there is no word. this guy from kansas says if you are trippers and you have plenty of work. certainly not down here. i have been a self-employe carpenter for 33 years and have never seen anything like this before. we have been through recessions, but nothing like this thing if you are self-employed, everyone who wishes, carpenters, painters -- anyone related to construction does not even hit the radar screen as far as unemployment as. we do not get unemployment. these figures of 10% and lower are off the screen. it does not even count as. . .

the average american person, always knock down the hispanic race, they come over here and do -- and what not. the average 30 year old, 35 year old american will not go out and farm labor. host: jim, are you in the farm industry in california? caller: i am retired now. but i worked my whole life -- i worked construction, construction industry off and on for over 35 years. host: we appreciate you joining this morning. thank you for all of your calls. will -- more coming up. in just a moment, we will speak

to b speakoles -- we will speak to corey boles, and talk about the cash for clunkers provision that will be signed tomorrow. later, bradley gramm will cover the pentagon for many years and wrote an extensive book on donald rumsfeld called "by his own rules." coming right back with more "washington journal [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2009] >> the fcc could -- should be a model for transparency, openness, and fairness. >> tonight on "the communicators." a discussion on president obama's choice to lead the federal communications commission with andrew feinberg and fawn johnson.

what the fcc would look like under a new chairman, tonight at 8:00 eastern on "the communicators" on c-span2. >> there is still time to get your copy of c-span's 2009 congressional directorate. with information on house and senate members, the cabinet, supreme court justices, and the nation's governors, plus district maps and how to contact committees and caucuses. it is $16.95. c-span.org online. /products or call 1-877-on-c- span. >> how c-span funded? >> donations. >> from the federal government. >> grants and stuff like that. >> maybe from sponsors? >> they might get some government funding. >> the viewers? >> how c-span funded? 30 years ago, america's cable companies created c-span as a public service, a private business initiative.

no government mandate, no government money. >> "washington journal" continues. host: corey boles covers congress for dow jones newswires and appears in "the wall street journal." we are here to talk about the past for -- cash for clunkers provision. what will this mean for the auto industry? guest: i think lawmakers hope it means another boost to flagging sales. we all know the story of the troubled u.s. auto industry. what this will do is essentially provide a cash incentive to people to trade in older, heavier polluting vehicles and buy new cars off the lot and hopefully get rid of some of this huge backlog. >> you had a good graphic that accompanied an article he did last week with your colleague at "the wall street journal" about what the provisions would do. we will live look at it here. the requirements -- 18 miles a

gallon or less, built in 1994 -- for a new car it has to be at least 22 mpg and in $4,500 subsidy and the last -- guest: if it is least 4 miles, 3500, and at least 10 miles improvement, $4,500. host: have they done these projections on not just in terms of what this will mean for the auto industry but what about the environment? pollution standards? guest: this is one of the most controversial aspects. you said yourself, it is only a 4 mile per gallon improvement, which is really not that much. there was an alternative piece of legislation by senators feinstein of california and senator from maine and their plan would have been much more rigorous from an environmental

standpoint, and much larger increase in terms of miles per gallon efficiency. all it really is is another bailout for the auto industry, not really doing much to improve the environment. host: what if i have a truck for this you become a different requirements? guest: different requirements for what you would be able to acquire. but as long as it satisfies the 18 miles or lower and owned since 1984 and over a year, trucks would be able to qualify. host:corey boles will be here for the next half hour. talking about the cash for clunkers provision. how soon will this be signed into law? guest: of the president should sign it into the lot any day. it was attached to the war funding bill, a pretty controversial piece of legislation itself. he wants to get signed into law to make sure there is still

money for troops in afghanistan and iraq. host: "the washington post" had an article on friday about the passage of that legislation. they write that several other countries had success with this type of legislation. what do you know about that? guest: of one that is most often referred to is in germany -- they did see a sharp spike in auto sales. there is some controversy for the program because there is some evidence that says this year's sales had dipped off more sharply, last year people were planning to buy a car bomb a year earlier instead of being a net increase in the number of cars sold. but economists are arguing back and forth. host: if you have questions about the plan, corey will be here for the next half hour to take your phone calls. maryland on the democrats' line. caller: i just traded a good chevy in and bought a dodge in

december, dodge caliber. 2007. this car has in -- has been in the shop more than i have janet -- i am just at my wit's end. can you help me? thank you. guest: of technical speaking, you could benefit from this program because it is a vehicle knew where the 1984 and if you bought it -- you have all but four a year. in terms of problems with the vehicle itself, you have to call your local dealer. host: go to the dealer with your car -- it is not a trade in because they will not take it and resell it. guest: they will get a scrap fee. i'm not an expert. i know there is a different rate for scrap. the dealers will get compensated by the government through this program and they will also be able to sell your car for scrap. but that is kind of keep to the

program, these older cars will not be back on the road. host: joe in syracuse, new york. caller: of the question that basically it relates to behavior. we always tried to motivate people by a tax incentive. why don't democrats start buying small and cars? rachel maddow drives a big four- wheel-drive truck and joe biden drives a chop the truck. is it -- is there a reason why they don't buy a yaris or fit, thereby doubling their gas mileage and therefore cutting co2 in half and cutting the importation of gas and have? why do we need tax incentives when the democrats themselves should just be driving smaller cars. are democrats embarrassed to drive smaller cars? guest: i suppose there is a fair

point, if they are supposed to be inspiring people to buy smaller cars, this should lead by example. host: he mentioned foreign cars. an article in "the new york times" say small car makers benefit from detroit's financial woes. is detroit competitively positioned to take advantage of cash for clunkers in offering high mileage vehicles as well as some of the foreign competitors? guest: it is probably a fair comment to say detroit is very much going through the process of reorganizing their product lines and bringing out smaller cars. i do not think this program is going to benefit the next generation of cars we're talking about coming down 2010 or 2011. this is really meant to be a short-term stimulus. a lot of the larger and more traditional vehicles obviously would not benefit. guest: -- host: was there much opposition to this? guest: i think there was. the environmentalists were opposed to this version because they said it that not do enough.

a lot of fiscal conservatives were opposed because it was yet another billion dollar ad on to lots of government largess. but there were a lot -- and of supporters in the auto industry and congress and those who view the problems of the auto industry as akin to the economy that it got through reasonably smoothly. host: any way to understand how they will track how successful this is? guest: i do not think tracking will be difficult because it will be administered by dealers so dealers will receive a certain number of vouchers and they will keep tabs -- i do not know who in the government, but somebody, to figure out how many are being shifted. it is crucial to note that this is almost a trial. there is only a billion dollars added to this bill. the estimate a full program would cost $4 billion. i think there will be another debate in congress than whether or not it was successful in the first three months and whether they want to renew it.

host: of windsor, vermont. grad on independent line. caller: i am an auto mechanic from independent. this whole project that they are throwing out there -- you know, the bottom line is the american public, we have no money, number one. a number two, the first comment, the lady commented about her problems with american made cars. quality-control. we are competing against the japanese and europeans and the bottom line is the american public were so dissatisfied with american-made cars that we have to go to the grass roots, research and development. as an auto mechanic, i see it time and time again, the dealership's, the service departments are terrible and people are dissatisfied. they're not going to buy american made cars. they will keep going back to the japanese and european-made

vehicles. i just feel that these incentive programs, i don't know. talking about maybe newark-type cars. people with gas-guzzlers' some of these people have no money and that is why they on the vehicles. they are fortunate enough to buy a newer vehicle, they are dissatisfied with american made cars. it is quality-control. we need to go into research and development to compete against the japanese. that is the bottom line. as an honest mechanic, i know what i'm talking about. host: any thoughts on his comments? guest: yes, there have been examples of this abroad, and in europe, especially, and there is really no telling what will happen. as the caller has said, there are many people suffering and maybe $3,500 will not be enough to buy a new car. host: he brought a point about people who have these clunkers and they are getting $3,500 or $4,500, but what is helpful in a not be in a range that they

could buy a new car. guest: if you are struggling with monthly bills, 3500 bucks will not make a difference. host: could you buy a used car to get better mileage? guest: no, that was another controversial aspect -- some are pushing this for used cars. as it currently exists, it is only applicable to new cars. host: hutcheson, minnesota. week on the republican line. caller: there is a technology, hydrogen gas. i spoke to a guy -- he is getting 60 miles a gallon now. two metal plates, 12 decibels battery and start bubbling in the water like seven-up. the bubbles are flammable gas made from water. this technology has been around for years and i cannot believe they are not pushing that idea. it works. i have my own car rides -- you can make flammable gas off of

water. host: thanks for the import. freeport, eleanor. the independent line. caller: i have a 1985 dodge pickup with a legendary slant 6 in june, 22 miles a gallon, weighs 5,000 pounds, it can gross 8,000 pounds. it is only 90 horsepower but yet it will pull anything down the road. way more dependable than anything out on the road now. and it was made in america. it puts food on the table for americans. i refuse to buy anything from japan or anything from korea, absolutely not. host: thank you for your call. guest: but i think one thing people should be aware of is that foreign-owned auto makers are huge employers in the u.s., especially in the south in states like alabama and missouri. toyota and honda and floyd thousands of americans. we are not just talking about

cars made in japan or elsewhere being imported. these are people building large factories and some of them are rapidly expanding manufacturing employers and the u.s.. host: greg on the democrats' line. caller: of the only thing i'm worried about -- is there any danger of people taking advantage of this government program and turning it all into a wash? and i would also like to ask you, how long does it take in the morning to cut your own hair? " scott why don't you take the first part? guest: there is always a risk of people taking a vintage of government programs. we will have to see how this is implemented -- host: you say it is a billion dollars, and the timeframe, a limited amount of money.

guest: depending on the success of this first go round, there will be renewed effort of congress come the fall to read up it and perhaps change the standards and change out works, but i think there's a lot of support. host: fla., sam, good morning. caller: good morning. the first time i have been able to get into your program. host: glad to have you here. caller: let me explain something here. there are no jobs. there is no money. people who can't afford this will not be able to afford it. it isn't going to work at all to help people get jobs. the problem is congress -- tom coburn has it right on. he said in the committee meeting that we are the problem. that means congress is the problem.

and they are. the point is this -- they overtax manufacturers until they left the country. now, if they want to come back, they will tax them for leaving the country. it is a mess here. and if people would read liberty and tyranny, they would figure it out because so many of our youth are not even talked about our country. what it means to be in our country. host: she mentioned senator tom coburn has been critical of stimulus spending. guest: i think he may have voted for it, but again, this is attached to a much larger war funding bill, which often happens to congress. anything controversial. host: president obama said earlier on that they were not going to have these supplemental

spending bills come on a larger issue, beyond cash for clunkers. will we see any more of these types of. big catch all bills? that's got this is what they are saying, this is the last war funding bill -- guest: this is what they are saying, this is the last war funding bill. it would be very shy to say this is the last catch-all large spending bill in congress, because that is kind of what congress does. host: why is congress reluctant to take something, like the cash for clunkers bill, and debated as a separate spending issue? guest: i do not think in that case it was the instance. i think there was pretty much widespread support, despite some of the concerns of those on the left and fiscal conservatives. i think what they were trying to do here is gain support for the wider war funding bill, and there were controversial aspect of that bill. i think part of that was adding

on to this to win support for that. he and also this being the last catchall spending bill for a while, they need to allocate the funding, and they wanted to get this thing going as soon as possible. so, it's kind of made sense from that point of view. host: of the $1 billion is from the 2009 spending -- though $1 billion is from 2009 spending? guest: yes. host: charles on the independent mind. caller: a stipulation in this bill, that the automobile has been made in america by americans and not foreign imports, even though it may be a toyota, as long as it is built in america? host: was there is the election? guest: there was an attempt but there was present -- plenty of wto issues. the u.s. -- is difficult to

answer that kind of language and then lit -- legislation. host: manassas, virginia. the democrats' line. caller: can you hear me? excellent. the last caller actually asked what i wanted to ask about the car having to be made in america. i drive a kia, i love,kia. it has lasted me so long, through my abuse. i was thinking it would be great if u.s. car manufacturers could kind of pair up with some of their -- i guess, competitors, because we would learn a lot. also i understand that this program, i guess some environmental and economic benefit. would it take care of the huge trucks that you see billowing smoke, these large multi-wheeled

trucks that carry materials across the country and what not, would this program do something about all the smoke that they are putting out? guest: to your first point, about u.s. manufacturers teaming up with foreign companies, that is what we are seeing with chrysler. they were effectively purchased by fiat, the and talked -- of the italian auto maker. there are no drop the world for efficient and small vehicles. i think that was kind of the point, fiat bringing its technology. to your second point, this would not affect commercial vehicles at all. clearly a mechanism to stimulate retail car sales. host: a commentary on "the atlantic" on line. cash for clunkers goes somewhat. he writes about what he sees is the main problem. he says the main problem, i think, was appointed -- pointed out by the ryan avent -- and trade and scd that gets 70 miles an hour with 617 of a gallon of

my one that gets 19 mpg with a 3500 hot bling hand from the government. -- with a $3,500 helping hand from the government. guest: it is aimed primarily at helping the of the industry. i guess it depends of your point of view, if you think that is a laudable goal and you don't mind, but if you think this is an attempt to clean up the environment, you may very well be disappointed. host: massachusetts. carol ann, republican. caller: i unconcerned -- i am concerned, americans with a high gas mileage cars, the present saying we will save 1.8 million gallons of gasoline, but who will make up the tax revenue that comes from the gasoline that we use? if we will lose all of that revenue, we have all these cars driving places, someone will have to step up taxes somewhere. i would thank you if you could give me a little bit of light on who would make up the taxes.

guest: of i think that cutting get -- i think that cutting gas imports, as you are aware, but united states imports much of the oil and gas from the middle east, canada, and elsewhere and that is part of the obama administration's motivation here, they want to encourage alternative energy like wind and solar. so i think they would probably argue that cutting imports of gas is not a bad thing, the tax committed elsewhere from other energy taking its place. host: lexington, but he kentucky, the democrats' line. caller: oit was already mentiond about as you day and a bill -- about the as you see in the bill. -- suv in the bill. i think we are just feeding the road that the president wants to take, and i really underestimate our congress.

the leadership doesn't seem real bright. and you talked about the war spending bill. i understand that there were some expenditures for aircraft carriers, or something that the secretary of defense had already knocked off his spending. is that correct? guest: there was a lot of spending on military construction, on purchasing new military vehicles, aircraft, navy vehicles, etc., in this bill. but to an extent -- the purpose of this bill. every time -- these large war spending bills, there is a lot of back and forth over which particular program should be funded. that is probably the reason why it took two months to get it done, is because various lawmakers representing their constituents wanted certain programs included.

i am not familiar with the particular program you are refering to, but there was a lot of buying of planes and trains and automobiles. most of the bill has not been signed yet by the president. -- host: of the bill has not been signed by the present. it could be premature. there is an article that about general motors and the ad budget holding steady. are they likely to take advantage of passage of this bill and drive advertising, or is this something the federal government will provide? guest: there is no money i am aware of to spend on promotion. i would not be surprised -- look of the hyundai advertising, pledging to revive the car if you lose your job, and you see others following that. host: bedford, indiana, john on the independent line. caller: anything in the bill that prevents the auto dealers from raising the price of a car

3005 funded dollars or 4005 runs in dollars? one of my main concerns is they will try to take advantage -- $3,500 or $4,500? when my main concerns a they will try to take advantage. guest: there is language in the bill pretty tightly controlling behavior and activities the of the dealers are required or not required to do. it is a long bill and i have not read of the word, but i'm fairly confident that there is going to be restrictions on their ability to increase the sticker price. host: now that the war bill is wrapped up and cash for clunkers, what is your next door? guest: thankfully -- i say that because of the very complicated -- i do not do much on health care. i concentrate on a lot of the spending so right now congress is working its way through the 2010 spending bills to give the federal government going. there are plenty of stories hidden on page 700 of each bill, so i ended a plodding through

legions of spending was a solution to find out what is really being spent up there. host: of the city joining us, corey boles from dow jones news wire and sometimes to be his work in "the wall street journal" as well. we will take the next half hour taking your thoughts on the situation in iran and specifically about the administration's response. we will play you a clip from senator lindsay gramm in a moment. first, some of the coverage and international paper's. "the financial times" says opposition in iran considers its options. a look at the front page of "the financial times." y dinging pick -- widening it out. poster of a woman allegedly shot dead on saturday in tehran. that image was sent around the world and the poster was created of this woman. i am going to pull this off and show "the wall street journal" this morning as they have a picture of the same woman on the street in tehran. this leads their front page.

they also have a story this morning about spying in iran. iran's web is buying aided by western technology. the report said that instead of confronting the political turmoil that consumed the country in the past week, iranian government appears to be engaging in a practice often called deep pockets inspection, which enables authorities to not only block communications but to monitor it to gather information about individuals as well as for disinformation purposes, according to experts that the wall street journal interviewed. the monitoring capability was provided, at least in part, by a joint venture of siemens ag, the german conglomerate, and no p.o. corp., the finnish cell phone company, and the second half of 2008, a spokesman for the joint venture confirmed. the monitoring center installed within the government's telecom monopoly was part of a large contract with iran that included contract with iran that included mobile phone networking and