are the differences of race and religion and politics within their platoon. it is no wonder many of them did so depressed when they come home. >> host: our guest now is transfixed him adrift of an organization known as issue one. >> a new nonprofit organization bipartisan group focusing on reducing the loads of money ove: politics. >> host: are your power he founded hashemite disco demolition. this country is on the tape. what are you trying to say?? speak not what we are trying to say is the problem with money and politics has reached crisis proportions in this country. it is a stage for cancer at this point. the public has always been

genuinely aware of the fact that money plays a role in politics, but we are making the argument across a very dangerous threshold to the point has created such paralysis in our politics and policymaking that we are losing our democracy. >> host: what are the examples of what you're talking about? >> guest: if you look at every number associated with money in politics, they've all grown exponentially in the last 20 years. we've gone from 500 lobbyists 20 years ago in washington to h 12,000 registered lobbyists. within a 5000% increase in what is called dark money, which is money not disclosed in the lastn decade. the 2000 election cycle is an aggregate of $3 billion election cycle. this is supposed to be a $10 billion election cycle. that is the math. but what patterns are created in

washington is the inability to legislate on behalf of the common good are the public eye.. the special entrées have sowed early rig the game and how such control over politicians and policymaking on behalf of the public interest. post go look at any big legislative moment and there is their severe compromises made during those moments that oneas could argue the public it wasn't fulfilled. take for in a financial reform. the wake of the financial crisis, global economy is brought to it means and the fixes we accomplish, some of them are good, but we didn't fix it all. that's not just me speaking.o that's gretchen morgenstern, financial reporter for "the new york times" who said whenever accomplish the big stuff. we didn't create the right transparent to you. we didn't do all kinds of stuff

that we should've done and a lot of that has to do with what senator dick durbin had when the debate around the legislation was occurring, which was the bank's own the place. when the dates on the place come you don't get a lot done on behalf of consumers when it comes to banking. one other vehicle. one of the major rise in health and obesity. it's going through the roof right now and it will cost us hundreds of billions of dollars downstream. the reuters news agency that a six-month investigative report t about the attempts to legislate the local state and federal level to address the obesity crisis and that concluded after every one of those five was that the sugar, fast food and corn lobbies won every major battle class yourself a question when you read something like that. and they look at a huge issue like that and they conclude that

we no longer -- we the people no longer have the ability to legislate our way out of our costumes, which was the very promise of america from the getr go. yardman of the book is we are losing our right to self-government we are becoming more of a democracy. >> host: phone number on the bottom of the screen. sure executive air. we have mine set aside for democratic, republican and independent. we look forward to talking to you. we often egrets.org to find out information on the typeface. did not raise the bar by candidates $720 million supporting the candidates $436 million. the >> guest: 150 families provide half of the campaign cash in the presidential election this year. that again looks like when you

have a handful of families in this country supplying most of the cash, that means we losethet this system funded by the wealthiest among us. so the other problem behind the numbers is the politicians todai are spending four hours a day, half of their time dialing for dollars. there's a great 60 minutes piece done a week ago and there is a republican whistleblower which we might talk about some point named david jolley who was talking about 30 hours a week of his time and colleagues signed strategist i would dollars. >> host: use just on then program several days ago. here's a look at what he had to say. >> reelection reason. we know that money in politics with different opinions about solution.

but i'm focused in on the amount of time it takes to raise that un money. understand if you raise $2 million reelection effort timed to take a a member of congress to do that. the reality is incoming members of congress are often instruct you to spend four to five hours a day raising money. it is brutal.these are people w it is a horrible life for elected representatives. these are people who come to washington where do agree politically or not, most come wanted to accomplish somethingsh on behalf of the common good. instead, they are shuttled into cubicles and closet that the republican headquarters and democratic democratic headquarters with a democratic headquarters with a sick and die a wealthy people trying to raise money.y. very few people live in their districts. o they will never meet any of them. what they have to do.

my dad fly fisherman. was that f he's got to think like a fish if you want to catch the fish. but they had to do four hours a day it's been quite a fish. they better think like about the people who read to $2700 checks are maxed out to them half the time. >> host: michael and twitter says this is nothing new. money is always been in politics. if the oil filter h. it's just more in the open now. >> guest: that is true. it has always been there, but not in the proportions we see today. thousand election cycle is a $2 billion cycle. this year is going to be $10 billion. more than tripling the amount. the amount is overwhelming right now. >> host: let me read somethingng that bradley smith at recently. former chairman of the federal elections commission said bohlmann is critical to inform this election proves once again that money can't make votersve like abuse they hear.ea

jeb bush is not the only lavishly funded candidate to drop out of the race. rick perry, scott walker and others raised and spent considerable sums. >> guest: i love that argument. that's the notion that one or two exceptions somehow prove a rule. it is an absurd argument to make and frankly if there's any truth to that, then tell me why thousands of lobbyists in this town are maxing out as much money as they can to thehe politicians they are trying to effect and tell me why the wealthiest people in america are writing his shacks political medica process.ot if you could do nothing, why are they doing that? when it comes to jeb bush, the press from no amount of money will have the personality flaws of the candidate. it is to tiny little moment in time and trying to extrapolatetr there is something going on,

shut them hold no water. >> host: issue on us or take the first call, i have a charge here. the darker blue up top, speakll about hillary clinton represent him. write here here represents candidate than committee money. you can see 76 million versus 180. we believe that to look at it for tax merion who is in virginia. democratic caller. good morning. >> good morning. thank you for taking my call. i just want to ask the gas trying to get the pharmaceutical prices down. apparently both of the elites on the democrats and republicans are trying to block it. >> absolutely.

a lot of people forget one of the first moves by the obamahi white house when it began the push for obamacare to strike a huge deal with the i pharmaceutical industry, which basically said we will give you total immunity on threat pricing i find that you don't see anything critical about anything more about today. they knew there was no way to take on the health insurance companies and the pharmaceutical companies at the same timeca because they have a powerless system. as a result we don't do it every other major western democracyh does, which is used our bulk buying power when it comes to prescription drugs medicare and medicaid. we have no ability to pharmaceutical companies to lower the price of this country. that was a confession made right up front when they begin the obamacare battle. >> host: but doria, texas, republican collar. >> caller: good morning.

thank you for c-span. i would like to ask the gentleman in question. what is world order? our country has been going down the dump for the last 20 for this the other question isional public and a democrat is one human to have. i am holding for trump. thank you very much. have a good day. >> guest: i can't talk about world order, but i can tell you the order in washington is one that in my mind and as a journalist before i startedst working on this issue is one that's increasingly dominated by these well-financed special interests. i'll tell you this when it comes to world order. in my mind, american democracy was the most revolutionary andum brilliant event that has occurred in human history.

when you look at what the founders had about democracy and corruption they wrote extensively about this. james madison was the secretary was keeping meticulous notes during the convention. he recorded the word corruption more than 50 times in his diary. but the founders were talking about when they were crafting a constitution was the kind ofs corruption that was the bending of the mechanism of government away from common good and towards what they called the factions. today we call that specials. so i interests. if there is an order so to speak going on here, it is not border the founders wanted. they wanted a representative democracy of our best ideas get manifested laws so we can solve our problems collectively >> host: our guest is attached on is the executive director of

the the "huffington post" executive fun. he launched the news project in online journalism and ran a national grassroots group called the alliance for democracy which focused on money and politics. >> guest: i'm caught >> host: now headed the issuee of one group. >> host: wanted to make sure we got some of your bio out. he's direct to issue one which has been around home are? >> guest: a couple years. >> host: in commandline. just got back for taking my call. i it occurs to me that a lot of united.are can do during trial i do united galactic, to think he

might well have a positive impact on what we were discussing or will he have tractable congress because theyy are married to the national interest american learned about reelection. just go with anything stronger later, it is hard to count. he has been outspoken about this problem. he stood on the stage with rivals and talked about how they've all been taught by the lobbyists and the donors and he can't be bought because the self financing his campaign. by the same respect has yet to roll out a single policy solution to the problem. it's hard to tell what he would push and what kind of test he would apply to any supreme court justice coming in because he just hasn't gone there yet. he's all problem and not a lot of solution at this point. at some point we are hoping he will pay the start talking about solutions to solve the problem.

>> host: india twitter wants to know more about your position can you you explain thee democrats position while t conveniently excluding unionhe i money? >> guest: there's almost two questions there. citizens united has nothing to do with whether it's included. what is talking about is there is a piece of legislation of the disclose that and there were concessions made for unions in that piece of legislation which is one of the reasons why it died. if we are going to have a truly a trulyent and functional system, and all of that money has to be disclosed. corporate money, individual money i'll has to be disclosed. we see a whole lot of malarkey in the system where corporations are starting to arise and kind of disappeared to move more money into the system.

but the union piece that has to be addressed as equally as everything else. just to remind viewers of the phone numbers.ra 2027 or 88,000. independents, (202)748-8002. looking forward to talking to more of you. on a cost of the state of washington sunday morning. >> guest: money in politics will be defining abraham lincoln. a all of the money was for him and politics.nd thing the second thing -- history, [inaudible] all the way back to the founding fathers. the labor movement was a great

country after 1932. my father went to work [inaudible] pai thank you for taking my call. >> guest: thank you, guy. i don't know if there's anything i've read about lincoln and major money in his campaign. campaigns that then were a totally different creature. when i read about was reagan riding his horse around this kind tree. we all know about the great debate. and at times is not a huge factor. politics is much of our local building and then a lot of the stuff we see today background is

not a profound link end quote, which i can't give you directly off the top of my head, in which he warned after the civil warr had been settled, he warned about the rise of corporate t power in america and the ability or mass aggregations of wealth to start exerting themselves on the political system in a way that would threaten the integrity of the public. in large part that is what we that is mass concentrations of wealth to want to constantly exert themselves. >> host: realistically, what if anything do you expect a change? >> guest: realistically allow the. what we see today is that kind of movement arise. justin citizens united has occurred in 2010, we've seen more than 600 resolution that --

past -- which include, florida. we see incredible rise to thank united has helped this problem that people are realizing it is time to move. that has been great to see you.h as you can imagine, one of thehe reasons we hear so much in the political campaigns this year is in part because it's out there. politicians are react as creatures and never public and talking about it, trump, sanders, the outsider candidate ho largely by that means that it's in the air. >> host: more calls in arepu moment. david jolley, republican from florida on this problem.t some

type in his name in the segment will pop up. talk about something called the stop act regulation -- legislation and what it would do. >> you would have a campaign manager, finance director andmpa campaign staff was possible for the operations of raising resource.. but as in the of congress come i your first priority is to do your job. the ideas that members membersde of congress do their job. but the campaign staff go raise the money. this would only apply to members of congress. as a challenger you don't hold the public trust.ur you can spend time doing it every want. once elected he do with the public trust and it's a violation if you're not on the t job working. >> host: could it work? >> guest: share, it could work if the beginnings reform. this guy to do a whole lot more than not give them a backup for a second and applaud

representative jolley for what is done. there's a long tradition of whistleblowing in this country and i see what he is doing as being right in that tradition. b he's blowing the whistle as a and he public servant on what he considers to be an utterlye dysfunctional system that is destroying the ability forli congress to operate and he should be applauded for that and he has suffered as a result of whistleblowing. listen, we've got to go beyondbo what representative jolley is talking about. for things i would mention real fast.ing number one new ways of financing politics in this country. i would get away from the millionaire and billionaire donors and incentivize small donors into the system in the same way bernie sanders has and ted cruz has more than a million small donors. how do we incentivize more into the system so that the systemed rests on all of us as opposed to a few of us. number two, lobbying and the

state of south carolina if you are registered lobbyists, and you cannot make a campaign donation to a politician because it looks like corruption. when you announce you got some kind of ax to grind to who accomplished the government, you throw money on top of that and it looks like corruption. number three, transparency. dark money is on the rise right now. we've got to eradicate it. finally, we need a good cop on the beat. the federal election commissionc oversees finance laws but right now it's in gridlock. a simple tweet would fix that. over and asks me is there a silver bullet to this cause then the answer is no. again a complicated cause there is no silver bullet. the four things i mentioned are absolutely 100% viable. we pass muster with the supremed court. three of those areas, legislation exists on capitol hill and is just a matter of

exerting the will of the peoplep at this point. the political will of the people to get this stuff pass. >> host: lots of folks waiting to talk to transfix. republican. hey, there. >> caller: i've got a couple questions. how can people with money protect their wealth or people at bernie sanders would like to tax them not particularly intobx poverty, but maybe they should be taxed 50, 60, 70, 80% to give money -- all people -- all kids should have college totally paid for her universal health care. the next part was, should somebody has to pay in taxes? like what should be a tax amount? should everybody pay some on the bottom amount? you talk about common good.

the founding fathers talk about common sacrifice. i think people with citizens united, the only way to have a voice for some people who try to take money away from that so they can give kids to buy. of somebody a group of people 60% in somebody else's money. you have a lot of people in your favor. noank you.ou >> guest: i can't speak to the nuances of bernie sanders tax plan, but i can talk to thewhic bigger issue, which is let's just talk about the hedge fund loophole. this is a tax loophole allowed to be taxed at a lower rate than almost everyone else in america. warren buffett, who we all respect has joked about how he pays a lower tax rate than the secretary does.

that is because of this loophole. for more than a decade, there's been an attempt in washington to close the loophole. if we did, it could generate a good deal of revenue for things like improving infrastructure and schools and whatever you want them. unfortunately because of the power of the hedge fund industry, we have been incapable of closing the loophole. when warren buffett himself was asked about it, he said we can't get it done because of the money in politics because increasinglt are becoming what he called a plutocracy because the citizensg united. when you can't get something simple something simple but my fact that 99.9% of americans would agree with and only benefits .001% of the wealthiest among us because of the way thee countess, that shows you difficult it would be to makenge major changes unless we first address the problem. >> host: barbara, and nick

penniman. >> caller: since the supreme court has said that money is speech, instead of trying to regulate how much money people can give, what about an idea of regulating, saying that donors can only give to people who would represent them? in other words, you could only give to the senators are your state or whoever is running for that position. as far as presidential, everybody could give two presidential because the president represents everybody. as far as corporations and unions, they would only be abler to give, for instance, the location where their headquarters was established. with something like that help? is that possible? and p >> guest: that's an interesting idea and i personally, just as a citizen in an american love the idea we would restrict giving two congressional districts. i can only donate money to my

congressmen and paul could only donate money to his. i like the idea that given what the supreme court currently is, that would be pretty hard tord pass. i also want to beat back the notion that citizens united was somehow the death nail of democracy reform or reforming this problem. it was a bad decision, a misguided decision in many ways. a part of it i agree with it as a publisher and journalist, but there are parts that i don't. it was not by any means this massive roadblock cleaning up the system. this legislation on capitol hill to address so many aspects ofthr the problem the supreme court would have no problem with. if we the people exerted our political will of our politicians and got legislation passed, it would take 75% of the problem overnight. we've got to realize the only thing holding back progress on the issue is not lack of good

policy ideas, it is lack of people's power right now. lack of us exerting willpower over politicians. >> you mentioned there's part of citizens united you do like. >> guest: you might remember at its core, it should've been a question of freedom of the freef press. citizens united is a nonprofit organization that wanted to run something called hillary the movie, the 90 minute documentary about hillary clinton.of a -- within 60 days of a primary or 90 days of general election. in the context of the primary going on between barack obama and hillary clinton back in 2008. the federal election commission said you can't do that becausel you're an outside group and this is essentially a 90 minute political attack at.

it is not a documentary. in my mind, that was the decision to do that, a massive reach of freedom of the press. if you've got a nonprofit group claiming they made a documentary, it should be allowed to air that. one of the things that justice side and citizens united is you don't want the court. you want journalism and propaganda because that is really nasty. you basically would shut down freedom of the press. from a freedom of the pressry me perspective, the piece that said that hillary movie should have been aired was a great part of the decision for me. then they overreached and said therefore as a result, any corporation union should be allowed to spend whatever they want in the context of elections and that's what's created. therefore all political giving,

the outside groups should be under strict did and create the super pac. it would've been a great decision. close quote 10 minutes left. livingston, texas on the democratic line. >> caller: you just answer what we wanted to ask. what drew you into the job you are in? was it the movie date or what? >> guest: i've moved to washington after 9/11 and worked as a reporter, editor and magazine publisher for her teen years before i got involved. the thing that drew me to this causes i saw constantly really brilliant ideas about how it affects our country's problems. not because they were constitutional. not because they weren't thought

through her research, but simply because a small group of special interest and wanted to happen. when i saw basically was the paralysis of our democracy. you've got to remember we are s supposed to have sent. the whole promise of america is 300 million heads are better than a couple and when we come up with ideas to fix their problems and our problems are so intense these days is so widespread. we come up with ideas to fix them and we can't then get those ideas turned into laws. that's a breakdown in a representative republic. i thought over and over as a journalist. i have this moment in which iwh realized that we had to go for the throat and attacked the dysfunctions standing in the way of us making progress on so man other issues. >> host: hobbit is the organization? >> guest: 15 staff and growing. also this wonderful group called the reformers caucus which he pulled together. former members of congress.

senators, former members of the house and governors.. we have 140 have come together to help you basically was blow the whistle and say that the game is over. this is a point in our democracy is all got to come together to fix it. >> host: this is a really big issue. are there any victories you're talking about short-term that you be happy with? >> guest: i would love to see us get a cop on the beat. that could happen in the short term. right now the fec has the federal election commission is 6 $60 million a year budget and arguably most of the money may well be a generated a couple blocks from here on an annual basis because they're so dysfunctional. a lot of the stuff we are singing would not be occurring if there is a functional federal election commission because they must be doing two things every day. they're not supposed to be

coordinating campaigns and they are not supposed to be disclosing more money. they are doing neither one of those right now. it's a problem that we could take care of it. >> host: let's hear from dave of issue one. >> caller: my comment is basically the biggest problem is the house and the senate. i don't care who the president has been. they can't get past the house and senate. trump would probably be the only one that could do that. the reason i say that if he would be the only one who would ask me, the person who voted for him, to help him get his pass in the house and senate. he would sit there and call out any republican or democrat in the house and senate that is not along with the plan and asked me to go stand on his lawn, his

barber shop, go to his lobbyist and get him to change his mind because he is hurting america. that is my comment. >> guest: donald trump for me as just so unpredictable to figure out which way the pinball would go. but listen, if we can get to the point if donald trump will come out and talk about real solutions to this problem, then i think that could be a major leap forward in his presidential campaign in the presidential campaign in general.pa what we need is a real debate between candidates right now about exactly what they would do to fix the problem. trump like so many have escapedk by todd about the problem, using citizens united has a code word for the problem, but not ruling out real solution.s, that's what we force them to get into. anyone watching this program,

please ask politicians to get specific about what they would do to fix this problem. >> host: susan, fort myers, florida. what you have to say? good morning. thank you for taking my call. i feel that citizens united aims to be overturned. i also feel that professional lobbying needs to be banneddwe nationwide. we also do not need the electoral college anymore. hopefully everyone is literate. we need to get up to debate on that. congress should be paid per diem as many people who work like that on main street and get into the real world. if they don't achieve any income and they get paid for it. thank you first time. think we >> guest: we are all feel like congress is an approaching enough on our behalf these days.

i definitely agree with the sentiment. i will say it again. u citizens united is overreached. it was fundamentally a bad decision, but without intimate to amend the competition to be able to having legislation to fixing aspects of the problem. if you want to overturn, there are two ways to do it. either push for a constitutional amendment, which is a very long process and very questionable whether or not you can get it over the finish line. or you can start putting challenges to a new supreme court to try to knock down or reverse aspects of that decision and others that need to be addressed.d. my sense is a more practical route is to send the challenges to the supreme court to question whether or not they really got it right with some of these positions. >> host: there is one that

won't pop up, but i want to read it to you from jd reading. do you believe the new model of the clinton foundation donors present the problem? >> you know, it presents a lot of questions. whenever you've got public figures like bill and hillary clinton of hundreds of millions of dollars swirling around them from all kind around the world, you've got to wonder to what extent there is a spillover effect that affects other aspects of their lives. their decision is public servant. so yeah, it brings up questions, that i don't think any questions have been definitively answered. >> host: will come to theer program, charles. >> caller: thank you. good morning.is i applaud your efforts on this serious issue. he said there is no magic silver bullet end quote required many changes. i wonder if you feel one of those changes is for the government to pay for the

campaign expenses instead of having donations and so on. puank you. >> their systems called public financing systems in which a politician once they apply and are qualified to get a black granite on a basically. those are interesting. ultimately, we've got to look at creating systems and then adviso small donors to give money so that politics is funded by all of us. the reason i am saying not is because of a simple principle, which is those who pay the piper calls the tune. right now in america, when wealthy corporations and wealthy individual donors pay the piper, ultimately they have a much better chance of calling the tune and the rest of us. we've got to get to a point where we all pay the piper and therefore the loyalty of our politicians rest on all of us, which is exactly what the

founders intended. number one. number two, the reason i want more small donors suspend thisis has every study done shows with someone contributes any amountte of money in politics, whether a buck per thousand dollars from and they are much more engaged as a result. a bird doctor politician, keep track of what their apps you. they write letters to the editor, call and harass politicians when they're not doing the right thing. it also ends up increasing or enhancing engagement. talk about finance and politics. i want to see all of us finance politics. joe from sun city center. >> guest: i'll make it quick. i was scrolling through theon at television, hit on 60 minutes. there is a program on it were

congressmen have to spend at least 30 hours a week across the street in this no-name building, hitting update donors, senators and congressmen. i mean, it is too good to be alive so i will leave it at that. >> guest: we talked earlier inea the segment i think we took four or five hours -- 30 hours a regl week. regardless of anything else you think about money and politics,a this is a fundamental question. is that the way we want our public servants who we hired two election, who we pay through tax dollars. they are essentially ourour empl employees. is that where we want our employees doing with half their time, sit in little cubicles from the little closets, tailored for dollars to wealthy people they'll never meet. the clear answer to that is no.

again, legislation has argued that proposed double fix that. they consented by small donors can i get these guys that the treadmill and we just need to start pushing for the sixers. the current system as it is is not only killing current people in office. it is destroying them and distracting them away from doing the work of the public good, but also repelling people from getting into public service. if there's anything that is clear that all of us americans today need a lot more public servant in office right now. >> host: working folks sign up? >> guest: issue one.fork. >> host: transfixed and executive director of the organization. first-time guests. appreciate your time and insight on things.

>> they are doing not what their kids this summer. so we are going to have some fun with that, do some things working towards constitution in the fall. i think that is exciting that so many families are going back and looking up those first

principles and founding documents. that is at the top of the list. some other things. there is a dead nails, bringing out the best in people. every once in a while, to get a new on how you beat the team now, i would say you beat people and assets. i've always been a big fan with the leadership principles. i read a review or two of this and that one is going to be a good one to read. kind of motivational. there is an interesting book, to its fluke. it looks at the mathematics and science behind odd occurrences and so i want to read fluke. i think it is interesting how sometimes something this needs

to happen.