tv Washington Journal CSPAN December 27, 2013 7:00am-10:01am EST
host: president obama signed budget and defense know for while in hawaii. in washington, they will go over the details of next year's spending. good morning. here are some of the headlines. from politico, barack obama signed a budget bill. it will provide a broad outline for the federal budget from 2015. it eases sequestration cuts. the bipartisan budget act secures a total of $63 billion in discretionary funding.
it also includes $85 billion in deficit reduction. when congress returns in january, lawmakers will need to approve the bill. it authorizes spending through the end of the fiscal year. that has been the case in recent years. from the new york times, lawmakers say progress on budget near deadline. the next deadline is weeks away. top lawmakers said that they have made significant progress negotiating a spending bill. it gives the appropriations committees an opportunity to reassert control of federal dollars. we have a chance to prove to the congress that we can produce bills. the past few years have proved frustrating for members of the spending panels. house republicans could not come to terms with senate democrats.
it has been a real struggle and tough at times. most members of congress have countered for the holidays. the bipartisan leadership has been assembling a $1 trillion money betweenit military and domestic needs. talksers involved in the say both republicans and democrats are determined to get legislation through by the january 15 deadline. from the new york post this morning, new obamacare fees are coming in 2014. the cost of the massive health care law will hit americans in 2014. new taxes pile up on insurance premiums and on their income tax bills. most insurers are not advertising the taxes that are added onto previous -- opting to
pass them to consumers, while quietly lobbying lawmakers for a break. the new taxes on one customer's bill added up to $23 per month. or $277 per year. this boosted the monthly premium. that is from the new york post. to see more of the facts and figures, go there. some 1.3 million americans are set to lose their unemployment benefits on saturday. that will escalate the battle between proponents of smaller government. it will hurt the overall economy. emergency benefits will end when funds run out. the cutoff will initially affect
1.3 million people. 1.9 million more will lose benefits by mid-2014. the is according to national employment law project. benefits average $300 per week. that is from the usa today article. obamashington post -- signed a measure using detainee transfers. he signed a sweeping defense policy law in hawaii on thursday. it cracks down on sexual assault in the military and eases restrictions on transferring to thees from cuba custody of foreign countries. that is a step towards closing the facility. he released a statement crediting congress for relaxing regulations. that is the washington post.
front page of the denver post -- firing over illegal use is ok. cannabis sales begin on january 1, one fact is sometimes overlooked. employers still can fire users for using the drug on or off property. legal for being adults to possess and consume in colorado. the usa today wrote a front-page article a few days ago. two weeks left to prepare for pot sales. that was the headline. what happens on january 1 in colorado? a series ofe are pop stores that will open up in colorado. froman walk in and buy pot
the salesman. it is a very interesting process. we have 100 or so stores that will be opening on january 1. host: what was the licensing process like? caller: we originally had a medical marijuana system. people to get the first crack at opening recreational pot shops. this process where it will be grown and tracked with chips, from seed to sale -- it is effectively being treated like alcohol. there are taxes and inspectors and a lot of paperwork. trenddo you see this as a that will go nationwide or spread out? caller: we have been talking about this in colorado for a few years.
we joke that we wondered if we would ever see medical marijuana legalized. it happened far faster in colorado than maneuverable expected. -- many people expected. the sky did not fall. there are arguments about whether it has been attributed to a crime. generally speaking, the sky has not fallen. there have not been major problems. it does seem like the advocates for recreational marijuana are knocking off states bit by bit. they have tested out the process. medical marijuana has been recreational. what about tax revenue? is there an estimate of how much this could raise? caller: a lot. the taxggle is that
regulators do not want to have the tax to high. that will push people back into a black market. you cannot grow this in your home. that is illegal. looked, they're talking about taxes equivalent to seven dollars for 1/8 ounce. host: trevor hughes with usa today. thank you for spending a few minutes with us today. caller: have a good morning. host: this poll came out in october. for the first time, americans support legalizing marijuana. we want to ask a broader question. we want to have a discussion with you on the war on drugs. not just the legalization of pot , but other issues on the war on drug. do you think it is succeeding? start dialing.
the numbers are on your screen. host: participate as well on social media. you can take a vote in the poll that we have there as well. or send us an e-mail. this from last week. obama frees 21 jailed on unfair drug laws. he commuted the sentences of eight drug offenders. that sent the system him away for lengthy terms of unfair. an important step to
restoring fundamental ideals of justice and fairness, he said. each of the inmates, who sentences are being shortened, has served at least 15 years. they received mandatory minimum sentences. obama signed a law for increased parity. from forbes, recently, earlier this month -- 80 years after prohibition, president obama continues a failed drug war. the war on drugs is an unmitigated failure. those who support the war may recall prohibition. paternalism, which was rightly repealed. legal drugs are still relatively cheap and widely available. prohibition has enriched a it has criminal past --
increased the crime rate. drug prohibition has also created an enormous tax burden. fight the war and keep a million people in prison. the war on drugs cost about $80 billion per year. that is a significant amount even by federal standards. the war on drugs has destabilized foreign governments and created eight general disrespect for the law. benefits, butth the government denies those benefits and keeps cannabis in a restricted category. nothing has prompted the federal government to call a truce. a recent poll found that 75% of
adults think that the war is a failure and they have a strong case. adams writes that no tendency is quite so strong as the desire to lay down rules of conduct for other people. government does that because it can. dealers and users of prohibited sus this is wheeled no political clout. we begin with a call with ed in tennessee. independent line. caller: that kind of sums up the failure. the war on drugs will go down as one of the biggest mistakes, along with alcohol prohibition. the war on drugs is devastating the black communities. everybody wonders why the blacks are shooting.
their families have been destroyed. taking the mail out of the family. they are locking up women. we are locking up more children. we are insane with this commercialization of everything. as the quote from taft -- mark twain had one. other people's problems or vices -- this is insanity. host: what would be a solution in your view? caller: legalize all drugs. you do not have to advertise them. why are we putting human beings in cages? host: you're talking about all drugs? caller: right. methamphetamines were the most prescribed drugs in the 50's. the most drug addicted segment of american society is
middle-aged women. look at the blacks who go to jail. they make up 13% of the population. 13% of illegal drug users. 74% are incarcerated. you can look at the 2010 act -- 52% of crack users are white. 38% are black. 88% of those incarcerated are black. host: you seem to have a good knowledge of this. is this a topic that has been of interest? caller: i have been studying it for years. the stat that got me was the one i just told you about the blacks. host: margie is in leavenworth, kansas. caller: good morning and happy
new year. i'm glad you asked this question. i think that the war on drugs succeeded greatly. they got what they wanted. capitalized punishment in our country. just like other things they are attacking. it is legal and wonderful. --they can drag up your drugged up your kids from day one. make up diseases. they can do anything. then, control the other drugs that people could get that they want. and punish them. i worked in a clinic. it was such a disgusting thing. all drugs should be decriminalized. get off people's backs.
the prisons are profiting. all of these drugs are advertised on tv. it is really a shame of the money that is being made. host: thank you that it -- very much. there is a chart from the federal bureau of prisons. these are the folks who are incarcerated. and purple is for drug offenses. the sheriff of king county in we covered a hearing for him in september. here's what he had to say. [video clip] the top law enforcement official in the largest jurisdiction in the country that has legalized marijuana. i have been a police officer for 37 years. i was elected as chair of last year. during my career, i have investigated everything from
shoplifts two homicides. i have been a narcotics detective. the war on drugs has been a failure. we have not significantly reduced the demand over time. we have incarcerated generations of individuals. the highest incarceration rate in the world. the citizens of the state of washington decided it was time to try something new. in november 2012, they passed an initiative to legalize recreational amounts of marijuana. at the same time, they created strict rules and laws. i was a strong supporter of this initiative and remain a strong supporter today. there are several reasons for that support. most of all, that is what the people want. they voted for legalized marijuana. the government has failed the people. they want to try something else. too often, the attitude of the places that we are the cops and
you're not. do not tell us how to do our job. that is the wrong attitude. i will not fall into that trap. paul --lis from st. tragically, politicians frame it as a health issue. it should be framed focused on economics. napolis, what do you think? caller: it is a complete failure. a good part of my generation -- there was the article in usa today, one in four people are convicted felons. old, i was18 years incarcerated for marijuana usage. i graduated from college and started a business and raised a family. it has been something that plagued my life completely.
something that is legal not even five miles away. at the end of the day, it just made it harder on life. you see a lot of people who see these things. it is not what you see on television. you see the bus with the cartels. there are millions of citizens getting disenfranchised off of something that is not even criminal. host: thank you. gary in virginia. good morning. caller: how are you doing? -- i willat we republican usually. the last few times i voted for obama. he said change and i thought -- i did not think it would be change out of my pocket.
i think that the mandatory minimum should be gone. there should be medical uses for marijuana. for people who are in pain like me. in,ar as the call is coming maybe he will do it. -- that is heroin bad. that should never be legalized. thank you. from our facebook page, someone who posted pragmatic party for america -- you are missing the point. it is not about drugs at all. it is taking us 40 years to realize that. the war on drugs is about warehousing poor were nonwhite people for profit. someone else says hsbc bank was caught laundering $850 million
of drug cartel money. they are still in business, what a joke. next call is from ralph in delaware. caller: good morning. thank you for c-span. host: war on drugs succeeding? caller: no it is not, sir. i had a daughter who had a drug problem for 20 years. she was arrested. the policeman gave her drugs. he took her to a drug dealer. she handed the money to the drug dealer, got the drugs, and they drove around the corner. they did the same thing and the cops handed her the money. she handed the money to the drug dealer. she was charged with a drug dealer. this was in pennsylvania. when she went to trial, i went there. it was when bush was running for election. they had chairs and stuff set up on the courthouse lawn.
i knew my daughter would not get justice. sent was a gentleman who half $1 million from arizona to the county. the cops arrested him. host: thank you for telling your personal story. bring it to a conclusion. waser: that gentleman arrested and spent two years in prison. my daughter was sentenced to 2-4 years. thank you. host: michael in new york city. good morning. caller: i think it is an absolute failure. you look at the position of president obama. you have afghanistan, which is -- prime minister blair said 91% of the heroin worldwide. if we were to take it from a
biblical point of view, this is 91% of the heroin. that is right in front of us. we have troops walking by it. why don't we bring the oil fields? we have troops in there. why don't we give that to minorities in the black community for scholarships? you will solve the heroin problem. you will solve the educational problem for minorities. thank you very much. by the way, the president has gone into sudan. why don't we give him a picture of detroit? it needs the money. we're going all over the world and starting this money -- spreading this money. host: thank you very much. monti tweets in that the war on drugs starts in elementary schools, where kids are talked to and told not to resort to drugs.
books and tvs to watch for in 2014. we want to show you some of these that are coming out in 2014. former secretary of state hillary clinton has an as yet to be titled memoir. it will focus on foreign policy. that will hit the shelves in june. greenwald's book about edward snowden will come out in april. memoirs of the secretary of war will be about robert gates is time as defense secretary. senator,exas state wendy davis, has a book coming out in the fall. she filibustered in texas on the abortion bill. gabriel sherman has a new book.
that will come out in may. elizabeth warren has a book coming out in the spring. as does glenn beck. his next book is tentatively titled "controlling education." robin roberts has a book coming out. those are some of the books coming out and went to 14. also, plans are underway for or -- the white house is looking for to a big day in 2014. michelle obama's 50th birthday. that will be on january 17. there will be a party the following day, snacks and sips and dancing and dessert. the date e-mails are already being sent. guests will wear comfortable shoes, eat before you come, and practiced in shoes.
eric in pittsburgh, republican line. caller: i think that we live in a culture that fantasizes war. you cannot look at a later without seeing an image of war. look at our national anthem. it is about war. it is a war in them. host: is the war on drugs succeeding? -- war any kind of for proves the point, and then the flags are put down. everybody moves on. host: that was eric in pittsburgh. milton, west virginia -- caller: sorry about my boys. it is not succeeding. in drugan increase
addiction and west virginia. it is tremendous. it heroine and oxycodone -- should be a health care issue. the problem is that you have your treatment centers and stuff. the money is so expensive. you can go to the treatment center, but there is medication now. they help people to get off of it. they are so expensive that the average person cannot afford it. host: should they be legalized? caller: i do not know how we will do this. the increase in crime -- trying to get the drugs -- i think the incarceration is the problem. what we have to do is, instead of incarceration, when a person is known to be addicted, they go through the court system. into aould be put
mandatory rehab program. that really watches what they're doing. give them the tools to stay away from the drugs. they cannot. it becomes a lifestyle. -- they are so caught up in the whole system of it. have always felt that marijuana should be legal. it is a plant. host: thank you for calling in. limo driver tweets in that if we take the profit out of drugs, we win the war. from the front page of the wall street journal, the government pulls the reins on disability judges. they are smarting from recent scandals in the social security administration. they're working to ensure the disability benefits are awarded
consistently. there will be more latitude to crack down on judges who are awarding benefits outside of the norm. a few weeks ago, the administration notified judges of these changes. that is the front page of the wall street journal. brooklyn,call from what is your opinion on the war on drugs? caller: i think what we need is a much more scientific development and how we research. you cannot really get decent studies. it is dangerous. also, to get marijuana legalized, the biggest damages to your lungs.
you have a way of making it into a medication. we would have less sickness from the drugs. i do not think all drugs should be legalized. i have a friend who works in the hospital er. he said that the worst drug addictions that he sees our alcohol and heroin. heroine brings the people close to death. it slows down their heart rate. probably one of the worst drug addictions you could find and it is perfectly legal. how many deaths you have from alcohol? the war on drugs is a failure. people are dying from a we have that is legal. be lesser drugs should studied first trip people should have access to the studies. we should have a vote on whether it should be legalized. if you do not study the issue,
you will probably not make a good decision. host: thank you. harley says heck no. have theirericans lives ruined over committing a so-called felony. employers will not hire anyone with a criminal record. especially in wirral areas, where jobs are scarce. bill says the cure is worse than the disease. this has cost americans more freedom than the war on terror. brenda in texas. what do you think? caller: i think that being a recovering drug addict from 23 years old, and being around a drug rehabilitation, i think that we all have our choices to make. whether they are good or bad, right or wrong. when people start bringing in
religion, they are trying to put fear into people. that can make it worse. i think that religion is what is killing people today. if people see the truth -- host: go back. is there a way in your view or should there be a way, as a recovering addict, to control drugs? caller: to control drugs? i think that once you get into therapy and find out your core you're probably going to keep going back out and using drugs. host: how long have you been sober? caller: since i was 23. i turned 50 --
host: 27 years. caller: as long time. host: it is. should they be legalized? caller: alcohol is already legalized. it is already out there. kids are getting it. --is just another gateway to when i was out there and 23, all it took was being a little bit tipsy. that was when i was offered my first dose of methamphetamine. i was addicted and it was pretty bad. i am on the other side of that now. if people would just search their hearts and see why they're using drugs.
as far as the military goes, in myoes on with that -- opinion, there are a lot of women, and i am not downgrading meant, but a lot of men are getting -- a lot of women are getting used for men's purposes. a lot of women are really suffering. host: thank you for sharing your personal clearance with us. butch in kingston, ohio. it is funny that nobody is talking about the heroine and cocaine that is coming across the border. we need to" her. i grew up in a small town. there are 20 or 30 people every week at traffic stops for busted for heroin or cocaine.
are in the gas station bathrooms shooting up. who is going to take care of these people if you legalize heroin? it is in a liquid, pill, and needle form. who will take care of them? we're losing the war. host: the president of columbia was in town this month. he was talking about international wars on drugs. [video clip] in thee succeed objective, which has already been agreed between the two parts. colombia without cocaine -- think of what that would mean to the whole region and the u.s. we have been the major provider of cocaine for 40 years. can you imagine what this would mean if there is change
internally that disrupts the flow of cocaine to the american cities or to the regions? it would be a major breakthrough. that is extremely important. besides the other point of having peace in our countries. host: the front page of the new york times this morning, new york is soon to trail florida and population. they have the status as the most popular state. they will soon fall behind florida into fourth place. this is a long anticipated drop that is rife with symbolism. it could carry serious economic consequences in coming years. california, texas, soon to be florida. the new york. the front page of the arizona republic -- feds deport fewer. this is the first decline since obama took office.
368,006 hundred 44 people last year. 644 people. back to your calls on the war on drugs. massachusetts, what do you think about it? caller: good morning. that it is time for the marijuana moonshine party. host: what does that mean? caller: if you selected the marijuana moonshine party, they would repeal all of the problems with marijuana and moonshine. an americancitizen to have five gallons of moonshine and five pounds of marijuana. those two numbers will not allow you to run out or be a millionaire selling them.
they would be strict prohibition on -- there would be regulations. you could not combine with your neighbor and sell it. you could not make bathtub mint juleps. host: legalize in small amounts? -- the what you need is whole presidency should be the marijuana moonshine. what i wanted to put down was that cannabis and nicotine are a drugs. there is a lot of zeal and ego on all parts -- from the dea, down to your local beat cop. everyone says they're doing their job. really, they know. we heard from the chief in washington. the sky has not fallen. anarchy has not taken over. it is time for the marijuana
moonshine party. host: all right. thank you for your idea. jamie is in manassas, virginia. good morning. caller: thank you for taking my call. i am really amazed at the number of people who are calling and. they are advocating legalizing drugs. there is a reason why drugs are illegal. i know people in the health profession. i was told first hand what drugs do to physically. they are just bad for you. you have people calling and saying we should legalize drugs and walk around in a stupor. pretty much, society is just a deteriorating. we are becoming a wasteland. is, do not make that choice. if you need treatment, get treatment.
if you continue to make a choice and break laws that have been in place, then there has to be a deterrent. if the deterrent is incarceration and people do not like it, they can make other choices. that has to be something can make an incentive. take away the incentive to take drugs. host: thank you for sharing your opinion. from politico, who will survive 2014's top primaries? it goes through some of the senate primaries that are happening. some of the political primaries. number one is the kentucky senate. no one expects mitch mcconnell to lose to his primary opponent. he will have to expend a decent
amount of resources on the primary, instead of saving for a general election fight with the democratic secretary of state, allison grimes. they also talk about the georgia senate. whoever wins the primary will take on nonprofit ceo michelle dunn, daughter of politician sam dunn. -- crazier this politicians primary gets, the more hopeful national democrats will be that they can make seats competitive for them. polling has shown mike ahead of lynn cheney. cheney's connections could make it a more competitive race. finally, the pennsylvania governor is another one.
the gop governor is vulnerable. democrats know it. no fewer than eight democrats are vying for a chance to face off against governor corbett. reginald in illinois, democratic line. what do you think about the war on drugs? caller: it has always been a joke. i was born and raised in the south side of chicago. withay the police interact -- it was crazy. it is a high area. we do not get along with the police. i grew up and moved to the suburbs. what i noticed was the way that they checked us up on the street. they always had us on our knees. in the suburbs, they do not do that.
the majority of the people that use drugs that here are white. the brothers were the ones that were always going to jail. they turned white guys into informants. they go home and have an uncle monitor on. -- an ankle monitor on. i was ok for about 20 years. i was saying all kinds of crazy stuff happening. i got shot by a friend of mine. i was not using any drugs -- i was an average -- avid churchgoer. he got jealous and chummy up. -- shot me up. i have extreme pain. host: you talk about your cocaine addiction. should cocaine be legalized?
caller: no. i have a- heroine -- friend who stays in the hospital because of alcoholism. those things, like the guy was saying, they deteriorate your body. they do things to your body. the only thing i have ever seen someone do on marijuana is you everything and go to sleep. they do not do anything violent. it is hyper. addicts, -- that things can happen. -- bad news can happen. their mood altering drugs. host: when we talk about controlling drugs, how do you get to where people are not using heroin and cocaine? lock the borders down as
tight as you can. that is where it is coming from. i believe that a large percent we went overrs -- and did something about all that stuff in afghanistan. their drug products are here in the united states. host: how long have you been away from cocaine? caller: three years now. three years clean and sober. i have vowed never to use any other drug. i do smoke weed now. weed is the only thing that kills my pain. i am on oxycodone. i am on the highest percentage of morphine that you can take. i only have one kidney now. i smoke weed to counteract the morphine and hydrocodone. i use that when i am really
spiking. i really need something. it kills the pain. host: do you smoke it legally? caller: it is illegal in chicago right now. we're passing a law in illinois to help us who need medical marijuana. in february.o pass it has already been passed. host: do you smoke everyday? caller: i do actually. not as much though. i smoke one day. i may not need any more until the next night. that smoking is strict leave for my pain. if i don't have pain, i do not smoke it. -- if it the pain and is severe, to where i am not
catatonic, but i am debilitated, i really need the marijuana. once i do it, then i can eat. i do not have an appetite when i'm in pain. i can get up and move around. i can be a husband to my wife. that, i am just a ball of nerves. in excruciating pain. marijuana actually works. if they will legalize the drug, let it be the marijuana. host: thank you for your time this morning. robinson, illinois, what do you think? caller: listen, i have two points to make. there with me. that this all is comes back to personal responsibility. if a person wants to do drugs, that is their issue to deal with. it is their issue to deal with all the way through.
if they get addicted, that is their problem. i hear a lot of people saying that you have to have the drugs to be illegal because the kids will get them. they said the same thing about cigarettes. then they made convenience stores start carting kids and did not look up age. it worked. smoking among teenagers went way down. they started this card hard thing. a drug dealer on the street does not ask a child for id. it does not matter. a 10-year-old could buy a bag of weed. cocaine rocks, whatever. the drug dealer does not care. you tax from the state and you card hard, it will be done. keep it out of the children's hands. personal responsibility --
people are going to do what they do. be responsible for your own actions. you do not need the government to come in and babysit you. grow a pair and be a man about this. host: robinson, illinois. i am patriot tweets in -- compare crime rates now to the 80's and 90's. it is way down. it is working. the pew research center came out with 13 data milestones for 2013. some things that they have been tracking over the years, where opinions have changed. number one is growing support for same-sex marriage and gay legal agreements. 67% support those. 51% of americans support same-sex marriage. another one says that the u.s. should mind its business internationally. that is up to the highest level since way before 1964. anti-incumbency
moves. 48% said their representative should be reelected. 38% say no. here is another 1 -- does the federal government threaten your personal rights and freedom? the american of population. up from 26% in 1995. tony and burlison, texas. you're the last word on this issue. what do you think? caller: i have been a professional now for 20 years. i have been smoking marijuana for 35 or more years. i just wish more professionals would call in and give their opinions on it. i think that the bottom line is -- thee growing up
family life. if you do not want your kids to drink, you teach them not to drink. my kids are in their 20's now. they get to drink. me, let's go back a little bit and each construct. -- deconstruct. you're a licensed plumber and you smoke everyday. caller: pretty much. host: you have kept your job, no problems there. caller: no problems. host: do you have to buy this illegally? caller: yes. that is the only thing that i do not like about it. you think that marijuana should be legalized? caller: definitely legalized. host: do your kids smoke pot? caller: no. host: do they know that you
smoke pot? caller: yes. host: then why don't they smoke it? caller: it is the way they were raised. they have their own opinions about why they want to do and how they want to run their lives. they have their own enjoyment. their own way. host: do you consider yourself to be a danger when you're driving when you are high? caller: no, not all. if i did something like heroin or methamphetamine or cocaine or alcohol, i absolutely -- i have friends with all of that who have died. host: so what should be legalized? caller: marijuana. host: should the heroine and cocaine be legalized? caller: heck no. not at all. that is a family killer and the life killer.
that is a world destroyer. anybody who has anything to do with allowing that to come to our country needs to be dealt with accordingly. that is -- that is the ultimate kind of dangerous drug. when you do it once or twice, you are hooked. they have got you. that is what so is dangerous about hair when. host: we appreciate your participating. very quickly, some tweets. is theling drug use responsibility of parents until kids turn 18. after that, it is very hard to control. the war on drugs has been a failure. had the money been spent on education, treatment, and opportunity, no drug problem. steve says that the war on drugs is a complete failure, no matter what we do, people keep doing --
drinking alcohol. sam says the government has no business telling you what to put in your body. fork you to everyone participating in our opening a discussion topic. coming up, we have rebecca sinderbrand of politico. we will talk about politics and 2014. whor that, linda robinson, has covered the u.s. military. she writes about special forces in her most recent book on afghanistan. she will be following. that is what is coming up on "washington journal." ♪
>> we now have secular norms. theological norms. they govern our acceptance or rejection of the ways in which a god or gods can speak to people and what impact that has. for example, the branch davidians. who saysdavid karesh he has special insight into the bible. the other mammals of the -- the other members of the community understand the bible. they understand that they are living in the end times. that, by itself, does not seem to be a problem. elements,ads to other they trigger law enforcement concerns. as well as the popular concern. then, suddenly, this idea of someone listening to god and having followers do things
against the norm, that is the problem. that needs to be policed and controlled. >> wesleyan university professor argues that religious persecution has been prevalent since the mid-1800s. even committed by the very government that was supposed to protect us from persecution. that is sunday night at 9:00, part of book tv on c-span two. "washington journal" continues. host: before president obama left town for whole white, he held a news conference talking about 2014. [video clip] up, we you add that all have an economy that is stronger than it was when we started the year. more americans are finding work. they are experiencing the pride of a paycheck. we are positioned for more growth and more jobs. i firmly believe that 2014 can
be a breakthrough year for americans. but, as i outlined in detail earlier this month, we all know that there is a lot more we will have to do to restore opportunity and growth for every american. that will require some action. it is a good start that earlier this week, for the first time in a year, both parties came together to pass a budget. some of the damage that created headwinds for art hot -- our economy. we need to straighten our middle class. it means that the american people will not be exposed to another reckless shutdown every few months. that is a good thing. host: now joining us on our set , who isca sinderbrand the white house deputy editor for politico. how important is 2014 to president obama? guest: you are looking at the
final year where, generally in the second term, he can expect to have any real sway. we are looking ahead to the midterm elections. it will be a big deal. democrats are hoping to hold on and maybe make up some ground. the poll numbers are not looking too great. 2014 is a pretty critical year. host: he talked quite a bit about the economy. why did he say it would be a breakout year? guest: we heard from the white house a number of times in december. economist pointed to growth and said that growth is actually exceeding their expectations. they're cautiously optimistic that they have made sluggish growth and the economy will make steady progress. host: from your paper this morning is this article. a big gain for the republican party. that republicans
are holding a 49% lead over democrats. guest: let's be clear. this is a snapshot in time. we are a year out from the elections. they are talking about this reaction that people are having to what they have seen earlier this fall. we sell the republicans feeling the brunt of public backlash over the government shutdown. now, it you're seeing lingering issues from the affordable care act. really just a snapshot in time of the next few months. they will be critical for setting the narrative. host: there was an article in the new york times this morning -- the republicans debate next move. will they continue to push their repeal of the health law and will it do damage to president obama politically? guest: this is the question. right now, you have a lot of
democrats thinking to themselves, has this rollout just been a bump in the road? when we get to the summer and the fall, is that going to be a real blip? or is that something cemented in the public's mind as a failure? it has been picking up as the deadline near and the problems are largely in the past. itthe election draws closer, will be seen as a conditional success but not a failure. host: we will put the numbers on the screen. rebecca sinderbrand is joining us, white house deputy editor of politico. we will get to those as soon as we can. one of the issues that has been coming up is immigration.
the immigration reform. is that going to be an issue in 2014? guest: everyone is watching to see what john boehner will do. ofhas hired an aide john mccain. we have seen the white house holding back a bit of their criticism. a lot of people interested in what they heard at the president's press conference. nod toheard him make a the idea that house could take bill piecemeal.n we're did not hear that option mentioned in his press conference. we don't know whether he will be making more of a press for the senate bill to be taken up but this will be a major issue in 2014. host: does the president have the clinical clout to push
immigration or any big issue? guest: we have had this discussion where if the president is pushing immigration hard, that may signal the white house is more pessimistic about his prospects. the harder the president pushes, the less likely he will get those wavering democrats and republican support needed to pass it. perhaps that signals better prospects for the bill. perhaps it signals pessimism. as he gets closer and we are looking to 2014, this would be an issue the democrats will talk about in the midterm election. it remains to be seen. host: i want to go back to the comment that this is the last year, next year will be the last year the president has any
political pull to set the agenda. why? guest: this is just historically speaking. we cannot speak in absolutes here. heading into the end of your second term, the spotlight shifts. we are seeing a bit of that. all the discussion about hillary clinton for the democratic party. to the extent the spotlight turns to hillary clinton, that is the spotlight in the democratic party off the president. as 2015 gets closer, we know the senator will make your decision about running for president. that will get louder and louder as time goes on. again, the white house has a limited window. but the president holds center stage. host: from the political
magazine, the lease productive congress in history? what is the congressional agenda? guest: there is a lot on their plate. bill,ation, the farm which has a big shot at passing, and unemployment benefits, which democrats will be eager to talk about as we look to highlight income and inequality into the midterm year. midterm years are not fantastic years for getting broad bipartisan pieces of legislation through the house or through the senate. it will be interesting to see what happened. this debt ceiling, whether the house will pass a clean debt ceiling. for anotherger -- showdown. host: what is the biggest
pressure on john boehner? guest: it is almost hard to pick. immigration. what is he going to do? will he bring the senate bill to the floor? and the debt ceiling? andook the fact that he did it was not his ideal strategy and not one he would have picked himself but he did it. would he do it again if thi ere remains something for his caucus to get out of the white house? lots of pressure on john boehner. host: what about harry reid? guest: it has been interesting to see harry reid taking the role of enforcer, kind of holding the line, almost playing bad cop, telling the president not to yield. the last showdown in the fall.
that is a role he continues to play. host: rebecca sinderbrand is our guest. stephen from florida, go ahead. caller: i have a question. [indiscernible] withs brought down explosives on 9/11. host: stephen is a 9/11 truther. dorothy, you are on the "washington journal." we are talking about all attacks. -- politics. republicans do not care about anything except for the rich. they only care about getting elected again.
they do not care about the poor. people neede said, to consider themselves like god was, like jesus was. he cared about the poor. it is not about them all the time. there are people in need. the affordable care act. many people need that insurance. it is going to do this or do that. think about the people who died and are going to the doctor. more, $12 more, $30 more, these people who don't have anything cannot even go to a doctor. host: any comment for her? thing it is any string looking at the deadline coming up for the affordable care act.
that is going to be a real moment, just like the october 1 rollout was. this is a six month marathon and not a sprint. they are dismissing the early enrollment figures which were.disappointing there is going to be a lot of focus on how many people have signed up and whether or not it comes to the original expectations. host: there is an article this post." in "the new york people will see in creases in their health care premiums. 2014going to be spending talking about health care? guest: it is going to be a focus for the early part of the 2014. there are a lot of question marks. some people will be getting surprises. some could be good surprises.
it has been said before that 2014 is going to be the war of dueling anecdotes. people will be seeking out personal stories on both sides and that will be a hot topic of conversation. host: bill from new york on the independent line. caller: hi. i am a vietnam veteran and clinical psychologist and have been following c-span for many years. i am please with the unfiltered quality you provide for listeners. i am concerned about one thing. the concerns this gentleman had about 9/11 and building seven and dismissing it is saying he is a 9/11 truther. i think that is insulting. architects and engineers -- host: thank you, bill.
name a website. we have to move on. gave you a chance. albert in delaware. caller: thank you so much. i appreciate c-span and the journalist. she seems to be -- host: what is your question? think republicans are afraid of all the people that signed up for so-called obamacare? that the democrats are going to roll these people out? democrats are going to roll these people out in the upcoming election in 2014? thank you so much. guest: it is certainly going to be an issue in 2014. if people are happy with their
insurance, they will help bring people out. just because you signed up for insurance does not make you an obama supporter. it is going to be an issue in the campaign. we are seeing negative ads on the affordable care act and the rollout of the affordable care act. some democrats themselves are not happy with the way the rollout was handled. it may be negative or it may be a wash, depending on where you stand. that question remains to be seen. host: rebecca sinderbrand, how cohesive is the president's team? there are some new members? guest: john podesta is coming in. there are several issues in particular that he has been known for in the past and we can expect to see an active on those
fronts. there are more staff changes to come. expect more announcements in 2014. we will see new pushes a new areas from the administration. we know the president will be rolling out new policies on the nsa, theand way that data is gathered. he is reviewing them right now. what his pixar for which proposals he will adopt. we will hear more from the administration. he will speak about his foreign andcy agenda on both iran afghanistan will be big issues and the president is expected to speak about his foreign policy agenda for the remainder of his term. lots on his plate next year. scheduled to 28 is
be the state of the union speech. johnny, you are on with rebecca sinderbrand of politico. hi, johnny. does --why [indiscernible] democratsr about getting positive results. when it calls for republicans, it is like they have lost objective [indiscernible] destroy this country. thank you. guest: 2014 will be a very interesting year in terms of the midterm elections. you will see both sides battling it out. beenlicans have not advancing a positive agenda. they have been pushing back on
the president's agenda. they have been doing their best to advance their ideals and the last bills do not have a prayer in the senate were signed into law by the president. they will make the case they are advancing their own agenda what is being blocked. host: what is the relationship between john boehner and harry reid? guest: it is not the best. it has been an interesting dynamic. looking at the ways in which both of them are dealing with the dynamics in their own party, particularly john boehner. it was interesting to see coming out of the debt ceiling fight, there was the expectation that might be disappointment with members. they had almost nothing to show for it. there was unanimous support and
is, this is a discussion where strategy and tactics and policy. was that the right call to shut down the government? a lot of people came out of it feeling as though that was not the right strategy. we have seen the republican party make a turn. you are seeing a lot more in terms of oversight in terms of focusing on the problems with the law and that has gotten some support from democrats, who also have their own tough questions for the administration. to the extent the republican party has turned its attention away from the appeal, the public focus has been a fairly successful strategy. you have seen their approval ratings bounce back. about theral articles
chamber of commerce and businesses and republicans fighting back against the tea party side. guest: we have heard this before. the question is, whether this is the year. you do not necessarily feel as is a real strategy for pushing back. there is a will for pushing back. certain candidates have pushed back against the tea party and the non-tea party candidates have come out on top. whether there is a concerted effort to target the tea party in a way traditional mainstream republicans have been targeted by the tea party in the past, it is not clear that is happening at this point. there have been several attempts . we will see what happens in 2014. host: will the issue of gay
marriage be an issue in 2014? guest: it is not clear whether it is something that politicians are eager to talk about. it is a sea change from where we were a decade ago where it was considered to be a decisive issue. now there is a reluctance on the part of most republicans to discuss this. even to the extent you oppose it, is not necessarily going to be a net benefit to talk about it publicly and is not going to help you keep your seat. host: is there any discussion about changes to gun laws? guest: that is the big question. that is a leftover issue from 2013 that seems to have fallen by the wayside. there have been a number of executive actions.
we may yet see more of those. several of the items of the recommendations that came out have been implemented at this point. in terms of progress and legislative progress, that is a question. the background checks, there is a constant focus on certain key votes to see whether it is safe to switch. certain people were seen as swing votes. pusher in fact there is a to bring it back to the floor and whether those votes could be brought over. that may be a tough sell in an election year. vivian tweet from shepardson. host: gary from cleveland, ohio on the republican line. understand there is a
provision in obamacare, they are setting aside $15 billion of the taxpayers money for insurance companies, if they do not make a profit. llarshe second year -- do set aside for the insurance companies. a gigantic bailout. would this be a big misstep as far as the democrats are concerned? guest: one of the keys for the administration in containing industry support has been making sure that they feel as though they can depend on some of these projections. we have seen enrollments fall short of where insurance companies expected it to be. you want to keep their support and keep them in the mix in
terms of her moaning it -- in terms of promoting it. we are not seeing the numbers that have been projected. the numbers that people pay, the rates that are based on that. the key is keeping the insurance in the street in the mix. host: what do you see as the biggest vertical danger to the president in 2014? guest: the lame-duck status. lastore time goes on, the ability he has to convince his party to push his agenda. he is the one that people are still going to turn to in leadership. to the extent to start talking about the 2016 election -- "we" being journalists. to the extent we start talking
about that, the less we will talk about the white house and its agenda. particularly in a midterm election year. and a lot of democrats might be nervous about the president and his agenda. may not be eager to be seen as close to him and be identified with the affordable care act rollout. that remains to be seen. the fight to remain relevant as it gets closer to 2016. he u: i have resisted to rge to pull out the chris christie-l.a. carton article -- hillary clinton article. caller: i just retired. i am 64 years old. i got a letter saying i'm increase in my
income. how much do the government get in cost of living? i think it is more than 1.3%. guest: cost of living adjustments are a major issue for people living on limited income. one of the things democrat looking to highlight is going to be the issue of income inequality and the minimum wage, unemployment benefits. the money people are receiving from the government, whether it is keeping pace with need out there. that is going to be a major issue in 2014. expect to hear more talk about that. sea of tranquility tweets in. guest: that is the question. it depends who you ask.
there are a lot of seats that perhaps should not have been in play before that may be in play, on both sides. , heading into a midterm year, you usually see the president's party lose out. in the wake of the debt ceiling fight, they might be able to buck that trend, looking back to the second term of the clinton administration where democrats did fairly well. the question remains to be seen which dynamic takes hold. host: charles from illinois on our independent line. caller: hi. thank you for taking my call. i wonder if the guest would be able to talk to any topic that less reported that drug
policy. cover press is able to the kinds of hot traversal subjects going back to things like the iran-contra affair, leading right up to this building seven think that people keep calling about. i wonder if c-span can tell me, have you had any credible people that are skeptical or advocates of government complicity in this? host: thank you for your follow-up question. back to his question on drug holocene. policy. guest: it is a fascinating issue to watch. we have seen for a long time that the issue, whatever the white house ask for public input on the issue that people would
like to talk about, marijuana legalization shoots to the top of the list almost every time. they do not necessarily want to focus on that. we are seeing interesting experiments taking place in colorado where voters have approved limited legalization. you are seeing the question about whether the government will step in and enforce the federal laws and allow the states to continue this experiment and whether a legal industry can be created. host: we have this tweet. we have seen some of that in the past few months. we saw that during the debt ceiling and the government shutdown. harry reid wanted to see the
president take a tough line. that is something republicans did not expect him to hold. they expected him to fold under and look for compromise. that had been the copper mines in the past -- that had been the compromise in the past. we have seen that line coming from the administration. the president was asked about it. is the administration willing to deal on the debt ceiling, and the answer is always no. here.a couple of tweets press conferences with the president. are those scripted? are they free for all us? do you feel you're getting a good give and take? guest: this administration has
gutted a lot of heat -- has gotten and a lot of heat from reporters on access. we're seeing pushback from the white house press corps about the policy pushing their own photographs from you fence and restricting access. there was discussion before the winter holiday that took place between officials in the press office and representatives of the press corps. you heard the president say his new year's resolution is to be nicer to the white house press corps. we will see if that holds. host: go ahead with your question or comment for rebecca sinderbrand. caller: thank you and praise be for c-span. hasclimate change problem not been discussed in the presidential election.
a new book came out in october by alan weisman. is the countdown of the collision between growing population and running out of resources. is there must interest in how citizens promote the idea that in 2014 election and the agenda come is there any indication there is interest in this collision between growing population and running at of resources and what citizens can do to promote -- this does come up as a major issue. guest: climate change is an issue now. we heard from the president earlier this year. he came out and talked about climate change. he said he would not get the kind of comprehensive legislation he.would like from congress he was leading with executive
actions that he had been holding onto, waiting to see what would happen on capitol hill. one of the big issues is the keystone pipeline and what the administration is going to do on that. we expect a decision fairly soon into 2014. tweet.e have another guest: enough to say at this point the odds do not look rate for president obama getting a bill to sign on his desk. the odds are not fantastic. that is going to be a touchstone for partners in a conversation heading into the midterm elections. democrats focusing on the minimum wage and the economic issues. host: how significant is it that this a, is up for reelection
next year? guest: incredibly significant. everyone has been having this conversation about how that plays into the dynamic with mcconnell. you have seen them become very close to aids of rand paul. this unlikely rapport, or unlikely collaboration. maybe it is a relationship born of necessity. that is clearly something that mcconnell feels as though he needs heading into and it looks like it will not be an easy election. host: how would you define the republican agenda for next year? guest: it is very much focused on gaining ground, for both parties. focused on gaining ground. there is a limited window where we will see legislating going
on. this congress -- if you think this congress was unproductive, just stay tuned. the spot will be on the politics of this. polls.rs head to the host: what about tax reform? guest: there is a possibility of progress. there has been some discussion of that. it seemed as though that issue dropped off the agenda. look for progress in the early part of the year. host: michael in alabama on the independent line. caller: good afternoon. my heart goes out to the caller from mississippi. he may have made a blanket generalization about obamacare without meaning to. republicans have gotten
-- have focused on the family and radio and tried to equate ands christ with hamilton laissez-faire capitalism. i hated just as much as he does. here is my concern. mentioned, nobody has -- photo card laws. i believe that they can be a good deterrent against voter fraud. i am worried about white, able-bodied mischief. sweet deal between the republican party leaders and seven white dixiecrat's -- and southern white dixiecratx. tell local polling workers that elderly people, college students
and minorities and handicapped people -- host: i think we got the point. guest: that is something we saw the obama administration make a concerted push on. all these laws and restrictions on voter access that have popped and 2012.010 eric holder said they will be pushing back fairly aggressively. we saw that in texas and north carolina. we do not expect that to be the final action. interesting to see as the process works its way to the court. it is a top party for the white house. host: do you foresee any big cases for the supreme court? we have not discussed the courts. guest: there are a number of issues making their way to the high court.
issues related to the affordable care act and when it comes to religious objections by employers providing coverage. nsaome point, some of these challenges to make their way, data-gathering and surveillance, to make their way to the high court. we heard from judge leon. he said the information that the obama administration has been collecting is likely to be found unconstitutional on fourth amendment grounds. it will be interesting to see as these cases start to make their way to the high court. host: where did you get your start in this business? guest: i started out with the associated rest here in washington, d.c. i have made my way around. i spent time with cnn, just a
couple of blocks from where we're sitting, and now i am with clinical --politico. host: do you think we will make it through 2014 without hearing the words "grand bargain"? arizona, you are the last word. caller: hi. -- the court in washington, d.c., with some more democrats. they are trying to stack the supreme court. rejected -- the press that in the 1930's. , sincee press support they do not seem to talk about
stacking the appellate court the way the president has? shuntnk he will try to courses from other divisions into washington, d.c., since they are so underworked relative to the other courts? guest: there is a distinction between what happened with roosevelt back in the 30's and what is happened now. roosevelt was looking to expand the court and create new positions. the president was looking to fill positions that were already existing and had been vacant for some time. you saw real frustration on the part of democrats. the slow pace of judicial approval they were getting. the respondent was the filibuster change. there was a huge sea change in the way business was conducted on capitol hill. there hasn't been so far the pushback. passed quietly.
people are talking about procedural senate rules, which does not resonate with the general public. judges are still a big topic of conversation. since the filibuster change has been passed, it is not clear where the conversation goes from here. host: we have been talking with rebecca sinderbrand. thanks for your time. some more segments coming up. next up is linda robinson, who has been in afghanistan and has written several books. her most recent is about the special operations forces. after that we will take a look at the u.s. consumer and consumer trends. ♪
gettysburg. there is good evidence that lincoln was not invited early and that he wrote the speech late. he invited a lot of people to go. just because he did not write it for three weeks does not mean it was not important to him. >> events surrounding the gettysburg address and the president's plan and approach for the speech. sunday, this weekend on c-span3. >> "washington journal" continues. host: now on your screen is linda robinson. her most recent book is called "one hundred victories: special ops and the future of american warfare." what are the special operations forces? guest: they are actually a large group of 33,000 uniformed
special ops from all the services. thehave marines, which are newest to come into the special ops community. navy, air force, and army. 50% of the army is uniforms special ops guys. the navy seals are very famous. they are one of the smaller components. they comprise 9000. the army includes rangers, about 3500. they are very well-known but a small segment. host: 33,000 uniformed men and women. what kind of operations do they conduct? guest: the range of operations is very wide. most people associate them with the direct action missions, jumping out of helicopters and
d, and thaten rai is very much part of their skill set. they have a whole range of missions they do with other forces and other populations. that is what my book tends to go into, those other missions, that they work out in 70 to 80 countries throughout the year. they go out in small numbers. many of these forces go out in a blended capacity. you can have some seals together with the green berets, the army forces, and some civil affairs and soldiers. the often tend to work in these blended packages and rarely in large numbers. i do not want to neglect the air force special ops. they will often send one combat controller out with a team or a seals team.
that air force guy is charged with calling in the direct fire or just maintaining the communications with the un manned aerial vehicles. some of these missions, they will not fire a shot. they are engaging in the combat what they will still always have the ability to call him prior to protect themselves if need be but relying on the aerial, unmanned aerial vehicles overhead to provide them that situational awareness. they are out there often in very dangerous areas in small numbers. how can they survive? they have a big toolkit and a lot of techniques and procedures to keep them safe. i spent most of my time with them in afghanistan and they would be the only u.s. military
around for miles and miles. they have to have the ability to protect themselves. they would be living one team in and really they would rely on the villagers to develop a human source network to help keep them alerted to any threats that were coming their way. host: you said they do the hermetic jumping out of helicopters and taking out bin laden, but some of their other activities, would be fair to say they involve themselves in nationbuilding activities? aret: i think that if they finding the will power in that community to solve their own security threats. if you allow me, the title "one hundred victories" is a little bit of ironic title.
if people do not read the quotation is entirely inside, it says the acme of skill is not to win 100 victories in 100 battles but rather to subdue the enemy without fighting. i took that title for the book because it means these guys are experts at finding ways to accomplish the end without fighting. often they will be -- there will be a big battle. like the cover picture has a team that is in an area of afghanistan and the team that went in first had to fight a horrific battle in the very place with that photo was taken. after they fought that battle, they found a local ally and they successfully pacify the entire province going to the popular quarter going all the way up to
the capital. villagers tod the reach these agreements they would defend their own villages. they built 14 observation posts along this highway and at that time there was no commerce. the taliban had free reign of this province. so gradually these villagers -- there were just ordinary citizens who volunteer for these groups. this was one of the most troublesome areas. there were a few other troops there throughout the wave of the war. it is finding those leaders within the population that are having the courage and the given a little bit of training. it is less about making them jedi knightsops and more about finding their courage and giving them just enough skills to defend their
villages against the threat. the taliban in this case. some of the elements were linked into the al qaeda network and al qaeda affiliate. this was back up against the border with afghanistan. the magic is how they get in and find the right partners. that is one of the big lessons that i think is transferable from this long saga they went through in afghanistan. regular civilians can be a huge force multiplier. think of yemen, very tribal population. the rate of the government does not extend outside the capital city. or let's say north mali. they do not want to be governed by the african forces that are based in the south. this idea of having local defense as a stepping stone to a
broader security solution is very transferable. is one of the lessons i think can be applied elsewhere. host: we will continue our conversation with linda robinson . but first we want to introduce you to special forces commander en, talkingrav about his view of special forces. [video clip] movierybody has seen the and that is important. capacity sobuilding nations can deal with their own problems. so that we can help them deal with their own problems. you cannot get there unless you begin to build the trust factor. we have people that speak the language, that are culturally attuned. it is a very small footprint.
we work hand in hand with the u.s. mission. i will state this for the record as many times as i can. we do not do anything that doesn't have the approval of the .hief of the mission so these are important concepts. as we go forward to build the trust and build a network, it is all done in concert with the country team and the embassy. guest: he is very emphatic about using others and partnering with others to solve the threats. we have been through this dncredibly, the longest perio of war and there it is a tendency for people to shut that down. this is an option between
hundred thousand plus u.s. troops going someplace and doing nothing. and i am not saying it should be applied everywhere. i go back to the cover of the book. that is one team that pacified an entire province with the willing support of afghans. it is important because it is a way to get a community mobilized. they also co-op and they will train special ops forces so they can deal with the higher-end threats. they probably built the largest and most self-sustaining special ops command that they ever had. this one hasn't air wing so they can be -- this one has an air wing. they had ranger like forces.
is a very articulated force with this command with the ability to train and select their own members. this is going to be a permanent solution. they have done that in columbia and in other places. the other thing i think is important that is part of the vision is these global soft network. friends andour allies around the world have their own special ops forces. they are willing to come together with our forces imparted to do some of these things. very few people realize there were 24 countries special ops in afghanistan. they took on doing provincial gh-endse companies, hi police units for these offenses. british,ve the
norwegians, a lot of european countries, croatia, the czech republic, estonia, that the one he, romania, all of these countries were willing to help do this work. a powerful worldwide network to be able to go in and potentially lead some of these efforts. we don't always have to be in the forefront to do this. host: linda robinson is our guest. we will put the numbers on the screen. 202-585-3881 for republicans. 202-585-3880 for democrats. 202-585-3882 for independents. if you are a current or former member of special operations, would like to talk with you as well, 202-585-3883. you can also participate via twitter or e-mail.
twitter.com/cspanwj. you caught the future of american warfare -- you call it the future of american warfare. i want to go through a couple of tweets. in recruiting the locals, the partners. guest: this was an incredibly successful venture in afghanistan. it grew to over 25,000 civilian volunteers in the civil defense exercise.
it did hearken back to an effort undertaken in the vietnam war which recruited 50,000 mostly high lands, they use it to secure the central high lands and other tribesmen. this was something that they fanned out into the villages where the insurgents were the strongest. i found as i traveled around and focused on three provinces because i wanted to keep going back to the same place. it took a figure of some charisma and encourage, a local figure to rally the population. there was ofng course critical. you had to find a local individual that would serve as that leader. wasas a figure named -- he in a posturing province -- pash tun tribe.
they rallied around him. there was a lot of criticisms and try to smear his character with repeated allegations. in the north, they had great success built around a figure. he was quite impressive. he was much more low key. the people trusted him. he helped find leaders around the villages. you have most of the population is now secured by these forces. it really did work and i think that people are really concerned with what will happen with afghanistan in the future. this is a local solution. they can hold their country. ops, are they the future in place of massive troops? guest: there is a clear message
from the american people, the political class that there is no money and no appetite for going into a large expeditions. the key is to really study the population and be able to find those allies there, and also have some patience. this effort took several years. the team went for two long tours. so it was a three-year venture. can we go small and go long? that is the question for the american people. are they willing to support having people out there doing things to help secure a country, but it would take a number of years? i was encouraged to see the latest poll. 55% of americans are willing to have a small number past the 2014 end of the town but -- end
of the combat mission in afghanistan. there was a full-blown civil war in iraq and a large number of troops. peaceere there as a enforcement mission to separate the warring parties. and a lot of iraqis came over to the defense model and securing their own neighborhood. some of those elements were also tried earlier in iraq. host: next call comes from elizabeth in massachusetts, on the democrats line. caller: good morning. i would like to know what ms. robinson's opinion is of the wars."irty i would like to know how much of ops istivity of special
engaged with undeclared activity that we have no oversight of. guest: i would like to address oath of these points. hen animal the craven -- admiral the craven said we do not go into a country without the ambassador's approval. that was not always the case. so his repeating that the ambassador is the president's representative in any country and that is a lesson that they have learned. they cannot go sneaking into countries not have that ambassador -- without the ambassador's knowledge and approval. book, he focused on three places and focuses on the commando counterterrorism units and he did not get access to
those units but he did a lot of on ground reporting and i think in a case of yemen, there was a heavy emphasis on that approach. there was a lot of drone strikes as with pakistan. that is a case where as he does point out, you had a lot of complicating effects on the population from that heavy dose of drone strikes in that kind of approach. and so that has happened and the balance as i see it now and i think president obama was trying to hint to this back in may in a speech he gave that they will tighten up the criteria for using that approach and it the standard is a threat. i have had a lot of contact with special operators
across the entire community. many of those involved in this threeare the first ones, generals i covered in this book, two of them come from that they are the most sold on the indirect approach, where the the greatestch has chance in the longer term to work. there will be some efforts to target discrete individuals, but that is not going to provide an lasting security solution. and think the community itself is very clear about it coming now we need to make sure the policymakers also understand that. a armor member of the special operations forces. from, i wentg
active duty to reserves, and i was wondering what your opinion , if you saw that is reversed table?he host: what is your position? caller: i am an nco. uest: psychological operations as and renamed, but most of us still use sign-up to remember. official term is a military information support operation. they are all in active duty, but what have and was similar affairs was blood, and there was a hot small office component, majority are in the reserves eared the
mentorship, they set the doctrine of the strategy, but here they are over in the -- forces,se is, they get worn out and it is very important to be judicious about the use of them. they are also the most in demand by the embassies that want them because the countries are very receptive to having the civil affairs individual's come out to assess the security threats, the population needs, they will bring in medical and veterinary care. they will do a lot of things that help connect the population with the government, but they also can pave the way for other types of special operations. so does very board that those two halves of that going get brought more closely together. i do know that the command of fort bragg is looking at this. host: next call is from john, in
texas. go ahead. john is gone. we are going to move to johnny in maryland. caller: good morning. radio.ou for c-span my question is less about special forces combat more about afghanistan in general. signed thehaven't forces arrangement agreement that would keep us and afghanistan, and we have rent to just leave. i would've that has anything to do with enron. --the center where did negotiating be nuclear deal with iran, and they do not want us in afghanistan. thank you very much. that is an interesting question, and there are a lot of influences on president -- the afghan president.
standing down, there are elections in april. the worst-case scenario right now is that in a book about when there is an election, the next resident of afghanistan will decide if they wanted to decide thisagreement -- sign agreement that would keep advisory troops on. there was just an afghan gathering that just overwhelmingly endorsed this idea of u.s. troops staying on in a trading and advisory capacity. 55% of americans are supportive of that. these would be small numbers, people do not realize that we still have troops and goes about. this is a long-term mission to help finish growing and professionalizing the afghan forces. they are in charge in the country now, the u.s. is providing support, critical support, medevac, air, and some overhead intelligence surveillance, and ricotta bits -- reconnaissance support. the things can make a great
difference. the afghan army, the u.s. has also pledged with his nato allies to continue supporting the cost of that. there are big decisions out there, and i think there is a someng political scene, roster and by the afghan president. there's a good chance that we will get that done. host: we first met linda robinson here at c-span when she was working with world news and world report, but then you left, and where did you go from there? guest: i have been think tank hopping. i have enjoyed a book writing career. and now i do an alert -- analytical work and writing. i did that largely at the johns hopkins school of advanced
international studies. this bookwork for traveling to and from afghanistan. it is long for research and writing that is my home. i had a great career with u.s. world news report, and gave me time and space to do the in- depth research that i love. host: do you have any formal involvement with the u.s. military in any capacity? guest: our corporation does the analytical work for both the u.s. military as well as the u.s. government as well as nonprofit and private sector. a big chunk of their work is forg analytical research dod and other institutions. according to your bio i have here, you are a senior fellow? guest: i am actually the
chairman of the army board of visitors. that is an unpaid position. it is a group of us, six civilians. are asked our advice about curriculum and other things. i am also on the board of the national defense university, and similarly it is an unpaid position. these institutions have a huge number of international military and civilian fellows each year, or students. the student body is very mixed, and this is a critical way we -- the kind of bonds that are formed by the special update the going into the each company -- country, they will form bonds over a year studying together. oft will provide a lot connectivity and relationships that if our entire military approach, which if you read the guidance, to put a lot of weight
on the partnership approach. looking to friends and allies around the world, and knowing people and having personal bonds with them, and understanding their country. you learn a lot spending a year with these guys, that is a very critical art that remains funded retract the to budget everywhere. it is a small payment that pays off bank -- big. our next caller is john from there, vermont. vermont. like your show.
i was in the air commando wing, in 1968 1969, and they changed our name to special op's which would kind of resented. were in southeast asia, and special forces were on a lot of the local tribes. it is always other day over the years, we promised to stand by these guys, and then the picture that is burned into my memory is the top of the american embassy in the 70's when we hold out and left all of these people to their fate. i was wondering if you, as an author, had written about that, and have any comment on it? it has bothered me for all of these years. do you think we have rebuilt the trust of the local people would we do go into an area they do not worry we will have your back
, because we did not do it in the 1970's. guest: i think that iconic photo, for anyone who has studied history of a is extremely important area to do we leave our friends in the lurch? left very abruptly in iraq because we cannot come to an agreement. i think there is quite a prospect with the prime minister coming out to ask for help, to go in and in a small way and not do it for them, but to help them. that is what we are on track to do in afghanistan, and i'm very concerned that if we do not find a way to do that, that we will have expended a great deal of blood and treasure of your -- as your generation did in vietnam, without having that final endgame. i have talked to his many special operators of the last 12
years, and many of them are very aware of what your generation did. and the civil defense initiative in afghanistan, any of them talked about the defense group that was initiative i mentioned earlier in get out, and the marines did their version of the combat action of troops. they came into the bill -- villages and rebuilt with the people. i think that model has now been taken from your generation for application as appropriate in the future. host: how much does it cost to train and equip each of these special operators? how long should they stay in the service after this training, should require a longer enlistment? guest: they come in and they stay, their career long people. years as the average
age, quite a bit older than your 18-year-old or 19-year-old. platoon member or a perjury unit -- infantry unit. , do not have the overall cost but it is a relatively cheap investment into these individuals compared to the overall cost of the military. if you include everything, including the service provided support, and does not exceed seven percent of the total cost that we spend on the u.s. military. when you think about them spread around at all of these countries, they are very much part of this endgame plan for afghanistan. you have very large numbers we combine them with the coalition forces, relatively speaking, around fourth 2000 sum total -- 13,000 sum total.
budget hast that the grown, the numbers have grown, the 33,000 u special office -- u uniformed special officers. the operators are recruited from the ranks of the regular seamen, andrmen, marines. they get called out, and then once i got to this rigorous training, they tend to stay in. host: according to special operations command, the joint effort was established in 1987, it was headquartered at mc dill
air force base in tampa, and had approximately 67,000 active-duty together,an workers the $10.4 billion was budget for this year. i tend to use the 33,000 figures for the people understand that the guys with the patch on their shoulders, that is the number. host: a tweet -- everybody is writing right now -- fighting right now, because of this tremendous pressure on the budget. the special ops budget has been protected by and large for the last decade. but they are fighting now to hold onto what they have. i get by think that the numbers may come down somewhat, and it will not be catastrophic.
i think that people understand that these special operators have proven themselves to be highly useful across the range of conflict. i disproportionate cut would be highly unlikely. people need to understand it is not just going in to do the bin laden rates, they do a lot of what we you would call force multiplying activity by using these other forces to get the job done. host: what are some of the failures of the special operations forces? guest: i think it is very important for people to understand the country knowledge , and language knowledge as the bedrock so they can go in and find the allies. so it fails generally speaking when they could not find that charismatic leader of the local population that was willing to stand up. in some cases, also, there was today by golf. there was really decades and
decades of strife and conflict and an area. one of the big things of this book is both bringing together ,he soft units in afghanistan finally in the last year they were brought together under one command. -- need to have a unit of unity of effort and demand with the special forces. in some areas they're going off in different directions, trying different approaches, and that did not work. there are a lot of stories about that in the book. i think that the people who lived through this, and they would lose people as a result, hopefully those lessons are seared into their brains. they need to carry it on and make sure in the future they have a common approach because if they do not, lives will be lost and the mission will fail. host: kathleen, from ohio.
we are talking about special ops. caller: it sounds like a fascinating book. kind of asked my question when he asked about the failures. one of my questions was if you 33,000 under the u.s. military special ops, and then if i say there are 67,000 34,000 contractors it sounds like. in scahill's book that was asked about earlier, under the bush-cheney administration workhat the special ops outside of the congressional oversight. i wish you would talk about that, and also, why is it at a time when a drone can see a fly
is thatel's butt, why we here at united numbers of innocent people killed in , andnistan, pakistan iraq? about how these people are compensated for their families? it is so disrespectful, i believe, to talk about the innocent people who died -- ank you.in guest: i do not have the number of contractors, but they are the minority there. civilian casualties, this is a huge issue, and i think no one should reproach that, and
theyone should understand effect it has on achieving goals. the numbers have come down over the years. if you think about and historically, world war ii, there were massive civilian casualties. these technologies have enabled increasingly be sure of what they call positive identification before they fire. but absolutely, the compounds have roofs on the homes, you cannot be sure who is in their. -- there. rules became increasingly restrictive. some of the units on the ground were complaining that they're putting themselves in so much risk because they can never call in that fire when they're being fired on because they had been able to on us -- unable to
establish that positive identification. there are a lot of rules in place. the government of a thin-skinned -- of afghanistan have certain criteria that must be met. i would warn you do not take the scahill as the only picture of reality. i would worry that that would leave you as the perception that all the time everywhere, egypt the samples of the worst cases -- he took the examples of the worst cases. i've spent much of the last 12 years out in the field, and i would tell you that the lengths to ensure nole go civilian casualties, as when it happens it sets back the
mission. generous one, the worst atrocity i was close to was the worst atrocity of the afghan war. it was the massacre of men, women, children. it was a surprise to me that the entire western province did not erupt in flames. they paid millions of dollars in settlements to them. they flew the little girl out to the hospital to get surgery. not to say that this made up that, but efforts were made. there on people out the scene where the afghan governor, the president's brother, the provincial chief of police. they knew it was very critical to try to keep this population from completely losing hope.
i'd 20 give you a little fuller idea what is going on. he joined us just a few weeks ago for the book festival. , and youeremy scahill will see him talking about his book. thank you for holding. caller: good morning. my topic was the mess over there in afghanistan, the amount of years that we have spent over we havell of the lives lost and are still losing very and the billions, and billions of dollars that are spent for bribes. we need this in the united states, what a waste. we have record property in this country. thank you.
think this is an accurate reflection of the big sentiment among the american people, that massive expenditures and massive wherements are just not the country wants to go. i believe in the early years in is bornean, and this out by the first few chapters of the book, that we were too focused on counter care terrorism -- counterterrorism, and got getting the afghans ready to defend themselves. certainly, using the local population. one general told the last week that he tried to get the tribal engagement going there, but the standing general at the time said no we need everybody on the counterterrorism and other guerrilla troops to do anything else. the amount of aid given
was the be on the cap acidly of -- beyondry to absorb the capacity of that country to absorb, and that led to the corruption. what is a modest amount of aid that can be used appropriately, and in an advisory force i can help them complete the job? there is a very unwarranted view of the afghans not a willing or capable. i have seen some tremendous displays of courage out there, and as i mentioned with all of the provinces big secured by these local volunteers, that his extraordinary success in my view. host: you say that patients does pay off, the u.s. merrily -- rarely musters the kind of patient records in these ventures to produce results, but that those not render validator argument for taking a long view. guest: we do have the example of
columbia. i was down in the jungles of colombia, watching this eter, national ops went down there and help them to train in insurgency techniques, and they built a very efficient special ops of columbia command. in the case of columbia, for about $7.5 billion you got a solution. it wasn't the multi-hundred billions or trillions of dollars in other wars. host: how many special forces are in afghanistan right now? guest: the numbers are coming down, i think it is around 5000. he idea would be to keep somewhere in that realm, may be
somewhat less for the longer- term. bring the conventional style. ost: what is the next most busy country for special forces? guest: there's is nothing that approaches that. you're talking about a few hundred, and they have been working heavily in a dispersed way in northwest africa and east africa. there is still about 500, may the 400 in the philippines. they are in the process now of turning over fully to the philippines, maybe a small footprint will be left behind, but your lett -- you're looking at 400 or less. thank you for being on the washington journal. coming up, we will be looking at the u.s. consumer, and spending
habits. ♪ [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] think radio is the longest and best form of media that is left. ist we're doing right now unprecedented, only c-span does longform conversations anymore aired you need to read books at the arty way -- anymore. you guys are the only re page notes during your interviews.
this is the best interview that i have had on this tour. i love the interview on his new collection of essays. radio, three hours is an abundance of time, and i can do so many different things. >> more with radio talk host hugh hewitt on c-span q&a. >> we bring public affairs events from washington directly to you about putting you in the room at congressional hearings, white house events, briefings, and conferences of a at offering complete apple to gavel coverage of the u.s. house. all is a public service of private industry. we are c-span, created by the cable tv industry 34 years ago and funded by your local cable or satellite provider. now you can watch is in hd. norm, andhave secular
thatf theological norms govern our except as a reduction in the ways in which a god or gods or goddesses can speak to people. we have some saying they have a special insight into the bible of and that these insights help other members of the committee that community understand the book of revelation better and help them understand they are in the and sign -- the end times that others do not accept. that in and of itself is not a bad thing, but when it leads to other elements that trigger things of law-enforcement concerns as well as the popular press concert, then federally, this idea of somebody listening to god and having his followers do things that seem to be aberrant to the national norms, that is dangerous.
that needs to be policed and controlled. professorand religion nine on night at afterwards, art of book tv this weekend on c-span two. >> washington journal continues. host: this week on our america by the numbers i where would you take an inside look at the u.s. consumer and consumer spending. joining us are to guests. -- two guests. jim tankersley and nicole mayerhauser. ofst: we are in the business measuring the u.s. economy.
we also take a look at international economics. we measure trade statistics as well. host: how do you measure it? guest: we take a lot of data from a number of different places, the census bureau in particular is one of our most important data sources. based on economic guidelines, they thought how to measure the types of things, we compile the statistics. we produce them monthly, and we produce not only nominal but real. we take into account inflation, and we just those numbers for a session so we can take a look at what they are after adjusting for inflation. host: so you cover economic policy for the post. we are in the middle of the christmas season, what has it been like in terms of consumer spending? immensely important for retailers across the country. it is a time to make or break
your profits for the year, and there was a lot of anticipation that this would be a big year. when we have seen them a fascinatingly, is just how afford it has been for online retailers. there is a surge in online retail spending, which has led to a cups that vote -- led to .iccups that surge in spending has changed the way that consumers are dealing with the holiday. we forgot to wait and see what the final numbers are going to tell us, but it is clear we have an evolving consumer when it comes to christmas and other holidays. host: what does he mean when he says evolving? guest: at some point we're going to take a look at the history of what consumers have spent their money on and what other people have spent on their behalf. what people spend money on has changed over the decades, and jim brings up a good white that
online shopping is becoming more and more important. i do not have specific numbers on that, is what you can see is the types of things that we have been buying has changed. we are moving from a goods type purchase to a more services i purchased. as incomes go up we can only rise so many good cook -- we can only buy so many goods. a shiftefinitely seeing over the years. host: let's look at a different set of stats. youris something that agency has put out. the blue line is food and beverage consumption. 23% in thee from 1930's down to lengths -- less than 10% of art discussable --
of our disposable income. here, 20% onn line health care issues. guest: absolutely, and warily what this chart shows is two things. spending has gone down as a share of everything we go down and spend our money on. eat the same amount of food, but we are not going to be spending as much if the health care is an interesting story, because what you see here in the 1960's is when medicare and medicaid started to come into effect. part of the measure of consumer spending include spending that is done for us on behalf of others. so the government spending on medicare and medicaid is actually included in that green a number.
included iflars are the money is being spent on our behalf to pay for services like health care. host: should social security be in the air -- in here. ? just a set aside, not so much a spending number. that i think is very telling is the yellow one. that's what you're seeing there is the rise of international trade. guest: now we are probably around 30% of clothing that is important battle on with that you see declining prices. host: 30%? have not run the statistics recently, but overall
imported consumer spending is not that much. it is a little over six percent, maybe seven percent, but clothing in particular has gone up. host: the numbers have gone up -- dos screen. the screen. in general do you find yourself spending more, or less, or about the same? of course, you can always make your comments via twitter. of the bureauuser of economic colossus --
analysis, what are we looking at now? guest: that gives you a birds eye view of how we have changed our spending from goods toward services. let me see if i can get this right. goods are in the blue. guest: we do not consider the purchase of a house consumer spending, that is actually an investment. range that you pay on your house, if you're a renter, or a mortgage, that would be a service. a motor vehicle, i car, your clothing, all of those types of things. host: if you have an internet supplier, cable -- guest: that would be a service.
mix nowa little bit of that the economy is getting arder to -- as we're talking about earlier, there is a much stuff that you could buy. you only have enough -- so much space. the way we live and work is based on services, on internet, on finding phones and games to play. things that are service-based. the fascinating new study than a runner-up this year is that this shift to services has had a real effect on employment. coming out of a recession it would read that we created jobs faster because we hired at the factories. more service- the based economy, and i have to wait for the consumer to walk in the door for you to start hiring
people. instead of hiring at the factories in anticipation of the consumer walking in six months from now. that has led to a lag in hiring times that has led to a delay in recovery. before we go any further, --e's the latest shops snapshot of what consumer spending will like right now. how do you measure the growth of the u.s. economy overall? the four part one percent, we mentioned that on based -- based on the final user. final demand for
griffis -- for goods and service makes up 70% of that final demand. we take a look at the other components, what businesses are buying and what their he invested -- what they invest in. that goes into gdp. whether they buy goods and services, or they invest in roads in those types of things. and then we see how much we export, and we subtract all of that from what we import. what we want to concentrate is on what is produced inside the united states itself. i'm a perpetual pessimist on this economy, but i would describe it as surprisingly better than we thought. ofhought at the beginning this year there was a lot of optimism, that we're going to have early rapid growth this year, and i thought it was overblown. the case atto be the start of the air, but the last couple of corners have been
very good. consumer spending is a big reason why. people are just spending more money than we thought that they were going to. i think this was the best three- month time since the recovery again. host: here is a chart. we will have nicole explained in just a minute. or outwe be saving there spending? guest: classic conundrum, because if you are spending all your -- if you're saving all of your money now but you're not stimulating jobs for other people when the economy is still struggling to grow and there are still 11 million unemployed people in this country who would like to have more activity than less. thewe saw this movie in 2000's when people are not saving at all, and borrowing to make up for the lack of income growth. and so we went to be really
careful about not getting back to another situation where we are sort of overleveraged as a country. ifis a delicate balance, and you ask 100 economist, you'll get 99 answers. host: what are we looking at? again they're saving relative to what they were doing in the 2000's by leading up to the financial crisis, and the great recession. -- seeing a rate of just under six percent, which was higher than the last decade. but relative to history we still have a saving rates that is lower than the last 80 years. that we makegest $50,000 a year we are saving
4.2% of that, and putting that in the bank, correct? guest: for the most part. what we're looking at is that the companies is not only what we make in wages and other type of compensation, but also what the government may give us an transfer payments, social benefits, entitlement, that type of thing. that interest we may earned on bonds we hold, or other types of investments that we have, minus the taxes that we pay out to visit the -- payout. this is the saving rate we have after that. host: a tweet -- how dependent are we on forrnment transfer funds some of these facts and 80 figures -- figures? numberse do not have based on income distributions, because depending on where you
are it will be more or less. in the economy as a whole we are income comes our government benefits to some extent on average. in regards to what we spent about about 10% of what we spend is somehow supported by government. calls.et's take some bobby is enforcement, arkansas -- in fort smith, arkansas. i buy less and been more and spend more because the price of everything has gone up so much. ay on the try to st
same spending level. i have to go back to foods that are not good for me. host: because of the cost? caller: because of the cost, yes. hear?what do you guest: i do not her know -- i do not know her exact income level, and i'm going to figure sheep also the bottom of the distribution issue struggling to buy. unfortunately real struggle for americans who are working 40 hour weeks at minimum wage, or just above that, who are struggling to make ends meet and struggling to afford things like healthier, fresher food, which just cost more in those places been cheap, profits -- processedoods --
foods that are easier to come by. host: are prices going up? this is 1978 on the left, and 2013 on the right. nicole, if you could explain? this chart shows is that prices are going up, and this is aggregate of course. we put everything that your lying in one gigantic basket, and let you see that price growth has very mild. host: three percent, four percent, there is a big spike -- , but for the 80's the past [video clip] few years and has been below two past few years it percent.below two
they're growing at a very moderate rate. guest: here's the problem for people like oppy -- bobbie. lowation rate are really historically, but you have not had a raise in five years, that is still -- everything is still costing more, and you're not getting enough. people in this country have not had a raise in a really long time. host: monica, springtown, texas, good morning. please go ahead. caller: me and my husband are both on social security, and we on waterot more money and stuff like that. we do not have hardly enough for texas, they only give us
$60 for food stamps. more,nd a lot whole lot but you cannot get the government in texas to help us. host: you are on food stamps? --ler: not anymore, and not it is only $16, why go through the red tape? mention, we are asked in the tweet earlier about government spending on the economy, and this is an area where it has had a clear impact. when food stands get cut, that is money taken out of the economy. people do not hoard food stands, they spend them right away. we have one million people who -- about to lose there their benefits tomorrow.
this is a real impact would need pulled from steps or 11 a people -- he's a minute people -- eliminate people from those rolls. isst: what we are seeing less of what we spend today is coming out of our pocket directly, our personal pockets then was in 1959. there is a lot going on here, but one of the most interesting pieces of the pie in 2012 is that gold 10.4%, which is what we're talking about a little bit earlier. and coming social benefits. medicare,es here are medicaid, and your supplemental nutritional insurance -- the food stamps, the snap benefits.
and did not exist in 1959, now they make up a little more than 10% of our total spending. purple --in the guest: that came from our own .ocket host: and the blue -- housing.occupied we measure consumer spending, we have to take account of the fact that we live in a house and that the house provides a service. indirectly measure what it would cost this to pay our own rent rate that is what that blue represents. what it says is that over the years we spend more money on paying ourselves rent if we
own our house. host: government supporting going up are the lines for this one? guest: yes as demographics, particularly, we do not have these programs a little more than a half-century ago, and now we have them. and a lot of them really benefit older americans, and baby boomers are starting to retire now. projectionsg to be of dramaticly growing spending by not less. aheadd.c. troubling lines -- do you see troubling lines ahead? guest: there are two ways to look at it. we will have to in some way figure out how to either support the additional -- we need to get
more rent of the new -- revenue to support the benefits, or cut those benefits, or does have a lot of economic growth that we're not predicting right now. perceptive iomic do not know that is super problematic one way or another. lot ofre a countries that have extra be bad ifand it would health care grounded out other things we do like basic research on science. that would be a bad thing, but we have not seen that happen yet to a great degree. host: david, from clearwater, florida. caller: good morning. allegationlicy, an -- and allocation of income, i'm worried about the $.30 they theye for local bread then
charged a year ago. gas prices are up, that is not reflected. i do not know if it covers the cost of transporting the stuff, i dohese are things that not know if they are in those figures or not. certainly my cost of living has increased substantially. i am retired, and working full- time. allocate theif we military into the economy? host: when you marry three percent increase of the consumer price index, that does not set well with you? caller: it doesn't up here on my grocery slip -- appear on my grocery slip. host: you call this the pce, what does that stand for? guest: it is the technical term
for consumer spending. rent,ealth care, your your computer the dubai, -- tgha buy, they are all being aggregated into one big basket. what do you say to him with his gas bill going up? guest: those prices are captured in the aggregate price index. as far as when we see this growth but it is 1.1%. how much of the food that they are buying -- what is that weight versus the amount of the weight of all of the other things that they are buying? prices may be going up 30% in one area, but with regards to the weight of the entire basket of goods that someone is buying, if it is small then you're not
going to see that same 30% at the top aggregate level. host: what would be going down? going back to this first chart that we used. if the money that we spend on -- food andrages beverages is going down, but health care is going up, does it not come out to be about three percent or so? yes, att the very top, the aggregate we're about one percent. if it is over a longer time, it is about three percent rated that is going to show rise increases of that time, your health care also will be growing. clothing in particular has actually seen actual decline in prices over the years. that is helping to drag down the aggregate rights that we look at. host: josh, leesburg of
virginia. good morning, thank you for taking my call. interesting conversation. it seems to me, and hopefully you can comment on this, there that youl component inability ofhe your factories to fire up and stimulate the economy where it once did. e past, were there not major infrastructure projects? it was not just firing up firingy for the sake of up, there was an overall mission in the country, an ambitious mission where the government said we're going to the moon, or
we're going to build a major dam that is going to produce hydroelectric our, etc., so that there was a mission and the public and private sector knew that it had been legislated, and could therefore -- it was not such a risk, the banks would lend money, and then the factories would fire up -- host: i think we get the idea. guest: there is a massive backlog of infrastructure that needs to be addressed. we have roads that need to be repaid, with bridges that need to be reinforced met with next- generation infrastructure that needs to be laid all across the country. this is something that will sound shocking but most people in the country will agree that the us cable or commerce just
chamber of congress, the president, there's the general idea that infrastructure projects are good and things that the government should think about but there's not been any agreement on how to capitalize on those investments. of this not come out congress, or the previous one, and i'm not super optimistic about the next one. and it is something that a lot of people think we should be doing. host: when stimulus spending was happening but could you see effects in your numbers? guest: absolutely. the state andat local levels when there was construction type activity going on the highway improvements and the stub of things. -- those types of things. you can see that kind of taper off again. host: we are talking with nicole mayerhauser and tankersley --
jim tankersley. thank you for joining us. have a great weekend. ♪ >> today on encore presentations of q&a programs, we continue with richard baker. he discusses the historical narrative he cowrote with neil mc neil titled the american syrups, an insider's history. that is at 7 p.m. eastern, here on c-span. tonight, c-span's year-end review examines the federal
budget and government shutdown. we will look back at the actions leading up to the failure to resolve the budget, and the 16 day government shutdown. it a clock on c-span. >> we now have secular norms instead of theological norms that govern our acceptance or rejection of the ways in which a god or gods or goddess can speak to people and what impact that has. the branch davidians. david koresh said he had a special insight into the bible and that these insights helped the other members of the community understand the bible better and allows them to understand that they are living in the end times in a way that most americans do not accept. that by itself does not seem to be a problem. but when it leads to other