come in and help them set boundaries. this is a great thing to do. we did a curriculum ourselves of the department of justice called internet safety 101. it is a dvd teaching series we turned into a three-part tv series with pbs and one and ending for it. it is on vimeo right now. it has a workbook. we designed for individual use. pta's,small groups and for empowering adults. even good parents may feel intimidated by the technology and you say he don't have to be a geek. one of the most important things any parent or teacher can do is build an atmosphere of trust with those kids and keep conversation lines open.
host: our viewers can go to enough.org. ted, north branch, minnesota. go ahead. caller: i am an industrial engineer. i have been studying children all my life also. for controlling children is simply -- it happens between the ages of 0 and one. the child's mine is like a nifty bucket. up with trash, flashing lights, cell phone calls, widescreen tv. breast-fed andot a mother's loving arms, you will have a thug.
newscasters have said 96% of life timers in prison do not know their abc's. host: that is ted from minnesota. fromt to get to randy, taxes, a parent. caller: pay parent and grandparent. the earlier caller stole my thunder about the lumia -- melania trump having her hands full with donald. my other point is satellite providers have pay-per-view movies. , by one has a description down below it a very graphic depiction of what is in the movie. any child can scroll past that and read that. i can read the description to you over the air but i am sure -- host: i think we know what we're
talking about. not just cable companies but tech companies, are they doing enough? guest: i think they can do more. that's a good point you brought up. there is oversight by the fcc over a lot of what happens on television and in some degree cable. whereas the internet there isn't much. the hard-core promoter fee that adults cannot get in bookstores, kids can get for free. something like 40% of boys have seen sex online. the vast majority of kids have seen bcl he. the new normal for new school in high school is anal sex. i'm sorry, but this is the reality and they're getting education from this information online. is of the things we ask for greater cooperation with the government to encourage voluntary steps to deal with
some of this. the tech companies and the cable companies are not dealing with child for knocker fee, -- pornography, but this other material they can get more aggressive. we started two years ago the national porn-free wi-fi can ping -- campaign. when they hop from the schoolyard to the local 7-eleven, to the restaurants, whatever it is, or the stadium to watch a ballgame, they are hopping on the wi-fi at the shopping malls. we are going to corporate america. we started with starbucks and mcdonald's because they lead the friendly wi-fi movement in the united kingdom under cameron. here is the leader of the united kingdom saying, i will provide leadership on this level.
that was very important. he made things happen over there. this was voluntary. we have done the same thing here. they went to mcdonald's. they are effort starting in the first quarter of this past year, they are filtering child pornography and pornography in almost all their 14,000 restaurants. and starbucks never responded to us until we put out a press release on mcdonald's and the press called them and they said yes, we are going to do it to. we are going after all these been using corporate america saying this is after your best interest. you are helping to avoid sexual harassment in your workplace. this is a win-win. it will not cost you anything. there you go. host: we will go to seattle. what is your name? hania. is
i am the parent of a 16-year-old boy in high school. through a combination of work and he is a wonderful young man that is respectful of his classmates and girls. i teach him it is not enough to not bully, he also has to step in if it is safe to intervene if other people are bullying. i want to go back to the point about specifically donald trump's behavior. it is enough enough to say things got ugly during the election. i think when a person with one cause aweet can 19-year-old girl who is trying to engage in the political process to literally receive want to know, i from my perspective when i'm teaching my son to not only treat girls with respect, to call out his fellow high school boys to treat girls with respect, to engage in the
political process, how do i take donald trump saying those things? if you are not going to brush them aside for kids, you cannot oppress them aside for the president-elect. had we teach my son and his friends here are all the things you cannot do. they are not acceptable. then they hear the president-elect doing those things. how do i resolve those things for my kids? guest: i understand. it is hard. it is just hard. i do hope that we will see great improvement with him here shortly and over time. i think it is hard to reconcile that. the important thing is to say this is really about you and your choices and what is the right thing to do. and not everyone in authority is always going to make the best choices. what i always do, no matter if
it's a situation with the -- with him or a new story like the pork rub that shot herself in taxes in front of her parents because of cyber bullying, all these things are very negative kinds of things. we can use them in teachable moments. i would encourage you to find a way to use that at a teachable moment. how do you want to be? this is what we expect. this is how we raise you. and help them understand the importance of the golden rule and what it would feel like if you were on the other end. of the talk about empathy. we lose, an hour kids have a tendency to lose empathy when using technology because people are saying and putting things out there that they would probably never say to somebody's face. what we have to help young people understand, and adults,
that there are consequences. they may be unintended. it may be an unintended consequence, but there are consequences to everything. they can go viral just like that. host: angelina from clearwater, florida. apparent. caller: i teach my kids to go to school, get their educations. do not go around calling people different names. i had my children when i was 17 years old. i encouraged my kids to go to school because my mama that the same thing for me. calling kids all kinds of names and stuff, that hurt their education. i teach my grandkids do not look at color, skin color. tell them to treat them just like themselves. i don't understand how could a andident go out in public
sit down and talk about the other president, then talk about a lady in the white house for a long time trying to keep the right going for what others -- for education. i don't think that is right for him to say names. host: angelina, i believe your comment there. william from louisville, kentucky. caller: hey. host: go ahead with your thought. caller: cyber bullying that they are talking about on c-span, what i am not understanding is this. it is a choice whether you get on the internet and do that. it is not anything that is personal that anybody can do it and use someone else's name. there is no way the individual can find out if it's actually
coming from the individual or not. guest: that is a good point. when you are talking about his impersonation. this is a tactic of a bully. that is when someone pretends to be someone else. often times they can use someone else's password. that's what we always say teacher kids not to give up their passwords except for you the adult. parents, you should have your kid's passwords to everything. you need them in case of emergency. think about middle school. mean girls. your best friend one day can be your worst enemy the next day. theou shared your password, one girl can go in and pretend like she is u.s. are putting stuff out there. but this is something that happens. that is one of the ways it can
happen. let me say another thing about by standards. if a child has been cyber bullying has not been cyber bullied, most likely they at the very least have seen it and witnessed it. there is so much that the bystander can do. part of it is to connect together and stand up for the person being bullied. let the bully note this is not acceptable. if they do that together, they lose the fear factor that the bully is going to turn on them. tot: if our viewers want learn more, go to enough.org. donna rice hughes, ceo and president of enough is enough. thank you for your time. guest: good to be with you. host: thank you for watching. we will be bto