talking about how it was a what do they call it? turned it into a goldmine. >> occupation became common at that article also said something that i thought was very important if you don't like mentioning it. what a difference when there's an advocate with an activist, and that unique case was a peaceful understanding, support. a lot when into it at a lot of hard work went into it to develop the indian school is thriving on 17 acres, beautiful. but the advocate and activist working together, that went on until of course wounded knee and other things that begin to escalate and window policies that can escalate that, termination, relocation, boarding school, all of a sudden the reversal starts to happen slowly but theyn did begin to happen. when you don't have the advocate they can go the other way.

not that that it was a ut happened in milwaukee is still progressing to this day, still thriving to this day, and landed back in, beautiful words. that was the outcome there. >> there may be people i'm sure there are people -- >> will break away briefly from this program to keep our over 40 your commitment to covering congress to retake your life now to the floor of the u.s. senate where lawmakers are holding what we believe will be a brief session today. no votes are expected.

>> the appropriation for the department of health and human services. the food and drug administration is an agriculture appropriations bill i've never been quite been times. >> will do the american history to tv. >> if there's not some resolution either continuing resolution maybe they come to some kind of a deal on these spending bills thin piece of the department of health and human services will cease to function until they figure out how to find them here the department of health and human services is one of the department's where most things continue even in the absence of appropriations because so much of the spin is what we call mandatory spending and that's not affected by the appropriation deadline. >> what is in the health and human services budget just remind folks were trying to

understand these 12 big bills that move through and what pieces their interest in watching for. >> the big pieces in the hhs appropriations national institutes of health, centers for disease control and prevention, all of the mental health organizations, organizations, parts of it that actually provide medical care through community health centers and other places. there are a lot of what we call discretionary spending that runs through that bill and it would be impacted if congress doesn't come to some sort of funding agreement at the end of september, this might be a good time to do one on one between major spending and discretionary spending and how that plays out amid the budget battles that happen every year. >> mandatory spending continues unless congress changes it. i'm like the appropriations that has to be proved every year or funding stops, mandatory programs go until congress affirmatively stops the funding. medicare, medicaid, social

security, the obamacare subsidies, most of the chip program, children's health insurance program. those are all mandatory and those would continue even if there is a spending impasse which it looks conceivable there will be a trend is congress trying to affirmatively stop funding for any of these mandatory programs? >> guest: not in the next two months. which is not to say they may not end up there at some point but right now there is no, we're talking mostly, the fight currently is about the spending bills mostly and also about some of these authorizations for some of these spending programs that are going to expire at the end of september. the important difference though is if the authorizations are not finished at the end of september doesn't mean funding stops for those programs are, in fact, my favorite little factoid that federal family planning program

title x has not been reauthorized since 1984. it's continued to get funding. congress has tried any number of times but never managed to agree since the 1980s now that program should be authorized. >> host: can we do 101 on authorization verse appropriations? >> guest: the description people like to use it as authorization to putting money in the checking account at appropriation for spending the money from the checking account. the authorization sets the outline for what things should be, what federal funds should be spent for what types of things. policy is supposed to go in the authorization bill that's why they often get bogged down because there are fights about policy. the spending for ts are supposed to be just for the money but there are ways to put policy writers into the spending bills and that is what comes up the works when the spending bills don't get done in time. >> host: what our policy writers that you are attracting

that could be coming up the works in the next few months? >> guest: the most famous of a an issue this year is the hyde amendment which is been in the hhs bill since 1980s with the late henry hyde republican if illinois famous antiabortion member of congress and it bars most federal funding for abortion. over the years that is been admitted sometimes to allow exceptions for rape and incest, sometimes not. there have been various iterations of that that basically that bill had carried the hyde amendment since the 1970s because neither side has had the votes to change it there been efforts to make a stronger or weaker, even take it out and basically you would need 60 votes in the senate to do that and there is never been 60 votes on either side of this issue. >> host: another policy issue we talked about is efforts to stop federal funding for transgender care. where does that stand right now? >> guest: that's one of the big writers of this year.

just as they are height and limit type amendments, language in several different appropriation bills, not just on hhs, there are gender affirming bands in several different appropriation bills because you can see how some of the speg bills go to other departments but there giving healthcare adjacent services or actual health care kind of services that are sometimes funded through the defense bill or veterans affairs bill that have their own healthcare program. there are things being attached to somebody's other bills here it's not just the hhs bill, and how big is the hhs bill? >> guest: i haven't looked in, meaning many billions of dollars but it is a small segment of hhs suspended because so much of hhs spending particularly medicare and medicaid is mandatory. >> host: the defense spending is the biggest discretionary spending part of the bill. what are the healthcare issue in the defense bill your tracking

at tff health news? >> guest: we are tracking this for not just the spending bill but this change in policy by the biden administration to allow service women and family members who are stationed in states where abortion is barred, therey would be allowed to pay for the travel and time off for women to go to another state to get that care and obviously senator tommy tuberville is famously holding up pretty military motion need to come to the senate i sorta expect it to get tied up in the defense authorization bill that just got through the house and the the senate. i imagine it will type the defense spending bill. >> host: where does that stand right now? what is your read on that standoff and if they can come to agreement. >> guest: i don't know where that will end up here this is an issue because this is the first year we had abortion banned in many states. that had not been an issue here it'd been issue with some

overseas spending about servicewomen in countries where abortion was banned. that had been fought over for many years so this is obviously going to affect many more people who will be seeking those services because there are now so many states where members of the military and people don't have any choice about where they are sent. >> host: a lot going on on the healthcare front in the next two months on capitol hill when congress returns ahead of the september 30 deadline at the end of the fiscal year. julie rovner here of kff health news to help us break it all down. a good time for your calls if you have questions on federal health care policy, republicans, so i was putting the light regionally. easter central time zones it is 202-748-8000 here if you're in a mountain or specific time zones 202-748-8001. she is with us until the end of the program the next half hour this morning chocolate and start

calling in. for what the health view assuming that it picked up that podcast at what is going to fight if they had over there? >> guest: i have basically many about a dozen and a half female health reporters from around d.c., in some cases around the country and we get together every thursday and talk about the week's weeks hy news. it's fine and it is a good listener. >> host: what are you going to be talked about this week? >> guest: a lot of what we're talking about, or congress to answer many of these health issues that either need to get done or in some cases congress would like for them to get done spiritually to talk about this. there's a lot of effort on drug prices, a number of congressional committees in both the house and senate are working on this issue. it's something they would like to get finished before the session of congress is done. >> host: if viewers want to pick up what the health compared to the go traffic anywhere they get the podcast. >> host: this is me looking up

numbers, $127.3 billion was what hhs asked for on its discretionary side in fiscal 2023 but then 1.7 trillion in mandatory spending. bring that back and explain what the much smaller number is and with a much bigger number is. >> guest: the bigger number is mostly medicare and medicaid. the discretionary part, the biggest piece of the disclosure park against the national institutes of health, the centers for disease control and prevention, the fda which is in the hhs budget request because the fda as part of the department of health and human services but gets funded through the agriculture appropriation, the food part of the food and drug administration that would be part of that. >> host: in reading the steps we just topped line for hhs ngc $2.95 trillion in fiscal 2023 in spending and you see the number and gets a project to break it down by mandatory discretionary.

>> guest: right spirit valerie is in saginaw, michigan, you are on with julie rovner. good morning, good morning. i hope i'm on-topic but i think it's almost criminal to expect women to cheat themselves desperate keep themselves in good condition to fight for our country when we are taking the right to get paid for travel, not for the abortion but for travel. to be reimbursed for their travel. and i would like to know how much money is being diverted out of medicare into medicare advantage, if she knows anything about that? because that is a program that needs investigating. it has nothing to do with medicaid. it is private insurance companies. can you answer that, please? >> guest: two different issues there obviously that was a good

description of the fight going on in the military over abortion and other reproductive healthcare that may be difficult to get there is not just abortion. a lot of the states with abortion bans come there's other kinds of healthcare women can get because doctors have left the state or because their pregnancies that e pregnancies that are going wrong and it's difficult the doctors don't know whether they can be prosecuted for care other than abortion. so that is a big issue. as we mentioned being fought out in several different venues and corridors. the medicare advantage issue, the call is correct as a private alternative to medicare. not to medicate the there's manage caitlin medicaid but it is just a medicare is increasingly popular because people who are joining medicare are increasingly used to being in managed care plans and medicare advantage often offers extra benefits to people, things

like vision care and dental care and so a lot of people want to join it although it is and we at kff health news have investigated this a lot. there is some wastage. companies are making profits off of basical a government program. they are not just giving extra benefits to the beneficiaries. they are also keeping some for themselves. >> host: about how many people or how big is medicare advantage versus medicare? >> guest: almost half. it's great right up towards half. it's a big deal in terms of how much you spent. there the big fight in the early 2000, actually in the late 1990s because there was so much overpayment going on congress cut it back as part of the big balanced budget act and the plants all started leaving because he could make any money. the republicans a 2003 with that that addictive prescription drug bill started to give them enticements

but again they started overpaying for him so there's been this overpayment underpayment trying to get the payment right really over the last 25, 30 years, is that hello medicare advantage has been around for three more than that. since 1980s, why did they create in the '80s? >> guest: because republicans created in the 1980s there was the hope managed care could provide better care at a lower cost. that is still the hope of managed care and in some cases it can't in some cases it hasn's entered the idea was we should try, let these companies see if they can take, originally they were paid 95% of what patients would have spent in the regular medicare program the company said we can take that 95% and make the care so efficient that we can actually make a profit answered medicare money. that hasn't always happen but that was the origin of the program. >> host: independents kentucky, sandra. good morning, good morning.

i don't know if she knows about this but i would like to ask you about prescription costs, if there is anything been done or are they doing anything at all in congress about prescription costs because i am on xarelto because that blood clots in my legs i'm 78 years old, and it's costing me over $400 for xarelto which is a blood defender to keep from getting blood clots. i don't make that much pension or social security so it's very costly for me -- it's not just me. i'm sure it's a lot of people in my same shoes. they always talk a good story but and never do anything about it. thank you. >> guest: the caller is exactly correct.

this is a big issue prescription drug prices when you go out and ask the public what are the most interested in having policymakers address, always near the top when you talk about healthcare. we've seen action this year as a vision from a number of committees mostly looking at that pbm system, pharmacy benefit managers but they were created as he said they could negotiate with drug companies and get a better deal for the insurance companies but that's how they started but everything that the pbms do is basically opaque that nobody knows how they operate, how much money they keep, whether sometimes they are actually encouraging the insurance companies to buy more expensive drugs because they get a bigger cut of that than less expensive drugs there's a lot of pbm transparency legislation that is bipartisan that's moving through the house and senate. one of the things congress would like to get done when they come back in the fall weather they will, even though it's a bipartisan issue drug prices are

bipartisan if you come pbm reform is a bipartisan issue. there's pieces that the pbm industry doesn't like in the drug industry may not like advair are still very powerful. may be these things will make a cross of insight is not a sure thing. >> host: we did we start having pbms, the pharmacy benefit managers and why was it created? >> guest: in the 19, i think the making '90s. we were first aware in the 1990s and again as i said they came in to say to insurance companies we can negotiate separately with the drug companies, get you a better deal. very much like medicare advantage with the pbm said we can make money off of our cut and save you money and it is a win-win for everybody and it has always been that way. >> host: what did you think when the pbm executives on capitol hill earlier this year and are sitting alongside some of these a drug company execs and which with the fingers were being pointed? >> guest: always at each other it's a big problem and it's over

somebody else's, somebody else's fault all of these problems. >> host: who did the members agree with? >> guest: the members were maybe a bit confused but it is hard to tell and that's part of why they are working on transparency legislation because it's really hard to figure out some of these business relationships pick what we seen over the years is the insurance companies have bought the pbms so the pbms are no longer independent. many of them belong to insurance companies picked up the largest ones belong to insurance companies but now they are captive and it really is hard to know what's going on and i think members of congress in both parties are very frustrated about this because they are getting calls like we just heard of people have drugs they have to take to stay healthy come to stay alive in some cases in your costing them more money than they have. >> host: on the disagreement side that might be coming things that we talked about abortion, transgender care. on the agreement cites the pbm

reform anything else fall into that agreement category? >> guest: congress is working to reauthorize the community health status program which includes a number of programs to train doctors particularly for primary care which there's a shortage particularly primary care doctors. >> host: what does that mean? >> guest: it's very popular again bipartisan federal program that offers medical care in underserved places. in inner cities and in rural areas particularly places with our not a lot of health facilities that are not hospitals they are primary care centers, they do it through medicaid traffic no, through the community health center. it's one of the discretio policy

issue. is a bipartisan bill in the house. there's a pension bill in the senate oddly enough which is a whole issue going on with the health, education, labor and pensions committee where bernie sanders is taking some of these what are generally bipartisan issues and trying to push them further than even the moderate republicans innocent want to go. >> host: to bronxville new york this is jerry good morning you were on with julie rovner, good morning. i have a question also about prescription drugs and i'm a little confused about it. i have heard the president talk about new legislation has been enacted to limit out-of-pocket expenses. and what i've heard is that those out-of-pocket expenses will not exceed $2000 a year. can you tell me a little bit about that? because it sounds great. i'm very cynical about it.

my out-of-pocket expenses well exceed $2000 a year on a drug that i must have. and i just would like to know what the horizon is on the real cap of out-of-pocket prescription drug expenses. >> guest: the inflation reduction act the bill congress passed last year, the partisan bill did have pretty much the first serious limitations on drug prices that you see in a couple of decades because of the power of the drug industry but they were small steps. there's going to be some negotiating between the government and drugmakers over some of the most expensive drugs for when expected to see the first list, only ten drugs, by september 1st. that's part of this. >> host: why only ten? >> guest: because they are starting slow. i think it is ten and ten and 25. some of these drugs, it won't be

that hard to find drugs of other people take that are very expensive so the first hint i think will be significant blockbuster drugs from everything we can tell. there's also an out-of-pocket limit on insulin for $35 a month. again this is just a medicare the moment. the caller didn't say what he was on medicare or not and there is an out-of-pocket cap under part d. right now they're supposed to be a gap. the idea is that after, with the program is set up, patients pay 5% of the remaining drugs after they hit the hit what is supposed to be the out-of-pocket cap for the year. well now that there are so many drugs that are so expensive, 5% and be thousands and thousands of dollars so they want to put a dollar cap on that i believe it takes effect in 2025 but i'm not positive. >> host: not that i'll have you come back into your score but do you think you could entertain drugs that will be on that list? >> guest: no. were waiting to see.

xarelto, the blood thinners that was mentioned earlier, is likely on their. probably a couple of the company trend we tremor we had about 20 more minutes. we have agnes in southeastern massachusetts next on with julie rovner wow my question is, how do we get all the financial profit movement out of healthcare? so not just the pbms but all those entities, all those venture capital firm that are buying up hospitals, physician practices and such peer it's just everywhere. >> guest: yes. we have kf f health we have private equity and healthcare. differences between parts of health care system that are intended to make a profit, they are a for-profit hospitals, lots of for-profit pieces of health care system. the drug industry is a

for-profit piece of healthcare system but then there are private equity companies coming in not so much because they want to deliver healthcare but because there's a lot of money and they would like to share in some of that money. there are definitely issues going on in private equity by up for instance, in pennsylvania private equity by the hospital and closed it and basically because of real estate was worth more than the hospital. that is a separate issue that's going on in healthcare but it's an age-old debate, how do you get the profit motive out of healthcare? because i won't even say democrats and republicans, what many people argue is if you take the profit motive out we will lose the innovation. if you're not consented to make a profit and why are you going to do that question you might go to another industry where you can make a profit tremor about 15 minutes left in the program for julie rovner with his. questions on health care fund, a perfect person to ask that question two. it's 202-748-8000 if you live in the eastern/central time zones.

202-748-8001 in the mountain or pacific time zones. kf f health news.org is where you can go to see her stories and our colleagues speaking of asking questions you're asking questions of previous hhs sectors about what that job is like earlier this summer. three spill the beans talk to you. what did they say traffic one of them was a kurt, xavier becerra is interesting xavier becerra kathleen sebelius was hhs sector under president obama and alex azar whose most recent h secretary under president trump and get a lot of what they said even if they were from different parties was pretty similar. it's a big job. you were overseeing a budget of trojans because they oversee the medicare part as well as the discretionary part and there's a lot of moving parts but it was interesting to see how they tried to do in on small things they could get change.

..

they have more impact on the mandatory side. the rulemaking process and sometimes they go too far for challenged in court and sometimes they win and sometimes they lose but there's a lot of discretion in those spending programs. >> other cases you're watching the next term of the supreme court? >> not yet but i'm sure they

will come up. it's early. >> this is david in north carolina. good morning. >> i get my free and we are on social security and her medicine cost about $400 a month and she gets $920 a month. she has to pay for her medicine. >> back to the cost of medicine. >> night and ohiolong the prescription drugs never included in production

. >> is different than other drugs, they are harder to make and you can't copy them easily so that has not been generic copies of drugs the way the husband of other drugs so when competition comes in, prices go down and congress is looking at this but when there is enough then prices cannot, you can't make copies of biological drugs so there was a provision to make bio similars so they would not be similar copies but other types of the same drug to do the same thing. we know humira is the one probably most people have heard of. i think we are about to see a similar one. >> how long has biologics been

around? >> delete 1980s and 90s and we have seen more in the last ten or 20 years. >> buckeye state white house ohio, mike, you are on. >> very informational, appreciate you taking the time. i have a couple questions so i'll try to be quick. do you think the added about illegal immigration along with the way economy and inflation added an extra strain on medicare and medicaid prescription drug industry? i know you go to the hospital and your uninsured and a couple thousand dollars bill for 10000-dollar bill and lower income like i am, eventually places go up or somebody picks up the bill and i'm curious if this is adding strain on the

system. >> probably not financially, people are not eligible for health insurance. immigrants who are here legally have a waiting period before they are eligible so people think if you go to the emergency room, he will get treated and everything taken care of. the emergency room law only requires true emergencies be dealt with, you have to admit you to the hospital so if you have no health insurance, you can only go, it is actually an emergency or if you are a pregnant person in labor, those are the two things covered so people with no insurance diagnosed with cancer, that's not considered life-threatening emergency even though you could die if you don't get care and you probably won't die but that's not covered by emergency treatment act.

>> are treated differently than adults? >> there's a children's health insurance program, it's easier to get government health insurance and community health centers do treat people who are not here legally let's say there is a large strain of immigrants or people here not without papers and other places and they have emergencies but it's not like they're going to emergency rooms getting care in. >> good morning, this is tara. >> i'll be brief but why is it that congress can get the same healthcare why are these drugs

that are so disclosed from president biden doing wonderful work, getting drug prices lower? a lot of things like human insulin doesn't touch the average and if it does, you have to be on medicare. how come pharmaceutical companies trying to sell the drugs by giving great trips? that is still going on. thank you. >> i tried to read it. >> this is actually not true

anymore, they do have the same health insurance. congress no longer has the same health insurance most federal workers have because when they pass the affordable care act, it's one thing republicans to support the members of congress and staff have to get insurance through affordable care act just like people who don't have health insurance. you could say they have less health insurance than most other people because they are employed but they don't have employer health insurance, they have to go through this that i think is still little-known although very confusing for a lot of people not just members of congress but staff who navigate ways to get health insurance. the second one about drug prices, this is the beginning and as much as they could get

congress, it difficult to get anything through congress. there was an effort to make that on all, not just people on medicare and i was taken because they couldn't get the last vote they needed in the senate to have that in their efforts to pass separately. there just has not in the votes in congress to do this until recently. what president biden got past is on the one hand, very minimal in many ways but also the most it's been in many years. >> asking about the number of americans impacted, one of the professors that on the

pharmacology, a doctor there, americans with diabetes 7.4 million rely on insulin to manage care. >> we've seen so many cases of people trying to ration or cut back on the insulin and dying. it's a drug that keeps you alive to that is a big issue and i think the last issue is drug companies are doctors, it was supposed to have gone away in housing but that something that keeps reporters very busy. they are limited in what they can do. there you go to a two hour briefing and that doesn't happen anymore. busy working check out their

work, we are going to go a little past the top of the hour because we've been waiting for this grieving of the air and space association today. this might be past the top of the hour. good morning. >> you are very informative. i've got three questions. prescription medicine is cheaper in the united states? december 1. what is congress doing about healthcare coverage for psychiatric patients? are they addressing that? my husband is 52, $500 a month for his okay for i think $6000 deductible, he's self-employed. is there anything to lower the price in the future?

>> canadian prescription drugs are threats almost every other country except the united states drug prices we can't make the money in the united states, we are limited in what we can make overseas so again back to the innovation argument, we can't make these drugs anymore, we have to make what we can in united states and of the argument that's been going on for 30 some years that i've been working with the united states is practically alone not having price control on drugs and people do go across the board particularly in northern state of mexico to buy cheaper drugs you can get personal supply for

yourself and they are getting drugs in their and they say they are canadian and it can be problematic the general rule, they are cheaper and other countries to mark about healthcare? >> something congress is working on, the biden administration put out new rules, something congress has been working on for a long time the late 90s and tossed a couple of and we have not seen to help treated the same as other medical ailments and something give administration is working on and congress is working on more mental health care so it is a known issue and heart to know how much federal government can do beyond the mental health

parity issue. >> the last question, a $6000 deductible. >> this is another issue with the out-of-pocket cost. originally we have deductibles and co-pays because the idea was people had given the game that they would be more careful and if everything was free, it wouldn't overuse it but the problem is sometimes an arm or a leg and people can't afford these deductibles and if they have lower deductibles than insurance is that, that's for the public option comes in. this would be a bigger thing to be in agreement on. >> where you get your podcast, prevented the.

k of health news.org.

the interest rate. >> thank you for having me. in the industry and what do you

think for mortgage rates in particular? >> it had been posted to percent and 7% in the most aggressive policy 1980 and another increase personally i disagree with the assessment because of the fact that inflation is coming along and there is more indication it will, brother and there is a leg of monetary policy and you don't want to put it into recession but aside from a soft the latest increase pretty much takes it in, what is the direction of the future and further increases to push mortgage rates even higher? >> the ongoing demand in the

united states. >> the dynamic the company are down 20% from a year ago and home sales are down. homebuilders see recovery hopping and stock prices are rising in making profit and is due to the fact that they can produce empty homes providing inventory. u.s. homebuyers across the country, what is the biggest frustration? lack of inventory and lack of choices out there because will turn toward new construction must by builders are seen low inventory level. >> you touched on this, your concern interest rates could get to where that could be the

sticking., not just the inventory, that could be a potential homebuyer assess we are going to stay out of the market because they have gone to high. >> we always see responding to higher interest rates in the housing sector that retreated initially, they are beginning to see recovery but higher interest rate, it means people who consider homeownership, they are saying goodbye to the. in a half a financial capacity. >> we talk about the rebound in new home construction but overall new homes and existing sales, where are prices compared to last year? >> prices are nationwide, national media home price, the same now as your go.

it has been stable despite overall reduction in home sales but we are seeing a reasonable impact. in the market we continue to see the most affordable region of the country with these increases. >> a chief economist with national association talking about the state of housing america particularly with interest rate increases announced, we welcome poles and comments. here's how we are separating the lines. if you are a homeowner (202)748-8000. if you are renting, (202)748-8001 and all others (202)748-8002. the comments of fed chair jay

powell talking about the housing market in relation to the rise of interest rate and your thoughts on what he had to say. >> you talked about getting the housing market back into better balance in the market bottom. where do you see that right now with constrained inventory of existing homes that might come onto market at a time when existing homeowners are reluctant to move? all happening with fixed rate mortgage around 7% with what you're talking about on the industry standard, are weakening closer or further away? >> i think we got a ways to go for the reasons you talked about. many people who have lowering mortgages or might want to sell in a normal situation will not because of the value in their

mortgage which means supply is tight, we're just keeping prices. there's a lot of supply online right now and buyers are first-time buyers coming in with these elevated mortgage rates but it will take time and hopefully more supply comes online and we work through it. we are still living through the aftermath of the pandemic. >> your thoughts on what fed chair had to say. >> was happening in the marketplace we see homeowners who purchased at 3% homeowners have the chance to refinance and they refinance to the rate. they want to make a move and think there's any want to give

this up. we are changing in terms of circumstances. maybe marriages, a good indicator and devotions happen but there are life-changing circumstances, new jobs and people are not moving so america is not the endemic. one way to facilitate inventory onto the market immediately because homebuilding takes time, commercial building tried to convert it into a residential unit, it takes time. to incentivize real estate investors who released properties onto the market you can do that by lowering property gains and make it conditional

and the restriction when you've got more inventory. >> therapy a more recent post covid. looking at this commercial property that transformed into a rental property, what are you seeing? >> is not as far as pre-covid but many are able to work from home so there is across the country and they are rising and makes logical conclusion and we convert those into a residential unit so it requires funding and a tighter perspective and costly to convert so why don't we

concentrate on building more homes? >> we have focused our conversation on homeownership, but can you tell about this particularly post covid when rent rise across the country? putting a limit on caps on rent, how pervasive is that? >> it's understandable what is a renter and very frustrated but in terms of economic impact, is probably the worst economic policy and housing affordability because new construction will not happen and runs are very

high and restrictive building the the areas talk, midwest, they are reasonable. this could be a devastating impact in the long run. short-term directors but housing shortage intensifies and rent will be much higher. >> in your view, it scares renters. >> the building literally deteriorates. we will pulling overtime so america wants to see improvement. >> we welcome your calls and comments we will go first to actions from greensboro north carolina. welcome. >> are you talking about this or just homeowners? >> the state of housing.

>> i don't have much to say in public, i just want to talk about the politics and what's going on in our country. >> will save that for another segment. >> thank you for taking my call. the federal reserve system is the corporate is creating an 1930 and the fed by now and all mortgages it's all related to the fed. stop using this as the phrase. the food and drug administration and whatever his name is the reality is federal reserve is the instigator.

>> we want to go to tampa bay, florida and hear from randy on the other line. go ahead. >> good morning. i'm residential superintendent in florida 40 years in the tampa bay area. it's a strange phenomena the thousands in florida coming from california and new jersey, illinois, young families but younger people don't have a chance to buy anymore. these apartment goals are going up by the mass because younger people can't afford to buy they are rising at so there is real voice. our company will do over 3000 tampa bay area 8000 units. thousand single-family home.

we are booming because people are leaving. majority of them are selling up north and buying down south and a lot from warner, it's been amazing. >> you mentioned about $2000 it is $2000. i can easily do that, because so feeling more and need to go north they are moving into states any condition, wide population we need to build more. go back to pre-covid, we did a study and population growth and the number of jobs increased and

we are short on housing units in relation to five to 6 million units, 20 they refused to budge downward and we need to assure there is new construction. family homes and apartments, it's the only way to moderate these increases. >> local governments have a role in helping facilitate portable housing? >> you talk about some regulations and building activities, there could be zoning rules where it doesn't have to be a single-family home but a large pot so local restrictions and regulations and zoning, all have a major part to play.

>> robinson renters, go ahead. >> good morning, guys. i live in upstate new york experiencing a real resurgence in employment. spending $100 billion just outside of syracuse, it will provide 50000 jobs and we have no housing to accommodate what's on the horizon so i'm giving everybody a warning, we need residential construction up here. thank you. >> they have expressed concern with manufacturing and the number of jobs and secondary jobs but let's remember upstate new york, it's one of the most affordable regions of the country, one can buy a middle class middle income midpriced

home for about $250,000 so very affordable. people are anxious about property tax but with job creation in the region, housing affordable is a greater chance to build more especially not restricted by this availability so there is great opportunity for local officials who need to allow more buildings were created and one other thing, i was amazed one could a million home $2500 and affordability and have the flexibility for working remote possibly environment will and there are areas that are

quite affordable. >> the national association of realtors not just looking at data actually on the ground construction and what people are doing. >> i am very fortunate, have the opportunity to go to different regions of the country building a large number construction and will obtain rent growth and they are not considered rent control. it's very manageable so some areas there are simply lack of housing. realtor who say it's tough to do business because there's not a single inventory available. consumers will have limited choices with no inventory in the neighborhood, they cannot purchase so we have to consider some policy and temporary

measure for more inventory on the market and mom and pop investors release property was gains taxes that would be a big boost. >> you did your study in 2019 almost five years on in your organization says the adult in the country. >> homebuilders and recent data are building about the historical average but not building more to compensate, the housing deficit is still lingering and we need to oversupply just to catch up with housing shortage we encountered in earlier years. >> (202)748-8000. renters 2488001. >> thank you for taking my call. i want to know what's going to

happen to seniors. my parents moved in our home and welcome to them last year. they had a lot of stuff and we needed to put our stuff in storage so we've been looking over your, another place to go to help our parents. south carolina, north carolina, there's nothing out there affordable. the inventory is so low. something needs to be down for seniors who can't live in apartments or have mobility issues and can't move anywhere. it is a mess so we are in the middle of a sandwich, an extensive area but just trying to find a place affordable for us. there are seniors in the young,

this intuition is serious, we are in a housing crisis and i want to know, what do think people think of helping seniors get housing? >> one thing we are noticing is for households and multigenerational families, they like the house and those grandmother in one side and we are seeing more of that and cultural factors, the housing affordability or on affordability that we see this trend in the d.c. area out into the next two counties and they become more affordable but it depends upon if they have school

reasons or job locations or retirees, it is much more affordable away from the big city and we have noticed it is still ongoing. >> question on twitter, why was it cost-effective to build affordable homes for baby boomers but impossible for today's generation? >> hard to build a home, just look at the price of lumber and construction workers and wages to pay? considering everything the only way to make the numbers work we are focusing on this larger sized home so focusing on larger sized homes. in some areas where land is cheap, it can be more because land pipes are cheaper but to build more affordable housing, it requires some level of incentives to make it work.

tax credit or by level of spending, people can view it as housing. >> it might be worth pointing out when baby boomers began buying in the 70s and 80s, interest rates were. >> my parents bought their first home at 15%. some people but at 18% and you ask them what it feels like hindsight and everyone said was the best decision i ever made because people could always refinance but as it climbs, people began to refinance to lower payments even though they bought at higher prices. when interest rates were high, it was slashed so people are stuck in place of the interest

rates of the impact. >> concern over potential rate increases, mortgage rate increases, and inflection where rates fall somewhat and higher interest rates opportunity in terms of prices for people to buy. >> one group that homebuyers of the housing equity and one reason the economy is holding up is because 60% of americans are homeowners and they feel comfortable buying furniture or going to the west still and has held the economy rather than trying to limit raising interest rates is to raise supply and

these prices so that is a better solution. >> henry in california. >> thank you for taking my call. i want to start by saying 2008 debacle, folks who didn't lose the banks and what i want to say about housing currently they open up for people to go get and it's a good idea. the government owns a lot of land and they could put small manufactured homes and technology is way good right now. the folks to get their first home and seniors can get small homes and they built the

community and they haven't made enough money and able to own their home so those things can go and buy downs. it is a brilliant way to go and able to afford, it's not happening as much because is not beneficial for the bank. and we have interest rates higher than 19% and what the sellers are doing with smart realtors as they were carrying 20% loan but the banks don't let them because they will make their money because the homeowners will make it. a home owner has equity to take the 20% and get a monthly payment and he can make some money on that. these things are not allowed.

>> and they may be held by the government or local government because that's one of the elements but it can essentially be for homeowners at a reduced price but we want you to build more affordable housing in the numbers can be better in the other part is the buydown, they are offering that. and we will offer a mortgage rate so maybe that is the reason they are seeing more activity and financing and does permit the finance and mortgage rates are high with our financing

opportunities but is not very popular at the moment and it's done through other ways but some realtors and things can be created and is just that inventory is not there and interest rates are high. >> recently saying housing recession is over but the same time recovery has not started. you talk about inventory, other things have to happen to make that recovery? the inventory situation is addressed and more homebuilding or real estate investing coming onto the market and the other part is for ynger americans to say the opportunity to buy the home, we are not there right now because interest rates so when inflation comes down, i hope they understand elation continues to fall down and stop interest rates or cut interest rates going into next year and

reduce mortgage rates so younger generation would have a better chance of participating in this ownership. >> let's hear from mark, massachusetts. >> a great desk and you bring a lot to the table. i have for about 20 years in the northeast and the vacation community in high-end construction.

it bottomed out a month ago or six weeks ago and spiked up again dropping again but the price of lumber is still up. you know what's going on but material prices are low but retailers are the price of retail. >> the supply chain issues we have, you could even get that 2020, 2021. >> it is available but it is fluctuating and retailers are saying prices fluctuate, we want this high-end condition and we enter competition everywhere and we have more people going into construction because lack of

workers in make it hard to build a home. it is not about every american having college, it is a good income but that's not happening as of yet but we need more people going into construction. >> you want some insurances that prices are going to rise consideration building a new development, is that possible to do? >> it locks in the price and they are changing and one thing. up until now but what happened during that time they were in the middle and lumber prices

began to be too expensive. they have to wait another year so waiting and waiting and it costly for the developers. most of the supply chain issues have settled so hopefully the builders become more active prices of homebuilders are very high, up 50% from a year ago. we are assured local government does not hinder incentive to build more. >> kathy, good morning. >> good morning. the situation i am seeing in communities in which i live, gross proliferation of airbnb industry and housing no longer available for rental or home purchase due to close to 40% of

houses city limits are airbnb's. there are three on the block with i live, a house that's a stone throw away, 300,000 i think about eight years ago, nine. $950,000. >> who's buying their houses? >> i don't know who's buying them. people that have a lot of money but the situation is that many people who work in a community here, the hospital the skilled nursing facility in factories, they don't live inside the city or county. many of them come from sheboygan county and you are talking about 50 miles one way to work.

i was lucky i got this house when i bought it but it's nothing like when i grew up and it was affordable. >> the purchase of places for airbnb. >> the airbnb industry is the housing supply issue there are the same number of homes in the area and when it's airbnb, they reduce and there's less supply but in south carolina looking at murdaugh beach and other areas, they found airbnb did not have

housing supply if you allowed them to develop more. saying okay, we have ten new additional housing units and it's all about supply. as long as there is supply, it provides more opportunity for more americans to buy. >> let's hear from james in chicago. good morning. >> good morning, how are you? kathy had a great question. i'm a volunteer community development here in chicago, we've been working on a lot of projects, different ways to have more space and one of the problems we deal with is a lot of land that undeveloped owned and held by individuals and/or entities and live in states to contact these folks who own land

and our city has pro development regulation and is stops this land that is legally incentivized to develop and besides them living out of state and can't reach them, in chicago we have about 120, one 30,000 units of making housing in any given year we have about 60000 people experiencing homelessness and/or being in transition so ample supply of homes, units

accused look at the numbers, why are the prices so high? i want to get your thoughts. my solution is there too many landlords holding and owning housing and holding the units back to the market to inflate the prices. we need to do serious land reform and social housing to take it out of the hands of the. >> many empty commercial buildings need to be rezoned diverted into residential affordable housing. >> if you have empty land privately and there's nothing being done with it, they will not get return on that. they're not getting any return on that so they are incentivized

to release those properties and financial because it does make sense of the housing deficit on one end or people struggling to buy a home in the other you say there's so many vacant homes. the make empty shopping malls, maybe that could be converted and cap into education centers. and how to utilize commercial buildings into partly residential units. >> a front page story about the price of home insurance, they charge more and cover less is the headline. the higher cost lower coverage extends well beyond california and hurricanes, floods and wildfires and they say i don't think anyone is safe right now

as someone quoted in the article. >> i'm beginning to hear of this certainly in the prone areas we have seen property insurance not being available and lack of trade workers in this property damage and it is much higher but we address more people going into the trade skills industry and look at the competition. the insurance market is dominated by a company with a competitive marketplace so we need to ensure more competition in the marketplace and the 1.5 million members together and

we want to see other industries as competitive. >> wesley chapel florida up next. >> good morning. my question is regarding new construction home in the florida area right now. i'm wondering the impact on restraints utilizing undocumented tradesmen who possess the skills needed and required and construct new homes. i see a number of projects in florida where there is a substantial numbers of trades and undocumented, i think

tradesmen doing an excellent job bringing houses fourth. >> we have this process for people to come for a specific purpose and they returned to the country of origin and reconsider whether they can return to the country and the other part is not only relying on immigrants who build homes but for americans to going to trade, they are offering help but we need more americans into the trade skills. >> the chief economist the national association of realtors, thank you for being with us this morning. >> cindy kelly is with us, founder and president of the heritage foundation and dive a

little deeper, the history of the manhattan project. for the film, are you surprised, it's this big box office draw. >> this was my hope along, this happened with world for two history. as a world war ii commission for the big monument and they were getting nowhere. the film came out and galvanize the american audience. it is a dramatic way they haven't heard before. ...

the book no space by martin sherwin and hybrids came out in 2005 and thousands of others very credible good books but nothing that has been, no movie has been a blockbuster club when you think you been working on this for 25 years which gets us to your organization. you are its founder and president peer why did you start it? what is its mission? >> guest: i began it in 2002. i have been with the department of energy. in fact, i had a full career in the federal government or i began. it was unrelated working for the environmental protection agency

and then cleaned up the form of nuclear weapons complex. working for dealey which is a successor agency to the manhattan project. they were going to tear down all the remaining buildings that were put up to work on the manhattan project on laboratory property. aren't you going to save any? , why should we? i was able to get a small federal agency, the advisory council, for historic preservations to get interested in it. they brought their advisory team out and they said these are monumental. they were just like overgrown garages, just small buildings put up just as crude as they could be for the duration of the work to build these. >> host: if you see the film

oppenheimer you see these seemingly temporary but huge villages and complexes created in world war ii. let's start at the beginning. what was the man, what was the manhattan project? why was it started? >> guest: manhattan project was started in desperation. the international community of physicists, most of whom had gone to school together basically in germany here oppenheimer was a classmate of his german rival, vernon heisenberg. they knew each other but as soon as the discovery of fission, feasibility to split the atom of uranium happened in late 1938, there was a race. all physicists in germany or the teams of physicists in germany, japan, england, france, the united states begin racing to

make an atomic bomb peer they knew do since the 1920s this could happen. it was a race against hitler's germany. hitler invaded and started world war i on september 1st -- >> host: world war ii. >> guest: right. the discovery happened in late 1938, early 1939. it was a race. unfortunately the united states kind of cackling kind of slowly. >> host: why? >> guest: actually one person said it's like swimming and molasses, bureaucracy. they appointed someone who was fairly senior, that was a good thing except he was kind of old. this was a young man's game. the people involved and do knew about this their own in their 20s and 30s. it was not the right appointment. this had to be done quickly, had to be done with the right

people. the british were on it and they actually benefit from a lot of refugees from hitler's europe that came to work in the laboratories with the british. >> host: you mentioned it was a race between us, the u.s., the allies and the nazis to get the bomb. there is a statement film were i believe it is the actor oppenheimer says essentially the nazis will be so because hitler, i'm paraphrasing, believes physics, this is a jewish science. was that true? was at his view? >> guest: it ? >> guest: it was absolutely true and it was much to our benefit. we had at least 100 jewish refugees, top scientists, nobel laureates who worked on the manhattan project with us because they were refugees from hitler's germany, austria, the nazi country, italy.

so it's very true. his prejudices against jewish people and the scientists who are on the forefront of this was much to the benefit of the allies. >> host: how does oppenheimer come into this group of scientists and why is he chosen to lead the manhattan project? >> guest: oppenheimer was a very unlikely choice. people who were advising the head of the manhattan project general leslie groves, none of them had oppenheimer on the list are first of all, he unlikely at the other possibilities have not won a nobel prize. he also had not managed anything for some people thought he get miniature hamburger shop. he had graduate students and had to run classes but that was it. and thirdly, he had associations with people who were communist

party members. his wife, for example, was a member of the communist party. his brother, his girlfriend. so while he was not himself, had leftist sympathies in the regrout for suspicions. >> host: why did general groves portrayed by matt damon in film, i did general groves have this confidence in oppenheimer? he seemed to be his choice no matter what tractor he was absolutely groves choice. groves was very astute judge of people and he knew two things. one, that he was brilliant interesting to understand what it took, what would it take to make a bomb better than the other people he interviewed and two, he was very ambitious. he had not won a nobel prize. this was his avenue to fame here and just like groves who had been passed over to go into the

field to have action, in europe in the war theater, he wanted desperately to make a name for himself. so the two of them saw the means to fulfill their own ambition in each other. >> host: cillian murphy mr. casten founder and president of the atomic heritage foundation. we talk about the manhattan project and robert oppenheimer, particularly with the release of the new film oppenheimer. 202-748-8000 if you're in the eastern/central time zones. it's 202-748-8001 mountain at pacific region. the film focuses mostly on the activities at los alamos, new mexico. why was los alamos chosen? >> guest: los alamos was where it happened peer that's where the brain trust was i should say that had responsibility for designing and testing the bomb and overseeing science across

the complex. it was 5000 people at the end of the war. something a little more. they thought they could do it with 100 scientists andhe families. it was far more complex than ever imagined. the other sites were involved in production, production of the ingredients of the bomb, usually significant role but it wasn't the same as designing and testing the bumper oak ridge, tennessee, for example, had mammoth factories first of the kind to produce enriched uranium. on the west coast, england, so the japanese couldn't blast them from the shore was hampered along the columbia river in eastern washington where they produce plutonium and built the

worlds first reactors translate in terms of the role of oak ridge and enriching uranium, the creation of those uranium pallets a big part of the film. the fact was we had a very small capacity like a lot of things at the beginning of the war doing that so they had to ramp up the production as well in the very,, very short time. how was that done? >> by trial and error. had no idea what method was going to work to produce enriched uranium appeared so general groves authorized three separate methods, three sets of huge factories to producene by electromagnetic separation based on a design by lawrence and berkeley. beley. that was one method. the other method was gaseous diffusion. they do a mile-long building called the k25. the third method was developed

for the navy that was differential in thermal and heat, and it was so inefficient they could only enrich things from one to 2% and they tour the factory down immediately after the war. but the three methods together it turned out essential peer they took it from taipei and gave it to the second plan. the second plate enriched it from 2% to 20% and then the ticket to the third electromagnetic separation plant and that put it at the level they needed for a bomb translate of the original, the three original sites for the manhattan project and oak ridge, tennessee, hanford washington, and los alamos or any of the three still involved in the production of nuclear weapons? >> gue: as a matter fact,

congss has in 2018 provided something like 46 billion by now or some such number four los alamos to continue making plutonium pits. they are taking pits that are in storage now in pentax, which is in texas, and kind of making sure that they the worker m is a fundamental period changes a lot even within five minutes and within 50 years and may have changed quite a bit it may not be reliable so they are just now building factories if you can believe it to create new, that they're confident will work. they are smaller and can fit in new warheads but it's an important topic here it's a good thing this movie came out.

>> host: there's something serendipitous about watching the fact that oppenheimer had probably been here this had property the new mexico well before los alamos was ever used in the manhattan project. he happened to go the lander he lived in new york city, correct, but is heated by the owners property and very, very rural new mexico. >> guest: that's right. oppenheimer fell in love with it as a teenager. he had developed dysentery on the family vacation in germany just before he supposed to start his first year in college. he was confined to lives apartment in manhattan and driving his mother crazy. she said hey, can't we find some from high school to take you for a few months or a year off and you can go out to new mexico? that's what he did. he wrote horseback and explore the whole area and fell in love with it, the land. he says in the movie digested

for six to new mexico and i will be happy. >> host: online for those of you in the mountain and pacific time zones, 202-748-8002. that includes new mexico. 202-748-8000 is the line for the east and central and melt in the pacific, 202-748-8001. let's go to katona new york enter from lewis. lewis you are on. go ahead conduct thank you for taking my culprit i've enjoyed the discussion so far. i have seen the oppenheimer filbert i also read a great deal about oppenheimer and the manhattan project prior to the failed but he had a question relating to the way particular thing is portrayed in the film. in the field went oppenheimer security hearing comes up, general groves gives testimony at the hearing, and although he

prays this oppenheimer, at the end he's asked a question by the attorney rob for the commission. would you approve oppenheimer for clearance today based on the current standards? groves gives sort of like hedges and eventually says no, based on today's standards i would not approve oppenheimer for a clearance. which to me seemed a remarkable statement given groves complete confidence in oppenheimer during the project. and i wondered how realistic that scene was, and also what you think groves really thought by that point of the certificates in terms of his view of oppenheimer. and again thanks very much for answering. >> host: glad you got through. >> guest: thank you for the question. that's a tough one. it actually calls on trying to figure out what was in groves mind as well as what had happenedetween 1945-54. what happened was groves was

going to be the odd man out. he had hoped that the army would have control, the military would have control but oppenheimer had pushed for civilian control. groves of course was behind building the hydrogen bomb and oppenheimer was on the other side. there must've been quite a bit of friction between the two. on saying that, groves was absolutely sure that no man other than oppenheim could have done the job he did to run the manhattan project. i think groves was foolish to try to answer that question. it was a question that the aec should ask itself, not fair to ask groves who has probably no familiarity with their standards and it was inappropriate question. it was kind of a trap. there's no right answer. >> host: let's hear from

esther in laguna hills california. welcome call back yes good morning. thank you for taking my call. i have two questions peer the first, i read an article in the "wall street journal" that einstein was somewhat of a mentor to oppenheimer, which is interesting to me. and i wondered how much, how involved was einstein in the manhattan project because of that mentorship? that was the first part of my question. the second part is i was surprised to hear that, to learn that there were so many jewish scientists involved in the manhattan project. and as a result of that, i wonder if there was pushback against the jews after that was, after the manhattan, after the bomb was developed as so frequently there is, as being a

jew myself i'm very sensitive to anti-semitism. and i wonder if there was pushback against jewish people in general because of this influence of jewish scientists. >> host: thank you for the call. >> guest: good questions. i think that christopher nolan took a couple of liberties with einstein. he hadn't played a bigger role than he actually did. he at oppenheimer ask him to do the calculations as to whether the air would be ignited by the blast at trinity that wasn't the case here einstein was visited in long island in august of 1938 to sign a letter to roosevelt warning him of the german effort. so he famously gets the credit for kind of getting the ball rolling andetng the united

states and the president to start this effort. but after that he didn't go to los alamos. he didn't play big role. is equation e equals mc square was at the fundamental, is a fundamental principle behind the atomic bomb. so his shadow was everywhere but he wasn't. after the war he was at princeton at the institute studies that oppenheimer was then director of. so he and oppenheimer spent more time after the war when they were together at princeton. with respect to whether jewish scientists because of the rope in the manhattan project were vilified, that's hard to say. i think not particularly because all participants were secret. a word, the american public

wasn't told it was working on the manhattan project they didn't even know about the manhattan project and afterwards it was still classified information and people, they didn't talk about i worked on the atomic bomb, especially after it became clear that there was an arms race and people began to question whether we should be building more weapons. there was an anti-nuke movement, so to speak. so i haven't heard that. >> host: how long did the information about who was involved in the manhattan project stay classified? wind we first know that, the american public find out that it was robert oppenheimer and his other scientists? >> guest: it wasn't that -- trend [inaudible conversations] he was known publicly obviously, yes. >> guest: right. there were no reporters involved in covering the manhattan project except one, william lawrence who was invited specifically whatever he wrote,

so that was it widespread rest about it obviously until after the war. it's too hard to figure out who was on it. didn't keep a list of names that los alamos they had badge photos, photos biker driver's license id and numbers. didn't have a name. united number. people call office and asking can you tell me what my grandfather did at such and such a place? there are no such records. it may be some buried in somebody's back room. >> host: the film shows him wearing a letter and a number, g6 or whatever and a circular badge first, the first caller mentioned this, the hearing that is a part, i don't want to give with the film, a big part of the field is a easy hearing, the security clearing hearing for robert oppenheimer. spoiler alert, he loses his

security clearance. what was the ramification of oppenheimers loss of security clearance at the end of the hearing? >> guest: that meant he no longer had access to classified information. and everything -- >> host: did it affect his career at princeton? >> guest: absolutely. it was devastating to her it was into his career. this career. he was on 35 advisory committees. he was the go to man. had the best understanding and he had, he was a philosopher and a thinker and he was thinking about how does the world cope with this? what is the aftermath of this? was going to unfold? he was pushing very hard for international control of this, which is also anathema to the likes of lewis straws in the aec in the military. the air force thought old boy we're going to get a real ramp-up, more bombers come more icbms, ballistic missiles.

we are going to have a heyday with this. and with the development of the hydrogen bomb at oppenheimer's stance kind of cut, which cut them back, way back there so they cut him down themi want to play for the audience in a minute or two years of the actual words of robert oppenheimer from our american history tv election here on "washington journal" but let's hear from anthony next up in miller place new york. good morning, thank you so very much. oppenheimer ostensibly was the grandfather, payment einstein of the space race to death and destruction peer this is hitler's paradigm come to you, it's been like launched into the future now whereby we are cursed by the nuclear age, whereby the space race for power. i mean it seems to me that mankind has the inability to rise tohe occasion here.

the best and the brightest to develop these technologies spoke out against it early on and sd no, no, no this is not a course we should be taking because, i mean, you need three hours for this topic because there's the military-industrial side of the nuclear power and then there's industrial uses and whether it is portable reactors or what have you they were going to build a mark to reactor but i think they did. there's a few probably running but a great many other directors that exist on our planet today had we fueled slate doubled the waste and yet nothing else has been taken into the repository as was required. they permitted all the reactors that the waste would be received by 1996 and took them out but now you come out has been deemed unsafe from what i understand they're using fracking and ejecting a lot of volatile waste byproducts of the nuclear industry. it really is and entering the genome of our planet because it's such a diabolical, you

can't see it but radiation is increasing in our environment at a rapid level now because of the industrialization and militarization. >> host: anthony, several topics introduced. glad you got through. cynthia kelly, do not respond? >> guest: i'm glad you raised the question, the question about what about the uses of nuclear power or energy apart from weapons. that's a huge subject. one veteran i interviewed said it's too bad you only have one opportunity to introduce yourself. the bomb was the introduction of nuclear energy. and people conflate the bomb and its dangers with everything else, which is very unfortunate here it is brought us untold benefits to mankind from cancer diagnosis and treatment, two as you mentioned, outer space

exploration, to nuclear energy that can power the planet with industrial base 24/7 power that's unlike any other of its rivals. it's a complementary mix we need but we desperately need to have safe reliable nuclear power in the mix so it was a harnessing of atomic energies is a way richard likes to think of this. this is a project the manhattan project wasn't just making the bottom. their biggest contribution was harnessing this power for a myriad of uses. >> host: i thought we'd take a moment listen to actual words of robert oppenheimer, speaking in 1945 and again this is from our american history tv collection. we covered a number of incident oppenheimer over the years, the last ten years or more pic here he is from 1945. take a listen spirit the speed of the development, active and essential participation of the

development have no doubt contributed greatly to our awareness to the crisis that faces us, even to our sense of responsibility for its resolution. but these are contingencies. what is not contingent is that we've made a thing a most terrible weapon that is altered abruptly and profoundly nature of the world. we have made a think that by all standards of the world we grew up it is an evil thing. by so doing, by our participation in making it possible to make these things, we've raised again the question of whether science is good for man, whether it is good to learn about the world to try to understand it, to try to control it, to a give increased insight, increased power. because we are scientists we must say that all unalterable just to these questions it is our fate and our commitments seldom made explicit, even more

seldom challenged, that knowledge is a good in and of itself acknowledged with such powers must come with it. >> host: oppenheimer raising real concern and yet say an alterable yes to these questions. what did you hear there? >> guest: it was a little bit hard for me to hear, i'm afraid, but he said we are scientists, we have to know. have to provide to mankind the knowledge of how the world works and how science works, and to harness it to mankinds benefit but that's kind of in our nature, the nature of science. people or to discover and then try to fathom how best to take these discoveries and apply them in a way that are most beneficial to mankind trim with some of the provisions visions portrayed in the movie, they try to get behind his thinking,

particularly like after the bomb was dropped. were those reflected of his actual views? wife he toured about the fact we had to use of this weapon? he called it in those, it's a terrible thing. >> guest: he did say it was a terrible thing but he never opposed the use of the bomb. the atomic bombs on japan at the time he was on a committee to advise the secretary of war simpson and the like, and he said this is not our expertise. we don't know what's going on in the negotiations between the japanese and actually reaching out to the soviets for peace here we don't know what's going on in the minds of the soviets, or truman we don't know the conversations that happened. we are not in a position to

judge whether we need this weapon into what are not that we should leave that to the military. our job was to produce it we are scientists. i think after the war many scientists said we need to be more involved in political decisions and how our discoveries are made and used. >> host: the movie shows a scene between a group meeting at general marshall, sector for stimpson is there and that you specifically choose not a military target the final decision is on civilian targets come to nagasaki and hiroshima. is that relatively truthful? >> guest: that's not a fair statement. the bomb not be micro targeted to these facilities there there were industrial facilities that were manufacturing military equipment and munitions in both cities.

there were stations for army and other military personnel. it just happened that the plants were surrounded by civilian residences and homes, and that the bomb created a huge blast and thousands of degrees temperature that created a firestorm for most of the people were killed by fire. of the buildings were knocked down by blasts, we will try to get as many calls as you can. beth in carrollton texas. good morning. you were on with cynthia kelly, kelo. >> host: humor on the air collect thank you. yes. i'm calling, i'm from a very large family and i had a lot of people in world war ii, and my future husband who i married in

1962, his uncle who was dr. david lyons who graduated from university of missouri, and he was part of the manhattan project. and lived in los alamos and then later taught for many years at berkeley. and he was the kindest, most gentle man. and when i met him it was a just, i can't say how, what a beautiful man he was. but later i asked him to write a story for my children about his life, and he said no, he didn't want to. he didn't mention that he didn't want to be remembered by the atomic bomb or anything.

he just didn't want to write anything about his life. and yet he had taught at berkeley for so many years and he was just a beautiful man. >> host: all right. any comments for ? >> guest: thank you very much for that question. you are absolutely right i mean, your experience is something that i found as well. i interviewed 350 veterans of the manhattan project, and many of them had never spoken even to the families before we had these interviews they were very reluctant. after the war many physicists left the field future thet to be associated with nuclear weapons and went into biology or biomedicine or other fields entirely. so there was a lot of ambivalence of the people who worked on the project for very, very strong reason, patriotism, defeating the nazis, keeping the world safe for democracy.

bringing their brothers and fathers and nephews home from the war and ending the war as soon as they could so there were very heartfelt reason for doing it afterwards, they had misgivings. >> host: and these oral histories once we can find on the website of the atomic heritage museum, voices of the manhattan project. that hf dot nuclear museum.org for more information. grand rapids, michigan, is next. john, welcome to the conversation, good morning. how are you guys doing? >> host: fine thank you, i was a child of the cold war there i was born in 1951. in fact, today's my birthday, i turned 72. >> host: happy birthday collect thank you. anyway, i paid close attention to what was going on with nuclear weapons at that point. i've got two questions right now. number one, i have seen things are her things, whichever, that

one of the reasons los alamos was chosen was because of the fact that if there was a mistake or an accident that they wouldn't kill a bunch of people like in chicago. and then also there was two different bombs, one was a plutonium bomb and one was a uranium bomb, was it a boy that was the plutonium and fat man or that man was a plutonium and the other bomb the long bomb that when there was the uranium bomb. >> host: thanks, john trejo the second part of the question which i heard better, which is about the two bombs yes. little boy was designed with uranium enriched uranium like you to do if they have more than one batch of uranium that they could use for second bumper in

fact, they didn't they only had one bombs worth of uranium so they had to use this newly discovered plutonium, discovered in 1940, a man-made element the presiding officer: the senae will come to order. the clerk will read a communication to the senate. the clerk: washington, d.c., august 1, 2023. to the senate: