it's what gets them up every morning and keeping them working late into the night. this is absolutely a labor of love. these teachers recognize how demanding this work is, but they also see the potential for fundamentally transforming the life chances of their students. they know that school culture is a difficult, difficult thing to change. but they also believe that all children, all children must be given an opportunity to fulfill their academic and social potential. as one study of turnaround schools in philadelphia put it, teachers at successful turnaround schools feel like they are part of something big. let me give you an example of being part of something big. one of our panelists you'll hear from in a few minutes, carol smith, fantastic superintendent in portland, oregon, will talk in a moment about how the sig program has worked in her district at roosevelt high school. two years ago, roosevelt was named one of the worst schools in the state.

but its first year in the sig program roosevelt has had a 14% jump in its four-year graduation rate. attendance is up. test scores are up. and discipline issues are down. but just as telling, just as important, roosevelt's educators have fostered a new belief among students about what's possible for them. the arts, for example, are thriving. so is the school's drama program. last summer, the students performed a play at the international thespian festival in nebraska. that was a first for a public school from portland. to make sure all the students could make the trip, drama director jo lane took out a second mortgage on her home. that's a remarkable, remarkable commitment. but we have to give her some help. and i'm going to figure out how to do that. in cities like st. louis and portland, maine, local unions are looking to improve and to strengthen school turnaround efforts. they're collaborating with management to design turnaround customized supports for teachers and new professional development for staff in turnaround schools. a final barrier to turning around schools is that parents are supposed to fight change in neighborhood schools.

sometimes parents do cling to the familiar. but we're finding that parents and community organizations are in many cases actually helping to drive change and to enhance learning opportunities. community engagement is crucial to successful turnarounds. as dennis vanrorkle points out, you can't spell partners without parents. >> here in washington, d.c., education secretary arne duncan participating in a forum sponsored by america's promise alliance. it's called the grad nation campaign. this by the way was launched two years ago in 2010 by america's promise alliance working towards two key goals by 2020. a national graduation rate of 90% and a college graduation rate of 60%. that would be up from 30% today. by the way, how are the states doing? as we said earlier, tennessee and new york with some double digit gains in the overall high school graduation rate.

joined by alabama, florida, georgia, kentucky, massachusetts, missouri, north carolina, south carolina, texas and wisconsin. the ten states whose graduation rates have worsened over the last eight to ten years, arizona, arkansas, california, connecticut, nebraska, nevada, new jersey, new mexico, rhode island and utah. this is "washington today" on c-span radio. in some other news today, on wall street the dow closed up six. the final numbers, 13,239. nasdaq was up 23. s&p was up five. apple saying today it has no plans to bring its more than $60 billion in overseas cash back to the u.s. until congress changes tax laws. the company announced today it's going to begin paying a dividend to its shareholders and will buy back some stocks. moves that will require about $45 billion in cash over three years. but the company said it will

rely exclusively on its domestic cash reserves. apple chief operating officer peter oppenheimer said in a conference call repatriating the cash from offshore would result in significant tax consequences under current u.s. law. a new study by the center for public integrity ranking the states on the least to most corruptible puts new jersey at the top. this is a state where in 2009 three mayors, two assembly men and five rabbis were among 44 charged in a money laundering scheme. yet the center says it's analyzed 16,000 data points during a year-long study of public ethics laws in all 50 states. it hired reporters to support its findings and new jersey merited a b-plus, the highest grade, ahead of connecticut, which had a "b." washington state, california and nebraska all had b-minuses. georgia, one of eight states graded "f," came in last. still in new jersey, the son of former congressman donald paine, the late donald paine, plans to run for his father's seat in the house. donald paine jr. is the

president of the newark, new jersey, city council. telling the associated press he felt an obligation to continue the legacy of his father. his father died in office on march 6th after serving more than two decades in that spot. and french president nicolas sarkozy says authorities are raising the terrorism alert to its highest level across a swath of southern france where a gunman opened fire at a jewish school before fleeing. the attack in toulouse killed three children and a rabbi. the worst ever school shooting in france. one of the weapons used was the same used to kill three paratroopers in two different attacks in the toulouse region last week. at the state department here in washington, d.c., spokeswoman victoria nuland had this. >> we were shocked and saddened to learn of the horrific attack at a jewish school in toulouse, france. we stand with the victims of the attack and offer our condolences to their families and their community. we join the government of france

in condemning this unprovoked and vicious act of violence. >> victoria nuland, state department spokeswoman. back in a minute with more "washington today." >> subscribe to the daily c-span alert and receive the latest c-span schedule of events. from the white house, capitol hill and politics. you'll also get the capital spotlight news story, trivia and unique c-span promotions. there are two more alerts available for the book tv and american history tv weekend line-ups. you can sign up for the c-span alerts at c-span.org. welcome back to "washington today" here on c-span radio. two years after the president signed the health care reform legislation, and with the u.s. supreme court about to consider a challenge from a number of states trying to overturn it, that challenge will begin next week with oral arguments. supporters and opponents of the law gearing up for what many are calling a message war like it is

2009 all over again when the issue was being debated. today a conference call with a number of democratic members of the house of representatives including representative javier becerra, democratic of california and jan schakowsky, democrat from illinois, to question whether or not this is going to have any impact on the 2012 presidential race and congressional races. more from today's conference. >> the last question will be from so man-kim from politico. your line is open. >> quick question for the members. how concerned are you that the issue of health care and the health care law will drag down candidates this november? i saw a new poll today that shows the law is still very unpopular. >> doris and jan, why don't we each say some final closing remarks. >> go ahead. go ahead, javier. >> i simply will say this. jan made the point best when she said the more people see what the affordable care act is doing the more they're going to like it and the more they're going to

support it. people are hungry for a chance to have decent health care that they can pay for and not go bankrupt. and i believe that you're going to continue to build on the millions of families who have benefited by keeping their adult children on their health care who now have children who have a pre-existing condition who can enroll in their parents' health care. the seniors who are benefiting from the improvements to medicare and its preventive care and the doughnut hole coverage. you're going to continue to find folks benefiting. but in 2014, if the supreme court does justice by the american people, we will be able to include some 30 million more americans into this coverage so that people will be able to say, finally, that they're not concerned about paying their mortgage or paying their health care bill and they will be able to survive these bankruptcies that today we see are principally driven by health care costs.

i have no doubt that the public will support this. i don't believe for a moment if a candidate stands up and -- and talks about increasing access to a good doctor and a hospital, that he or she will find himself in good stead with the voters. therefore, anyone who believes that extending quality health care to americans under the affordable care act is good i think has a great chance of getting elected to office and should stand strong behind that. >> this is jan schakowsky. we're not going to leave it to chance that the american people understand the importance of the legislation right now and the benefits that are about to come. there are public information campaigns that are going to be conducted by groups like the alliance for retired americans. we're going to be doing truth

squads. and people are going to be invited to meetings. we're going to get -- maybe barbara can talk just a little bit about what, you know, her group alone is going to do to get the information out. it's about telling the truth. and -- and going after the lies that are being told about the impact of the affordable care act on people. and we feel convinced that telling people what's good for them is good for them probably is a lot cheaper than telling people who's good for them is bad for them, which is what the republicans and their funders are doing. and so we're going to -- this is going to be a primary organizing effort on the part of the democrats and our allies among senior -- legitimate senior citizen organizations and other public interest organizations. just to tell the truth over the next several months.

and we believe the american people are desperately wanting to have some relief from the health care costs that are the number one cause of personal bankruptcies in the united states of america. >> two members of congress in a teleconference on this week. the second anniversary of the health care law. the president signed into law 2010. representative javier becerra is a democrat from california. just a moment ago you heard from representative jan schakowsky from illinois. joining us live on the phone from capitol hill, emily ethridge. she's following this story from cq. thanks very much for being with us. >> you're welcome. thanks for having me on. >> this is really the start of a message war we're going to be hearing from democrats and republicans. a week of events in which they're going to try to commemorate or criticize this legislation. what can we expect specifically? >> that's right. it's already started.

there's not only been conference calls like the one you just played but a flurry of press releases. today republican senators were on the senate floor having a colloquy about the problems they see with the health care law and the damaging effects they think it will have. i've seen some democrats on the house floor beginning to give speeches. long. >> let's drill down one of the key issues that we're going to be hearing about from the republicans in the house, and that is this medicare spending board known as the ipab, which is the independent payment advisory board. what is that and what's the issue? >> the board is something created under the health care law that is a panel of outside independent experts that if medicare costs grow -- increase at a certain rate, it has this trigger. this board has to make recommendations for cutting medicare costs. then congress can decide whether to take those recommendations or make new ones. republicans think that handing congress's power to a board of unelected officials, they don't like the idea that they would have to give it over to somebody

else. and it's really a big part of president obama's plan to fix medicare and keep medicare spending down, which we all know is a big issue this year. >> congressman paul ryan this week unveiling his own budget blueprint. we're going to get more specifics tomorrow from the chairman of the house budget committee. but he has been talking on the house budget committee website about the issue of medicare making some significant changes overall to the medicare program to try to stop the -- the stem of spending that we've been seeing in this country and bring down the deficit. >> that's right. he really wants to make that a contrast to the ryan plan, a republican, house republican plan, as opposed to president obama's plan for medicare which they say is ipab. that's really another showdown this week that we're going to see in the house. >> one of the specifics from the ryan plan, and he has the support of congress, senator ron wyden of oregon, the idea that some options who decide not to take medicare would have the

possibility of buying their own insurance through a private market and take a subsidy from the federal government. is that going anywhere? >> that is an idea that we expect to see in the ryan budget tomorrow. we haven't seen all the details yet, but it looks like that's the way things are turning. we've been hearing from senator wyden today. he said, i don't know what's in the budget but just in case it is the ryan/wyden plan here's what i think about that and here's why i think it's a good idea. it's definitely a thing that's slowly gaining some bipartisan interest. but definitely not enough now to really become something real this year. >> we're talking with emily ethridge following a story for cq roll call. she's on capitol hill. a week from today the u.s. supreme court will undertake three days of oral arguments and we'll be showing and letting our radio audience listen to the oral arguments each day as the supreme court releases them. that in essence is the culmination of this week long message war carrying into next week on the third branch of government. >> that's right. it's the perfect storm. you've got the president and congress and the supreme court

all weighing in on health care. it's just a huge time for this law right now. >> what are you looking for this week and next? what are you preparing for in terms of stories for cq roll call? >> we're going to be covering every aspect you can imagine. we're going to have someone inside the supreme court covering the hearings every day. my colleague and i will be outside talking to lawmakers. a lot of the lawmakers that helped write the law are going to be attending the hearings as well. so we're going to cover that as well as all of the outside groups that are protesting against the law or rallying to support the law. there's just going to be a lot of action here on the hill. >> emily ethridge following this for cq, thanks for being with us here on c-span radio. >> you're welcome, thank you. more republican reaction to the second anniversary of the health care law that the president signed on march 23rd, 2010. tennessee congressman scott desjarlais and arkansas republican tim griffin both freshman representatives in a teleconference earlier today. >> you guys have spent your time here in congress advocate -- mass spending cuts. this is about $500 billion in a cut of spending.

why is this one not proper? >> you're talking about cutting $500 billion from medicare in the form of rationing to seniors. so it's not a sensible or rationale or reasonable approach when it comes to seniors' access to care. >> go ahead. we all know if we're going to deal with the debt, we're going to have to deal with medicare, among other programs. we've got 10,000 new retirees going on medicare every day. there's no doubt we have to deal with cost. the president's plan, he says i'm not going to reform it. i'm not going to change the way it works. i'm not going to make it better. i'm not going to encourage innovation. i'm not going to do any of those things. i'm just going to rely on reducing line items as needed to reduce services.

in my opinion, that's a total cop out. because just because you're against the ipab, doesn't mean you're not for doing something. in fact, just the opposite. we're the ones who said, yes, we need to reduce costs. but you can reduce costs and harm seniors' access to care, or you can reduce costs in a reform way much like whether you can debate which one you like, whether you like the one that we passed last year, the wyden/ryan proposal, whatever it is. the one thing we ought to be able to agree on is the status quo is completely unacceptable. and from the president's quotes, what he says, he seems to get it. but his actions and his budgets have simply taken the approach that we're just going to cut and we're not going to do anything to change the forces within the

program. so there are -- there are good ways to save and there are less preferable ways to save. and this particular proposal or this particular law, ipab, will do nothing to make medicare run differently. it will simply say we've run out of money, now we're cutting. >> tim griffin is a republican from arkansas. scott desjarlais republican from tennessee. they spoke to reporters on capitol hill earlier in the day. jonathan whitesman says for conservatives on the health care law it is repeal or nothing. let me read to you what he wrote for the "new york times" caucus blog. republicans observe the second anniversary of the president's signing of the health care law this week, a new motto is emerging that could hurt the law's implementation. repeal or nothing. they're talking about ipab, a moment ago in the background from our interview with the reporter from congressional quarterly that gave an essence of what ipab is all about. here's how attorney general richard -- edwin niece writing a

letter to republican lawmakers against efforts to repeal. an independent board empowered by the health care law to find ways to bring down medicare costs. according to this letter it's not that they despise it. according to this letter they loathe it, they want to get rid of it. here's one sentence from their letter. ipab is an unelected and unaccountable board of 15 bureaucrats empowered to set medicare reimbursement rates in order to control costs and it will mean rational health care for our nation's -- rationed health care for our nation's senior citizens. that letter that went out, if you want to read the details is available on "the new york times" website. emily ethridge pointing out ipab is the one issue house republicans will take up as a way to repeal a key part of the president's health care bill. that gets to the larger issue of agreement on capitol hill on many of the major issues. whether or not there is any sense of compromise or bipartisanship. there was a topic we talked about this morning with bill

galston, co-founder of no labels. we want to hear from you whether or not there are ways to improve congress. you by the way on whether or not you think there are ways to improve congress. we'll let you listen to the phone number in just a minute. but first here is a portion from today's washington journal. the reputation of the congress of the united states in the eyes of the american people has never been lower. recent surveys have put it around 10%. i suspect that used car dealers do a little bit better. now having said that, the point is to try to fix the institution. no labels doesn't believe that members of congress are bad and corrupt for the most part. we believe they're good people trapped in a failed and obsolete system of rules and procedures. and what we're trying to do is to add a citizen's voice to encourage them to do what they know is the right thing. let me make one other point.

yeah, there's much too much money in politics. but we also have to recognize that this is a very large, diverse country. and many people campaign for office on the basis of platforms in which they sincerely believe, in which they push for when they get to the house of representatives or the senate. but if you're in the house, there are 434 other people whose opinions and whose constituencies you have to contend with. if you're in the senate, 99 other people. so compromise is the name of the game in washington. and there's a difference between compromise and corruption. and we'd like to try to persuade the american people that compromise can be honorable when it represents the search for common ground. >> our interview with bill galston, co-founder of no labels. he joined us this morning on c-span's "washington journal." by the way, if you want to get more information, nolabels.org

is the website. we are democrats, republicans and independents united in the belief that we do not have to give up our labels merely to put aside what's best for the country. that's our question. how would you change congress? would you change congress to make it work better? our listener feedback line is 202-626-7962. again, 202-626-7962. tell us where you're phoning from. keep your comments brief. we'll use more of your comments throughout the week here on c-span's "washington today." again, the question is how would you change congress? how would you make it more effective in order to get things done. 202 is the area code. here at c-span radio. 626-7962. senator barbara mikulski reaching a milestone having served 35 years in the house and the senate. she is now the longest serving female member of congress in history. back in 1988 she talked about politics, gender politics, at the democratic national convention in atlanta. >> every family's got its worries. paying the mortgage.

school cost. an aging parent who needs help. some families shoulder more than seems possible. drug addiction. family violence. broken homes. but family life should be more than just coping or making ends meet. more than just pinching pennies and dipping into the nest egg. if there's anything that concerns the american family today, it's this. our government hasn't caught up with the new facts of american family life. families have changed, so why can't washington? new facts. moms working. nearly 65% of all mothers are working. part time, full time, all of the time. keeping the family together. making ends meet. making america more prosperous. working mothers need affordable day care and the pay they deserve.

too often they can't get either. over 10 million children under 6 have working mothers. yet child care centers accommodate barely a third of the need. if we want to keep our economy humming, let's get mother some help with the kids! affordable day care, family leave, it's just not too much to ask! and no working woman should take home a paycheck that is less than she deserves. american families will be stronger when working women get changes in their checkbooks and in their law books. >> a milestone this week for senator barbara mikulski. she's now the longest serving woman in congress having first been elected back in 1976 to the house and later to the u.s. senate. she's joining us on capitol hill. thanks very much for being with us. >> happy anniversary, c-span. you know, you've brought the

congress its floor activity, its committees, to the american people. and you've not only made history, but had a big influence on history. >> in fact, you saw the advent of c-span two years after being first elected to the house of representatives. >> yes. it was electrifying. >> let me ask you about your first run for the house and when you ran in 1976, did you expect to serve 35 years? >> when i ran for the house of representatives in 1976, it was the bicentennial year of our country, 250 years. and i was excited to be part of a great reform movement. we were in a post watergate era, and we wanted to change the way congress functioned and open it up to the american people and do things certainly very differently. the other was i wanted to be part of the new wave of women that was coming in to the congress that was an outgrowth

of the women's movement. so the face of the -- of both the house and the senate have changed, and i would also say the whole demeanor of the institution has changed. >> when you first were elected to the house, there were 21 women in congress, 18 in the house, three in the u.s. senate today. that's increased significantly. 92 women serving with 17 of those in the u.s. senate. your colleagues in the senate chamber. >> yes. when i came to the senate in 1986, ten years after elected to the house, there were in all of american history only 17 had served. very few had been elected in their own right. most had succeeded their husband. when i came, there was only one other woman, senator nancy cass casselbalm.

right now there are five republicans. hopefully we can increase our numbers with the next election. >> from your perspective, having served in both chambers, how has congress evolved and changed over the last 35 years? >> what i have observed both in the house and certainly in the senate is that there has been a change in the demeanor. there is less of a sense of bipartisan camaraderie and less of a sense of stability. when i served in the house, we faced some really big, big challenges like we weren't sure we could meet our social security check obligations in the mid 1980s. ronald reagan was in the white house. tip o'neill was in the speakers chair. bob dole and bob baker were leading the united states senate. those men put party aside. we had to make tough decisions, and each had to give a lot. but at the end of the day, we saved social security and showed that we could govern. now what we see is the people

are more interested in party, more interested in scoring points, and i think we need to get back to finding what colin powell once called that sensible center, where we think about the next generation and not the next election. >> why is that so difficult? why is bipartisanship, why is compromise so much more difficult in today's political environment? >> because it's more about a struggle for power of both of the party. and i believe that we need to get back to remembering that we are there to serve the nation. the oath that we take is to the constitution of the united states of america, one nation under god, indivisible. we don't take an oath to a political party. sure, we sign up for a political platform, but that's advisory and optional. the constitution is not. >> we're talking with maryland senator barbara mikulski, a milestone this week, the longest

serving woman in congress. over the years you have worked with a lot of public officials, democrats and republicans. spend a momentum moment to reflect on some of the individuals who have either influenced you or shaped your agenda. >> well, i've served with wonderful people in both the house and the senate when i came to the house of representatives, barbara jordan was completing her last term. and i sat next to her periodically and learned a lot about the parliamentary procedure. congresswoman jordan was one of the great leaders of our time. and worked with wonderful people like the legendary tip o'neill. in the united states, and of course nancy pelosi. nancy and i went to the same -- grew up in baltimore. she in little italy, and i in the polish neighborhood. we went