tolerate that and that we will seek a separation of those people and when i talked about the 40 plus cases where we were seeking disciplinary action, the majority of those are senior executive service and you should know that the veterans affairs department separate over 3000 people per year in the list of people that i'm currently tracking for potential separation is over 2000. so i'm just talking about the leadership positions that have been more written about in the news. the inspector general testified that the house veterans affairs committee hearing, that he arrest the 500 people on average per year from the veterans affairs department. department. were talking to people on the

top of the organization and we are currently tracking about 2000 people for disciplinary action a total of all levels in the report that i provide to the chairman and mr. miller has over people on it. but it needs a very significant level. [inaudible question] >> i cannot comment on this passivity is because it is in progress. so i can't comment. >> we are referring to this as about 10% of patients still awaiting us and the number was 10% in about 30 days from now.

i'm wondering if he's the that is acceptable, is that good progress. it's a good question. >> we are going through a process right now of and working in the private sector and what acceptable wait times are. what you'll find is a varies widely depending upon whether it's primary care or a specialty and also geography. prior to this job i live in cincinnati and ohio when i would make an appointment with my dermatologist and was usually nine months out. but that was the way that dermatology works. and we are trying to figure out what the right standards are, we have used the 30 days from the date that the veteran would like the appointment is the standard that we are using right now. and until we get a more defined manner and in one that works well with the private sector, we

will work with that standard. >> you think that that's possible that i could go to 0% in the foreseeable future to . >> in some places it already is. it's an average and i've been that the facilities were we have mental health capabilities if someone wants to walk in on an appointment they can. and we have some cases where we have walk in primary care facilities. it's an average so you can assume that there are become specialties and other places that may be too high and we are working to get those done. >> so under law they said that they are ruling them in faces of three rounds. so what do you tell congress about that and then number two,

who was responsible for the delay in makkah contractors? is it something you didn't anticipate? >> first of all, the law did not specify specifically which part for which data are which addresses. lost generally are not back there and in fact after the law was passed, you recall that went to a committee in the house and the senate has different laws and they got together and after the law was passed i had separate meetings with the chairman and we went through this and said what do we need to correct. and we need to put together technical changes for the law that they then acted upon. and at the time that this was passed there were no ideas as to how to best secure to them

that's our job. our job was to execute the law the best we can. and so we immediately stood up trying to figure out can we do this ourselves or do we have to hire and at the same time we work with the veterans service organization in the and the staff of the two committees in the house committee and to talk about what is the best way to do this. and if you look at the law that was accomplished as it started going out, i think that you would argue that it's nothing short of excellent execution and it was during the discussions that we had with the house and senate committees and went to veteran service organizations and i particularly would -underscore this because all of us were feeling fearful that it

would create chaos amongst the urban population and they would wonder why they are receiving this and they would have trouble sorting through the various instructions as to whether it was because of a 30 day wait times more just because there are veterans enrolled in the health care system and that is why during this we determine the best way to execute was still beating the deadline was to do it in phases and it was relatively unanimous to that point. and i know there was a statement last night that that wasn't the point. and actually his representative was in our meeting and agreed that that was the best way to do it.

>> we have advocacy groups and we are grappling with this. so i wanted to know and that includes intelligence as well. >> i'm sure you raise the question because to me this is one of my highest priorities. as we go through this change after we have to change and create capability to deal with an increasing number of the male e-mail veterans. right now about 11% of our veterans are female, about 20% of the dod is female. in our structures in our buildings were built in the 1950s and 1960s and 1970s. when i was in the military i didn't see too many phenol soldiers during my time in the airborne division. and we have to change, we have

to hire more female specialty doctors and we have to hire more female primary care doctors because oftentimes they want to go to a primary care doctor that is a female, we have to change the facilities and we have to provide daycare and we have to do things that we haven't considered before. it's one of my focuses on my trips has been to get out areas where we are working on this. i was just in atlanta will be inherited the building from department of defense and we are turning it into a women's health center where we can provide this kind of capability and are female veterans don't have to go to the same facility as the men and they can get the women-based care. we are partnering with the college of medicine on that and i walked through that facility

with the dean, were making great strides, but we have to do more. in regards to homelessness and benefits, you know, because we are going to be looking at more female disability claims and we're going to need to provide new facilities for homelessness i was just in new england at the center for homeless veterans and i met with some -- one in particular, one of the homeless female veterans there. and we contribute money and resources to that site. starting in the new year we are going to remodel that tire this will be because right now the women veterans don't have a way to enter the facility and exit it without going through the multi-gender state. one of the things that we have learned is that the women want

to have their own floor and they want to be able to come in and out. and so this is a huge issue and we have a lady veteran, a west point graduate, and she works in our office and is the advocate for the women's issues. and it's a very important thing. and in fact i will be speaking saturday -- monday in the white house, about the employment of women veterans. >> we proved about $16 billion in emergency funds based on what was recommended to get a handle on these problems. where are you on the spend on of those resources and do you have a better sense of what it is going to take and will it take

more resources to consider a digger appropriations bill. >> we need more data. the original one was 17.5 and what we didn't get was, for example, the ability to hire more people to deal with disability claims, which is part of the original spending and we didn't get money for the program for the homeless. but if you think about a curve and a linux going northeast and about the fact that we were below the line in terms of the money that we needed. this gets us closer to the line but the line is still going northeast.

we had agent orange presumptions, we discover things like tbi and now we have those that thought before those things were available. we have the average veteran of it makes claims and after world war ii it was one. but the other thing is that you don't see the full effect of the war on the veterans of that war until 40 years after the war is over. because these veterans age and as they age, they get more and more difficult problems and i can attest to that because i have about 60 parachute jumps and am missing about two discs in my back and every night it started to stand for long periods of time. so 40 years from now and we are

going to be asking for budget increases in order to do that and be able to provide the capability that we need to provide for the veterans. >> any budgets? >> under president obama the budget has increased every year. that is good news. but again, that curve is headed on a loop up and it's not study and it's not flat. most americans would think that the wars are over so we don't have to about that. we are still dependent for the civil war and we still have many

spanish-american war dependence. we are still talking about this 40 years after. [inaudible question] >> we are getting a lot of reports about the climate at the hospital retaliations fearful of coming forward and so what are you doing to address those ongoing issues, and can you place anything tangible that has changed and not reed. >> a number of things. number one, if we have any inkling that we are going to take disciplinary action, and they're no longer in the operation, secondly i asked the

retaliation and we've been certified now by the office of special counsel and that was not the case previously. number four is when we need this situation like we did in phoenix. did you talk to them today, i think that they will tell you how things change they are happy with new jobs. at least that's what they told me. and you should check with them. things are changing pretty quickly. and you have to make sure that you on top of the changes because you could be hearing old news. and i've heard this and personal visits the retaliation will not be tolerated and i want to know about it. and i will go to the source and find out about it.

>> people felt that this was a guy who got it. he had run the army. if he couldn't get it, how could you get a given the corporate background. and he had talked to him to avoid whatever it was that he ran into. >> 's wife and i have served on the one raising committee. my alma mater and his alma mater. i think that the skills that i need to do this is not unlike those two run and 85 billion-dollar company in the world. and that includes the

disciplinary action. you read the article is and so why's it in my interest to go slow on disciplinary action? explain why that is in my interest and why you want to play it critical game about veterans. i care for veterans and 5 billion people around the world in over 200 countries around the world and that includes people in this country, 90 million of which user health care system than you can imagine that when i was asked to do this job i thought it was is that it's not that i need this job, it's a calling for me and it's an opportunity to take 40 years of leadership experience all

over the world with different size organizations in the quiet to a very serious problem in the united states to care for people that i serve with who put their lives in danger to save my life [inaudible] >> the general was explaining how his problems were isolated. there weren't that many. many reports came out and they were clearly systemic. are you convinced that they are not able to hide it from you? >> when you have run and 85 billion-dollar company in 200 companies around the world and the speed of languages you operated in those countries, we've traveled, it's pretty hard to hide.

>> he said that rebuilding is priority number one. >> to make you have a constant drumbeat including the involvement with the ig and how this might have been influenced and a lot of this has talked to but there's no feeling that the bureaucracy is years away from being fixed. so it's how are you doing with this and are you at a point where you feel like you're making some progress. >> takes time and as you know i gave him my cell phone number at the first national press conference. in the early days i was getting 250 calls or texts per day. and i set up a team to help me remediate every one of these

actions. and now it's five to 10 a day and we have been able to radiate a number of those, probably over 30% and that includes those who want to give us results. we are responsible to the taxpayers. some of those are queer issues that we have that we have to solve. and when i can consult one of those are help to solve one of those and then you call me back and say that i've changed a life, but i've made a difference, that is everything to me and that is what counts. and they are going to change this in an organization that is focused on the customer.

and where everyone worries about outcomes and not internal outcomes. >> as a leader you have to set an example. and i was trying to set an example for the organization but my expectation is for all of them and you really have people giving out cell phone numbers and you have people embracing veterans as they walk in the door. and now you're seeing it even more probably. it's going to take time. but we will get it done. >> the gao reported that this would triple last year with

disability from social security and 2300 veterans received payments for more than 100,000. and some of that is, i think, based on the law and so the law needs to be changed. and so i can tell you what we are doing is that we are working hard to improve our quality of our disability claim activity and generally we've been above 95% sometimes with 98% and we have a whole quality organization and make sure that we are doing our job right. this is one of the areas where it has helped us and we have more work to do.

the other thing is the claim work and initially it was all done on paper. and you can do it more quickly and you can do it more accurately. so we are working with these veterans service organizations into what we call what they help us to and also we are doing them digitally. [inaudible question] >> the commerce minister acting legislation, trying to prod this to make greater use to help this. until let's talk about this straight up to help you guide

and they say this and a lot of veterans say that it manages a cadre of programs and if you talk about that a little bit, please. >> okay, for frist welcome one of the changes that we are making is the strategic partnerships as a force multiplier. when i was preparing for the confirmation hearing of went through the existing strategies of the organizations that are publicly available online. the second strategy talked about strategic partnerships and what i found in the organization was a bunker mentality but was looked at as more of competitors are example major-league ace

ball hunley used but first game of the world series to call out their support. which includes the opportunity to go there. and that includes those that had put together a program to welcome back veterans and the owner of the boston red sox, both of which i visited. they felt like they were not getting the support from the va that they wanted. so i'm all about partnerships. i'm all about strategic partnerships because it's an opportunity to multiply the capability that we have and as i was mentioning before, we don't have the budget that we need herriot so why would we turn our

back when there is help to be given. having said that, let me tell you a story that early on in the job i was told about this program at the local law school. i won't mention any names. and that law school wanted to provide pro bono help to help veterans, just like a veterans service organization would it was very effective and they did a number of the claims for us as law students. it wasn't too long after that that we had a letter saying we have to continue doing this and would you now pay us to do this. >> i appreciate pro bono work and we have partnerships with the best medical schools in the country and ours that massachusetts general hospital and the doctors there teach at

harvard medical school and they work in the va and they serve at the hospital. duke medical school, the doctors there work in the medical school, they also do their crumb of work and the reason they like to do this and the reason that 70% plus of all doctors have trained at the va is because we have this unique combination of the three legged stool. we have the best patient in the world to clinical work in the very appreciative patient. and if you want them to do this have them teach at. we spent $1.8 billion a year on

research and many doctors want to do research in addition to the clinical work and educating others. so when i go to these medical centers i also meet with the deans of the medical schools about the associations that we have and the potential to boost up our operations when we need to by using more of the medical school that doctors have warned or in the case of las vegas when i was there, we have air force base doctors who do physicals and they come and view the chemical work at their local va because are able to keep their medical practice robust while still serving in the air force. we want a relationship that is mutually beneficial and we don't want to have to and paid grievously for her. >> last question.

>> when it comes to so many claims and whistleblowers, when you selected these people that they ensure that they were not part of this? >> yes, and what we did was we brought in a general counsel from the outside. from the dod. and she was a former general counsel of the va. and the people that we broaden, to the best of our knowledge have been vetted and are frankly doing a big job as i talked about, it is a big job and i sat down with one of the veterans

service organizations and individuals the other day and i showed him the pages and pages that i had all of the people that we have disciplinary action going against. this is front and back printed in this group is very busy. so i know that you all have written a lot about this, but that is not it. we are talking about senior executive service people there. >> we have people in different places that are working on it. >> well, it's a very fluid operation. and not the top of the operation are people that i meet with regularly, three people that i met with two of the three yesterday. .. --

host: our postelection roundtable is rejoined with jackie kucinich of "the washington post" and jill -- and gail chaddock of "the washington -- of the christian science monitor. can you explain? the monitor did a cover story where we pull together the ,est people we could think of longtime congress watchers and congressional leaders and i was involved in interviewing a couple of them. at the end of it, i realized that their suggestions for reform all involve reversing previous reforms all of which have had unintended consequences such as transparency laws that were designed to bring people into the negotiations. instead what happened, the negotiations went straight out of the room. there is even less availability

too many things. campaign finance reform, we know what has happened with that idea of getting money out of politics. readearmark reform which i about endlessly. i was enthused with the concept which is why cover do so much. one of the things that seems to have happened is that politics is not work as well unless leaders have some kind of leverage over members that are in litigation. in effect, every reform idea of the last 20 or 30 years has had pretty serious unintended consequences so the headline is kind of a joke. obviously, an institution that has a rating of nine percent, lower than tv news irena to inform you, lower than just about any other institution, obviously we have to do something to fix it but it happy what we've done before. host: let's talk about the election returns we begin the morning by asking what the

messages to washington. what is the message to speaker john weiner? guest: speaker john banner -- john boehner needs to get his caucus in line and he started to do that at the end of last year where he got to a place ready to get people -- his people to vote for something and stop doing things like trying to repeal obamacare. i don't think that has gone away. i don't think they will be able obamacare the cycle. they wanted both sides to work together. you will get republicans working together however, you look internally and there will be internal strife with republicans and we will see if they can break through those. over the last congress, we sought on the house side and mcconnell will have to try to get a balance on his site as well. host: the message to the new republican leader of the senate, mitch mcconnell? guest: try to get things done.

get that body moving again. one of the interesting things particularly on issues -- they are talking about keystone as one of the things that republicans will try to get done now that they have both houses of congress. i love the democrats also supported keystone. some of these things -- it's not necessarily a slam dunk just because you have two sides of congress that agree with each other. host: here is what the president said yesterday on the issue of immigration and whether or not he will have executive order if congress fails to act on the issue. [video clip] >> i have no doubt that there will be some republicans who are by any or frustrated executive action i may take. folks -- i just have to say -- who are also deeply opposed to immigration reform. in any form.

and they block the house from being able to pass a bipartisan bill. i have said before that actually believe that john weiner is sincere about wanting to get immigration reform passed which is why, for a year, i held off taking any action beyond what we have already done for the so-called dream act. could to giveng i him space and room to get something done. said at the time was it in fact congress -- that this congress could not get something done that i would take further executive actions in order to make the system work better understanding that any bill that they pass will supplant the executive actions i take. takeaways if you

can read between the lies is that he will have an executive order on immigration and he also indicated that he will probably veto the keystone xl pipeline. he did not say that but if you read between the lines, it seems that's where he might be going. guest: i think that's absolutely right. there are suddenly to new numbers we have not used in washington very much. one is to 90 and the other is 67. that is threshold for overcoming a presidential veto. it's the new reality now. you can talk about many things but if you and i kept the president to sign your bill, it is going nowhere. the other thing i think that is interesting about this is the amount of leverage that both leaders have within their own party. the president talks about it as if it is a character issue that john banner could not deliver his caucus. when nancy pelosi passed health care reform, she had 40 votes on her own side of the aisle that she could say we don't need you.

john weiner has not had that. boehner doesr john not have that. he can say you can vote however you want and get something through. those are the two numbers. john boehner and mitch mcconnell are getting attention in an op-ed. they said -- they conclude by saying that the skeptics say nothing will be a compass in the next two years as elected servants of the people in a we will make it our job to prove the skeptics wrong. guest: color me a skeptic. i think not only are there internal issues but you have the president ready with a veto. it is only vetoed two bills so far in his presidency and most of that was because of errors in

the bill. i think you'll see that uptick significantly. as far as tax reform, you have corporate taxes as something they will push. you have the medical device tax they want to repeal. those two things, it will be a difficult task. host: the democratic leader nancy pelosi again said she will run -- do you think there will be any movement to have change in the democratic leadership in the house or the senate? guest: i always think there will be and that not -- and it never happens. there's no reason to think i could be right in this case. this is a leader just raised $100 million. if you go over her entire career, going back to when she was cartoon does a hostess who gave parties, she is raising a ton of money. knowing the donors on the democratic side better than probably any leader ever, i don't think she is going unless she wants to. it seems pretty clear she does not want to. host: she said our members and

candidates one hard-fought campaigns and supported by an connected to their constituents and strengthened by the tenacious leadership of steve israel. unfortunately, we lost a valued members of the house but we must continue to fight the middle income -- type for the middle income families. guest: i would agree with gail that nancy pelosi will be there as long as she wants to be. the math does not look good for democrats in the house or until they take over the house again, i think she will get some of the younger members of the caucus challenging her. until then, there is no reason. host: look at this map. you can see the dark areas are republicans in the house of representatives and the lighter areas are the democratic seats

in the house. it is certainly on each coast and sprinkled in the middle and the upper midwest. for the most part geographically, it's a republican country when you look at this map. guest: a map that is even more interesting to my sense is looking at what happened at the state legislature level. au now have 25 states with republican governor and an entirely republican legislature and 2/3 of the states have an entirely republican house and congress -- house and senate. that's next ordinary set of numbers especially when you see what they are doing at the state level. the decisions they make about medicare and access to guns and even women's reproductive rights, if you ask yourself, what most impacts what my daily life is like? the states are having a great deal to say about that. a lot of the interesting fights

are at that level and many people expected that sam brownback would be gone. his plan was to radical. he is still there. governor walker is still there. i think that is every bit as interesting as what will happen in washington. >> to take consequence of 2010. -- it is a consequence of 2010 when the republicans started rising and democrats have not been able to break that. since that happened, people talk about how the tea party is diluting the power but that is things that that particular revolution has helped. host: we heard from senator pat roberts on his victory beach saying he will be the incoming chair of the senate agriculture committee. what changes can we expect among these committees in the senate when the gop takes over? guest: as far as --? that is a next question.

things thatof the is going to change as far as the races that are still out -- mary landrieu's biggest pushes was that i am the chair of the energy committee. that's why you should send me back. she is no longer the chair of the energy committee. she does not nearly have the employee should and democrats have the majority and i think that hurts her as we go into this december runoff. host: it was reported this morning that a lot of the traditional groups that supported democrats may not be there for her because of her support of the keystone xl pipeline and issues dealing with women's reproductive rights. guest: exactly right. jeb hensarling interested me because he wants to stay on at financial services. he was the one that people thought might challenge john boehner and now that will not happen. that is an interesting story how the speaker has moved very quickly to consolidate his

position. i think you will see a very different situation in the new house. -- u.s. tea party people who do you give credit for in the new congress? it's not like 2010. even within tea party race, one of the most interesting things will be looking at where senator paul and senator cruz goes. senator paul is introducing new issues with tremendous bipartisan potential such as the nsa. sentencing or you can get a lot of support on the left over issues like spiting - spying. i think there will be creativity on the gop front. paul has a great relationship with mitch mcconnell because they are from the same state. he has endorsed him and endorsed him early against his republican

opponent. i think that relationship is going to be extremely interesting to watch. i think it's good for mitch mcconnell. if there is a filibuster in the air particularly. he will have more control over the. host: jackie kucinich of "the athington post" as we look the election returns and what it means for congress this year and next year. patricia joins us from panama city, florida, on our line for democrats. caller: hi, how are you? thati wanted to ask is now the republicans have taken over everything, does that mean they will go along with the paul ryan budget and give vouchers out instead of medicare and will they also privatized social security which they threatened to do over and over again? host: let's take the social security issue first. that has not been part of the debate but will it? guest: social security is

something everyone talks about always finds a good reason to delay. for the next two years, i think everything could get absorbed into 2016. people are already talking about this being the election of our lifetime because so many critical issues will have to be decided. ever since i covered congress since 2000, there has been people saying that if we don't do it social security now it will be too late. it really is upon us in 2016. i think anything big will be kicked over into that time simply because you cannot overcome a presidential veto and no one wants to go into that election with very tough votes. the social security vote will be very difficult if you don't do it in a bipartisan way, it will not get done. host: let's go to cookeville, tennessee, republican line -- caller: thanks for taking my call. there is one part of the election that i think was not

covered and is important. that is the confirmation of federal judges. [indiscernible] they had a rule before the they can hardly get anything past without a simple majority and now that the republicans have control, probably more moderate judges will come up. far as anything else, we should think about medicare. they have to do something about that because there is probably a lot of money there. host: thank you. guest: i think a lot of nominees -- i think democrats will try to do something in the lame-duck session. i think that will be on the top of the agenda for the democratic senate. host: let's go to mark from west valley, new york, our line for democrats.

good morning. are you with us? one more time -- how about tim in maine joining us on the republican line. caller: yes, i would like to make a comment about an executive order. that i would like to see the president make. hello? host: we can hear you, go ahead. caller: for many years, there has been corporations in this country that have been hiring illegal workers for the sole , these of evading taxes social security medicare taxes. i would let's see the president -- i would like to see the president to an executive order to go after some of these ceos specifically in the meatpacking industry. they have been doing it for 40 years now and getting away with it. host: thanks for the call. guest: he's right, that's one of the issues that is most frustrating.

i think it is also one that potentially could unite some democrats and republicans. the leadership does not want to go after corporations, period, whether democratic republicans. that has been a real sore point. i think the colors right. is he still there? host: he's not. you brought up the issue of executive orders. the president frame the issue of immigration saying that if congress acts on emigration, that would supersede anything that i sign into law as an executive order. he says congress ask but if you don't, i will. guest: another element is that if you act in a way i think is acceptable, i will resend my order. it's a brand-new theory of checks and balances. the first time i heard it was who said webesera have given congress time to act and they have not acted and now we are acting.

where in the federalist papers does it say that one branch gets to say to the other -- timeout, we are acting on her own? guest: this does not solve immigration problem. the senate passed an immigration bill. i don't see how republicans taking the senate means immigration reform is clear to go. host: let's go back to the editorial with speaker john weiner and senator mcconnell and they talk about obamacare. [video clip] >> it's no secret that every one of my members thinks that obamacare was a huge legislative mistake. it has fouled up the health insurance market and put states in a deep hole in terms of the medicaid expansion and their ability to finance a few years from now. i had the ability, obviously i would get rid of it.

obviously, it is also true he is still there. we will be discussing how to go forward on this issue when we get back. this for sure -- there are pieces of it that hard neatly unpopular with the american people. is medical device tax which exporting an enormous number of jobs, the loss of the 40 hour workweek, big mistake, that should be restored. the individual mandate, people hated. -- hate it. i think we will be addressing that issue in a variety of different ways. host: this morning in "the washington post" george will talks about what he says is a fresh start for congress and makes reference to what senator mcconnell referred to as the , a 29 billion tax dollar blood to an industry that has 400,000 jobs in the president said if you come to

death with good idea to the table i will look at them but i will not undermine the key components of the affordable care act. that is one key component because it funds the affordable care act print where does this put the president and the republican leader? guest: i think it will probably get vetoed. mitch mcconnell's rhetoric came from the i will repeal it rhetoric. he is already a little bit softer. the tough thing for mcconnell on obamacare will be conservatives in his caucus. they're going to keep pushing this and will keep pushing obamacare related measures and attaching them to all sorts of bills. he will have to find a way to manage that. havingoesn't help senator ted cruz as a foil for senator mcconnell? guest: it can help and hurt. it's a double-edged sword. republicans get blamed again for derailing any progress in the senate if they keep talking about obamacare for the next two years. host: if you are in the cabinet betweenorrow morning,

the president and the congressional leaders, democrats will thelicans, dynamics be between the president and senator mcconnell? guest: their relationship is not as bad as people think. mcconnell is a professional. through and through. nobody knows procedure better than he does and probably no one knows his caucus better than he does. you do not underestimate him. you heard in the president's speech yesterday a lot of respect for him because he felt he is someone who when he says he can deliver his caucus, he can. i think that will be the basis for a working relationship of sorts. i think the president's real problem is actually the democrats who bitterly resent the impact he had on their races. makescasional remarks he -- he said at one point, it's good there is a republican house

and senate because now we can negotiate. i'm wondering what that sounded like to a house democrat who in effect gave them everything he wanted at the beginning and since then has seen their ranks continue to decrease. host: some interesting insight from your college -- an extensive piece available online at washington post.com. this that name in most viewers may not be family or with -- david krohn who was a key player to harry reid. he said sometimes the messenger is not good. guest: he is not off the reservation. is a very close confidant to

senator reid. it's not like he ran out and decided he was going to talk to some reporters. this was something that was sanctioned. piece it shows the frustration senate democrats have with the president throughout the election particularly when it came to money. the president can raise tons of money and they wanted him to raise money for the senate majority pack. his advisers cap coming up of legal reasons why he could not. i feel like they felt that obama used his network for his reelection and left them out to dry. there are comments that the president made during the course of the election in the last two or three weeks where he said my policies are on the ballot and every single 1 -- i looked at the debates one night with republican and democratic candidates. it was on c-span. echo when you looked throughout with

republican candidates saying that the president said his policies are on the ballot. that did not help. host: let's go to don from california, and democrats line. morning, you talk too much. c-span is just another conservative station. that election was nothing but another example of white supremacy in america. america is going to forever be white supremacists. terms --as given in into the hands of the wicked in the book of job in the bible.and that's my comments. host: we disagree but thank you for sharing your views. south carolina, good morning, republican line. caller: good morning.

i wanted to make a comment about what the president had stated, his figures is that 1/3 of the people voted and because of that, is going to invalidate the election results. if you look at the time when he was voted in as president in 20 -- in 2008, 49% of the people voted. he was elected with 27% of the people that voted in that 49% block. does that invalidate his presidency? that is my question but have a comment -- the only way that this man is going to be stopped is to impeach him. i would rather have a buffoon like joe biden then i thug like president obama. guest: i love the turnout. can i talk about this? i was struck by his remark. if you look at what he actually said, he said yes, i heard what

voters said but i also heard 2/3 of voters who did not vote said. the turnout in american elections compared to almost any other standard is very sad. when you break down the states and there are some preliminary stuff on the web coming out on the first estimate i saw is only eight states that had turnout below 1/3. they are interesting states -- texas is like 28%. new york is on that list of very low turnout. maine which is why i hope the color had stayed on is the highest turnout state and the nation. it's something like 59%. theout is an issue but president did not say he wouldn't invalidate the election. point just to --

not spin - but have people look at it in a different way. 1/3 eligible voters gave republicans a resounding victory but what did the other 2/3 think and that's an important question in a democracy. house democrats lost at least 14 seats in the house and since the president has been office, the democrats of lost 69 seats in the house of representatives just on par with the worst midterm election dating back to harry truman. guest: i think the underlying issue for all of this is the economy. when people cannot feel the economy getting better where they live in their lives, politicians than lose elections and particularly for the party that is in charge of the white house. i think that's why you keep seeing this happen. host: this is from twitter --

guest: i think while president obama's office, she is actually right. it will be a hardbell to unring. it's an issue that generates the republican race. for larger donors, gets them to donate. host: let's go to rick from auburn, washington, independent line, good morning. caller: thank you for taking my call. i want to say that the caller from california is an absolute idiot. i am stating something that is obvious and i apologize. acted likeresident he is a spoiled little child when he talked about the 2/3 that did not vote. are you kidding me? this is what libertarians and independents and republicans are all about. you talk about the 2/3 not doing anything and meanwhile they get

the unemployment and all the benefits we are talking about people that want to get up and do something about this country. are you kidding me? host:.thanks for the call again, i go back to what gale said, i cannot elaborate any better, that the president said to look at this in a different way and acknowledge -- host: let me follow-up on that -- i think some of them tried. i think the president is so unpopular in this country that they could not surmount that. you heard several democrats try to run the fact -- mary landrieu got herself in trouble because she said she still supports favorable care act. that has been a tough thing for her to make it good thing even in a state like louisiana. host: she asked for six debates

with congressman bill cassidy. we will cover them here in the c-span network. our guests are here at the table from "the christian science monitor" and "the washington post." we will get your comments on congress on the election in the -- and what the 114 congress will look like. before that, we had to get to the lame-duck session. what can we expect? this is from "the whole huffington post." guest: one thing that matters to voters is that government is still funded which has not been a trivial issue. i was interested that practically the first thing mitch mcconnell said is that there would be no drama over funding government and there would be no drama over debt limits. we will not use this is a location to leverage the sessions. he was really speaking straight to ted cruz quick couple of days earlier said we have a new

majority and now is the time to press these issues with the power we have. mitch mcconnell has said quite the opposite. he said we are going to go over what is doable. but the firsthy thing the house or senate would not do is to have a vote on obamacare. out -- onet people record and have the president veto it and they will turn to the camera and say we can either keep running this bill by and lose because we do not have 290 votes or 67 votes in the senate or we can make the best we can into something good for the american people at a time when they need government to function. i think that's what will happen. hr 1 two 1 - it was or three years ago but it's not something i think they will be able to -- for certain members of the republic debts of the republican party, safety votes

is not enough. >> sure. host: let me get your reaction to what senator mcconnell said his relationship was with the current majority leader harry reid. [video clip] >> we have had some spirited debates on the floor of the senate about the way the place is being run. but we don't have an acrimonious relationship personally. what was your question? >> what was that conversation like an are you two going to work better together? , obviously having been a leader in a tough race himself, he called to complement me on what a skillful campaign we ran. he obviously paid close attention to it. as many of us have discussed before, that has been the new paradigm. you got a kind of presidential level campaign if you are a leader of the senate. harry said he followed it closely.

he complement amana campaign will run. host: he said it's not an acrimonious relationship. do you believe him? guest: i think they have their moments. i thought one of the more interesting stories is that moderate democrats in the senate are not happy with harry reid. said he willin have to give us some assurances that republicans can get up and down votes on their amendments and some other things. not that they have control of the floor. veryoderate democrats were frustrated with how harry reid ran the senate. we will see if he has a challenge. host: any chance that joe manchin would switch parties and become a republican west virginia? guest: that is such great speculation at the beginning of any cycle. it was a piece a few days ago

that the senator from maine would switch and in 30 seconds he gave impromptu testimony denying it. i don't know what the incentive would be for joe manchin to switch. he's got such a wonderful position now going back and forth between two parties. people like olympia snowe, susan collins have achieved a great deal by being the person the middle. i don't know why he would want to give that up. heidi we know that heitkamp will be one of those issues -- one of those people. senator one or narrowly escaped ed gillespie. narrowlyr warner escaped ed gillespie. alaska's not certified. there is a group of senators that were important before but now are more important being moderate members of the minority party.

host: from selma, alabama, jessica is on the democrats line. good morning. caller: good morning, steve. lome complete my message. i would like to ask the guests to give their opinions on the variables --se gerrymandering, and voter suppression, citizens united, a biased media, and popularity which is closet racism. they have on the republicans get out to vote strategy and their messaging? i will take my answer off the air. gerrymanderings and how the map looks, that has not had an effect. you have this urban/rural divide when you look at this map. it is hard for democrats in recent years to make act the gains they had in 2006. guest: this is such an important

issue. everything you mentioned is important to talk about. i think the biggest thing again goes back to turn out. when i started out walking campaigns, when you richard voters, you went to all the doors and registered and went to shopping malls and registered as many as you can. now is completely different. what if you end up registering someone who votes for the other side? how bad would that be? so we target minutely who exactly is one of our people and we mobilize them. i think to break the lock on politics that you're describing, that thought has to change. i don't know why it never would because as long as you win by one vote, it does not matter if five people turned out to vote or 5 million turned out to vote. for the public, it matters a great deal. there has to be a public move to get away from this frankly

disgraceful turnout level for the world's greatest democracy. i was out with americans for prosperity in north carolina canvassing with them. they had tablets that had pins and each pin was either someone who needed to vote and have been houset house or it was a that had already been registered and we went to the neighborhoods in and knocked on doors and register people to vote and have a conversation. green,n the pin turned they went to the next test. it's incredible the level of sophistication on both sides. host: the former and likely of the committee makes the point that after harry reid, the gop should not unilaterally disarm. it will take years to undo the damage done by senate democrats barring filibusters of judicial

nominees. some call this the nuclear option put in place by harry reid. what can we expect if anything? guest: i think you just heard it. it was a sad thing about this business of seizing power. president obama as a senator had great concern about the executive powers that president bush had seized. as president himself, he went on to seize more. when the senate pulled the so-called nuclear option, this had been bubbling under the surface for a long time. it flies in the face of senate tradition. the senate is not the house. the senate is the place where you are allowed to debate. it's not the filibuster that's the problem. it's something more obscure. whether harrybout reid and mitch mcconnell like each other, they are

professionals, does not matter whether they like each other. a matters is one thing -- the only power the majority leader day with start out the the motion and in effect setting the emotion -- setting the agenda. he can also fill the tree, the amendment tree. once that's done, there is no room for an amendment on the other side. all the old movies you see of the senate where the senators rise up and propose things, that is gone. now you have to break through that tree. whoever is in the minority decries the tree and the minute they become in the majority, they embrace it. sadly, you made about to see the same thing play out again but if anyone is serious about restoring the senate to its greatestas the world's debate society, they've got to do something about that tree. lakeland, florida, on our line for republicans -- was on your mind? caller: praise be for c-span

which is a gift to america. brian lamb is a true santa claus for america. host: i have call that i have heard them called many things but not santa claus. caller: you give america a gift with c-span. i disagree with the guy in california but the other guy should not be called an idiot. let's not call each other names. i'm a moderate republican and i'm trying to promote bipartisan efforts and i sent a letter to my congressman who was a republican and i have been in correspondence with marco rubio and i've sent letters to elizabeth warren and debbie wasserman schultz to ask them since we will have shortages in is future of resources, this one of the main things we have to study. i want a bipartisan congressional study group for phosphate and how we will do a the coming shortages. mitch mcconnell should be prime minister and we have to govern and work with obama.

and jon huntsman will be or is ration. he has the organization no labels. he will be our inspiration. magazine, itist said we can fix obamacare. that was about a month ago. mitch mcconnell will be prime minister and we've got to govern and be positive, not negative like rush limbaugh talking about obstructing. that is crazy. that's mental deficiency to talk like that. -herderte the mosse republicans in honor of teddy roosevelt and our agendas to push for cooperation and fix obamacare mitch mcconnell will be prime minister and jon huntsman will be our inspiration. can you give me publicity for the agenda? it's an informal group now but this proposed agenda for the moose herder republicans.

ask if those congresspeople got my letter on phosphates. host: we will share your comments with -- about brian lamb as well. guest: one thing i'm looking forward to seeing who emerges as the dealmakers, who are the new people that will be reaching across the aisle? , he waslike tom coburn very conservative but you saw him working. who are going to be the people we are watching? i think senator manchin is one but he is not new. with all the new senators coming in, it will be interesting to see where they fall. host: this is from the tea party organization -- it gives you a sense of the pressure house-senate republicans will face from the right. [video clip] >> for republican leaders, speaker john boehner in the

house and presumed majority leader to be mitch mcconnell in the senate, i have two words -- earned this. live up to your promises. repeal obamacare. use reconciliation to pass a bill repealing obamacare and put it on the president's desk. let him veto it and draw a line in the sand. secure the border and block the president planned executive and the state. , andain the rule of law prove that we as a country, as we have been for more than two centuries, are a nation of laws not of men. host: this goes back to what we said at the top of the conversation -- what can we expect of the new congress? you indicated that probably more gridlock. guest: that's always the default. one thing i have learned about

covering the tea party is it is not a monolith. it does not have leaders. they've like to think that it does because it makes it easier to do our job. it does not have leaders. suggest there is another tea party agenda emerging. she articulated the ted cruz tea party agenda. bridges, fighthe them everywhere. the other one is the rand paul initiative. office somes first safer's presidential bid in california, really? i republican who thinks they can do something in california? is reaching out to silicon valley. i think the rand paul camp will develop within the tea party like mandatory sentencing.

you can attach the black caucus on to that one. but things like nsa spying, which is an interesting issue to raise of hillary clinton becomes the nominee. there are all kinds of creative possibilities here that really are not covered by what she said. what you heard there is one branch of an old tea party. there are lots of new parts of the tea party developing. they got clobbered in this election. many of them are still heartbroken about mississippi. they are looking for a new face and it's not necessarily fighting the old losing battles. tea partys was not a election. this was an establishment election. tea party candidates were defeated in the primaries and the establishment rose. even someone like joni ernst to have the backing of tea party and establishment in iowa and nationally, these are

establishment candidates coming to washington. a lot of them probably will not answer to the tea party to be quite frank. host: speaker john banner and senator mitch mcconnell in "the washington journal." you can read the full editorial online at wsj.copm. let's go to illinois, independent line. caller: good morning, c-span. i think the subject is still on what to expect with republicans, , withp control of the senate and the congress, correct?

is that correct? host: turn it into a question. is -- i haveestion a comment and a question -- is that ok? host: absolutely, but we are short on time so be brief. caller: i think the people of america should not expect anything different. i think also that they should not blame either party. either democrat or republicans because these guys are in this for not just political game but also financial gain through major corporations. i think they sickly the major corporations in this country have actually, in a sense, have

held america hostage in a way. ok, three point $7 billion spent on the selection, how the respond to that point? guest: that's a great deal of money. i would not go quickly from that to the personal finances of members of congress are why they are here. the longer you look at this place -- you mentioned the tom coburn -- when he came to the senate, everyone assumed he would burn the place down. he was known for some fairly idiosyncratic things he had done and was viewed as extreme. he developed into i think one of the iconic statesmen of the senate acknowledged on both sides. he may be one of the few friends that barack obama has when he was in the senate. congress iseasons so negatively viewed is that people really don't see what goes on here on a personal

level. to the surprise of many people, including me, there is a lot of nobility here. whate are actually doing they see is the right thing in their own light. there is money when you leave. there's not a whole lot of money when you are here. i would not be so quick to generalize the way the caller did. this is one of those things that everybody talks about how bad it is and how there is outside morning campaigns and that is horrible. the president talked about isis and ebola will ask congress for $6 billion to do with ebola. this is a tweet from one of our viewers -- do you want to tackle that? guest: it's very interesting --

you mentioned rand paul. i guess he is trying to bolster his far -- his foreign policy credentials but there is a strain of not wanting to go to war again among more libertarian minded republicans. i think that is going to become more pronounced. there is going to be a debate over the funding for the president's campaign in syria and iraq. i think it will be very interesting to see how much of a voice is republicans who are done with spending money on wars have. host: let's go to john in sarasota, florida, democrats line. caller: what a blessing i got through. host: glad you got through. caller: i have not called a long time. i have tried to call my could not get through. please don't cut me off. i initially called to make a comment which was constructive about the press.

i want to do that since i heard these comments about obama care from the tea party people, i want to make two come in spirit went about health care and to about the president. i'm a 60-year-old man. healthnot had any insurance for years because i cannot afford it. i was taking care of my mother who had alzheimer's. i could not get health care for myself. it's because of the aca, i have been able to get insurance. here in the state of florida, we have one million people. one million people who benefit from medicaid expansion. but for political reasons, $51 billion of taxpayer money we don't get back because we have a republican legislature who wants to poke the eye of the

president, one million people -- you all have nice health packages. imagine if you could never go to a doctor. we will get a response to that. an extremelymaking important point. time, we are so focused on who is president that we are not investing the get deepereeded to where the state decision is what affects sony people's lives. -- so may people's lives. caller: i want to make my comment about the press. thinker.be a critical this is what i have observed. over the last few months on every major sunday program,

every major host and everybody out there, it's a casual comment. washington is broken, gridlock in washington. nothing gets done. the fact of the matter, from my point of view, it's not that washington is broken. there has been a record number of filibusters and there was a shutdown of the government that resulted in the downplay of the s&p credit rating. say it's not both parties. republicans have moved to a radical party. host: thank you for the call. i was not sure what he was saying about the press. when you go out in the states and you talk to everyday americans, they do want

washington to do something because they are sick of hearing this cliche that washington is broken, sorry. that was one of the messages of this election. if wanted to see the gears and start running again. the devil is in the details. replaced one cliche with another. host: wisconsin. last caller. what is on your mind? caller: thank you. i want to follow up the topic of it. care -- my co-pay is $4000, not to mention the premium. i'm scared to go to the doctor. close to dying before i pay all that and go broke. wisconsin has health care through scott walker.

i would be interested on your opinion on that. welfare -- people should be drug tested before they can collect welfare. their name should be put on the food stamps so they cannot trade them to other people for other things. host: are you self-employed? caller: yes, i am. host: what is your monthly insurance bill? it's actually paid through my wife's work. i could not afford it. there is going to be -- there has to be a day of reckoning for social security, medicare and medicaid. decade because, within a , they are collectively going to take those resources to settle

the debt. from --te will come they had experiences in states to look at. that is what is going to happen here. how they deal with health care, how they deal with social safety nets. when this debate happens, you can be certain that they are ding to look at a, b, c, for how they look at it. host: what to expect from the lame-duck congress? guest: the fact that mark warner's race was so close in virginia, that was the one race i looked at and said, what happened? bill is something

they have to get done. host: biggest surprise? guest: the biggest surprise for everyone was the virginia race. people were gasping when those numbers came through. it was the biggest surprise. by biggest surprise was what happened at the state levels. experiments, state beingally in kansas where swept aside by voters and that did not happen. i think the lame-duck session will be quite. elections wound and this election wounded a lot of people. there are wounds within the republican party and wounds between republican and democratic parties. tremendous wounds between congress and the president.

host: