tv Washington Journal CSPAN December 14, 2016 7:00am-10:01am EST
former florida senator and bob graham. chair at nine :00, spotlight on magazines features michael worn on republican plans to repeal the affordable care act. ♪ host: it is "washington journal" for december 14. the federal reserve chairman janet yellen is expected to announce a slight raise an interest rate. the only increased this year with the last one occurring in 2006. you can see the chair's announcement and what it might suggest about the economy on c-span this afternoon. you can also go to www.c-span.org for more information. 20 children and six adults at sandy hook elementary school -- the townives
plans to remember that event today. on this anniversary, a debate about gun violence and what to do about it. we're interested in hearing from you. how to best reduce acts of gun violence. if you are a gun owner. if you do not own a gun, 202-748-8001. if you want to put your thoughts on how the best way to reduce gun violence can occur, you can put those thoughts on facebook and twitter. patch talks about the remembrances that will take place in sandy hook today. it has been for years since the gunman took the lives of those 20 innocent children. -- four years.
today, the town will hold a somber, silent reminder for 15 minutes, the time the shootings took place. the superintendent said that the will bees of silence for department staff and the schools themselves. abc news looks at the efforts made by the obama administration since that shooting at sandy hook. mr. obama has made little federal progress towards what he repeatedly described as "common law." the outgoing president has knowledge one of the greatest time -- hasis acknowledged it is one of the greatest regrets of his time in
office. it was in 2013 when the president signed 23 executive actions relating to gun control that are still intact. as far as major legislation is concerned, nothing on that. again, those numbers come how to best reduce gun violence, 202-748-8000 if you are a gun owner. if you do not own a gun, 202-748-8001. you can always post on twitter and facebook, too. will is in baltimore, maryland. does not own a gun. give us your perspective on reducing gun violence. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. the best way to go about it, i believe, first of all, we need more in-depth background checks. , these concealed weapons that people are allowed to carry in public, i don't see
why that is necessary. laws haveyour ground proved to have been not what we need in today's society. making the trip on martin von martin- trey travesty. i've never owned a gun. i've tried to live the right way. you live the right way, more than likely, you will not need to use a gun. i've taught my sons the same. stress to them that i don't want them to begun owners. -- to be gun owners. they don't own a gun. i think the world would be a safer place if we had less guns and more importantly, why do we need assault weapons?
host: jerry is in detroit, michigan. also does not own a gun. caller: good morning and greetings once again from motown. i think the best way to deal with gun violence is just like ller said, he mentioned assault weapons, we should bring back the assault weapons ban. or aecides a soldier police officer assigned to a swat unit needs weapons like the , the ak-47 and a 50 caliber sniper rifle? these weapons were made exclusively for the theater of war. i cannot see for the life of me how any civilian could justify owning these weapons of war.
, the assault weapons ban that was originally part of the 1993 crime bill by president clinton, it was allowed to expire under george w. bush. the one drafted by senator dianne feinstein. caller: that is correct. she was excoriated for that by those who somehow blindly feel that civilians have the right to own these weapons. they think the second amendment means anything goes. you can own as many as you want, any kind you want, to take anywhere you want. they use the second amendment to justify owning these weapons of war. inish i could ask the people the gun owners of america, do they believe that private citizens, people who have no
military or law enforcement background whatsoever, have the right -- do they think the second amendment gives them the right to own these weapons of war? host: let's hear from a gun owner. barry in iowa. good morning. what do you think? caller: i'm a federal firearms license dealer. i ground checks are done. about banning assault weapons come it should be more the gun owner response ability and the fact is, the young man , she gaveis mom him the opportunity to go in there and get the gun. you see all these shooting accidents, kids shooting others and so forth, where do they get the gun from? the parent was responsible. assault weapons -- a car is an
assault weapon. what can you do about that? are you going to take away forks, knives? ar does not stand for assault rifle. talk about the background checks. we hear a lot about that. how are these conducted and how are they able to do that if they are at all site locations like a gun show? caller: you bring a wi-fi connection and you can go on there and run your background checks right there. that can next to the various databases that provide information on the background of the person interested in buying the gun? caller: yes, they do. connectioni-fi through verizon, people can buy
arms from me at gun shows. i've turned down two transactions. host: what would happen to you if you sold a gun with circumventing that background check? what would happen if you went around that system? caller: i would be the one going to prison. host: let's hear from another gun owner. trevor in oklahoma. caller: good morning. say as far as the gun shows go, the licensed dealers and the people selling from private guns individual to individual, background checks are not required. weapons calls assault weapons of war -- last time i
checked, we are at war. there are people being beheaded in no clone the city. there's some bad stuff going on. -- in oklahoma city. people toof rich for say you can't protect yourself. it is a private transaction, if you and i were working this out, you would not need to perform a check on me. caller: that is correct. this.als know there used to be facebook pages ande you can go on there meet people in a walmart parking lot and buy from individual to individual. that will not change no matter what law is passed. theirduals can sell property and criminals can do it outside the law if need be. jim in columbus, ohio. does not own a gun.
is my: my point with all theevel groups like the brady campaign, monzon action, the issue with aassroots movement, i see fractured group of people like these groups that don't on aively work together common goal on various issues at the state level, which ohio has been atrocious for them, as well as the federal level. i have tried so hard to really try to find a grassroots group i can be a part of. the only one that seems to have some semblance of that is moms demand action. the other ones seem to be
working through their state legislatures. i think we need a grassroots movement. we need people that are going down to the statehouse and protesting in front of the capital. we need to expose the issues that are out there. that is what i think is missing. i always thought the brady --paign had a local charter does not exist. all those kinds of things and there's a bunch of people out here that would love to be part of a grassroots movement but it doesn't exist. i think we are totally missing the boat because we have to compete against the nra. curr "the hartford
ent" with an article about sandy hook. they put out a video in the hopes of talking about stopping gun violence before it starts the chilling video begins with everyday scenes at a high school. a second student is quietly planning a shooting. here's the video from that group, sandy hook promise. [video clip] ♪ way. >> you like to write on desks? >> that's what i do.
the only way -- you cannot stop gun violence because there are so many guns in the united states currently. you would never be able to get them all. the way to stop it is background .hecks you just have to be alert. part ofn a rural jackson, mississippi. it may take the police 20-30 minutes to get here if i have an emergency. that's why i own guns. far as the background checks, we had some people talking about that already this morning, saying if you are a ,ealer, you have to pursue one
if you are making a person purchase, you can get around that. person-to-person purchase, you can get around that. caller: you can get around it. we have gun shows here. you can get around that background check. person-to-person. but there are more illegal guns then there are legal guns in this whole country. host: let's hear from mark in kansas. mark is not a gun owner. you are next up. caller: thank you for taking my call. the morning. that good morning. i cannot understand these concealed carry laws that in kansas, you can carry weapons on university campuses. that should be banned completely.
this should be a background check, most of italy. .- most definitely you register it and you have to transfer the deed or title to that weapon to the person you're selling it to. host: do you think the pushes against the second amendment? don't think our founding fathers when they wrote the second amendment had any weapons that of would be coming out 200 years later. if they knew, they would probably change it completely. host: herman is in fort lauderdale. not a gun owner. you are on. caller: good morning. but like youa gun,
just mentioned, 200 years ago, guns were a lot easier to get. it is much easier now than it was before. the people that manufacture the guns, they are the ones were -- guns wille always be there. guns make a man who has a gun in his hand big. violence, it's the people supplying the guns to the people. they should do something to streetshe guns on the today. they feele guns and
once you have a gun, you are big. they don't care who they kill and who they don't kill. it doesn't matter. guns should come from the top. we have to stop it. the law should not be the nra saying we don't care who gets killed an. host: the fbi put out information regarding 2015 when it became available about murder victims in the united states. the 13,000 total murder cases the fbi had in record, 9600 plus involved firearms. most of those coming from plus.ns, 6400 252 involving rivals, 259 involving shotguns. lookan go to fbi.org for a
at that information. the best ways to reduce gun violence. that is what we are asking you in light of the four-year anniversary of those shootings at sandy hook. 202-748-8000 if you're a gun owner. 202-748-8001 if you do not own a gun. kentucky, a gun owner, this is daniel. good morning good you are on. caller: thank you for having me. recently new gun owners, my family and i. it is for protection only. it is not for doing things that people need to understand -- it is a right that you should have the gun. host: what changed your mind all of a sudden to get you to purchase a gun? i really did not realize
how vulnerable i was. it's him and he breaks into my home, it's my right to take care of my family. -- if somebody breaks into my home, it's my right to take care of my family. with a protection product, which is the gun. host: have you had experience with guns up to this point? caller: years ago, i used to , went deer hunting and squirrel hunting and rabbit hunting, stuff like that. it's been a long, long time. the idea of as , are theren violence changes needed in the process to maybe help that along? caller: i watched that video. if one of those kids had a gun, they could stop that violence in a heartbeat. my little my wife and
boy and i go out to the gun range. to do the training that we need to do. host: what does it take to own a gun in kentucky? caller: you have to go and get registered and fill out paperwork. we do that every time we buy a gun. aople need to understand -- lot of people throwing a lot of stuff around out there. it's not the gun that is evil, it is the person that is evil. they will do whatever they want with that gun. you have to be a responsible citizen to understand you have to protect yourself and your family. host: amity guns do you own and what types? caller: i have a nine millimeter pistol, shotguns. host: these were all purchased recently? caller: in the last six months. kentucky. is
larry lives in new jersey. -- harry lives in new jersey. not a gun owner. caller: good morning. believe we've become complacent as a nation. were brilliant , we got safe and felt it, but we are not safe anymore. stop the gun free zones. those are just targets. teach your children to respect the gun, how to use one -- so that they are familiar with them. that's what makes them respect the gun and things.
we live in a society where we have to protect ourselves and we don't know what we are up against tomorrow or the next day. the good guys are the ones going the policeting checking them out and all that kinds of stuff. the bad guys will get the guns no matter what anyway. why should we be targets constantly? areas, and different their crime went down because they were allowed to carry guns. when a criminal goes into an area thinking somebody else has a gun, maybe he will do that thing. that's he won't do that thing. host: terry in new jersey. off of twitter --
gallup put out a poll on december 12 taking a look at the topic of gun ownership among those identified as crime victims saying 33% of u.s. adults who have been recent victims of assault, that or property crimes owned a gun compared to 28% of those who had not been victims, a significant difference. theft or property crimes. 11,000 plus interviews done for this survey. you can find out more when you you can find out more when you
as prompt and professional and well-trained as those police where wendy responded that when when theynded -- responded, they were unable to stop it. as parents, we do everything we can to keep our children safe. is now time for us to assume responsibility for our schools. to stop a monster from killing our kids is to be personally involved and invest in a plan of absolute protection. that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun. -- full speech available on host: that full speech on www.c-span.org.
happened 30 years ago or 40 years ago. something has changed in the culture. nobody ever wants to look at that. the always want to band-aid for a deeper wound. back to buying a gun, i keep hearing liberals saying you can buy one at a gun show. the guys selling them from the different mr. bitters -- distributors have a guy outside and when you come out, you have to have a background check. pennsylvania, you cannot even buy a gun with a couple mr. meiners -- misdemeanors. ,f you go in with a misdemeanor a year in prison, the gun shop itself will call the police and you will be arrested and you will go to prison for even trying to buy a gun.
there is no solution except the cultural problem. is it a spiritual problem? i don't know. if you think it is a cultural problem, what is at the center of that? caller: it started to get big with columbine. what was the deal with the psychotropic drugs? we have little boys drugged with adderall and ritalin, a form of speed. look at that aspect. look at the lack of fathers. , fear ofof fear of god euro own father coming home, fear of the police. we all had that. schools use to have rifle teams. this is not about a gun. this is about something we lost in our society. host: tony from columbia,
illinois, does not own a gun. you are next. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. i heard on the news a couple weeks ago that they were going to slow down the production of these pain medications, oxycontin, vicodin, because of all the overdoses. sounded like a good idea to me. cut the number of pills you are putting out. why cannot the same thing be done with weapons? areguys making these guns putting them out there, putting them out there. they said that there was a million guns that got into the wrong hands. could that be right? i don't know. don't make one million guns next year. just don't make them.
, go take the gun test, do whatever you have to do to legally get a gun and you can send that to the manufacturer and they can make you one. nobody wants to take your guns away. why do they keep pounding them out like mcdonald's hamburgers? .ost: that is tony in illinois at two: fear this afternoon, janet yellen desk at 2:30 this afternoon, janet yellen making a speech on short-term interest rates, expected to rise a bit. watch it on c-span. you can also go to www.c-span.org and the app.ington journa c-span radio the papers all have analysis of president-elect trump's choice of rex tillerson as of
accepted generous donations from oil and gas industry for his political campaigns. he was in the right place at the right time, benefiting from the surge of shale oil in texas. governor perry has proved he is -- with domestic production. it also quotes bill richardson saying perry is a dealmaker may political presence and a good manager. he is too tight to fossil fuel and also fuel industry. tied to fossil fuel
and the fossil fuel industry. sean is in broad run, virginia. a gun owner. we are asking for best ways to reduce gun violence. caller: good morning. i believe it is through education and liability. , we have aans culture, we love our guns. learn all the ends and outs and the statistics , the dangers and everything of gun ownership and also are tested, you proven you are proficient and liability -- if the weapon is insured and documented, you are less likely to go and sell this person to person to a possible bad guy. i can sell my gun to a bad guy legally and there's no issues, no liability. if i am held responsible for
that weapon, if i sold it and did not go through the proper steps and measures, i am held liable, i am less likely to sell a gun to a bad guy. there's all kinds of loopholes and it's a profit driven market. we're not getting around it. ,hrough education and liability we will drastically change the violence factor. host: indianapolis. not a gun owner. marjorie, good morning. caller: thank you for taking my call. i had a couple things i wanted to mention. while an automobile is manufactured for transportation, it doesn't sometimes kill. guns are manufactured to kill. sometimes kill. guns are manufactured to kill. guns and should be licensed and insured. should be licensed and
insured. thank you for listening to me. host: stewart in virginia. a gun owner. go ahead. i think we have to identify the difference between a gun and a weapon. i weapon is designed for killing. i will give you an example. m-16 asot refer to your a gun. if you did, you had to bring your am 16 to present arms and say this is my weapon. grab your crotch and say "this is my gun."
you had to continue to do this until you referred to your m-16 as a weapon. have a good day. host: frank from nashville, tennessee. not a gun owner. caller: what we are trying to do is basically boost gun violence, not end gun violence. it seems like a lot of people get it all mixed up. what i think should be done is we need to make sure we have universal background checks for all purchases regardless of what circumstances the gun purchase is happening. family members, friends, whoever. everybody needs to go and have a background check. it needs to be federal and state both. people in the u.s. will be
required to go through those background checks. for those gun owners responsible for all the gun violence, if -- the storesd need to be closed down. any dealer responsible for gun stores need to be closed down. host: the wall street journal takes a look at the president-elect's nominees, particularly the wealthy ones. the potential tax benefits are the result of long-standing federal policy designed to allow incoming appointees sell their shares and other assets to avoid conflicts of interest without racking up a huge tax bill.
you shut down those stores that will certainly reduce the amount of gun violence because it will reduce the amount of guns. people dying000 from gun violence is because of a proliferation of the illegal trafficking in guns if you bring that up, some liability and you cannot do it because the congress, the republican that, thereld do would be a lot less gun violence. it's not the guns, it's not the assault weapons or the semiautomatic handguns. the was a rifle team in my high school growing up when i was 13. it is not that. it is the illegal trafficking in
guns. host: let's hear from joann in bedford, ohio. not a gun owner. caller: this is a drastic solution. you need a drastic solution because you've got too much violence. they should publicize, make this public all over the country that , streethoot a stranger , you put out the consequences, you should somebody you don't know, you automatically will be put to death. we have so much street crime. people shooting people you don't know. you cannot even walk down the street without being shot. you don'tot somebody know, you will automatically get the death sentence.
that would cut out a lot of this. host: greg, a gun owner in tennessee. caller: good morning. myself.emocrat, i own 32 guns. i own rifles, shotguns and pistols. the best way would be education for children. i was taught by my father when i was a child, i received my first gun when i was 10 years old for bird hunting. i also taught my son who is now serving in the u.s. marine corps . children come if you have a gun safe, you don't have to worry about losing your gun or a falling into the wrong hands. education is the smartest way. teach our children, just like you teach them fro right from
wrong. host: why 32 guns? why the need? caller: my father just passed away two years ago. i received all his guns, plus all the guns i have bought. are being passed down from generation to generation. when you received those guns from your father, did you have to do any reporting? caller: no, i did not. -- online,tered them you can register your guns. manufacturersthe and give them the serial numbers . several former members of congress will be paying us a visit today to talk about their new initiatives and efforts. next, we will hear from ray lahood and tim roemer.
their efforts to reduce big money in politics. later, senator bob graham taking a look at civic engagement in the political process. those discussions and more coming up as "washington journal " continues. ♪ >> i do think you can learn from failure. if the next president wants to aspire to be like somebody, they probably want to aspire to be washington or lincoln, but you cannot re-create the country and you cannot have the civil war. what do you do next? you aspire to be james monroe? i don't know.
but you can aspire not to be james buchanan. >> robert strauss talks about n'ses buchana presidency. differentiation of good presidents and bad presidents -- washington and a then and fdr are always debate, they were decisive men. you cannot come to the top of the ladder and not be decisive. buchanan was a waffler. james polk hated him for being a waffler as secretary of state. sunday night at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span's q&a. onnext week is authors week "washington journal."
end of white christian america." president?"ke the be sure to watch all this week on "washington journal ." >> "washington journal" continues. host: two guests joining us to talk about the influence of money in politics. served asim roemer representative of indiana. also joined with ray lahood kim , served as the transportation secretary from 2009-2013. welcome back. with a both affiliated group called issue one. what is that group? one, we think the
most important issue in politics , whether you are concerned about guns, climate change, , issue one is concerned about our democracy and making sure the people own our government. we the people is what we are all about, not big money interests, not the billionaires telling legislators what to do. , aformed the group bipartisan group working together, 165 former members of congress, senators, congressmen, ambassadors, cabinet secretaries, 40% of these 165 are republicans and we put together five principles for taking our government back and for transparency in politics.
so little people have their government back and doing things so that this wonderful united states government of hours .peaks for the average person host: focusing on the aspect of money in politics. n from thee lear last election? what lessons will your group apply going forward? guest: if the founders were to come back and see the kind of campaigns that are being run now for congress and for the white house, they would be astounded by the billions and billions and billions of dollars it takes to get elected to the white house and the millions and millions of dollars it takes to get elected to congress. the founders never dreamed that was the way that our representatives were going to come to washington, d.c.
that you would have to have a lot of money or raise a lot of money to be an elected representative. that was not what the founders thought we should be doing. if you want to run for congress today as an average ordinary layer or a a brick dentist or a doctor, you are looking at a minimum $1 million to $3 million you will have to raise to be competitive. moneyystem is a wash in -- awash in money and is not the system average citizens want. host: you wrote a recent op-ed on this topic. can you briefly describe what it is? what needs to change? guest: i believe one of the things that happen in this election was the donors across
, iowa,at midwest wisconsin, michigan, pennsylvania, a lot of those voters, a lot of them who had voted for president barack obama decided to vote for donald trump for two reasons. one was because they are ticked off, there is rage out there percolating about jobs. secondly, they are enraged and very angry about washington not working for them. whether they emailed their congressman or senator, whether they need help from their representative on a particular problem, they don't think this place works anymore. they don't think it represents them. all the polling we see these days says when you ask the regular voter who does their member of congress listen to first and foremost, what do they say? big donors.
secondly, lobbyists. third, maybe them, maybe the voters after that. we have a trust in congress that is a percent or 9%, but when cockroaches and north korea. between cockroaches and north korea. voters have said enough is enough, we want change in washington, we won our government back. our 25 dollars to matter, not these folks writing checks from new york and san francisco to decide what people in -- for: 202-748-8000 democrats. 202-748-8001 for republicans. 202-748-8002 for independents. several proposals to change what's going on.
the first would incentivize small dollar donations of $200 or less by offering tax credits. can you explain those? guest: in order to run for congress, you have to put together a rather sizable budget because the districts today are large and the districts require you to get your message out and the what you do that is through television. television is very expensive. sometimes you might use direct mail, sometimes you might use of social media. lion's share of getting elected to congress today really requires that you raise an enormous amounts of money. you end up what doing is coming here to washington and hitting up political action committees and lobbyists rather than going to
and friends and neighbors you andhem to invest in invest in your candidacy. there is something wrong with that system. i.e. the recommendations we are making our that we give the ,verage ordinary citizens friends and neighbors in these districts a chance to invest in the candidate they believe will make changes in washington. host: we will show you some of those other recommendations. we start with michelle in wisconsin. democrats line. go ahead. caller: good morning. i was calling because i'm very frustrated with the fact that allowedeme court alone money into politics through
citizens united. the small voter, their boat does not count anymore. -- their vote does not count anymore. i'm so tired of lobbyists going theird.c. and presenting loss, what they want done with those companies to give them all these brakes and everything. -- presenting their laws. didow a lot of people who not vote this last election because they felt their vote was not going to matter anyways. which is so sad that people are getting to the point where they will not exercise their rights when it comes to voting. upset with lobbyists for pharmaceutical companies who want big money for their prescriptions.
guest: you hit a home run. i agree with everything you just talked about in regards to the little person in america. to do things as we articulated in our proposals for issue one in a bipartisan, commonsense way to make government be responsible to the average american voter. i used to have this poster in my congressional office that said " govern."people it's not the lobbyists or the big donors, it is our constituents, that person that aomes up to you at 711 on saturday morning and they have a problem and they want access to you to help fix it. thatlle is also right in when members of congress are spending 40, 50, 60% of their time raising money, dialing for dollars in cubicles over in the
republican national committee or the aquatic national committee, they are not doing their jobs, they are not listening to that farmer, that small businesswoman. you are listening to the person who can write them the $100,000 check. now, they are raising money for super pacs for leadership pacs . they are not sitting in a committee learning more about what to do about the afghanistan war, learning about what to do to grow our economy. that is what members of congress should be doing, not raising money. pay attention to the average voter. i think michelle pretty much hit it out of the park on citizens united decision that was made by the supreme court, that allows for enormous amounts
of money to be funneled into an organization with really no accountability, no knowledge of where the money is coming from and frankly, how the monday -- how the money is being spent. that decision has hurt our political system in a way that people recognize that needs to be changed. it is certainly one of the aregs that our 165 members concerned about and trying to figure out a way to fix it. citizens united was one of the worst decisions for the political process, allowing enormous amounts of money to become a part of the political system with no accountability and no transparency. that is the part that hurts. host: from virginia, republican, jim. caller: good morning. is suchalled that there
a bipartisan contempt for freedom of speech represented on your panel, today. we heard from these people talking about citizens united, the horror of people banding together and spending their money to influence government, the right of free association and free speech. yet i'm willing to bet you that neither one of these people who are condemning money voluntarily given for free speech activities have ever done one single thing duesevent forced union from being spent on politics. two outat is one reason of three states that constituted donald trump's electorate victory, part of the blue wall were formally forced unionism straight -- forced unionism states and are now right to work states.
if you think free speech -- politics is expensive now, wait from you prevent people freely expressing themselves as your two guests are advocating. guest: let me jump in, first of all. up could not be more mixed or more wrong in what he said. not only firmly supports the constitution and the first amendment, but we want to make sure that free speech and government and participation is open to all the people, not just billionaires who can write orheck today, not disclose be transparent about who they are giving to. we have seen more and more that somebody can write a six or
seven figure check to ray 501(c) 4 -- to a 501(c) four, not disclose the contribution, and we talk about disclosure and transparency. we have the technology that you are going to be -- whether you , you should give disclose who you are giving to. that should be automatic. free speech to give money, but free speech to tell who you are giving it to. that rayhe little guy and i are standing up for. i used to have this event back in indiana, called the garbage can turkey roast. a little town in indiana, we would have voluntary contributions. people would show up on a sunday morning, and we would have 400
people put turkeys in new garbage cans, roast them, serve food to everybody. money, one way we earned from the people in the district, not big interests in new york and san francisco that don't even tell you who they are when they are writing a check to these undisclosed organizations. guest: i don't agree with jim and what he said, and i agree pretty much with everything that tim just said. he made the points that i would make. host: we will go to california, richard is next. caller: to get money out of politics, i don't know if this would be legal, but if you took and presidencyse , all the donations go into one
pot and it would be divided equally. the government could turn around and put a figure on what you could spend for campaigns. that way, the playing field would be even. how the candidate would get its credit would be advertised. this person or this cousin -- company donated so much money to them. the money in turn would be equally divided amongst all the candidates so everybody would have a chance. if the billionaire wants to put and i want to put in five dollars, my five dollars means as his $5,000. i don't know if it would be legal. guest: i understand what you are saying. if you heard what pedro said earlier, one of our recommendations was to give power back to the local
political committees, whether it is the republican committee or democratic committee so that people can make contributions. then that money is disclosed, who wrote the check, and also where it is going. is it going to the local county clerk or the sheriff, is it going to the congressional candidate? full transparency and the ability of people, average citizens to write a $25 check or a $2500 check, and we know where the money is going and we know it is being directed by people who have a common interest in making sure there is transparency and disclosure and an opportunity for average citizens to make a contribution. said. i like what you we are not trying to get money out of politics. what we are trying to do is make
sure there is disclosure and transparency and make sure that if you are a small donor, $20, we are looking at the possibility of tax credits or matching that. states across america are already doing this. states are taking on small donor empowerment, ethics reform, lobbying reform. it is washington, d.c. that is doing nothing. mr. trump, congratulations to the president-elect, you talked about draining the swamp and fixing a rigged system. lets see you do something about it. improved disclosure, and power ower-collar voters -- emp blue-collar voters, fix an election system that is paralyzed and wasting $60 million a year in taxpayer money
because they vote 3-3 on everything. those three or four things, if we could do those things, it would go a long way to fixing the system. host: solomon is from california, democrat. disadvantagedor cannot afford lobbyists. the rich run the country. deregulation, people running their own little countries with their own lobbyists. even in the right to work states. they will not pay more than seven dollars an hour. win.st cannot guest: that is exactly what we are talking about. we are talking about changing america so that people throughout blue and red states,
throughout the united states of america believe in their government again. all the studies show that if you give five dollars or $20 to a campaign, you are much more likely to vote, to care about voting, to care about the process. why can't we do some things to empower those little guys? that is the american spirit. that is what we have always done is try to help small businesses and the little guy, whether you s,e poor or middle clas you are not believing in democracy, and our group is fighting to get members of congress to pay more attention to this. to get mr. trump and vice president-elect pence to pay attention to this.
it is not just jobs, but trying to fix a broken democracy and put trust back in it. host: do we have to reconsider trying court cases such as citizen united -- citizens united? guest: it will take legislation to correct the kind of system that currently exists. it will take legislation to fix the citizens united decision. it will take legislation to allow for common citizens to have a say by writing a check. it will take legislation to require members of congress to be limited in the amount of money they can take and who they can take it from, and the reporting part of it is very important. the transparency is very important. where the money comes from is important, and all these things will take a legislative fix. that is why tim and i and the
other 160 plus former elected believe that now is the right time, and we are grateful for c-span for giving us this platform, to advertise the idea that as a new congress comes in and as they are sworn in and the 100 senators begin their session, we hope that this will be on the top of their top five items, because it will take legislative action to fix the issue. guest: issue1.org is our website. i encourage viewers to go there and look at our recommendations. we have sent a transition memo team to have them look at it and see what they like and what they are willing to work on. we are willing to work with embers of congress and share it
with them. it could take decisions like overturning citizens united. it takes the american people to say to their members of congress do something about this. let us reclaim our government. don't spend all your time with lobbyists and raising money, make sure that whether you want to cut government or balance the budget or do something about syria, that you are doing your jobs as legislators. guest: let me mention something we do in illinois, my home state. springfield is the capital. when the legislature is in session, they passed a law that said no legislator can do many fundraiser when the house or the senate is in session. that might not be a bad rule to implement in washington, or perhaps we include that in our legislation. when the congress is in session,
no fundraising. do your job, legislate, listen to the people. representative of illinois, and then tim wilber joining us as well, the former u.s. representative for indiana. jaquelyn from california, republican line, go ahead. caller: i would like to correct you on some things. -- i am glad that you are stepping up. california has a different, unique problem. i lived in northern california all of the northern counties voted for donald trump. we have not been represented in the state of california for decades. we had two senators that were
sent. we had two representatives in washington. we had been fighting for the last four years for vietnam veterans. you are putting a lot of things out there when it comes to the issue of politics,. caller: we voted for reduced -- only being a representative for so many years. i did not get them of -- i did not give donald trump a dime. i actually emailed him. host: let's go to ernest in tennessee, democrat line.
caller: hi. god bless you fellas, you sound really inspired. if we don't get the money out of politics, this country is gone. guest: let they respond to both. let me clear something up with jaclyn. i did not vote for mr. trump. mrs. clinton, i worked hard for mr. obama, for both of his terms. we actually won indiana for mr. obama in 2008. this is not about who you voted for, though. our democracy is not working. whenever i travel to different countries, people say to me instead of saying you come from the greatest democracy in the world, they say what is wrong why aren'temocracy,
every seat in the house of representatives up for election? why don't you guys get money transparent and disclosed in your politics and why are billionaires running more and more of your show? i am offended overseas. we are in a crisis with our democracy. i am willing to work with mr. as our 165 former members of congress are. we want to work on the kinds of recommendations we have come up with. the second thing i would say to ernest, he sums it up really well. we better do something, or else. john adams said very pessimistic lee, democracies commit suicide. they choked themselves and go out of existence. not if we fight for it.
not if the american people take their government back. if we do the kinds of things people are doing across the states, getting reforms in the state government and if we do that at the federal level, i think we will have trust restored in this system. host: let's go to tim in massachusetts, independent. i want to thank you for coming in, this morning and by extension, i would like to thank all of the guests who come in to c-span throughout the year. cs, out here.-aholi we continuously watch people when it is not an election year. we definitely need to make some changes to have a more representative government than we have, correctly. one ofyou had mentioned
the reasons you have to raise a billion dollars or more is people of the size of represented by each representative. i want to ask if you are aware the sizehe last time of the house of representatives was increased. many decades ago and there have been proposals to increase it, but i don't see any sentiment for doing that. the number 435 was set a long time ago. host: a couple of questions outside of what you are talking about. we have heard that president-elect trump once to put a good-sized transportation infrastructure initiative out there. what do you think about the proposals? guest: i would like to compliment president-elect trump
for picking elaine chao as the secretary of transportation designee. i think it is a great choice. elaine served as secretary of labor under president bush. she knows how to be a cabinet member and run a big department. she also served under president bush at the department of transportation. a great pic with lots of knowledge. she knows the ways of washington, and she will do a great job. a great pic in that spot. i will take president-elect trump's word on this. he wants to do a big infrastructure bill. in, in the first term of president obama, we had $48 billion under the economic stimulus will and we put a lot of people to work and funded a lot of projects and we know that when you invest in
infrastructure, you invest in the american people. the people that fix the roads and bridges, the people that fix the transit systems, and you create the kind of economic opportunity and economic growth for contractors, engineers, people who designed this infrastructure. investing in infrastructure is a win-win for america and will help get the economy going. the largest segment of unemployment in america is in the building trades. this is a win-win, and i believe president-elect trump when he says we will get a big bill, congress needs to pass a big bill, they need to find the money for a big bill and if they do that, america will become number one in infrastructure again. host: considering your background with the state of indiana, what insight like you offer as to what to give to this
trump administration? i congratulate vice president mike -- vice president-elect mike pence. i hope as he works his way through the transition team and eventually takes the job, that he will work across the aisle and work with groups like issue one deficient -- to fix a broken democracy, that he will counsel mr. trump to work on a big infrastructure bill that will invest back in america and create jobs, but also give us the best transportation system in the world. he is a thoughtful person. values who puts his family at the very top of his party or party list. i'm hopeful in those
that big things done in america are done with bipartisan support. guest: i served with mike pence in the house, as did tim. he is one of the nicest people that i have ever come across during my time in congress and during my time in government. he is a man of very high values and high principles. i have every reason to believe that he will do everything he ,an to move the country forward to solve some of the big issues. i am optimistic. i am thrilled that mike pence is there, because he knows congress, he knows washington, and i think he will be helpful for those of us who want to move forward. host: the group's website is issue1.org.
thank you both for coming on. coming up, another former member of congress joining us to talk about an involvement in civic government and engaging civic government. senator bob graham from florida. later in the program, we will hear from the weekly standard as republicans consider what to do with the affordable care act. ♪ >> every weekend, booktv brings you 48 hours of nonfiction books with authors.
saturday night at 10:00 eastern on afterwards, georgetown university professor looks at the failure of democratic political systems to provide the best outcomes and calls for a change in how government is run in his book against democracy. is interviewed by the vice president of the cato institute. why is it people that rejected the system, because they don't think it will work very well. they think it will lead to a bad outcome. >> they are probably right. outcomes,about bad then you were on to my site and user looking at how are you going to weigh fairness versus a quality outcome? >> the columbus foundation presents the american book awards which recognizes outstanding literary achievement from the entire spectrum. eastern, jonathan
zimmerman, professor of history at the university of pennsylvania on the increasing pressure to curtail free speech on college campuses across the country. talks about it in his book, campus politics. words whichot taboo had nothing to our discussion, the taboos ideas. is based fromulty a furtive action and we are not hearing from them that there is a serious pc problem. >> go to booktv.com for the complete schedule. >> below the transition of government on c-span, as president-elect donald trump selects his cabinet and the republicans and democrats prepare for the next congress, we will take you to key events as they happen, without interruption. watch live on c-span, on demand on c-span.org or listen for free on our c-span radio app.
>> washington journal continues. host: our guest is former u.s. senator bob graham, who served in florida from 1987 to 2005. he is also the co-author of a book, america, the owners manual. thank you for coming on the program. before we talk about some of the details, a couple of intelligence related matters. there have been bipartisan calls for an investigation into potential influence from russia in the election. what do you make of this? guest: i think the calls are very appropriate. i have been calling for this since september of 2001, to get all the information out about the saudi role in 9/11. just in the last few months beginning to see some progress.
i hope that this investigation does not take the better part of 15 years. it is important to the american people. it is also important to the american people that they know there is a good relationship between the president and the intelligence agencies. the purpose of the intelligence agencies is to provide to the president strategic advice that get through normal channels. oftentimes, that strategic advice is the key to good decisions that help protect the security and advance the interests of the united states. is very counterproductive for there to be a public clash between the intelligence agencies and the commander-in-chief. host: we heard the president-elect talk about his questioning of the cia investigation and looking into these matters. what does this mean, going forward? guest: it is not a happy sign in terms of what the long-term relationship is going to be.
in addition to involving intelligence agencies, it also involves congress. congress has a responsibility to provide oversight of the intelligence agencies. i had the privilege to serve on that committee for 10 years. i think this is exactly the kind of issue that congressional oversight is intended to provide. host: bob graham is our guest. the book he has cowritten, america, the owners manual. talk about this idea of increasing civic engagement. guest: one of the things we have learned out of this recent presidential election is how dissatisfied so many americans are with their federal government. federal government has probably seldom been in as low esteem as an institution and individual than it is today. what are some of the
prescriptions or remedies to restore what people like john adams talked about in terms of the closeness of the people to their government? i think one of those is to get the people more directly involved in their government. there has been a feeling that you can't fight city hall, just whatever government does, you have to take it. that is not true. there are many examples of where american citizens have seen a problem, a problem with government, action or inaction and have fixed it. our book provides the essential skills necessary to achieve that, as well as many case studies of how it has been achieved and advice from who are inls, people or out of political office, consultants and academics, as to how to go about implementing these skills of citizenship.
host: what is the one thing a person could do to directly get involved, especially if he or she feels disenfranchised? guest: you have to feel that you can be involved, you have to be passionate about the issue. one example of a case study, mothers against drunk driving. that group started new living room in sacramento -- started in a living room in sacramento. and mother was grieving, but also motivated to avoid a tragedy. with her friends, the established an organization which in a relatively short time has cut the level of deaths attributable to drunk driving in the united states by almost half. host: the book is called america, the owners manual. bob graham served in the senate from 1987 to 2005. our first call is from new york,
democrats line. gary, you are on. caller: good morning, senator. florida, i know miami lakes is a wonderful community that bob graham's family created, but having said that, i would like to make the point and hopefully get a response from the senator about the palletization of the cia -- politicize asian -- politicization of the cia. one week before the invasion of then cia chief walked into the oval office and said mr. president, it is a slamdunk. those weapons of mass destruction are there. we know what happened after the invasion. they weren't there.
when you think the president would be angry at getting false information? he was not. wouldn't you also think the senate and the house intelligence oversight committees would have been outraged and would have started another church committee -- search committee? they did not. a few months after that, the cia chief that gave our president bad information was awarded the presidential medal of freedom in attendance for many members of the house and intelligence committees applauding. guest: thank you for your kind remarks about my hometown. a few corrections. the intelligence committee did public,rings both in mainly in closed sessions on the run up to the iraq war. we demanded there be produced what had not previously been -- beenwhich was a
produced, which was a comprehensive analysis. i voted against the war, as did another -- other members of the intelligence committee who were exposed to that in-depth analysis. a joint11, there was inquiry commission staff made up of members of the house and the senate intelligence committee, which spent the better part of a year gathering information on the role of the intelligence 9/11, published a report, one chapter of which primarily related to the financing of 9/11 and pointed a finger at saudi arabia was withheld from the public for 13 years. finally in july, it was made available. perfection,proclaim i think the oversight committees of the congress were diligent
and did all that was in their power to provide to the american people the truth about what happened on 9/11. host: from florida, bruce, independent. caller: thank you. mr. graham, i always supported you. i always supported democrats, that i have a message for you and all the democrats. if you do not use the same strategy the republicans used against barack obama for eight years, i'm done with the democrats. there is no sense in you sitting there and being run over by donald trump and the republican party. you have a chance now to do something good, and that is oppose the lock. filibuster, delay and do not
approve the next supreme court justices -- justice this maniac is going to appoint. guest: i would agree if you are suggesting there should be examples and specific issues, such as the next u.s. supreme court member, which the democrats should make a strong stand in defense on behalf of the american people. i don't agree that we ought to adopt a policy that the republican leader in the senate did when barack obama was elected, which is to say the number one objective of republicans in the senate is to keep barack obama from being reelected. regardless of what the issue was, they opposed, delayed, frustrated the president. i believe the american people were similarly frustrated, and they showed that frustration in
a peculiar way at this election, by electing the candidate who appeared to be the most like that guy in the movie who shouted out into the night, i'm mad as hell, and i'm not going to take it anymore. they voted for the unusual candidate who conveyed a message that they were mad as hell, an were not going to take anymore. our democracy will not function when people yell at each other. workunctions when people together and understand they have a responsibility to the american people, whether they are republican, democrat or independent to do those things the american government can do to make this nation more secure. host: from south carolina, republican, mary, go ahead. sayer: i wanted to call and
that i am tired of hearing this story about the russians supposedly hacking into the dnc's computers and they stole the election for donald trump. donald trump was elected because the people of this country are tired of not having any decent jobs. they are tired of having regulations around their neck for every little thing that they do. telling our girl children that they have to go to the bathroom with boys, it is just ridiculous. these people say that our children have to do that, but they send their children to private schools. i'm tired of nancy pelosi standing up and saying you can always -- you can only work 30 hours a week, so you will have time for special events. the kind of people in this country need 40 hours a week. they don't need two or three part-time jobs. you democrats need to get over the election, because the people
elected donald trump. believe thist issue is about whether donald trump was going to be the next president, he was elected, under system andal college he will be the next president, that this issue of a foreign government being involved in our election, making what is alleged to have been a conscious decision to support one candidate over the other and then using their technical capabilities to achieve that objective is very unacceptable. we can't have foreigners determining who the elected officials in our democracy will be. earlier, i am a strong congressional
oversight committee excepting its responsibility of getting to the bottom of this, of if russia tried to influence the outcome of this election and if so, what sanctions to the -- should the united states add? what wethink we can do did with saudi arabia for 15 years, which was have compelling information that they were involved in 9/11 and do nothing, because that has encouraged saudi arabia to continue to support terrorist organizations and if we send the same signal to russia that it can involve itself in our presidential elections without any response, that we are just going to encourage more inappropriate to date -- inappropriate debate. host: from west virginia, democrat line. caller: good morning. host:one of the people who calln earlier when the two general and
-- two -- general gentlemen in, earlier. he said that right to work was the right way to go. i have a comment about that. i keep hearing this over and over again. there is not one state in this whole country that has any laws that state that if you do not want to belong to a union or go to work somewhere where union is in place that you can't go right down the street to the nearest place that is nonunion and get yourself a job. that's a fact. host: we will leave it there. let's go to brett in searchlight, nevada, independent. caller: good morning. guest: are you from harry reid's hometown? caller: yes sir. guest: i would like to go there,
sometime. hairy talks about it, all the time. talks about it, all the time. caller: we are a pretty small town, but we get along together. had about wanting to increase citizen's engagement with the government. everybody thatt is a congressman or senator, you call them and let them know. i do it all the time. arizona, i'min sure senator mccain got tired of me calling. host: when you called, what kind of response did you get? caller: did not get any. that certainly is appropriate.
people should register, they should vote, they should be participants in all the ways of democracy. don't forget that you don't have to wait to an elect -- to elect an official to take action. you have rights and responsibilities as a citizen of the united states of america to make a difference. i use the example of the women in a few yearsho were the principal force in cutting in half the numbers of deaths attributable to drunk driving. they used government, but they did not wait for government. they took the initiative. that is what i am urging. people to you -- you feel passionate about an issue need to have the skills of how to go about this. this is not just something that you pick up in the play yard. you have to know what the skills and how to use them are, and you have to be persistent. government does not typically
act quickly, and you have to be prepared to play the marathon game, not the hundred yard --. -- hundred yard dash. good morning, i have a question about the voting in florida. they were places that they were waiting for hillary. how come you don't check into that? guest: what was happening? caller: the voting in florida this year showed and was proven, there were places that they were rigging for hillary and we watched it -- examplehis is a perfect of what a citizen can do. if you believe there is credible evidence that there was some rigging of the election in florida, what you want to do is find out what official is
responsible for monitoring those elections and in the case of florida it would be your county supervisor of elections. go to him or her with the information that you have, if you have other friends who have evidence that there was bad behavior at the election, bring them along with you. that the newspapers or television stations no what you are doing, so that the public will be better informed. there are steps that you can take as a citizen, which will make a difference. host: we have heard the term from this past election of fake news, from the internet and other sources. what do you think of the rise of this type of information and what you think about the traditional news sources? -- what do you think about the traditional news sources?
guest: the facts are that all the traditional means of political committee kaisha and, newspapers, radio, television have seen a decline in their audience and particularly in the case of television, a delusion by the number of channels that are providing news frequently heavily partisan in one direction or the other. one of the things that has contributed to the current low standing of government in the eyes of its people is that the people don't know very much about their government. we stopped teaching civics in america in about 1970. ofhave gone from an average 31-year classes between the seventh and 12th grade to zero one-year- three classes between the seventh and 12th grade 20 civics classes -- to zero civics classes.
-- not only of whether we should teach civics, and the answer to which is a resounding of course, but what kind of civics. we should not be teaching spectator civics where all we do is teach the students to sit in the stands and watch democracy. we need to teach them the skills were they can be an active player and make a difference in democracy. --t: county from indiana tony from indiana. caller: the man a while ago who was talking to you about democrats are going to stop voting for you guys if you go along with these republicans. it started out that mitch mcconnell said we will make sure he is a one term president. they shut down the senate and nothing got done at all, and then the people punished the democrats. the republicans took over the
senate, the democrats worked with the senate, the people rewarded the republicans. if you go along with the republicans again, you're going to lose democrats because we aren't going to vote for you. it is time to stand up to these republicans because they are cleaning our clock. we will go third-party. guest: what i have said is yes the democrats ought to stand up where there is a matter of principle. if president trumpif president n out of the mainstream person to be the next u.s. supreme court member, democrats should protest, point that out and use whatever means are available to them. proposeding like the program of infrastructure, i think the democrats need to be cooperative because that is critical to the future of this country.
issue which i think is critical, i will be presenting ater today, as cochairman of foundation commission on higher education, a proposal that we think is the equivalent of the g.i. bill from the 1940's to increase the number of americans who have some form of education after high school, whether it is vocational, a community college associate degree, or a four-year bachelor degree. we need substantially more higher educated americans in america -- if america is going to be competitive in the 21st century, economically and politically. host: senator bob graham with us, he served from 1987 to 2005. independent line, justin in
indiana. civic: on the issue of engagement, i want to throw out the idea of taking a step towards democracy -- direct democracy. you could somehow give a voice via online mechanisms like change.org to allow citizens to have their input directly impacting the debate? maybe you could have a virtual vote, maybe through change.org or you could let people actually have a vote on a specific amendment or specific committee. there are tons of different configurations that would be interesting to think about how that could work. not necessarily constitutionally changing anything, but changing the rules of the house, maybe we could experiment -- experiment with limited measures to see how
it works. they could potentially increase the problems we have with special interest but also force people to debate the actual issues as opposed to what it is now, which is more like high school entertainment. if we get people to engage in the actual issues with direct democracy, we might be able to get people to the rational and look at facts. guest: i congratulate you for being so creative. there are a number of meanbilities that could greater citizen involvement without amending the constitution. this is a little bit off your specific set of examples. , thee earlier panel
mentioned that many states including florida prohibit members of the legislature from raising or soliciting money well the legislature is in session. legislatorseemly for to ought -- four on monday to have gone to a special interest and ask for a $1000 contribution to the campaign and then on tuesday as a member of the legislature, vote on a measure which benefited that special interest. congress ought to pass a rule and that is lit would take. you could just say that we will not solicit money while the congress is in session. that would be an example of the kind of direct citizen involvement, because it would increase the confidence of the citizens that the legislature was representing their interest, and not the last person who
solicited a campaign contribution. host: brenda in nebraska, republican. caller: i just wanted to say that i have been an independent for years until i watched c-span the last couple of years. after i republican started watching the hearings, and i heard you say that we need to have hearings on the russia thing. during the hearings on hillary or really anything against the democrats, all the democrats did was lecture and not even participate, and that was the reason i switched from independent to republican. thing, itthe russian has been used so much, it is like the brady thing where you marsha.a, marsha, i think the fact that
c-span caused you to change your affiliation is an indication of how powerful these influences are and the fact that you changed your party because you saw the democrats as being too obstructionist or two unwilling to listen to other issues is a is tiredhat the public of hearing politicians squabble with each other. they want to have a civil, awful, respectful of the public display of their public office. going back to this russian thing, if the allegations that true, it is a are very serious matter, a foreign government making it a just decision to try to influence the outcome of the u.s. election,
and i think all americans, republicans, democrats and independents, would agree with that. i think it would be a great disservice to our democracy if, well over 15 years after the offense, still squabbling over what of the american people are going to be given the information as to why the event was considered to be important. thank you for your call. i think you have made a number of good points. host: a lot of confirmation hearings destined for the senate. what is it like going -- what is it going to be like, being a minority member? guest: my policy was that as it related to appointments to the executive branch, for the president is selecting the person that he or she wants to
be secretary of state or agriculture or whatever, i gave a high level of deference to the executive. these are his people, they will be working in his or her name, yada have individuals -- that he or she has confidence in. it is different with the judiciary because the with the constitution was constructed, the selection of the members of the judiciary was to be an equal role for the congress and for the president, and there i think the standard is considerably higher for confirmation, and i believe that is where a lot of the fireworks are going to occur, particularly with this first appointment to the u.s. supreme court. host: how many votes are going to be needed in the senate? guest: several years ago, the senate change the rules relative to filibusters or judicial
offices and said essentially that with the exception of the supreme court, the filibuster will not apply to judicial appointment. the big exception is the supreme court, so if there is a contested nomination, it would take 60 votes to shut down the debate, and then move to a vote on the individual. magic number for the supreme court justice is 60. host: from ohio, independent line, tom. guestcaller: thank you for c-sp. we have to remember this is not the democratic party that we had when mr. kennedy was president. that was the last time i voted democrat. he would be turning over in his grave hearing these socialists speak the way they are.
we have to remember that we do not have a socialistic government, but we are, aren't we? how do you answer that? guest: when i was studying economics, i was taught that we had a mixed economy, we have an economy which is primarily capitalist, driven by private sector decisions, but in which the government plays an important supportive role, going back to this subject of infrastructure. from the beginning of the country, it was government, primarily the federal government that built the roads, the canals, the other things that to knit these 13 states into a nation, and i think things like that, and areas of fundamental to research, the ths
that we take for granted today, such as the computer that pedro is looking at, it was largely developed because of government defense intelligence and space programs. we have a mixed economy and the political challenge is to figure out what that makes should be. host: from oklahoma, republican line. caller: i would like to make comments about the senator's sad and pathetic statement about the russian involvement if there is one. they would not be able to expose hillary's emails if she did not use an elite -- the legal server, so that is a ridiculous stance. peopleatement about the not being aware of what the government is doing, more americans are waking up to what
you have been doing or not doing, and they are sick of it, and your stance is totally horrible. you are still whining about that, and i don't get your point, at all. guest: i'm not whining and i'm not taking a position, i am just saying that this is an important enough issue that the american have fulluld information as to what happened. there will be a debate as to what that means. some people will say it is trivial and dismiss it. others will say it is world war iii time.
done relative to 9/11 and i to see it repeated as to the role of the russians. sir, you are absolutely right. i hope you are right. i hope we would not find out the russians were trying to medal in our elections, but i think we and not 50 years from now still be worrying about what happened and dealing with conspiracy theories. ost: pat live necessary nebraska, independent line. hi, pat. caller: hi. is that americans are trying to be involved, but we votes are s like when being stifled by things like voter cross-check, that rendered how many of our votes just not even counted, it's disheartening and then we do have an incoming resident who can't even be tohered to do his job and go
national security meetings and briefings, that is my comment, love to hear what you have to say about that. again, the point i'm trying to make and is made book is that you to be ave to just wait cast n that your vote is and counted. there are so many other ways in where a citizen involved and can make a difference, but it takes forion, skills, persistence citizens to do that. a elieve this book provides lot of encouraging examples of has happened and the book provides a clear roadmap as how you can on the issue that you feel passionate about, make a difference. that the election been in your state has takenover, distorted, then you,
s a citizen, can do something about that, you don't have to wait for somebody else to take initiative. host: real quick, the comment she made about the resident-elect trump and intelligence briefings, cnn saying three times a week he's continuing is ecessary to happen everyday or -- guest: i think it is a matter of what the president's inclination is. some presidents got very down the weeds of the intelligence daily briefing, more of a it as general outline or suggestion of activities. that is up to the individual who happens to occupy the white house. not say that one is more patriotic or more committed to the other because or seven it one, three times a week. host: and when they are delivered to the
what is the ct, level of depth of information? to walk him someone through what this means? how does that work? quite detailed, tend to be on a specific topic. hey will have in the room the people responsible for producing hat particular presidential briefing paper. in many ways, it is a means of dialogue. ne of the things the intelligence community does, for instance, fill in the gaps. the president needs to know to make a decision, you can read about or see on television. is that final 20% that the intelligence community is for filling and so the president may say to the briefers, look, i want more nformation on points one, seven, 13 and 24 in this report
they take those instructions and the next time they have a fill out they will areas that the president had deficient. that's the back and forth that with the goes on presidential briefing by the community.ce host: our guest serves as chairman of the select committee 2000 to igence from 2003, senator until 2005 representing florida. also co-author of the book manual," the owner's thank you for being here. guest: thank you very much and viewers.nformed host: coming up, michael warren about the republican efforts changing the to affordable care act, he's eporting as a guest when "washington journal" continues after this.
>> the first faed lady to work outside the home, teaching in a school. eisenhower's hairstyle and love of pink created fashion sensations. .amie pink kennedy was responsible for the reation of white house historical association and reagan as a young actress saw mistakenly on the black list of communist sympathizer in 1940s and appealed to ronald reagan for help and later became his wife. stories and more are featured in "first ladies, historians on the lives of iconic american women," makes a great gift for the holidays. get a look into the personal lady necessary american history. stories of fascinating women and
how their legacy resonate today. of america's ies first ladies for the holidays. paperback, s in published by public affairs is vailable at your favorite book seller and as an e-book. >> i think culearn from failure. i think if the next president to be like ire somebody, they want to aspire to be washington or lincoln. recreate the country and can't have a civil war. what do you do next? aspire to be james monroe? i don't know. ou can aspire not to be james buchanan. president "worst ever," james buchanan, and the least of the presidents. >> differentiation of good presidents, d bad
washington, lincoln and f.d.r. are at the top of the survey were istorians take, they decisive men. you can't come to the top of the be decisive.t ler.nan was a wauf james pope hated him for being a waffler. he went back and forth on decisions. you have to tell me what to do. he was as president. >> sunday night, 8 p.m. eastern c-span q&a. >> announcer: "washington journal" continues. host: joining us michael warren ith the "weekly standard" online editor in a recent piece looking at legislative efforts the affordable care act. thanks for joining us. if you had to boil it down, what the e republican plan for affordable care act? guest: at the moment, three delay, replace, that seems to be where senate house leadership and
incoming presidential, the white tose, seems to be, they seem agree that repeal must come within the first couple of days new congress and administration, and then the question is how long do you implementation and then in the interim between the repeal, which republicans think do and the actual implementation of whatever that like, how do look you replace it and that is kind capitol republicans on hill are coalescing around, even policy onservative experts have real disagreement about what the best way to do this. host: is there some type of larity on what the replacement might look like? guest: several plans out there hat different republicans or conservative policy folks have put forward. you've got obviously the better was the house leadership, speaker ryan plan, many was synthesis of other plans.
tom price, likely to be health secretary, ervices has his own plan. the house member from georgia. plan, it'su've got a got cute name, but i refer to it proposed it, who hatch, burr and upton, in the plan. have their own they agree on the big elements f it and it is more about the devil is in the details and what paying for do for ertain kinds of provisions in this, how exactly you address the issue of people paying for health insurance who aren't able o pay for it, whether through tax deduction, tax credit, that is the fight and debate having among e themselves right now. there is this push from at least one conservative policy expert others who have been making the same arguments that kind of fight needs to happen before republican dos any kind of sort and this should be of one motion, rather than
something that is dragged out over the next two years. host: our guest with us to talk about this idea of what the republicans are doing when it affordable care act. for republicans. 202-748-8000 for democrats and for independents, 202-748-8002. -- guest: yes, in leadership, there -- rump group, the sort ofcaucus, which is hard to pin down the exact number, but probably in the 20s most 30s, sort of the conservative, most right wing of are epublican congress beginning to make noise. mark meadows, incoming chair of he group, congressman from north carolina, who is actually behind the effort that speaker y forced
resign.to is a nonstarter for them if it is delayed. mainstream of the conference and certainly this is the way they view it in the senate and in the transition team, any sort of implementation of a repeal, cannot happen immediately upon passing that repeal bill in to be more specific reconciliation esolution because the current insurance year has begun. people are buying insurance mainstream of the conference and certainly this is the way they view it in the senate and in the transition a function of trying to get something to happen that is not disrupt consumers, decisions and e
what they'll have to do over the next year. host: as far as layperson of it, what happen fist they pass the repeal, go two years out, go to the mid-term election and say senate overturns or other factors go into play, what happens then? is that being considered? guest: it is being considered, although that is a minority view. the piece i wrote for decisions what they'll have to do over the next year. host: as far as layperson of it, what happen the "weekly standard," i interviewed very well known conservative policy expert, he house argues that the and senate and trump transition team plan runs into this problem, which is it sort of spins out too much political capital over the next years trying to figure out what the replacement looks like. meanwhile, democrats still reeling from the election cobbel together idea of how to stop replacement proposal republicans come up with. republicans may fight house and senate and trump transition team plan runs into this among , which is it sort themselves about what to do and really there is no better time than really in the next month or two for republican unity on this and strike while the iron's hot. minority view among house republicans at the moment, although nothing is set in stone i think there is going to be
during recess a lot of thinking members about what the best process to go forward is. will say there is sort of unity among those top positions, and mike pencell running between trump and congress on repeal. > moderator: focusing on a piece from michael warren, taking a look at affordable care act. gop's game plan for undoing obamacare. richmond, from irginia, this is jim from richmond. jim, you are on, good morning, go among themselves about what ahead. thank you. thank you for c-span. been talking 've about this for eight years, republicans still don't have a replace it, i don't don't come hy they up with a plan and float it so
terms of where they find themselves, you can point obamacare andy to the volatility within the market after that party pushed through this bill. ow republicans are sort of going to have the same ossibility in terms of their olitical fortunes, based on what happens in healthcare, better be smart about it. is the argument house and
senate leadership are making, if we're going to do this, we can't be hasty with making a decision about where we go from here on healthcare. but the same time, they do have repeal d of nagging obamacare. on january 3, we will have a bill when the new congress comes in. so trying to balance the need i senate leadership are making, if we're going to do this, we can't tohasty with making a decision be prudent and make the right decision while also delivering on a very important campaign promise, which is get rid of this law that most americans don't like. jacksonville, om florida. democrat line. you are on, go ahead. yes, i'm calling about healthcare. bama signed for that healthcare, he involved the republicans. involved them and they -- he even took their ideas, but when it was time for him, when he's it in, none of them wanted anything to do with it. it, they went against him. it made the insurance go lot of the republican
governors know they are to not, it nt and is about medicaid and that had a lot to do with it, too. thank you. guest: if i understand correctly, majority of those under affordable care act came in under medicaid, what is the difference for them versus those getting subsidies and buying from the market place and what future hold for the two groups? guest: this is another difficulty republicans have to with now that they are in power. what do they do? i think republicans are against medicaid expansion, the governor ertainly didn't expand in most states run by republican governors, i think there is sort of be an effort to make certainly those at the lowest end of the economic scale whole in some different way than simple block grants, which is government was doing, medicaid expansion. in terms of with all due respect caller's take on the history of what happened with obamacare and sort of the evelopment of the law under
president obama and republicans involvement in it, of course no republicans in the house or voted for the law, this was passed entirely through emocrats and through some sort of legislative gamesmanship to scott browngh after was elected and stopped things the senate. early on, in the debate and discussions, you know, that president obama had about healthcare, it was made clear ryan talks about this a lot, that he made it lear that he wasn't interested in having republican ideas onboard, say with the issues ith medicare and sort of growing, spending problem medicare has, this was a big of paul ryan for many years and still is in many ways. i made it clear, he said, won, we're going to move forward with democratic proposal, that got.at democrats
they got almost all of what they wanted and then thenot, it law happened a and -- as i said earlier, republicans now own what happens with healthcare and they've got to be very smart and very politically aware of exactly what all the callers have been which is anything too disruptive, anything that interrupts what people are saving for and all that is going to be a roblem, you know, for them politically, in just two year is another e election. host: a disruption, in the washington times, it says lobbying groups say they stand to lose billions and 26 if they see influx of uninsured patient fist obamacare gets repealed. guest: that is right, going to be a big problem that i think ought to take time, there are proposals for what to do in terms of more
market-oriented ways, rather than simple block grants of money.er for that if they repeal all the taxes that obamacare instituted. where do you make up the savings so you can give -- get people tax credit or deductions, whatever the case may be. line, steve, ent go ahead. caller: yes, i voted for obama in 2008. thought he was going to improve the situation healthcare. when i signed up for it two years ago, three years ago, it extremely expensive that i couldn't afford it as self-employed person in my early 60s. -- now i have to pay penalties, by the way, about
$17,000 i would have to pay out for that if plan would pay for anything, right? so my question is, will i have penalty for not being in 2016 and d it repealed or t is going to happen? the idea behind delay, even folks who are replacing it immediately after you or concurrently with repeal, has to and people who are currently preparing to get on 2017 plan would be grandfath erred in, this is something you interrupt the health insurance market and disrupt it that way. know, the question is, you will penalties for not having or for not wanting to
urchase insurance that is too the sive, be a part of republican plan? i find that hard to believe and i think that if you look at all the republican plans for replacing obamacare, they all intend to sort of open up the arket place and allow for more for plans that maybe have, you know, higher deductibles, lower premiums and allow people who don't get sick to buy plans that really cover the basics. but the question is sort of how do you do that with all of the e have, you know, we heard the owner or caller talking about, kicking pre-existing conditions. the insurance market changed because of healthcare law. anything republicans do is going have to acknowledge that and recognize that it is not going make some mple as to great free market competitive environment over night. the "weekly standard,"
michael warren, we'll hear from pat in new jersey, republican line, hi. caller: hi. i'd like to know if there is any indication whether or not some of this can be undone the way it hhs secretary kathleen sebelius filling in the passed in the was original healthcare law. how much does the congress have be undonehow much can the same way it was put in by the executive branch? thank you. you actually ink have to start with what happened in the legislative branch in 2010, not going into too much etail here, but through budget reconciliation, how democrats pushed through the law, which is avoid that you threshold in the senate for filibuster proof majority, super majority for passing to do with it has taxes, revenue, any sort of budgetary matters, you can pass simple majority vote
through budget reconciliation is how on, that democrats passed it. really, as the caller correctly out, the federal regulators at hhs and within the white house, really filled in the blanks. the flip side is that republicans view the way to undo obamacare, they don't have super senate, they've got something like i think 52 republicans in the senate. are going to do the same thing and they have done this before. once republicans took over the 2015, they passed a reconciliation resolution house and the senate and that essentially did what next re planning on doing year. of course, president obama and didn'tresolution go anywhere. the following same model, which obamacare, t of doesn't repeal everything, all the regulations have to be dealt
from the executive branch and sort of going to be undo legislatively unless somehow they are able to to get blicans are able democrats in the senate onboard, that, if able to do they do replacement plan piecemeal, in my view and other conservative healthcare policy expert views, it would be smart statek up a number of red democratic senators who are up for re-election in 2018, who are going to be interested in sort of playing hard ball on the of healthcare and they'll want to be partners with republicans. ot on everything, but some things and republicaning will be smart to reach out to democrats board. them on host: josephine , independent line. morning.ood talking about pre-existing condition, keep in mind, when been ook at this, it has proposed, they want to block to go back to the states.
means, they will put everybody with pre-existing label as high-risk pool. what does that mean? it. can't afford it may run you $30,000. you might as well just die. that is more important and they better pay attention, almost all benefits on medicare, which is going to the doctor, having colonoscopythat, is washed out because affordable care act ntegrated with all different programs, so people selfishly were complaining how much i'm is the insurance companies complain to the insurance companies, not to your representative. are the crooks. thank you. michael warren did analysis talking about high-risk add, with proposed funding to support those. guest: all right. mean, this is not administration incoming trump
administration that will blanch spending, particularly if it is politically popular. i think that is sort of brave world for republicans, particularly conservative epublicans, but that is the way, the new regime here. i do think, again, republicans think about in smart ways and there are a lot of mart healthcare experts on the conservative side who thought long and hard, smarter than i am what kind ofactly, policies might mitigate a lot of problems that could happen if you just simply wipe out bamacare and all of the benefits that come with it in a way that again, fosters competition and gives consumers ways more options, so much of the problem with affordable d the care act are that the option have been have narrowed and when you, we have competition, you have to go
to the government to government doesn't work, incompetently managed, you know, mores go up and it will be unaffordable, that is the problem republicans have to this in wayow to do politically palatable and addresses the issues people is that insurance companies aren't always or very friends and the government should be in many ways looking out for consumers. james ou mentioned capretta, one thing he proposes as plan for republicans, wait until the incoming trump administration submits a budget framework. can you talk about to him why that would work better than what is being currently proposed? guest: again, if you don't have budge sxet way to, i think this and parcel with the plan propose a framework of what the healthcare regime hould look like and a lot has to happen through the budget because, as i mentioned, budget
issue.iliation look, this is test for is,ublicans and the question are they going to be able to govern, govern competently and majority in both house and senate, they have the white single ou know, every problem, whether it's, you know, overnment shutdown threats and these sort of things or problem with the healthcare industry, the on the feet of republican party. getting all our ducks in a row and making sure that you're governing smartly and properly, i think is smart way for republicans to go and this is part and parcel that oming up with a plan early on in this process, rather drag on over the next couple of years, let not just divisions, over healthcare, but things like budge sxet infrastructure pending, youville more
fractured republican conference than you might otherwise expect with the republican president at the top. this is not a party that is really united around much. one thing united around is so ing rid of obamacare makes wise point, says, strike all while it is hot. ohio, democrats line. caller: yes. what the gentleman said earlier here was very correct, not nsurance companies are the friends are consumers. the obamacare or the affordable care act for the last four years. negotiated for fractured republican conference to pass and so forth, basically got the best insurance i ever had in my life. as a matter of fact, i just went on medicare and i would have much rather stayed on affordable i had better se benefits. the fact of the matter is that is the problem. american people don't have -- have never negotiated
contracts, they don't know what they are looking for the -- what is really needed is a part of what hillary plan had, was where -- you elected six independent governors in your with the let them go insurance companies and negotiate a plan that everybody in the county could get and that could get the best plan. is, right now, is that basically ce company medicare, thing with independenthave the payer, who is basically putting on ttle bit of substance watching these private companies like humana, and the rest of them, where they have to keep in line and charge properly, but
the on't have that with affordable care act. host: thanks, caller, got to leave it there. think there is irony here, the proposal hillary clinton mentioned is really not off philosophically from what i imagine a lot of republicans are hoping happens, local, state level figuring out ways to meet americans and healthcare needos and sort of getting it away from the federal government and federal regulations. republicans have long talked about moving that divide between can buy that people insurance over state lines, increasing competition, you ultimately, this is -- the insurance market is a strange still a market and the best possible outcome for different o have companies competing over their and when you have policies that encourage that, particularly encourage local
evel, you are going to have people have more experience for and healthcare than top down from washington, which is really the view of away from , to get that. host: james live necessary kentucky, republican line. guest: yes, how are you doing today? thank you for c-span, i love the show. about, sir, i didn't what you are ot saying, here is what i believe. believe that the government shouldn't be responsible for just like althcare, anything else. if you buy a house, you do it on your own accord. that these people that have been getting subsidies and stuff, they should not get about the what people that have to pay and you see what it is like to pay and get nothing. i'll tell you, i have a lot of
a lot of stock in different insurance companies and they are making a fortune. believe that the insurance companies should set there and tri-care and i'll -- thank you for your show, i'll take it off the air. sir. you, bye-bye. guest: well, i think hilosophically, that is where republicans have often found themselves. the problem again, is that it is unravel hard to government from the healthcare industry. been involved has in this industry in one way or the other really since after the war ii, when you had regime that we still currently perate in, which is that companies who provide health insurance for employees get a tax break. medicare, dd in medicaid and then obamacare, you a lot of the government sort of wrapped industry.e healthcare
the question really is for republicans, who don't like unravel it in au way that isn't disruptive, that consumers, helps americans nd at this point, really does reach the goal of universal healthcare coverage, not in a single payer system or anything like that, which is really nonstarter for republicans, but a way that america who in have not been able to purchase health insurance before to do it covers affordable and them at the most baseball level. i think republicans would like a system that om simply gives subsidys to americans, like to empower those people to buy their own health insurance. it is not so simple. that is the challenge republicans find themselves in and policy wise. host: michael warren, give us a imeline of what we will see in january. guest: at the moment, when i talk to people on capitol hill,
stone, , nothing set in the idea, january 3, new comes in, i believe mitch mcconnell would like to repeal olution to obamacare going through at that point. inauguration, the after that, you know, it is a that of time before if resolution does pass, that resident trump signs it and then we start the delay. i think there is debate going on now.t is it two years, three years, do epublicans really want to have this kick in before the twe 201 be tion, when there could disruption, wait until after the 2018 election to kick in. this is all sounding familiar, is exactly the argument and debate democrats were having hroughout the passage and implementation of obamacare and hen really in the interim, you know, after march or april passed, it is gets
becomes question of what do we do, how do we replace this, we put sdpth synthesize and pass and try to get momentum and of course a lot depend on whether president trump makes replacement a for him and his administration and legislative union. with the ael warren "weekly standard," thank you. open phones until the end of the program. 202-748-8001 for republicans. 202-748-8000 for democrats. independents, 202-748-8002. we'll take the calls when we come back. >> we have a special web page at c-span.org, to help you follow
the supreme court. go to c-span.org, select supreme court, near the right-hand top of the page. once on the supreme court page, you will see four of the most ecent oral argument heard this term and click on the view all link to see all the oral arguments covered >> by c-span n. addition, you can find recent appearances by many of the justices or watch justices in their own words, including one-on-one interviews few months with justices kagan, thomas and calendar for a this term, a list of current ustices with links to quickly see all their appearances on c-span, as well as many other upreme court videos available on demand. follow the supreme court at c-span.org. >> i do think you can learn from failure. think if the next president wants to aspire to be like somebody, they probably want to washington or lincoln. you can't recreate the country and can't have civil war. do you do next? aspire to be james monroe? i don't know.
be james pire not to buchanan. historiannight on q&a robert strauss talks about james in "worst president ever," the legacy of the least lesser presidents. >> i think the differentiation presidents and bad presidents, you know, washington, lincoln and f.d.r. re at the top of the surveys historians take. they were decisive men. of the't come to the top ladder and not be decisive. waffler. was a james pope hated him for being a waffler as secretary of state. went back and forth on decisions. you are my advisor, tell me what to do. that is how he was as president. >> sunday night 8 p.m. eastern q&a.span's
>> "washington journal" continues. host: again, open phones, 202-748-8001 for republicans. 202-748-8000 for democrats. independents.or forbes magazine just releasing influential list. at the top of the list, vladamir by donald trump and the chancellor, the federal reserve chairman, janet yellin, there will be an announcement from the federal reserve to be dealing with topic of short-term interest rates. you can see that on c-span at 2:30 this afternoon, watch it, also c-span.org. access to it ain hrough the c-span radio appalachian. first from george, republican line. phones, first on open good morning, go ahead. caller: yes, good morning. democrats are trying to reinvent the wheel. i'll give you three names. people show us what to do, reagan and elt,
milton freedman, famous economist. roosevelt broke up the trust, we break up large insurance companies. i'm sure congress is not happy about that, because they receive from them and saying at competition across state lines. whatever it takes to get more competition. number one. reagan said we need capitalist-based society and he was right and many other presidents said the same thing. set up in a an system that works. right now, we're spending 2.7 poverty.n 1 trillion dollars, much smaller number, would be enough to give every one of us an ira with a dollars in it by the time we retire and have a which year income with to buy health insurance and everything else. e need to turn every american into capitalist by issuing an
start off certainly with poor helping them get this thing set up and funded f. we do that and then have competition and we have some of the better wengs you are talking about, can transition into system where make money both off the markets and off of jobs. quickly, keep up in the market, that is a good number. can do it in the longest journey starts with the first step. go ahead and move. host: matt from rhode island, independent line. hi. gone.r: he's host: carol, carol in grandview, line.ri, republican hi, carol. caller: hello. host: you're on. about, i want to talk citizens united. the reason these politicians are is fraid of citizens united because it's made up of citizens
like me. you can join it cheaper than you can join aarp. of they are not a bunch millionaires like the politicians want to make out. to stifle, that is why we vote them out. thank you. full page that was in "washington post" from democracy in progress pactis directed specifically to those electoral votes on monday. saying, ng the election i will read a bit. e bipartisan coalition of americans, scholars, officials nd citizens rights spirit of fellowship out of sense of patriotism and great urgency, there are times in the life of a when extraordinary rcumstances call for
extraordinary circumstances. tranquillity and to international stability. goes on from there, but again, full page ad took place "washington of the post" this morning. there is a story in the washington times taking a look colorado, t of concerning electors there who are interested in casting a state ther than who the voted for hillary clinton. this is valery richardson elector if democratic necessary colorado refuse to mrs. clinton, they can be replaced by others that will place the law. judge starrs gave secretary of state williams the option of removing the electors after he advice after rt's well publicized revolt by three electors. may cast said they alternative to mrs. clinton to deny the presidency to donald part of the hamilton elector movement.
the program as on last week talk approximating why she got involved. want to see the interview, go to c-span.org, name and learn about others in the movement. and cast to be decided upon monday. louis from pennsylvania, democrats line. ahead. caller: yes. the thing about the obamacare, i on't think people should be penalized because they can't obamacare. when they do taxes, i have my granddaughter and two great $589, iildren, hito pay didn't have insurance for them and i was paying for everything doing.re as far as congress, you have democrats and republicans in office right now, they should do what they have to do. they don't need a president to do the things they are doing, much. president can do so they need to do what they have
to do, this is why people want hange in there, they are not doing it. thank you. francis is next in california, democrats line. caller: yes, hi. see ght now when i go to any doctors or purchase to pay on, i don't have any co-pays. prior to this, though, i did years ago i did have to pay co-pays, 10 and 15 and $1.50 and for medication, that doesn't sound like a lot of see two en you have to or more doctors in a month and 10 or 15 each and you have to buy medication and that $5 or $10 or something like that, it really adds up. pay any copays't medication, i or
was worried now that the republicans are in and that all going to change? ost: from ohio, toledo, from timothy on the independent line. there., hi hi. caller: hi. can you hear me? yep, go ahead. caller: yeah, i have a question would like you to ask people when they first get on your line and that is, do you have health who is paying for it. my whole urance for life, i'm 56 years old and i got ick about a year ago and to pay for it. i mean, it's been a mess and all these people act like having ealth insurance is some big bonus or something. we're the only country in the world where people don't have and that's all i'd like to say. host: if you turn to the front age of "u.s.a. today," they
have a long story taking a look at drinking water in the united systems in ticularly rural areas, they say may have untested water. here are some of the findings from the report . fact, the story by laura nichols.d mark water from le get utilitys and 4 million americans operatorsr from small who skip tests or didn't conduct tests properly. test lion, the cost to every small water utility that even one test. that is in "u.s.a. today," along the story of drinking water in states.ted environmental protection agency looking at how drinking water affected by the process known as fracking. writing the y drinking water can be affected any stage of the fracking process, the report notes frchlt
acquiring water used to inject in production wells and waste water, impacts are seen at sites close to production wells. includes slightly stronger set of conclusions, but no direct policy recommendation. activities "can impact drinking water resources circumstances," and note certain activities or conditions may make the impact severe, including withdrawing water for fracking when water resources are limited. to graund water resource or inject intoing wells them to leak into groundwater. and dumping waste water where it can leak out. you will find that in the morning.ton post" this ntonne, baltimore, maryland, republican line, hi. caller: good morning. going back and forth about healthcare, my question is, what are they going to replace it with? i'm a republican,
voted, this time i didn't, but what i keep hearing over and again is this obamacare is horrible, we're going to replace it, we're going to make it such a choice.e have but what i've come to understand, what i'm seeing for that it really is not giving americans a choice and making healthcare affordable all. it shouldn't be a privilege. it is like a privilege and not a right. make like if they can't money off it, really the bottom ine is that the shareholders can't make money off it, it doesn't matter, people's lives assets to decent health tlt care doesn't matter. it republicans, independents, whoever, there is who tain group of people somehow are, you know, living high on the hog and they are fantastic healthcare
and they don't have to do anything and that is so untrue. morally wrong. host: linda, next up in ohio, democrats line. on.head, you are caller: yes, i would like to obama write sident and pass the obamacare act? putting he most votes that act into the american or the the democrats republicans? nd why is it called obamacare, because i personally don't think he wrote it. for what the for theid and voted for american people? thank you. host: "new york times" going on out t is beirut lebanon, artillery shelling resumed earlier today n eastern neighborhood of the
syrian city delaying evacuation members who aff were expected to leave under deal announced to the united nations. the latest whiplash for those trapped in the ruined city. turkey, deal by russian and syrian rebels, last emaining fighters were to evacuate the two rebel-held jointory and civilians can them or move to government-held areas. forces loyal be in to the president. on the front page, "new york taking a look at this idea of investigation look the russian ng by government talking on taking aspects there. a very long story, indeed, eric writing d scott shane for the "new york times." russia honed cyber power and today on american
election. if you go to the opinion section of "u.s.a. today" this morning, representative dana warbocher of california, talking, a republican, putin didn't steal the election, he says this, too coldlook at russia through war lens. one thing i learned while working for reagan, focus on objective, ant reagan's priority was defeating soviet union and we did with characters, the priority today, defeat radical terrorism. putin is no guiltless in deterioration between the both sides failed. of radical islam power, putin has had ample to lose faith in america's resolve. anna, from florida, republican line. you are on. caller: thank you for taking my call. an nt to say that i'm american and americans, we got stick together. we've got to stop this bickering back and forth about healthcare.
obamacare is pretty good. some people don't get insurance my husband and child is covered. it all understand how works because i apply every year can never get e myself. we've got to stop nonsense of and forth, republican, democratic, black, white, asian, we are tearing our country apart. host: randy from wisconsin, independent line. aller: yeah, i was just wondering your opinion on 4200 barrel oil spill in northern what would have happened if the pipeline was in north dakota and they had it still there? audience may not be following as closely as you, hat is your opinion on it,
then? caller: my opinion is that it hould not be allowed, and ially under waterways groundwater, you know, once it gets in, it is done forever, you know. and it just seems to me there has to be a better way. ost: let's hear next from linda, west virginia. calling on the democrats line. hi. caller: yes, i want to make a comment, i draw less than a month on social security. $100 a month, i do not have prescription drug nsurance, i pay out of my pocket. but i've got aarp, as secondary, it is $197 a and month. limitations e put on in the end of this bill that companies had to more increase in what they
were profiting. craig on the republican line. caller: yes, sir. it should be k done, any employer, i don't care small business, whatever, should get a very big incentive for insurance.lth the next step should be with people over 65, i'm not sure medicaid, icare or ones who have paid all their should get that. the other part for the people insurance,have health there should be something devised for them, but it be something that, it should be known from the axpayer how much it is costing and everything should be broken down. that is the way i look at it. hope that is all
right. that is the way i look at it. host: craig, appreciate you calling. you are the last call on the program. we'll do it tomorrow, though. nother program comes your way at 7:00 tomorrow morning, thanks for watching today, we'll see you then. >> a live view of the trump tower donald trump continues to meet with prospective cabinet nominees and senior potential members of his administration. this morning, they officially announced the nomination of rick perry to be ener