♪ host: good morning, today is wednesday, august 5. president obama travels to indiana today and will discuss health care reform and the coming. was president joe biden travels to detroit to visit an alternative energy project. the debate of sonia sotomayor will continue also, young america's foundation host its 31st annual student conference. congress does on healtbreak as healthcare heats up.

in "the n.y. times close-" -- clinton secures two pardons from north korea -- that is in "the n.y. times." six months later it says here that obama returns with an approval rating of 56%. he is expected to tout his economic stimulus plan to kill us growth. he will announce manufacturing plants, but officials say there are successes to highlight locally, signaling that the times are getting better. it says that it is great that he can return to committees he cares so much about and see signs of success. i hope that he will go way encouraged, and he should. there are encouraging indicators that the economy is turning around, but the battle is far from over. long term there is reason to be

optimistic, but still thousands of unemployed in this county begun until all are back to work, he does not think anyone can say it is all behind. on the phone now is a reporter for elkhart, indiana. what do you expect a president to say today? guest: we learned today that the president and his vice president's appearance will announce $2.4 billion in grants as part of the federal stimulus funding for an electric vehicle battery manufacturing. these will go to 48 projects in 25 different states. indiana and michigan are two states hit hardest by the downturn and are receiving the most dollars for these grants. there are seven projects in indiana, and 11 in michigan that will be funded. host: will some of the ago to

your town? guest: we are not sure until the white house releases details this morning. but there are two counties here in elkhart, indiana that have attracted attention. the plant where obama will appear today, where they are working on a hybrid vehicle -- engines for heavy-duty trucks, and then a company called electric motors corporation that is working on electric motors for smaller trucks. host: is that still the rv capital of the country? guest: yes, it they still use that title. host: this is the president's second trip there. what keeps the president coming back? guest: it is a question of timing. elkhart, indiana had been in the downturn before it began to hit other places. when it was time for the

president to push for his stimulus plan, this county has one of the highest unemployment rates and the nation. but people here feel a connection to the president as well. there had not been a presidential campaign coming through in the and the much less of this county in two decades. but obama had two officers said appear throughout much of the campaign and his workers were canvassing on the ground. the president came here once during the primary and once during the general election. the connection was forged back in 2008. host: you know that the president's approval ratings have dipped slightly. what you hear from people on the street there in elkhart, indiana from people? guest: there are a lot of people who are excited, but also a lot of skepticism. this is a conservative area of the country. obama did well here, better than john kerry and john mccain, but

-- he did better than kerry, but john mccain still one here. people are still wondering how this will all turn out in the end. host: is there anything you have seen that would suggest if the stimulus is or is not working there? guest: there have been a few projects under way and one that has been completed. there is a ribbon-cutting ceremony for $4 million revamped runway at the airport. there are some street projects that have started an companies working on those who say they have hired people back that they laid off. it is hard to trace exact job creation numbers for some projects because so much is based on a pass down the effect. all these projects will have companies hiring people back.

some people wonder how many jobs have been created by this work. host: thank you for joining us, josh. "the n.y. times" rights also that specifics improve, but hope is elusive. they write that when obama arrives here on wednesday, his second trip there since taking office, he is certain to find a president eager to hear about the announcement for some federal grants. but interviews with nearly two dozen residents suggest he will also find some who are increasingly skeptical.

today, also dominate the news is the former president bill clinton's visit to north korea to secure the release of two american journalists. on the front page here, president bill clinton met with kim jong il on tuesday. his visit was the most visible by an american in nearly a decade.

we want to hear from our viewers today on what they think of bill clinton's visit to north korea. in the same article, they continue "the routing tableau of the former president getting into a diplomatic crisis while his wife was embarking on a tour of africa and her role underscore the need an enduring role of the clintons, even in the obama era." the message was in turn passed to the former vice-president gore when he was asked if he

thought the mission would be successful. mr. obama did not speak directly with mr. clinton before the mission. but his national security adviser contacted the former president to sound him out. the senior official said that the administration did due diligence with north koreans in advance to ensure that mr. clinton wins, he would return with the women. we will take our first call from silver spring, maryland. hello? are you there? ok. not yet. bolling, also on bill clinton in today's "the washington post" talking about the impact of negotiations, they write that north korea had long made it clear they expect a high-profile visit on behalf of the journalists -- the

no government officials appeared to be aboard clinton's plan, but the nature of the delegation did the mission a quasi-official status. it is not clear who funded the trip. the first call is from georgia. caller: yes, i am here. good morning. listen, the reason why i was calling is because i agree the white house and in the former president clinton over there to recover the two women held over

there in north korea. the one thing i'm disappointed in some american people, the way they look at this opportunity for us to be friends with people outside our country. we need to reflect that we are people willing to sit down and talk with people who do not see things the way that we do. sometimes we need to sit down and talk with them and say, look, we have had problems in the past, but want to go on in the future. we need other countries to invest in our country so we can get jobs. i get upset when i see people, every time something great happens in our country, people get a little upset and negative about it. i wanted to say that was a good thing that they sent mr. clinton over there to recover these two people. i hope they do more of this

sitting down at the table with others. let's be friends with these people. host: today in "the usa today" i write about these relations with north korea. the next call is from stockton, calif., on the line for democrats. caller: good morning, i think it is terrific that president clinton was able to go to korea to help with the release of the hostages, the prisoners.

i do believe if john mccain had been elected there would get 12 years of hard labor because he follows the standard bush method of not talking to anyone and thinking that all work out. i do appreciate your taking my call. one more quick thing. as you are reading something from the small town of a car, indiana this morning, you read a quotation from a woman commenting that president obama was giving money to the car companies and to the banks. president obama did not give a dime to the banks -- that was the tarp program under the bush administration, correct? host: correct. caller: i see this happen too often on c-span for people are quoted as saying something false and no one ever says anything about it. these are serious times and we're dealing with serious problems and it is the responsibility of the specially people at c-span.

we're gonnare not going to get m the regular meeting. please make sure that people get the truth. host: the tarp program was enacted under president bush and has been continued under the obama administration. caller: yes, and the reason we give money to the car companies is to keep 10 million people working in the united states. president obama is not a liberal. i wish to work, but he is a moderate. for people who really think and read books and people who are dealing with facts, there are over 50 million people in this country without health insurance. we're trying to solve serious problems. let's make a deal and let's make it the truth on c-span. host: alexandria, virginia? caller: i have a response to the last caller.

do we really believe there were no concessions made for the release in north korea? what about the behind-the-scenes talk the probably went on? i personally believe something was said or done to at least a piece jong il. i think it is interesting that everyone thinks this was just a win-win. i firmly believe there were at least some discussions, something said, that had kim jong il deal he could release them and get something he wanted. host: on the opinion page today hear from "the wall street journal" it is written, can the former president clinton brokerage deal with north korea where others have failed? it is highly unlikely. it says that the reader of north

korea is suffering from several illnesses. he has probably see did powers to hard-line generals, though it is difficult to know for sure. thanks in part to fail diplomacy in both the clinton and bush administrations, there is almost no room left for a diplomatic relations. diplomatic talks began in 2003 after the north korean government admitted violating the agreed framework. its capital refused to verify its promises to dismantle its nuclear facilities and give up its small arsenal of atomic weapons. the next call is from massachusetts. caller: hello, good morning. i believe he did a wonderful job bringing home -- he and his wife, and whoever was underneath -- they did a great job. now let's bring home the

soldiers in prison and a few others in prison. if they can do this they can do other things. thank god, but why is it just journalist? bring home the other people. in north korea, afghanistan, or wherever they are held. if we can broker a deal this way, we can do it for others in prison. host: ok, washington, d.c., frank. caller: i think that our former president clinton did a great job. let me say this about the president. i voted for president obama. i am black. but i did not vote for him because he is a black man. i voted for him because i like his policies. like he said, we are all humans. once people learn to live together, then the whole world

will be better, but right now the united states is sending these spaceship's into space, right? what are they looking for? there is no doubt there are people up there. they not look like us, but god did not make a list plants that no one is living on. if we cannot get along with each other, why would they try to get on with us? -- god and not make all these planets that no one is living on. caller: good morning. i am a republican but i applaud president clinton's ability to get these prisoners out. but i think there are other problems with this administration. you are really going to have to do something about all of these acorn people calling in. i don't know how you can handle it.

host: detroit, michigan, on the independent line. caller: let me commend you for the topic today. is great to see the former president clinton and jimmy carter -- they are doing some things better grip. as a veteran i can feel a difference and makes -- they are doing some things really great. since president obama has been in office there has been a notable change. since he has been in office i have gotten a tax cut, a stimulus check, saved my home by reducing my monthly mortgage payments by $3. i was laid off last november. -- i save it $300 on the monthly mortgage payments. i got unemployment benefits.

now what he is doing for veterans and for education. i just cannot believe republicans can find anything negative about bill clinton going over there. or find anything negative about how hard this administration is working. the president communicates with people. i just think it is great. host: pontiac, mich., on the line for democrats. caller: do these people think we give nuclear secrets to get two hostages back from north korea? what is the big deal? host: what you think about bill clinton's trip and his role in it? caller: i think it is great and we should talk to more people instead of dropping bombs on them. how can it hurt? we do not need to give them nuclear secrets.

host: sarasota, florida. caller: historically, the north koreans have always done this type of things for the take hostages and negotiate. for them is a tool to gain food for their people. host: on the independent line we have carl from north beach, florida. good morning. caller: ok, from my military experience doing border duty i found that that you do not have a choice. when you have people who go over the border with a bike accident or as spires -- whether as by accident or as spies, you do not have a choice. you have to give the people back. it is so unfortunate that would

ever deal you must make, we have to accept the consequences. host: where did you do border control? caller: on the border in germany before they took down the wall. host: we had darrell from missouri. caller: good morning, i was glad he got these two people out of jajil. now a like to see him start in america -- and i'm glad he got these two people out of jail. he can get some of these innocent people released and then he can go to guantanamo and release some of those innocent people. thank you. host: beaufort, south carolina. caller: i want to make a clear, and that obama is not a moderate, he is a liberal.

he pretends to be moderate, but has every intention of moving everyone to the liberal policy which only 20% in this country indoors. as for bill clinton, i hope he continues to sell nuclear secrets to north korea and then maybe he can go over there in the next decade to appease his large ego. regarding the cash for clunkers, i'm glad we're forcing more people into debt and changing the natural market as we did for houses. the government thought it could create a new economy there and look what happened. you are doing the same thing now for cars, having young people go into debt more and creating an artificial demand. in germany it work for a little while, and then it created another problem because people

had cars. you cannot change market. you can only stimulate its so much. markets have to take care of themselves. people are so impatient they do not have time to wait on anything. it is a shame to see the dealers make extra profits because when people go into stores they do not. she down if they get a $5,000 coupon -- they do not negotiate down at the get a $5,000 coupon. but i hope that they do not apportion any more money. we will see long-term affects. liberals are running around and acted like it is such a great deal. we will see what happens in a few months or a year regarding the policy. host: the program is referenced on this front page.

they also have a graphic, the top 10 selling vehicles. the top three are the ford focus, toyota corolla, and the honda civic. the next call comes from albany, new york on the independent line. caller: i think president clinton did a great job going over there to get the two journalists.

another comment -- cynthia over there in israel, i don't know if she has been released. she is a former senator. host: she is a former member of the house. caller: but she worked for the government. i think they should go for that particular american. i have not even heard you say much about it. c-span, none of these channels say anything about cynthia mckinney. israel is our ally. she was taking medical aid to the palestinians. you bet there will go over there to get those irani in-americans. -- iranian-americans. host: the next call from south

orange, new jersey. are you there? no, next call, seneca falls, new york on the republican line. caller: hello? host: what you think about bill clinton's trip to north korea? caller: i think it is a wonderful, marvelous idea and their families must be pleased. but now would like to see him go over and deal with the nafta bill with mexico and other countries and bring a better job spec. bill clinton -- and bring our jobs back. bill clinton signed the nafta bill and lost all of our jobs. that is what the expedition was

and that is what happened. host: to alabama on the republican line. caller: good morning. i'm doing fantastic, thanks for accepting my call. i was disturbed by the guy who commented on cash for clunkers. he has obviously never worked in the car industry, but i'm a former car salesman and i know that the cash they are getting is not only blessing the family who gets the car, it is blessing the family who sold the car. when the economy bottomed, the car salesmen were hit the hardest. they know about dealerships the shutdown, but when the business and loans stopped, the car salesman stopped eating. the cash for clunkers is getting

food on the table. republicans do not see that because they are born into things. they are born with a car, their parents give them this and that. if you have noticed your phone calls, people: to say that healthcare is bad are people with health care already. the lady said we do not need health care and she had the nerve to say that she loves her interest. what about the mmillions who do not have it? host: ok, let's go to baltimore. caller: yes, i support the former president going over there to rescue those young ladies. kudos to the previous caller who spoke up for mckinney's prison stay in israel -- those our allies and no one has negotiated for her. she's a former congresswoman.

that is an outrage. host: ok, we will leave it there. our program continue surely with the conversation on the u.s. economy with the reporter from "the washington post." ♪ this week, the full senate debates the nomination of sonia sotomayor, live on c-span c- span and coming this fall,

toward the supreme court. the phenomena of facebook and the best-selling author on its success. it is part of the programming on the weekend. >> sunday, frank reflect some 15 years of columns for "the new york times" -- and his column following 9/11. that is sunday night on c-span. " continues. joining us now as an economics reporter for "the washington post" to talk about the u.s. economy. the headline says that obama is setting not to put a brave face on it coming. they have some statistics to back them up. figures last week show that the economy contracted more slowly in the last quarter, suggesting

the downturn might be bottoming. compresses are showing signs of stabilizing in some cities. the reports are likely to be over shattered. that is by that released on friday expected to show that unemployment rose again in july, perhaps to more than 10% for the first time since 1983. thank you for having me. the good news is, as the article pointed out and as the president is pointing out, that the recession seems to be ending. it looks like sometime this summer that the country will technically bottom out. it may not be rapidly, but we will level off. the important thing to keep in mind is that the recession ending is not the same thing as everything feeling good again. what happens is that the job market keeps getting worse usually after the recession ends

and production begins to rise. on friday we will see an unemployment rate there will probably show a continued rise. that employers kept cutting jobs. it will take several months of sustained growth in output before that changes. the question is, how soon will that change and how aggressively will the unemployment situation improved once it does? host: if unemployment rises again, does it make the administration more vulnerable to criticism that this is a jobless recovery? guest: it does, but it is a little premature to call the jobless recovery. on the one hand, they want to instill confidence and encourage faith and the economy. that can be self-flam. if people feel good, they're more likely to hire or spend money. -- that can be self-fulfilling.

but as long as people are having trouble getting a job it is hard to feel like things are getting better. we are in the worst economy we have had by some measure since the 1930's. that is tough to swallow for anyone, especially if you are out of work. host: what you think the president's message will be today in elkhart, indiana? guest: we have heard some specific language of the last few days which is that things are improving and we see signs that the recession is bottoming out, but i feel your pain -- says president obama. he understands the job market is bad. he is trying to do things to make it better. the stimulus package is part of the reason things are improving. he is trying to combat a drop in approval ratings. he is trying to show the administration has a plan.

host: we're speaking with neil irwin. if you use twitter you can also send us a message there. you also cover the federal reserve. what is the latest on ben bernanke and his performance there? do you think he will be reappointed to that posed by the president? guest: it is interesting to me. his term expires january 31, 2010. the president will have to decide whether to reappoint him or choose someone else, perhaps larry summers. it will be a big decision for the president. some of the issues are, on the one hand, markets like ben bernanke and there would be

continuity, confidence that a steady hand is at thetiller. he might be confirmed with fireworks in the senate. on the other hand do you want to reappoint the fed chairman when the unemployment rate approaches 10%? though ben bernanke has been aggressive in dealing with the crisis since it happened in the last year, he did not foresee it, did not see how severe it the problems would be in the early years of his time. it is probably a close call for the white house. i am sure there thinking about it carefully. host: one more question on financial regulatory reform moving through congress. where does it stand? how strong of a bill is it shaping up to be? guest: it is mixed.

the big hold ups, one idea of the administration has is to make the federal reserve a systemic regulator. that means giving the fed the power to oversee any company that gets big and complicated enough to risk the whole financial system. he did not have a company like a.i.g. that becomes huge without some government oversight. host: is this that too big to fail idea? guest: it is. you put stricter oversight's on them and discourage them becoming the big to begin with. but people are reluctant to give more power to the fed after all the bailouts. there is a lot of reluctance in congress to give any new power to the fed. the other piece is a new regulator to protect consumers of financial products. people who are taking out loans -- the idea is to have a single agency in charge of protecting people from potentially

unscrupulous behavior by lenders and other financial companies. that has strong support among democratic leadership. some centrist democrats and republicans are worried that it would add a layer of bureaucracy and not protect consumers, but rather only impose many restrictions on financial companies and limit the options available. host: the first call is from john in arlington, virginia. caller: i want to comment on the previous caller who talk about people talking on your lines and making untrue statements. it is really hard, i know for you, when he chastised you about the tarp funds. he said it was not under barack obama. is that correct? host: he did say that, and we clarified that it was enacted under president bush and has been continued under the obama

administration. caller: there is always the tendency for people to make those kind of statements. but to call things lies, it is good to qualify things -- he was a senator in congress and running for president. he had an opinion on the tarp fund. if you did or did not vote for it or did not vote at all -- so, it is also part of the congressional debate. many things that go on should be looked at holistically. you can say that bush did this, but it was voted for the overwhelmingly by democrats, too. can i make one more comment about the coming? i think things will go find talking about the cars. maybe the government should not

be in the car selection business. maybe we should not tell people to do electric over gas or fuel economy, but we will need cars for a while, so it is probably not the worst program in the world. host: cash for clunkers, hell is that indexing? guest: it is serving as a nice form of stimulus. this is a much smaller then the big $700 billion package passed in february. it is having a real impact on the auto industry. many economists have upgraded their forecast for the summer, third quarter. they expect the auto industry to stabilize and improve because of this program. there is a question of how long lasting the benefits will be. but for now in the middle of this deep recession in turned out to be a nice boost.

host: the next call is from jacksonville, florida. caller: thanks for taking my call. i get tired of the president blaming the deficit on bush. remember during the campaign, obama was a senator and he rushed back to vote on the $700 billion bailout for the banks? and when he took office in january, he had $350 billion of that left over. he continued to use that and then he voted with democrats -- only the democrats voted for that $787 billion bill. some say he has only spend 10% of that. it is not helping the economy.

it is not helping jobs. we have a corrupt media who will not give us the truth. as far as the health care, 85% of the people in the country are satisfied with their insurance plan. they do not want it destructive and obama taking over to make the government-run health care. but the media will not give us the truth about it. thank you for taking my call. guest: a couple of things to untangle here on where the deficit comes from. a big chunk of it is coming about because of the recession. however you want to apportion blame for the recession, the truth is that when the economy is in a deep downturn there's less revenue coming in from

taxes and business profits, and corporate taxes -- that is a big part of the reason for the budget deficit being what it is. the tarp was passed last fall. senator obama at the time did vote for it. that was $700 billion. that is not appear expense. much of that is being paid back and will be paid back. it was used to buy preferred stock, make loans. much of that has come back. not all of that. there will probably be losses. it looks like the government will lose money in c.i.t. the automobile bailout has a risk of losing money, but it is not appear loss. but the $800 billion is likely to increase the deficit both this year and next. there is plenty of blame to go around when you look of the deficit picture. host: on the independent line we

have john from palm beach, florida. caller: i have a question about the tarp funds. we are getting money returned from the banks. but when people ask where the interest is and how it is applied and spend, no one seems to have the answer. guest: there are the profits the government is making on the investments. the return, i believe, on investment in goldman sachs is about 23%. it is a pretty good return. that is remaining in the tarp funds and is now available to use if there is another financial institution that needs to be rescued. on the question of what banks are doing with the money -- that is also an interesting question lending is very much constrained.

it is hard to say it is because banks are not doing what they should be doing or whether it is because the economy is bad. host: the next call is from tennessee on the republican line. are you there? caller: hello, yes? on the economy i have a couple of suggestions, but i do not know if anyone will listen. hello? yes, i'm calling about the economy. if they would put the seniors on the liveable social security benefit, i believe it would help the economy and housing. seniors will spend it as far as cash for clunkers, there is no way we could afford the payments.

if you can trade in the old car for a new car. guest: it is true that when you make direct payments to people whether seniors or anyone else, especially those with lower incomes, it works well with stimulus. the money gets out the door quickly. people without much money are more likely to spend it. the problem is you do not have as long lasting results. so, the argument for spending money on new roads it is that you have something at the end of it. that is the debate. it is why more money in the stimulus is going to projects then to direct aid for individuals. host: haveca -- we have carl on the independent line. caller: let me ask this

question, mr. neil irwin. republicans complained about mr. obama and the job he is doing on the economy. let me go back to 19 a.d. when ronald reagan was elected. things got worse after he got involved. -- that was back in 1980. it was at least two years before the economy got better. guest: yes, the recession, the first couple of years of ronald reagan's term was pretty bad and the most severe in the post world war era. i believe the unemployment rate topped out around 10.5% and that recession. we are right now at 9.5% and still climbing. we came out of that serious recession in 1982.

by the time president reagan ran again in 1984 looked pretty good. the recession was engineer. this one was caused by financial crisis and bust in the housing sector. that one was caused by the federal reserve raising interest rates to combat inflation. they succeeded, but at the cost of high unemployment. the good thing about kthat kind of recession is that when the fed takes things back down, you can be confident things will improve. host: more from your paper. here is the headline. they write their personal income to could steepest dive in june.

on to the next caller from baltimore, md., on the independent mind. caller: good morning. i have a question and comment, real quick. when i look at what we're doing as far as economic policies, trying to reenergize the economy with all this money and all these different programs, and trying all these different things -- the question i have talking to some of my people -- i do not know if you have ever heard of the degrowth movement. we move away from the obsession

with trying always to grow the economy, pump more money, production, resources into the economy, but think about economic activities in a way that are more sustainable for our lives, the economy, and the environment. are there any connotations the economists are considering out of the box thinking for this whole process? guest: a couple of things there. it is true that the measures economists use like gdp do not capture other non-tangible things such as human happiness or the value of the nice environment. that is a weakness in those statistics. it is something for americans to

decide. is it better to have 2% growth and a better environment and more leisure time, or 3% growth and something else? that said, what we have now is not something anyone wants. if the normal unemployment rate -- it is something like 5%, that means there is a huge chunk of the population who are ready to work, but can i get a job. you can argue in the long run that we want a model of growth and an approach to the economy that has other values then just purely maximizing the level of growth, but it is hard to argue that you want for people ready to work to not be able to get a job. host: on our twitter page --

guest: in the long run ,yes. and the short run, we have a deep recession and you do what you can to get out of it. in the long run there are huge issues on how the u.s. government will pay for itself going for. printing money, the fed is printing to create money for various programs. it will have to eventually and won those or we will have problems with inflation and a few years. on the budget side, if congress does not find a way to get it in line, then eventually borrowing costs will shoot through the roof. people debate when exactly the inflection piont is on both those issues. -- the inflection point on those issues. host: our next call is from san

diego, california. caller: with your discussing the u.s. economy -- ok, you hit the words deep recession, but you do not say the word depression. we are facing a depression and the time has come for the u.s. as a whole to really look at itself and say, there is no more money. the money we are borrowing from china or whoever is getting worse and worse. i bring this up because i remember as a teenager in 1964 when my grand uncle, been a world warii that, everyone was fighting the big battle about medicare not been good for america. calling it socialism. the years go by and people say that is my -- what i earned and

deserve. everyone says we will and the trust fund of social security. but the bottom line is, you as an economist, a writer, how you look at america from 1960 when kennedy was president, until now how we have changed as a whole country as far as the economy? what you think are the milestones' affect us now? not being either president obama's or president bush's fault? where do we stand? guest: that is a broad question. we have a very different economy than we did in the 1960's. it is more oriented toward service businesses than many pressuring. it is more globally oriented with trade which is a larger portion of activity than it was

them. that creates a lot of benefits in terms of the ability to get goods and services we might want, but it creates some costs in terms of people -- there has been a lot of destruction to industries that have been in decline because of trade. it also contributes to some global imbalances now. we are borrowing a lot from china. there are two sides to coin. china needs to consume more just as we need to save more. a lot has changed and much has stayed the same. we have a system with a lot of it innovation and effort by a entrepreneurs to build companies. the question for everyone is, what does the economy look like in the future? now that we have been through this the crisis, what comes next?

we think it will include less housing, less investment in housing. less spending by consumers. prole more exports and more of business investments. it will be interesting to watch. -- it will probably include more exports and investments. caller: of like to make a comment on an issue that seems to be directly tied to the economy, the issue of health and education -- i would like to make this comment. i speak to friends and neighbors whose biggest concerns arehow to educate their kids and if they have health insurance. it was also my concern throughout my life in the united states. these are the biggest issues we must solve. it would also help the economy.

it would make us a healthier nation. the biggest stress has to be removed. it would also help -- it would also help the industry because they would have to negotiate with the unions. i used to negotiate contracts with the companies. the biggest things we had was the healthcare issue. that would be removed by taking care of it. also, by removing the stress it would make us a healthier nation. host: it is worthwhile to separate a couple things. there is the short-term situation with the recession, and then the long term things we want to do to make our economy strong. in the short run, stunned education, even the health-care legislation debated on capitol hillnow -- those won't do much in the next year.

in the long run, they are crucial. having a strong educational system that creates a modern workers is to our competitive advantage. we are spending 17% of national income on health care, more than other countries. we need to contain it. every dollar you spend on health care is something you cannot spend elsewhere. both issues are crucial for long-term growth. it is not the same as trying to figure out how to get out of this recession. host: from fort comelinda, are you there? -- from florida, linda. caller: spending has gone up 30%, and then there is the health-care issue. people are broke.

we're going to be taxed. how are we going to buy if all we do is pay taxes? guest: the president has said his goal is to be deficit neutral, not require any additional spending in the next 10 years. that said, it will include some kind of tax policy to pay for the new things. it is true that the president's proposal -- a how that works out, how to tax high- quality programs some companies give their employees -- all these things have costs. there are not a lot of free lunches to be had in economics. that is true in health care as well. host: thanks for joining us. coming up later, we will have a

conversation with senator patrick leahy from vermont. we will also have several other guests. first an update. >> more on former president bill clinton's trip to north korea. secretary of state hillary clinton says she is not counting on a breakthrough in relations with north korea. now that the two americans have been freed -- but she held out hope that north korea would be willing to return to six-party talks about ending their nuclear program. earlier today she said that former president bill clinton agree to the visit after the north koreans sent word through the detained journalists that his visit would be the best way to short their release. . .

>> two nuclear powers have been the: and international waters. u.s. northern command would not comment on the matter a question will be taken at today's pentagon briefing. finally, lawmakers criticized the ceo's of automatic before travelling to washington by private jet to attend a hearing about possible bailout. "the politico" reports that the house approved $2 million for the air force to purchase three gulfstream jets to be used by top officials and members of congress.

>> we will take you to the young america foundation's suit in conference after "washington journal." their topic is faith, family, and freedom in america. in the afternoon, the airplane pilots association hears from a pilot to talk about the latest developments in aviation safety. this morning the senate banking committee holds a regulation -- hearing on regulation credit agencies. live coverage begins at 9:30 eastern a.m. this week, the full senate debates the nomination of sonia sotomayor as supreme court justice. and coming this fall, tour the

home to america's highest court, the supreme court. host: we are back, -- talking about blogging efforts. we want to talk about what you are seeing in terms of lobbying efforts. in the "philadelphia inquirer" they talk about some of the protests and messages that have gone on at these of and around the country. they write about one event featuring kathleen sebelius and arlen specter.

host: carrying on on the front page of "wall street journal" as congress goes on break, lobbying heats up. public meetings nationwide this month

labor unions and others in the debate are lobbying heavily. if you want to call in, republicans, 202-737-0001. democrats, 202-737-0002. independents, 202-628-0205 let us take our first phone call from charleston, west virginia. caller: this is roger johnson from charleston. i am wondering why do we -- why we do not hear president obama talk about tort reform as a serious consideration for reining in health-care costs. that is probably one third of the excessive costs. do you have any comment on that? host: that has been an issue and i know several republican senators have brought it up.

next phone call from pine hurst, north carolina. caller: i just want to know about the health care situation. i am a republican but i do not understand what is going on with it. why do we have to change? a lot of people do not understand. you listen to people on the tv, radio -- even the president cannot make us understand what he wants to do. host: do you have health care, are you happy with it? caller: yes, i am happy with it. host: so you do not think health care needs an overhaul? caller: no, i do not. host: next phone call. caller: you have all of these republicans protesting and they

do not even know what they are talking about. the reason these people are not informed is because they listen to fox news. and it is not the truth. these people make fools of themselves. i like that young people will watch a station and they know the truth. these old people talking about this noise, the young people understand. also, the republicans are so pro-lashed until the child is born. after that, they could give a damn about the baby. it is incredible where you have these people who protest, and they are the ones getting the benefits from this. it is unbelievable. host: tom, on the democratic line, from ohio.

caller: i have a question that i have not heard yet about the health care bill. i am on social security disability. earlier this year, social security mentioned there would be no cost of living increase through 2010, possibly through 2012. is medicare part de going to be raised in the next few years? if it is, what is going to offset that cost? i am going to have to drop part b and my social security check stays level for the next few years. i hope you have a guest that you could pose a question to. host: thank you. next phone call from planes bill, illinois. caller: i have not seen any

lobbying efforts. i have been to some town hall meetings. host: do you know who your local congressman is? caller: yes, i do. my concern is these things coming up that we have learned about. i believe the way it is set up, it will lead to single payer program. one thing i heard on your show, on page 15 of the bill, the coming year after the program is put into effect, basically, insurance companies will not be -- you might be able to keep your insurance, but you will not be able to buy a new insurance policy. basically, it is going to bring us to a single payer program. whether you are a or 80, life is

precious. to say that one group of people can get treatment is one thing, and he said another group can get it is another thing. no one wants to think that somehow they are like a car. it gets older, they are not worth as much. when you are sick, or you could be dying, and there is nothing else that can be done for you, and it is something else if the medicine is available for you and it is not available because of a government-run bureaucracy. it is none of their business. i do not want anyone telling me at 65 discussing my future. i know what to do. the government has never done anything to make things better

in my life. that is all i have to say. host: a story about how the administration is dealing with health care reform. "as public skepticism from rises about president obama's plan, the team that got him elected is returning to online grass-roots activism to get control of the debate. they have begun a campaign geared add web-savvy individuals who will be critical to getting this new initiative through congress. responding to a headline and posting, administration spokesmen in a video posted on the white house web site, saying, they are taking phrases end " of context." -- and quotes out of context."

next phone call. caller: this health care is such a load of crap. i listened to that young man from oklahoma, that whippersnapper. he thinks he knows everything. he does not. us old people know what is going on. i want no part of this public option. these people, all i hear is they want people to give them something. before i was on medicare, sometimes i had health insurance. when i worked for a place that did not have health insurance, i did without, and i did the best i could.

there were times when i had health insurance but i had no phone. i had to make a choice. if they want health insurance, they need to get a job and pay for it. if it takes a second job, they need to pay for it. host: you said you are on medicare? that is a government-run program, correct? caller: yes, and it is not nearly as good as a private plan. medicare is awful. the things that they will do to us, the first thing they are going to do is cut our medicare. i am not going for that. we do not need a public auctioo. as far as i am concerned, i want

the government to stay out of my life as much as possible. they have taken over car companies, banks, and now they want to take over health care. i am going to fight for this as hard as i can. host: thank you. next phone call, georgia. caller: that lady makes no sense. when i was 17, i started playing bluecross blueshield. now i am 22 with cancer. last year and i discovered i had cancer. bluecross blueshield would not pay for my cancer because of pre-existing conditions. i am 22 with two jobs in treatment every other week. it makes no sense. i was a republican.

i do not understand why people are against this. i need this. i was working two jobs. now i have to pay for health care treatment. that does not cover $5,000 like john mccain wanted to do. host: how much is your health care treatment costing you? caller: between $1,000 and $5,000 every month depending on how often i need to go. it does not make sense that we do not have a public auction. i understand some of you are upset because people are ripping off medicare. i do not enjoy going to work. my hair is going away and i am

22 years old. i may not even have kids, that something needs to be done. host: next phone call from indiana. caller: i am calling about the health care provisions that were put in that fund women's health care. some of that is killing -- there is racial bigotry in the u.s. where one class is deemed ok to murder and killed. that is down syndrome babies. they say that these people are less than human because they have one chromosome different. this is racial bigotry that is okay to kill someone because they are a little bit less.

host: mark, on the independent line, new jersey. caller: my community bought me a bus ticket to go see my congressman. i wrote letters to a bunch of the representatives. i am a contractor and a landscaper. the facts are clear, our biggest problem in the country is illegal aliens and what they have done to our economy, health care, and everything else. it is about time washington started to deal with this problem. these questions are always pushed off to the side. all of the local businesses need to pay for these illegal aliens. that is increasing our insurance

premiums across the state. we keep giving these people time and it is time we hold either in the illegal aliens, or their country responsible. host: did you get a response from lawmakers when you were in washington? caller: he is basically not going to fight for illegals. i dropped off in a letter that nancy pelosi's office, asking her to explain it for us. she threw it away and said that it was not what she was interested in. host: next phone call on the democratic line. caller: illegal aliens are not a problem, a corporation that hire them are the problem. if you want to fix the problem, find the company's that hire illegals. as far as health care, single

payer is the only option, and the public sector has proven that to us by giving us a failing system that russians health care by not -- rations health care by not letting you choose. single payer is the only option for the country. host: next phone call. press got, wisconsin. caller: -- prescott, wisconsin. caller: i would like to hear about this single payer system. that has not been mentioned much. it seems all of these major industrial countries to use this, and their people seem to like it. i looked at a copy of "sicko"

and if it is true, it would be worth looking into. my mother is on medicare. she does not have any trouble. she has had all kinds of hip replacements, kantor treatment, and she is in her 70's. -- cancer treatment, and she is in her 70's. i have had trouble with health insurance, through my work, my whole life, and a lot of times i have to fight with them to pay the bills. it is a pain to sit on the phone day after day to get them to pay a bill that they were supposed to pay from the beginning. i would much rather do something else. i would like to hear about this single payer thing before i make

up my mind. it seems like this thing congress is putting together is a mess. i do not even know what it involves. maybe they should start from scratch. host: in the "washington post" a story about advertising on health care. "the increasing fight over health care is saturating the airwaves. drug makers, labor unions, both political parties, and health insurance companies, or all weighing in with significant that the eyes. nationwide, $52 million has been spent on health care-reform- related ads, setting the stage for a record-breaking

legislative battle. this could be the biggest ever as far as and advocacy advertising campaign goes." next call from madison, wisconsin. caller: thank you for taking my call. i think the biggest problem with health care is these people who are protesting do not understand what it is. i like the woman who called in earlier who is on medicaid, and she said people should go out and work. it is crazy. they do not understand that is a social program. that is an issue that people have, excepting the fact that the government runs something. even though they gave money to the banks, they do not think of that as a social program. now they say it is too costly

these are the people who send these people off to fight in afghanistan, iraq, and our military bases around the world. the waste and that is in the insurance is the problem. most of the research that is done on pharmaceuticals is done through colleges and with the taxpayer money, so health care should be right for people to have. when they are working, they pay taxes for this. people should start listening to more than fox news and glenn beck and understand what is going on, and they will see that single payer is the only option. host: next phone call on the democratic line. caller: i am so tired of the

ignorance of people in this country. i am on social security disability. i have been on it for 10 years. i do not understand where these people live. the only time that i have had to pay out of my pocket, and being unemployed, was in a high of to get my tooth pulled. any time i needed medical care, i have been able to go to the hospital. i am a cancer survivor. i do not know how people can sit in their home and say that they are not receiving medical care. they are aligned. -- lying. caller: good morning. i am a first-time caller. on the single payer plan, how much does it cost? does anyone ask the question how much it will cost the individual?

i paid $250 a month for my company. they pay the rest. very good company, very good plan, i am happy with it. this single payer plan, both republicans and democrats do not tell you what is covered, how much you have to pay for. host: next phone call from georgia. caller: i think the government plays a good cop, bad cop with us. if they can write a $1 trillion check for california and spend money where it is not needed and not pass health care and the things that we need -- i am 53 and an electrician, but i am not working.

we have 40 million people on of work, 40 million illegals? so there is a displaced and. -- displacement. the commerce department of not want to give us jobs. they want to bring lower wages to the country. that is the biggest problem with our government. people are saying, i do not want to give you health care, and then others do. they're just playing each other. host: mass., jean on the democratic line. caller: i am in favor of a single payer system. i believe the people who are

saying that they are afraid of the government taking over, i think that is an indication of how effective the insurance companies have been in their lobbying efforts. we are the government. i do not understand why people do not see a connection between the people and government. we have the power -- a vote -- but we have no power over insurance companies. insurance companies only bonus is profit -- motive is profit. they are controlling many members of congress by their lobbying and campaign contributions.

the cost of running insurance companies is very high. we are simply paying them, and instead of what people call and government bureaucrats -- this is a dormitory word they are using in a derogatory manner towards honest government employees. i am far more afraid of insurance to employees than government employees. host: next phone call from woodbridge, va. caller: talking to the woman who said that she could get treatment anywhere on medicare, i know a lot of people who cannot have insurance. they need to live one life --

one day in our life to see what is going on. if she did not have visibility, she would not be getting any help. host: we are going to take a short break. we will be back with patrick leahy, a member of the judiciary committee. >> we will take you to the young america's foundation student conference, where they will hear from tony perkins. there topic is state, family,

and freedom in america. in the afternoon, the airline pilots association talks about the newest data and technology available in the aviation industry. this morning on c-span 3, the senate banking committee holds a hearing on credit regulation agencies. live coverage begins at 9:30 eastern. this week, the full senate debates the nomination of sonia sotomayor s supreme court justice. and coming this fall, tour the supreme court. >> sunday, frank rich reflects on his career, including his look at the internet, whitewater

hearings, and his column following the 9/11 attacks. host: we are joined now by senator patrick leahy, a member of the senate judicial committee. i want to ask you about sonia sotomayor. there is a story talking about the white house meeting between president obama and senate democrats. they say there was so little suspense, the sun -- subject barely came up when they met. this is not even an issue, patrick leahy said, as he returned. guest: actually, it was done. i was sitting next to the president at lunch, and we talked about a little bit, but there is nothing to worry about. he made a good nomination, and

she is going to be confirmed. it will be a bipartisan vote, it will be a significant vote. host: are you surprised by the number of republican to have said that they will not support her nomination? guest: yes, some have taken the attitude that no matter who the president nominated, they would have voted no. sometimes i'd joke, even if he had nominated moses, they would not vote for him. her qualifications -- after all, she has had more experience on the public bench compared to any nominee to the supreme court in the last decade. she has the highest possible rating from the apa.

she has a tremendous reputation as a prosecutor. she has been rated as a mainstream judge just about by every organization. if she had been nominated by a republican president, i suspect that everyone would be voting for her. i appreciate those who have bucked their priority on this, despite being told to vote against her by their party. i will also say this to complement the republican senators -- some of the leaders of the republican party referred to her as being equivalent to the head of the kkk. none of these senators use that terminology, and they expressed a different reason for being against her. i thought that was very respectful.

i agree that both sides need as much time to ask questions. i appreciate the fact that we were able to have all of the questions we wanted. i appreciate the fact that at least one republican will be voting for her, and that is lindsey gramm. he made an interesting comment tha, similar to a, that i made about chief justice roberts. he said this is not a person that he would have recommended to a republican president, but elections have consequences. we have a democratic president, and she is qualified, so he is going to vote for her. that is the same thing i said

about justice roberts. it was not someone that i would have nominated for a democrat, but he was qualified, so i voted for him. i went to get the party leadership for doing that. host: i want to follow up on one question. one of the side debate is what this would do for hispanic voters. there is a story talking about republican opposition. a latina strategist goes on to say -- guest: i think that is the way they see it. if she had been nominated by a republican president, they would be appointing her because she

is so extraordinarily qualified as a prosecutor, a trial judge, then a court of appeals judge. she will be the only nominee who had currently served on the u.s. supreme court. she does have a compelling life story. her father died when she was young, her mother worked very hard to raise her and her brother. he became a doctor, she became a lawyer. she moved from the projects, learned english. it is the american dream, the sort of thing that most immigrants will tell their children, if you work hard, you can succeed in america. she did that. now many hispanic communities are saying, why are they trying to close the door on her? there will be a rally here in

washington today by a number of civil rights groups and hispanic groups, and frankly, i understand why they feel that way. i have seen letters about them in the record, i will speak about them today. they have a great sense of pride about this woman, and they showed. host: when is the final vote expected? guest: i suspect some time tomorrow. she will be confirmed in a bipartisan vote. usually the supreme court comes in in the first week in october, but this year they will come in in september. host: first phone call from benton, arkansas. caller: i am troubled by what i perceive to be in double standard. when clarence thomas was nominated, you tried to fry him on the judiciary committee.

he was not the type of black person you wanted. but in no way did the blacks ever say, shame on you, democrats, for trying to ruin democrats. but when republicans say something about sonia sotomayor's decision about that firefighter case, when it was clearly obvious that they passed the test and were not given the promotion because they were white -- oh, no, that is not something that white people should say anything about. when someone both against sonia sotomayor, you always talk about it like you just did, because she is hispanic. i think this is a double standard. guest: of course, i voted against him because i thought he did not tell the truth in the confirmation hearings. i said so at the time.

you may have missed the beginning of the program but i said none of the republican senators have talked the way that you described. that was republican leadership. you have also misstated the results of the firefighter case. she was bound by supreme court decision and following precedent that mandated the decision. republican and democratic appointees came out with the decision based on the previous decision. the supreme court, in a 5-4 decision, changed the president -- precedent.

host: john, on the independent line, new york. caller: i will make this as brief as possible. regarding judge sonya manner -- sonia sotomayor, i was not happy with her answers. i thought she danced around answers. guest: what do you not like? caller: i do not want to make that the subject of my call, i want to talk about health care. we have not heard much from you relating to the health care program. to make some comments and then get your response. i do not think we need a major overhaul of the health care system. of the few issues we are addressing, we could cut costs and still maintain a healthy system. i also do not hear anything about addressing the enormous

amount of fraud in medicare and medicaid which is in the billions. if that issue was focused on more aggressively, i think that would save an enormous amount of money. guest: one of the reasons you have not heard much from me is i'm not in the committees that handle health care. i have been busy on the senate judiciary committee. i have passed legislation in another area that the president will be signing into law which will be protecting consumers in mortgage areas. there is more than just saying, we need to go after them. why is prescription medication costing more in the united states and virtually any other country? why can't some hospitals cut costs by having electronic records?

that saves money, we need everyone to do that. i am pleased to see the american medical association, who had originally opposed any sort of reform, now working with the white house on a reform plan. one thing is obvious is we cannot continue with this. we are spending more than any other country on earth for health care. our people, in almost every single index there is, we are way behind in almost every category dealing with the help of our population. host: what are the major issues your committee will be turning to in the future? guest: we have some nominations come up in the future. some of them have been blocked. i do not know why. we are going to have what will be a hot button item, immigration reform.

i do not feel anybody feels the immigration system is working the way it should. most republicans and democrats feel like it is not working correctly, but how do you put it together? i agreed strongly with george bush on this, to have a comprehensive reform bill, rather than a piecemeal one. some of the proposal that president bush had, had they been passed, i think we would have been better off. there is no perfect answer. with a country as large and diverse as ours, it is difficult, but we need to do something. there are significant antitrust matters. i would like to see a change in the cocaine issue, which makes

no sense. we are going to have a pretty full plate. host: john, on the democratic line, from washington, d.c. caller: 5 was watching the confirmation hearings, and i think you did a great job. as far as town halls and go, everyone should be able to show identification before they enter to show that they are part of the district. it is not fair that republicans can bu is in people to block the message. guest: we only have 600,000 people in my state, so it is

different, and everyone knows each other. we go to the grocery store and people discuss any issue. even on sunday when i am putting gas in my car, going to the farmers' market. people have the chance to talk. it is discouraging when you have a small group of people who are bused in to a town hall meeting to make a scene. usually, veterans and people concerned about health care, maybe they have family members in the military, or they're concerned about the environment, and they want to ask mayor number of, some real questions. then they have a small group of people who want to shout, the president was not born here, even though everyone knows he was born in the u.s.

fortunately, in vermont, we tend not to have that problem. there are only three members of our delegation and each of us is approachable. that is one nice thing about our state. everyone in the legislature is approachable. host: rebecca on the republican line. called for, virginia -- culpepper, va. caller: i am sure you are familiar with "casablanca" and everyone is shocked about gambling. that is how i described your attitude but these republicans. my goodness, i am shocked. i am sure you can understand. this is my question.

i am a child of the 1960's, raised by the color blind, as far as race knows. can you understand when someone says a wise latina person, or any other race, could make a better decision than a white man or a black man, or whoever it is, that those kinds of words deeply troubled me. i was raised to see the world without race. that should be our goal, a colorblind society. guest: were you upset when clarence thomas used similar words when a republican president nominated him in his hearings? host: i think they hung up. guest: she was so far out of

context, i am not really going to answer. she said completely, the law is what covers. just about every nominee has spoken about their background. justice alito talked about his background. immigrant members of his family. of course, that shapes his thinking. i found nothing wrong with that. with clarence thomas, the republican president talked about his background, how that shaped his thinking. we are not all the same. even as members of the senate are not the same. her answer was, over and over again, ultimately end completely, the law is what is

in control. every independent study on her shows that that is how she judges cases. host: next phone call, michigan. jim on the independent line. caller: when will you folks who call themselves leaders, stepped out of the way? you have ruined reasonable planning opportunities for our country in favor of your selfish political gains. when will you any other political hacks get out of the way and put regular people first? most people in the country are not political people -- not members of any political party. guest: a question like that does not really bear answering. host: royal oakes, michigan.

sabrina, on the democratic line. caller: thank you for taking my call. thank you for working for the american people. i am calling for a couple of reasons. i am for the single payer system for health care because nine years ago today i was involved in a high-speed rollover accident that has not allow me to live the way i used to. my husband pays, with his employer, half of our medical insurance which is over seven down dollars a year. copiague it is about $500 to $1,000 a month in addition to pay for health care. since we have all these expensive -- expenses due to this accident, and i cannot buy my own insurance because his employer has their own, they

will not let me by my own, and now we may have to file bankruptcy because we cannot cover the high cost of health care. it is a crime that people are calling in against a single payer systems when they probably do not pay a nickel for their own health care as it is. guest: you raise one of the most troubling things in this country. we find bankruptcies in the middle class. the highest percentage is occurring in the middle class because of health care bills. study after study shows that. that is one more example why we need a better system. no other industrialized nation faces these kinds of problems, and most industrialized nations have health care people. i was at the luncheon yesterday

with the president, and he made a strong pitch that we come back this fall to work together, try to figure out how to get a health care plan. the senate and the two major committees worked very hard on this, and bipartisan support has been achieved. host: i also want to get your thoughts on the cash for clunkers program that is expected to be extended. there is a story on it. "there is no sound economic reason to produce cars that consumers are not willing to pay for in full. legislators are planning to subsidize the cost of cars and

this will only postpone job losses in the auto sector. the other than the lang the inevitable, the government should invest." will you vote for the extension? guest: i do not know, and i spoke to the secretary of transportation last night. i want to know how well this works. i have seen a lot of money going into bailouts of banks, and i'm not sure that worked very well. this one seems to be working, but i want to see how. my wife and i each have a car that is almost 10 years old, and they get pretty good gas mileage. i am not about to trade in to get two miles per gallon more. i am not trying to avoid your question, but i have gone back and forth on this. i spoke to ray lahood last

night, perhaps again today. i am not sure if this is the best idea or not. guest: next phone call from north carolina. barbara on the republican line. caller: i wanted to say the hearings went pretty well. when republican to oppose someone for a judicial seat, they complain about her philosophies and issues, the way that she voted. democrats go after personal character. you said you did not vote for clarence thomas because he lied. sonia sotomayor was not very consistent. she disagreed with statements she previously made. i have a problem with her because she had an issue where she would not answer the question about americans having a right to self-defense. she also has had multiple cases

that have gone to the supreme court that have been overturned. i have a way about -- i have a problem of all the way that she rules. guest: she has had over 3300 cases. 98% of them have not been overturned. those people in baseball -- most people in baseball would like a record like that. host: next phone call. richard on the republican line. caller: my concern is the voting process. many people in the country are losing confidence in our voting system. we have organizations like acorn who are now being investigated or indicted in 13 states in being considered in 14 others. yet, i see the house of

representatives chairman, john conyers, fiduciary committee refuses to investigate the problem. my question to you, as chairman of the judiciary committee in the senate, will you put forth an initiative to protect our voting system, our belt system? many people i talk to believe the whole system is rigged. guest: after seeing the mistakes in the bush-board elections -- gore elections, i think we saw how poorly the system is run. what bothers me the most, -- first, i do think that you can have a fair system. i do not like the idea of

having just electronic voting. i want to see a paper trail with it, so that when you have the recount, you can look at the ballots. that will protect both democrats and republicans. what bothers me the most is seeing low turnouts in the elections. i was too busy, it was raining, so on and so forth. i am proud of my own state where we have one of the highest voter turnouts in the country, but we have to do better. in some places you see people lining up at 2:00 in the morning, insuring that they have a place to vote. i think we need to see the same thing around the country. we need to be consistent. we need a consistent way to check what was done. states will have to determine

how people vote, but they ought to have a way to check the record after. i would like to see more done to get people to come out and vote to begin with. host: last phone call. stephanie, on the democratic line. caller: good morning. i am glad to get a chance to talk to you i think -- talk to you. i think you are doing a great job on the judiciary committee. we have a great candidate. the other thing i wanted to say to us, vermont had done a great job with their senator. i am from south carolina, so i really do not have too many senators that represent my point of view, so i kind of watched you guys -- watch you guys.

about these town hall meetings, where they are busing people in, i would hope that there would be some security at the locations. we are grown-ups, and we need to do something here. guest: we have not had this problem in vermont, but people ought to be heard who actually care about the issue. when you have so many people taking time off of work, needing to get babysitters, to come to these town hall meetings to hear these matters, they do not need someone coming in from elsewhere who just wants to shout and disrupt the hearing. yelling that the president was born in kenya.

we do not need to these things. if they want to demonstrate and they want to go somewhere to do that, that is fine, they have the right to do that. but these people who are talking about health care, want to talk about their families in iraq or afghanistan, talk about how they are going to get a job. host: we are going to leave it there. thank you very much. guest: you have the nicest location on capitol hill. host: that is right. .

following the debate about the nomination of sonia sotomayor, the senate will consider the debate about the cash for clunkers program. earlier, the transportation secretary called the program a huge boost for the economy. senate majority leader harry reid says he believes there are sufficient votes to get the additional $2 billion approved before the senate goes on summer recess. a recent study finds that the country's seven biggest rail transit operators have about $50 billion in a net capital needs. the house has approved and the

senate is considering a request to give washington, d.c.'s metro $150 billion next year. they named the lack of money the metro's biggest problem. they say that service as willis said he will decline if they do not receive funding not yet that follows the crash that killed nine passengers. politicos says that the former inspector general was paid more than $310,000 in exchange for his signature on a separation agreement limiting what he can say about the circumstances of his sudden departure earlier this summer. republican senator chuck grassley says he is wary of the government-controlled companies use of the non-disclosure comment. finally, a top russian general says that russia has no intention of returning u.s. humvees that were seized during

the brief for in georgia a year ago. the russian president says he considers them to be war trophies and has no obligation to give them back. there were seized when u.s. soldiers trained georgian troops for deployment in iraq. "washington journal quality continues. host: we're joined now with senator john castellani on the business roundtable. let me give you a chance to explain. guest: it is an association of the chief executive officers of the largest companies in the u.s. collectively, they have more than $4 trillion in annual revenues. it is the ceos of the big companies that you can think of. we're there to advocate for public policy. host: that was mentioned today in "the financial times" where

it says on the headline that obama was urged to make the case for freedom. -- to make the case for free trade. the letter which is signed by the president of the u.s. chamber of commerce and several other entities -- it was signed by all these entities. why bring it up now? guest: it is essential. 95% of the world's population lives outside the u.s. and we need excess of we will have the kind of economic growth we want. we want to be able to sell our products and services around the world. this has been a time where we have been very quiet on trade

and anin gear shooting trade while the rest of the world has been busy. some took the 5 million americans depend on the international markets and their good-paying jobs. host: the president has said he would give a speech but he has not yet. why? guest: we don't know what the president's motivation is. but in this letter and the conversations with the administration, we're trying to point out that re-entering those markets, continuing to expand them, and opening them, it is essential to economic growth and job creation. the president has been focused on other issues, but this is an important part of the economy. it should not be ignored. host: are there specific trade pacts?

>> their three, one with colombia, panama, and another -- there are three. the u.s. products related to, and panama -- to colombia and panama have substantial tariffs are levied on them. korea is more complicated. it is larger. there are lots of issues. but it is being able to invest their to sell products and services so that we can grow our economy here. host: on the domestic front, healthcare is a big deal. does the business roundtable have a position? guest: first of all, these companies provide health insurance for 35 million americans. we want to stay in the business. frankly, the cost of health

care for companies is just and sustainable and the way it is growing at three or four times inflation. we need to make high-quality and available for everybody. we need to bend the cost curve. we want to continue to provide health care for workers and their families. we need to get costs under control and everyone into the system, so we support health care reform. we have some issues, some things we favor in the bills the house is considering now. things present us with problems. we're working very closely with the finance committee negotiators trying to craft a bill in the senate. we work closely with everyone. we are at the table, talking with the administration. we want this to succeed in the right way.

host: give me something that you support and something that you oppose. guest: one of the things that gets lost is that the health care delivery system as we have it now in this country is not the system. it is a mechanism that focuses on treatment of disease or conditions when people enter a health facility. it needs to be expanded and modernized be more holistic and innovative. it needs to focus on wellness and prevention as well as treatment so that we can prevent a lot of conditions people now go to hospitals and doctors with. we need to do this by good management of lifestyles, weight management. that, thankfully, it is and just about everyone's proposal. that is very important if we will get high quality health care to everyone affordably.

host: what about the public option? guest: that presents us with some problems. we need everyone in the system, but we need a system that allows us to innovate. things i talk about and things that senator patrick leahy talked about with regard to information technology. government does not innovate. we are concerned it will inhibit innovation. the second concern is really in the way it is structured. right now when the government through medicare reimburses doctors and hospitals, they do not reimburse them for the full costs, so the shift those costs to employers. the way it is structured -- it is another big it entry into the market that shifts costs and is a more expensive for us.

host: let's hear from viewers. the first caller is from fort worth, texas, on the line for democrats. caller: good morning. i hope that you'll bear with me. i have had a little through the surgery. this gentleman has some point i would agree with and some i would not. my father [inaudible] -- my career was military. i love the special forces. what i see today is to be able to afford my people a decent insurance, my god, it is getting where you cannot afford it. let's get rid of this free trade.

[inaudible] this is breaking is. all i hear from you is about this trade. but your jobs, still in five states there are over 500 people laid off. guest: your first point, about health care reform, that is key. those who are uninsured because they cannot afford it, those who think they are invincible and do not want to pay for it, and those who move from job to job. we think that the key there is a reforming the insurance market. as a large employer we can choose between 10 and 12 plants, but you as an individual -- of course, you have some tri-care coverage, but individuals only

usually have one choice. as far as fur trade is concerned, we want access to markets -- as far as fair trade is concerned. we want access to the country's december that others do. we have 20 million jobs that depend on multinational companies. all in total 55 million workers depend on companies that can sell products and services around the world. these are very good-paying jobs, paying about 25% more than those which are not engaging around the world. host: on the independent line we have cecilia from michigan. caller: hi, i wonder why they are not emphasizing that businesses will not be able to afford to keep paying for insurance for employees.

they emphasize that if you have insurance now you could lose a policy you enjoy, but they're not talking about the fact that if you have insurance now you could lose your coverage altogether because of the expense involved to the companies. guest: very good point, and that is why the business roundtable and ceos are so focused on health care reform. we are really in and unsustainable position. health-care costs have been going up up to four times inflation. we're competing against companies that do not bear that cost. this is an economic imperative. we want to keep doing that, but have to have the kind of reforms, the focus on quality and on wellness and prevention

that bring technologies to provide productivity improvements everywhere else in the economy. we need those kinds of savings so we can continue to afford providing health insurance coverage for employees and families. host: on the republican line -- we're talking with senator john castellani now. we will go to our next call from kansas city, on the republican line. caller: i have a couple of comments to make. i have been in the insurance field for about 30 years. i want to throw out there that i think the big problem is our insurance companies. the insurance company will see someone die before their will

help them. people have to understand their policies, also. they do not understand them. i have denied so many crimes because of pre-existing. i have sympathy for these people. -- i have denied so many clailms because of pre-existing. the entire claim gets denied. i was very sympathetic with the other lady who called, saying she paid look cross and blue shield. i worked for them for years. i paid medicare claims with blue cross and blue shield for about a 11 years. i think medicare is great now. it is a whole lot better than it was back then. the big issue back then was the flu shots that seniors could not get paid through blue cross and blue shield. we had people always wanted to know why the government would not pay for it.

medicare is a government-run plan. they tell you what to do. also, the insurance companies set all these fees. it is not the doctor and patients. it is the insurance and the doctors. i am sorry -- i am kind of nervous. it is the insurance companies. they tell you how long you can spend in the hospital, what is covered. most of the plans -- you have to know your plans. most have clauses where they do not pay for something. host: do any of the companies, or any of them health insurance companies? guest: yes, they are. one of the things that is important and gets to what the lady was just saying -- part of reform needs to be insurance market reform.

the insurance industry has said that we recognize that and are prepared to make reforms that make the system work. she mentioned pre-existing conditions. the insurance industry has said they are for reform that eliminates the nine claims based on pre-existing conditions. the key is to make it affordable. to make it work we have to have the kinds of reforms that are already proposed by the insurance industry, and things they're willing to do. host: how the represent insurance companies? what is your reaction when congressional speakers have cast the insurance industry as a villain in this debate, as with nancy pelosi? guest: for the americans we

cover, we take our perspective from athe standpoint of payers. we look at it from that standpoint of payers in the system, like everyone else. it is politically tempting to vilify somebody. everyone is looking for a villain in this argument, but the fact is, if we are going to get what we all want -- and affordable coverage for everybody in america -- high- quality health insurance and high quality health care for everyone, then everyone must be part of the solutions. so, i do not think it is productive to vilify anyone. everybody has to be part of the solution.

host: let's go to our next call from buffalo, new york, on the independent line. caller: good morning, sir. when i was 18, 19, 20 years old starting now let me tell you i was driving corvettes and had anything i wanted. i had the women, the money for the women -- i want to know what my kid cannot have what i had. he is healthy and strong and takes care of himself -- why is my kid going to lose the opportunity to buy a vette and have a girlfriend and take her to a movie -- where are you in the president did not telling us what we can and cannot do with our own money? host: i think we will go to our next caller from tupelo, mississippi. caller: that was an interesting

question. [laughter] guest: i want to know how you get the corvette. caller: being from mississippi and republican i have a minority view. it seems the best thing we could do is go to single-payer medicare-style. the biggest market to drive costs down would be every american in wonder. that would be the biggest co-op. the other thing, if we did our exports, the cost would go down. if we try to sell american cars overseas we are 17% behind europeans. if you had single-payer, that wouldn't happen. the other thing, you would see an explosion in the growth of small businesses. the biggest thing keeping them from growing now is the tight credit -- decides that it is the healthcare insurance costs.

if we can reform the system, the other thing i think would happen if she would have more international business come into this country because there would not have to worry about health care costs. if they decide to build a factory without the expense of health care, they might choose the united states. the biggest cases we have in courts because of judicial resources in this as money are the cases for people who have pre-existing conditions, older, the age discrimination cases, and those who are disabled. if you have single-payer, employers would not have the temptation to discriminate. those people would not drive health care costs up as a result. guest: you make some very good point. the business roundtable at the

beginning of this sat down and asked ouourselves this question of why we should not have a single-payer system as they do in europe. they're good reasons why we did not think it would work. first and foremost were concerns that a single-payer system just cannot innovate. right now we spend $2.20 trillion on our health care delivery system. while we have the best health care in the world for those who can afford it, we did not do very well as a nation collectively when compared to europe, china, and even brazil. we are concerned that a government-run program cannot give us the in addition to improve both the quality and that reduces the trajectory of the costs. if we throw another $1 trillion

into the system will be even less competitive. secondly, we know that we can innovate better than the government can in the workplace. there are great programs for type two diabetes management that companies run. even for smoking cessation, one as an exercise. governments do not do that well. the third thing which is interesting, we still view good health care coverage as a way to attract and retain good, high- quality employees. despite the current economic slowdown and unemployment, when this economy returns, our ability to be competitive globally will depend on a high quality, well-trained, and a bit of work force. we need to attract those people. host: here is a question from twitter. guest: the business roundtable

is lobbying congress and yet that is what we do. we try to bring our perspective, that of those to run the largest companies in america to the public policy process. we provide information to lawmakers on the committees. and the house is the energy and commerce committee, the ways and means committee, and the education and labor committee. in the senate it is the health, education, and labor policy committee, and the senate finance committee. we know things about the health care system that even congress does not. where the cost savings of the kiddies are, where the innovative opportunities are. what does and does not work. we also provide them with our perspective on what they are considering would do to our ability on what everyone wants us to do. everyone says we want to keep employers in the game.

we want to allow those who have what they have to continue to keep it. to do that, some of the policy decisions help us, some hurt. we bring that perspective and tell members of congress and staff how the different ideas they are considering would affect our ability to do it. host: the next call comes from bethpage, n.y.. caller: i heard your propaganda, but as a liberal, i buy products and leave in businesses, but in a climate where -- and believe and businesses, but in this climate where business has taken over the legislative process, i have decided to take certain companies who give money to lawmakers campbell. i have told people to call tyson foods, a constituent of that conservative blue dog democrat

at this phone number. asked mr. chuck henry at this phone number -- either you do mike ross and the entire conservative coalition to back a single-payer resolution, and until that happens we will boycott tyson chicken and any tyson products. guest: good for you. that is the great thing about this country. everyone gets to exercise their political views and articulate it to members of congress to places where they buy products and services, but companies have a stake in getting this right. tyson foods, every company in america has a stake in getting this right. we want to have a health care system that not only works for the companies and employers, but works for everyone in america.

right now if you do not have health insurance you still get health care, not well or officially -- you go to hospital and get treated. we end up paying for it because the government will not. we employers pay for it and that is unsustainable. host: milwaukee, wisconsin, on the republican line. caller: thank you, c-span. you guys do a great job. you have been on the air for some time. the whole premise of the health care reform was to bend or lower the cost and provide for the under-insured or uninsured, yet i have not heard anything spoken about tort reform. i have not heard anything about what attorneys did with the asbestos issue for about 30 years or more now. the number of businesses who

have had to reorganize. there is a tremendous cost associated with malpractice lawsuits and what it does to those psyches in the medical profession, yet you have not mention that once this morning. guest: it is not off the table. thanks for reminding me. it is an important part of what needs to be fixed. the litigation environment in this country which is very severe causes behavior that costs everyone. you mentioned many of them. defensive medicine where tests, procedures are ordered that are only done because you're protecting against a potential lawsuit -- we all pay for it. we have to bring reason to our litigation system. we particularly have to bring thesreason to our litigation bill.

it nearly cost though ob-gyn practice to leave some states because they could not afford their liability insurance. it costs everyone in the country. you are absolutely right. we have to bring it reason and sense to this. it is disappointing that has not been focused on, but that is an example of how powerful those trial lawyers are. you're right that we need that reform. host: our last call from chattanooga, tenn. on the independent line. caller: i want to say that i understand the interests you represent and their concerns in terms of innovation. that is important in terms of drugs and new medicine, but i want to bring in something i have not heard talked about which is the fact that the price of advertising for drugs from big pharmaceutical companies

does not usually matched up with the price that they spend on research. i have read a few things about that. if you could just talk about that for a moment, i would greatly appreciate it. guest: it more than matches up. one of the keys to innovation is not just the way we deliver health care, but to make sure it is what we provide. we spend an enormous amount of money on research and development. they have to provide the next products that provide the kind of relief and cures american people want and need. they are among the biggest spenders in the world. one of the issues we're facing is that we do so much in the u.s. the we subsidize really the rest of the world. people talk of being cheaper to buy a drug in canada or france

or in the u.k. -- it is because the u.s. does all the research and development. we subsidize those drugs around the world. those countries have price controls on those drugs. we need a system to provide appropriate incentives for pharmaceutical companies, medical device companies, for providers to do the best research so that we get the best health care to get a fair return for shareholders. any of us with a retirement program have a place as shareholders. you have a good point. they spend much more money on research and development than on advertising. the key is to get that innovation, not to stifle it. host: thanks for joining us, senator john castellani.

next we will have a conversation with senator james risch, a republican from idaho. ♪ >> right after "washington journal" we will take you live to the young america's foundation conference. the topic this morning is faith, family, and freedom in america. in the afternoon, the airline pilots association hears from the faa administrator. he will talk about the latest innovations and safety.

this morning on c-span 3, the senate banking committee holds a hearing on the regulation of credit agencies. we will get proposals from the obama administration on changing regulation. it is also live at c-span.org. >> this week, the full senate debates the nomination of sonia sotomayor as supreme court justice. coming this fall, toward the home to america's highest court, the supreme court. "washington journal quality continues. host: joining us now is senator james risch. let's begin with one of the big topics of the week, the nomination of sonia sotomayor. why do you oppose her nomination? guest: for the same reasons that president obama opposed the two

nominations that he voted on. first of all, she was kind enough to spend a considerable amount of time with me and answering questions. she is charming, well-educated, and bright. but this is philosophical. i take my constitutional responsibility very seriously. the president is in charge of the advice. he did not ask me for mine. but i'm in charge of the second part, the consent. he made his decision on the two nominees for philosophical reasons. he believed these people were too conservative from his point of view, what you call it philosophical or ideological. regardless, he believed there were too conservative. i have the same point of view. i represent a state that is probably one of the most if not the most conservative in the united states.

frankly, i have difficulty because of her political philosophy and ideology. i am an attorney. i do have difficulties on some of the positions. the second amendment is very important in idaho. she is at the very least sell- off on the second amendment. she has called it a ride that is not fundamental. -- she is very sfooft on the sediment. i have a problem with that. when you begin to put adjectives in front of rights it causes me considerable difficulty when those are guaranteed by the constitution. host: another vote will be the extension of the cash for clunkers program. you have said you will also oppose that. what is your position there? guest: i voted against it the first time. this was simply giving out a

billion dollars that we do not have. it belongs to my grandkids. the difficulty i have is that it is not just the automobile industry having difficulties. our family ranches, and my friends at home said what about bucks for beef? if we would just stand on the corner and hand out money, it is not right. the question from a purely republican standpoint is, what is the proper role of government? it is not handing out money for people to buy cars. i voted against it for that reason. now, having been in place for some time, what we see is, the government which as usual is an apt at handling most anything. they cannot tell us how much has

been spent or will be spending a -- they are inept and handling nearly anything. host: you have the distinction of being one of the two senators voted in 2008 in the year not particularly good for the republican party. what are your thoughts on the current state of the party and how they're doing in the eyes of the american voter? guest: well, that is an ongoing issue, and probably much more credible than my statements about this would be what does polling shows. last fall on a generic ballot, the republicans were down 12 points. obviously, we see those every week. we look at the mall. we look at the average. right now the average has us dead even bigger -- we look at

them all. -- right now we look at the average which has us dead even. i am old enough to remember watergate. my friends in the republican party say this is a terrible. you should have been around when we watch richard nixon did on a helicopter and leave the white house. our stock was lower than. host: we're speaking with senator james risch of idaho. you're welcome to phone in. before we go to your calls we want to get your thoughts on one more big issue -- obviously, health care reform is moving through congress. in a story from "the new york times" today it's as the

democrats were urged to persevere in turn to get a bipartisan deal passed on health care. is there still bipartisanship? guest: how long is this program? you do not have to take my word for, but go out and ask and nay democrat governor would hapn to their state budget and state taxes if congress passes this proposal. bill bankrupt the states. -- it will bankrupt this is.

it is bipartisan, but that is the opposition that is bipartisan. it -- it will bankrupt the states. caller: good morning. i have a question. i want to know all week long all here is that the democrats say the republicans do not have a plan. i am a c-span watcher. hopefully, so are most of the democrats calling and, but the republicans do have a plan come tort reform, opening the borders. to me, that sounds like a reasonable plan, and the right one for this country. i don't understand what the republicans aren't pushing that agenda even harder with their own commercials so that others can understand their plan.

so that they will not be blamed if obama fails in his attempts. guest: that is a really good question. we do get accused of just opposing the health care reform. i don't think there is anyone that is not in favor of doing some type of health care reform. but right now, the other side is headed 100 miles per hour in the wrong direction. a bipartisan direction to move 50 miles per hour in the wrong direction does not cut it for us. just as the other side talk in generalities, and i can describe ours which are in the opposite direction. first of all commit any plan should be market-driven. that is not a government plan. secondly, it should be patient- centered, so that we americans

have full control of our health care, the insuring, assessment, and delivering of it. it should be a quality-focused. these are the objectives. unfortunately, this issue is very, very complicated. there was a lot of over- promising that took place in the campaign. the other side as funding is virtually impossible to deliver. no one has even broken into its component parts. to the president and means everyone will be covered. two doctors and hospitals and means they will finally be paid 100% of their delivery costs. to the average american is a means having absolute, total full control over their own health care and a lower-cost.

to each group mean something different. everyone is throwing it into one pot and try to resolve all aspects at once. it does not work. host: atlanta, georgia. caller: i am a retired member of an international union. i served for six years on our health insurance fund. i began my firm in 2000. i lost my legs in 2006. i'm the guy who had to return and tell them they could not have a race and tell them to put more money into health care. i saw health care triple in cost. i'm the guy who had to tell them that your cat is being lowered from $300,000 to

$100,000, and so on down the line. pained me to do that because if anyone had a heart attack and open heart surgery, these are working guys and would hi-- andt would get hit with $40,000. they got mad at me and i got angry. i had access to all local unions across canada and said there must be a better way. i called from one end of canada to the other and talk to everyone. i talked with everyone in every province. those guys and the men they represent loved their canadian national health insurance. did not have to wait for service. they can see any doctor they want to. i hear nothing but lies, lies, lies about that. it is untrue. guest: we are just the opposite.

we hear horror stories that are the opposite of what you have reported. believe me, if you or a loved one is diagnosed with breast cancer, you want that to happen right here in america. if you look at the difference in the success rate of treatment and survival from breast cancer, the difference is stunning and significant between the american system and virtually every other in the world. that is true with many other diseases. we do hear it both ways. the statistics are pretty clear. we do have a good health system in america. i will be the first to say it is expensive. there were a lot of promises to lower the cost of health care. one of the difficulties is, it

is an expensive system because we americans demand the best. when you do that you will have to pay for. the same is true with innovation, such as with different prescriptions and medical remedies. the alternative -- many people say to let the government to pay for it. the government is us. i saw a t-shirt that said if you think health care is expensive now, just wait until it is free. when you're talking about $1 trillion -- that is the bottom. it could go much higher. that is a lot of money. to bring a new, lower-cost health care online. host: former president clinton buy back the two journalists from north korea. what you make of that trip in the long-term implications on

u.s.-north korean relations? guest: you always hope that it will help. that is a dangerous situation, primarily because of the personality of the personality of their leader. certainly, congratulations have to go out to this administration and to the president, certainly to secretary of state clinton, and to bill clinton. people predicted this for a long time. that the north koreans would use it as a photo opportunity, as a p.r. gimmick to raise their standing in the world. but they still have great difficulties in that country and have a long way to go. but anything you can do to open gates is important. everyone here has breathed a sigh of relief that bears were answered and these two ladies are coming dhome.

host: the next call comes from new hampshire on the independent line. caller: hello, senator. how long have you been a member of the senate? guest: i have only been a senator for six months. i am new, but not new to public service. caller: i wanted to ask you so i would know whether i can when you are not for what has happened. we are a country of laws and no one can do anything that is not within the confines of the law. let's say that my house is on fire. i pick up the phone and call the fire department. someone breaks into my house and a call the police the problem. they take care of it. why can't we go to a single- payer system?

why can't we rely on it? as citizens, we support our police and fire departments and any other socialized system, to protect and serve us. yet we are allowing the insurance companies to make huge profits. i cannot understand why. guest: fair question. that is a philosophical question. i trust the fire department to put out the fire at my house. they do agree job. i trust the police department. i do not trust the united states government to take over the delivery of health care to myself and my grandchildren. delivery of health care is complex and very personal. i have watched the united states government all my life struggle,

tried to make successes out of things. they do not have a stellar record. i have no trust. i have no confidence in the united states government operating the healthcare system. host: let's hear from the republican line. julie in minnesota. caller: i don't think people understand with the healthcare. some people have said they hope no one takes it away from them. but there will be 7.5 million jobs lost if our health insurance industry is disturbing go we are a free country. i hope that someone records this. i do not believe that you can create this with government intervention. you cannot create private ownership with government taxes and eminent domain.

you cannot create free trade by taxing means of production. you cannot create of voter base with this paygo and non-profit illegal immigration. you will not create national security with our compromised orders. you will not have leaders if you do not have an education that lacks a competitive spirit. you cannot create national pride with these apologies. you will not create a strong defense with this week offense. you do not create prosperity with government takeovers. you cannot create healthy people by taking over all of our industries. i hope that you will tell people we do not want any more government expansion. you will not create a spirit of unity when you ignore people. i have a congressman who does

not listen to anyone in my district. i am the eighth district in minnesota. i am so unhappy that our stimulus money paid for bike paths and we have miners out of work. -- when we had minors out of work. these progressives running our country -- it is ridiculous. guest: let me go back to her first statement. right now, the senate committee passed on a building of their three over at the house. i invite anyone to randomly pick one page from the 1,100 pages and then try to explain to me in plain english. this will be a disaster if they keep trying to push this so rapidly. everyone speaks in platitudes, generalities.

nobody talks in specifics. there it is not anyone who knows what is in those bills except for the staffers, and even they are only familiar with a particular paragraph or the pages they wrote. it is more important that this be done right than in a hurry. president obama has four years. he does not have to have this done in the first year. the only way this will be done right is if we step back and take a breath. host: silver spring, md., on the line for democrats. caller: good morning, senator. thank you for the opportunity. before i watched c-span i thought congress was filled with stupid people -- now that i what i know that the congress is not filled with stupid people. they are smart. what i do not understand is why

the congress is so ineffective. guest: that it is a really good question. it is easily answered. that is, democracy is not efficient. it was not designed to be. it is full of acrimony, this agreement. but the great thing about this country and is the greatest in the world -- the best system ever devised by people -- and it is the people's government -- we debate back and forth and then vote and accept the results. it is the way we do things. for all of the complaints we all have about our country, if you just travel abroad a little bit, when you come home you kiss the ground. it is the best in the world. host: pittsburgh, pa., on the

independent mind. caller: -- line for independents. -- caller: i think c-span. we will lose this to partisanship the republicans and democrats. senator, i would like to say that you sound very partisan. that is this agreeable for american values. when you say you garter back and forth -- you vote republican, and democrats but the other way. the last thing is about health care. you mentioned breast cancer. my mother died of breast cancer. my aunt had both her breasts

removed. i'm 53, middle aged and middle income and have worked all my life. all my retirement just paid for two years for my son to go to college. i don't know about the next two years. i have no health insurance. we are working family. i am unemployed now, thanks to all the republican shenanigans and the nafta agreement. likeross perot said, it was a giant sucking sound where it all went overseas. when i will likely get a lump on my breast bridging what will i do? the previous thought was that i will go to a bank, hand them a note and to give me on your money -- when i get a lump on my breast, but will i do? then i will wait for officials to come and get me so that i can go to a federal prison to get my

cancer treated. guest: let me respond to your initial common. thank goodness, when people go to the polls, the vote for those who have the same philosophical bent that they do. but we see issues all the time that are very much philosophical. republicans do think in a free- market way, and democrats look to a government solution for all problems. so, there is no doubt that the two parties have philosophical differences. frankly, the strength of this country comes from the debate between the two. neither party wins 100% of the time. the pendulum swings back and forth. given the strength of this country, we live better than any

people could ever have hoped to live, even the rulers and the richest people in centuries past. we should all be thankful for what we have today. host: winston-salem, north carolina, good morning. caller: good morning, when talking about the expense of health care, we do not need health care reform. we have the best in the world. we do need of the reforms -- medicaid and medicare need to be reformed because the doctors are not being paid the amount for their services they should be. therefore, when the rest of us go to the doctor we are supplementing to pay for it. but also needs to be reformed are the lawsuits because the doctors have to pay so much to

cover them. insurance needs to be reformed because they look at us as individuals if we do not work for a company. it should be very large groups and even across state lines. do away with pre-existing conditions. guest: those are points well- taken. from day one i have said that before we take on health care we should fix social security, medicare, and medicaid. all three of those giant social programs are good, but they're not the sendestined, sustainable continued in their current position. not only that, but the bill they are talking about makes it worse. they want to reduce medicare benefits. i will not vote for that. i would hate to go home and tell the elderly in my state that