discussion on yesterday's white house jobs summit. "washington journal"" is next. . host: over at the transportation department, a conference on jobs and high-speed rail development. it is friday, december 4.

we want to hear from you people who are out of work for underemployed. the question that we have is what has your job search be like? what is the economy like where you live? those out of work in the eastern and central time zones, 202-737- 0002. in eastern or central, 202-737- 0001. the interview and reporting from justin hyde and richard will says that the president warns that the jobs lost during the recession might not return without a series of job -- government initiatives. further in the story, with reference to the national debt, the president ruled out any immediate ever to reduce that $1.4 million budget deficit until the economy rebounds

further. focusing on the deficit too soon "could mitt -- could risk a double dip recession." the president met with economic leaders yesterday for an open session and they concur -- a series of breakout sessions. at the end the president talked about the issues of the u.s. economy with 10.2% unemployment. here is a part of what he had to say yesterday. >> what people are going through every day is heartbreaking. the decisions that you make as a ceo have enormous ripple effects. you had to do it to keep your company profitable. on the other hand, the consequences of those layoffs are obviously felt deeply. not just by the individuals

involved, but by the places, the restaurants, where the person that was laid off used to frequent. it keeps on rippling throughout the economy. digging ourselves out of this whole is not going to be easy. the job loss this past year and the months preceding it were as severe as anything we have seen for a long time. generating the kind of economic growth that leads to the kind of hiring that gets our employment base back up to where it was is going to be hard. it is going to take a lot of work. host: that was the president yesterday. inside of open "the washington post" there is a story pointing out the top options for mr.

obama. barbara, wisconsin. good morning. how long have you been out of work? caller: i am retired now. i was one of the lucky ones. but i have five childrenñi that have no hope. one of my sons is 46 years old. there is no way he can get a job. i have some in their 30's. i feel that when i die, i do not know what to do with them. i have sold the house, but where are they going to live? i want to put them all in the house and make them babies again.

host: are your children working at all? caller: they worked, then they get laid off. the rent here is so high. they are too young for section 8. too young for cda housing. i cannot bring them in my house because i cannot have extra people here. i just go around and do not know. they are like little babies. you know? i have 46-year-old babies again. they need me. host: are they looking for jobs? caller: they look all the time. all the time. host: barbara, thank you for the call this morning.

front page of "the philadelphia inquirer" with that the article, "bailout for the unemployed." dale, how long have you been out of work? caller: one year, december 12. host: what did you do before you lost your job? caller: i was a construction worker. host: what has your job search been like? caller: terrible. my feelers are in the air. my old employer is hiring and i have been waiting for him to call me back. host: are you confident that you will find something? caller: i will not give up, life is too short, but like the other lady said, i feel sorry for my children. i think we should do something like what roosevelt did, getting

the public back to work. bailing out wall street is not helping me. i have no skin in that fight. host: why do you think that the economy is so bad? caller: i think that they've turned their backs on the average person. taking care of the big banks is not going to help the average people. they are the ones that need help right now. hs%iñ on the issue of unemployment benefits, this twitter comment -- as long as president obama continues unemployment, people will not seek a job. ronald, good morning. caller: i am not retired, i am young. i have been fired.

i am a security guard. i was fired a couple of weeks ago. i have been searching for jobs. i have had problems with my rent and no one will help me. host: why were you fired? caller: i was doing security at a bank from 7:00 in the afternoon until 3:00 in the morning. when i came back from my break the supervisor asked where i was and i said where -- that i was

at lunch. then i was fired. host: great falls, montana. how long have you been out of work? caller: just a few months. i was working at a pizza place, but it burned up by the beginning of november. i graduated in june. before that i was on social security, my mother died when i was a freshman. i was ok, my things were being paid for. when i graduated i figured i would get a job. everything seemed ok, the roller-coaster was not too bad. but ever since my job burned up, i have been out of work. i have not been able to pay

myself phone bill. my grandfather paid it for me and i have to work off. as far as finding a job right now after losing my job, it is hard. everyone here is looking for a job. everyone could use extra money. specially after high school, when everything used to be good. getting thrown into the real world is a lot different. host: the scene outside of the white house, the president press's business and job creation. there is an organization called bailoutpeople.org. next is wallace from albany, georgia. ñihow long have you been out of work? caller: i was forced to take

early retirement. i am 63 years old now. i was trying to continue to work, but i had a hip replacement. so, i went on through early retirement. i feel like health comes first before the job. the reason i say that is because if you do not have your health and you did not make it, you cannot go to work. you might come up and lose your job. or not be able to perform your job. i have a son that has been in a

vocation, and he has taken up all the mechanics. host: can he find work? caller: he cannot because he has a condition. every time he tries to get a job, he cannot perform because he has a mental condition and no health insurance. they lay him right off, even though he's got two degrees. he has good skills, but he cannot afford the medicine. i cannot a pet -- afford to pay for his medicine. host: thank you for sharing the story with us. this twitter comment from tom -- overqualified, underqualified, a terrible niche to be in.

we want to hear from you who are unemployed or underemployed. sherry, good morning. caller: i have been out of work for 14 months. host: what did you do before you lost your job? up caller: customer service, call center rep. for the past year so far i have had won temporary job that lasted for two months. that was last october. the same employer this year was hiring again, but the pay scale was from $11 per hour last year to $9 per hour this year. i thought that that was ironic,

that a lot of these employers are not doing full-time to avoid health benefits, they are doing part-time and lowering their salaries because they know how desperate people are. we are desperate. i have been working for 33 years. i want to work. host: the president yesterday met with ceos, economists, labor leaders, and government officials, admitting that there is only so much the federal government can do. my question, what can government do to foster a better economy for job creation for youth and others? caller: i guess what he is doing now, because it is a little too late, he has to work with the employers. the employers are the ones that hire people. he has to offer incentives.

what can i do to get you to start hiring again? tax credit, do what ever you can. there are 15 million of us out there that are unemployed. i did not appreciate his comment about there being just so much that the government can do. when you look at the bailouts they did with the auto industry and the banking industry, there is a lot that the government can do and should do. we did not create this mess. host: thank you for calling. how optimistic are you that you are going to find work? caller: i have faith in god. host: thank you. this is from dan, when the fed prints money it makes the dollar useless. the american people all lose.

during the course of the health- care debate this month, as we move into the conference process next month, we will be checking in on a regular basis with "congressional quarterly: politics" to track the story. kate is with us. caller: thank you for having me. host: this recipe for getting health care done is the front page story of "the washington post." are you hearing this? caller: it is a very quick timeframe that they are dealing with. yes, it is just a matter of weeks before christmas and they want to get something passed by the end of the year. as soon as next week is a real possibility.

host: can you walk us through some of the amendments on the floor? then there is a saturday and sunday session. what are you looking at? caller: it is a long and slow process. it took us four days on monday, yesterday is the first set of votes that we saw on any amendments whatsoever. now we are moving into the second stage with a chunk of amendments coming up. looks like there will be a session over the weekend, saturday and sunday. yesterday harry reid said that there would be votes over the weekend. the problem they are facing is that in the senate the rules are very cumbersome. what they do is they get these consent agreements to move forward on amendments and they have been hard to come by. there is no time set yet on any amendments.

host: we have been seeing publications about the republican attempt to use parliamentary procedures to slow down or block the process. what you think that judd gregg and amid mcconnell and others, what tools they have? caller: the democrats have a filibuster-proof majority as long as they stick together. as you said it is a matter of slowing things down and taking more time to do that. senator gregg, the top republican on the committee, put together a list of budget related points of order and other tactics that republicans could use to slow down the debate. republicans are saying that they are not trying to be obstructionist, but that date view this as a big and important bill and i want to use their

limited our to provide adequate time to look at what is in the bill and debate it. forñi their part, democrats want to get this through before the end of the year. they are going to do whatever they can. host: the other issue, this is a 2007 before page bill and there have been talks that senator colburn is one to read every page. the latest is that he may have a signed a pledge from each senator. what are you hearing on that front? caller: he said before thanksgiving that he was going to ask the senate clark, which is within his province, to read the bill on the senate floor word for word. it seems like that did not happen and now it seems that he is trying to get another, go another way with that.

he makes the case that the american people are concerned about what is in this important bill and that making sure that the senators are aware of what is in the bill is an important thing. host: with the health-care debate continuing and the president turning his attention to unemployment, stopping in allentown, pa. today, does that have any impact on what the senate debate is about? caller: in a number of different ways. democrats have been talking increasingly in recent days about trawling -- trying to draw a link between health care and the economy, making the case that you need to have this health care bill, a particularly right now when people are struggling. republicans in the meantime are making the case that the government does not need to be passing another trillion dollar

bill when there are people suffering. both sides are trying to use the issue to their advantage. the broader issue is that there are certain benefits that will expire before the end of the year, such as unemployment insurance, food stamp benefits, the need to be dealt with. if the senate is consumed with the health-care debate, those other issues will not reach the floor. host: qaeda hunter, thank you for being with us. we bill -- kate hunter, thank you for being with us. caller: thank you. host: we are continuing with your phone calls. we want to hear from you who have been out of work or underemployed. what is the job search like where you live? this twitter comment -- i cannot

imagine being a college graduate and getting this slap in the face. john, from pittsburgh, pennsylvania. caller: good morning. i wanted to say,ñi unemployment has changed for me. with the fuel and the money in the war, the economy that we handed to barack obama -- i am an independent. seeing the money that was sucked out of our economy, i am on the heavy equipment highway business. our business did fine for the last 35 years. we were able to sustain and make a nice salary.

it seems that we completely hit a flat spot when gas and fuel went up to $4. i do not understand how government, they flattened our economy out. once all of that money is sucked out, there is nothing left. host: thank you for the call. a couple of developments regarding pakistan. the attack that took place overnight, 26 people have been killed in an attack on a mosque outside of the capital. the gunmen stormed a during friday prayers, near the army installation. police say that 26 people were killed and 30 have been wounded. from "the new york times" this

morning, "the cia is expanding its role in the attacks in pakistan. the central intelligence agency sharpshooters killed eight expected militants, wounding two others in a compound said to be used for terrorist training, only the latest strike by their covert programs to kill operatives of al qaeda and their allies using this hellfire initiative that the president was able to use from its controlled aircraft half of a world away. the white house authorized the expansion of the program in pakistan, commenting that this is a lawless, tribal area. paul is joining us from california. how long have you been out of work, paul? caller: about one year right now. i work in information

technology. what i see out there, one, the employers have raised requirements. without a bachelor's degree these days you cannot get the same job that you could as recently as a few years ago. let's say that you can meet the educational requirements, the salary is significantly less. i heard the comment about unemployment benefits continuing in people not looking for work. i strongly disagree. çóunemployment, in most cases, s one quarter or one-third of what you would make it work. why would anyone settle for that? i have noticed that trade policies, they preclude the economy from coming in, there are no longer manufacturing jobs, people have opportunities to get entry-level positions in. overall things do not look bright for the future, in my

opinion. host: from "the pittsburgh post- gazette" that line is that (the president warns of difficulties in job creation." good morning, how long have you been out of work? caller: i have been unemployed since 2002. i had -- i was a software engineer. host: you have been out of work for a long time. caller: an illness was involved. host: may i ask how old you are? caller: i am 55. companies are hiding behind web sites so that they do not have to review your resume and they never called back regardless of qualifications. host: how are you surviving? caller: my husband is working.

host: any children? caller: three children. we have won the graduated from college in california. we have one that is in college right now. we have one that is between college careers right now. i feel that i have actually seen a lot of things, working in software for 20 years, and i think that a large part of the problem are the visas where people come into this country and work at lower wages on professional jobs, they are told they can get a green jacket -- green card if they work so much time that the job. this is the secret of silicon valley, these people work 12 hour days. there is no control over overtime. everyone talks about companies needing to hire people, but i think that they are making

people work their work very long hours. i have taken an informal survey of my friends and the ones that are working, including my husband, are working outrageous numbers of hours under the guise of salaried positions. host: what does your husband do? caller: i cannot say because i am afraid that company will put two and two together and let him off. host: thank you for calling, good luck to you. the economy is heading military families as well. "fewer donations and more requests. our last caller is from philip in maryland. caller: thank you for the opportunity. host: absolutely. caller: this has been on my heart and on my mind. i have been unemployed because

of budget deficits. basically i have been readjusting my requirements and the values of other contractors. that is pretty much the case. i am an entrepreneur by nature. by the way, i have an invention called tag ball, www.tagballs ports.com, but let me get back to what i was saying. it is psychologically damaging to the unemployed, as well as economically damaging. by the end of the year the investments that we might have, ira's or some kind of fund, on the back it might say what is it that you are filing? does it have anything to do with

audits? why can the government not provide a form theñi ella all of the jobs that can be done, from a to z, technological jobs and media jobs, why can we not have that right now? a national bordering program where all of those resources and funds that the government says they do not have, they do not have to print more money, but they can give vouchers where they have dividends or you can order your time for value. -- carter -- archer -- barter your time for value. host: "the president said this morning, we will get through this."

that is from "the detroit free press." the headline from "the washington post" is "general motors and chrysler saying that they plan to revisit their decisions this spring to close more than 2000 dealerships, indicating that some of them could be allowed to stay open. it appears to be an effort to stave off intervention by lawmakers on capitol hill." yesterday, david icher joined us on "washington journal." he joins us on the phone now from texas. yesterday you said you wanted to meet everyone and anyone. who did you manage to meet yesterday? did you learn anything new? caller: i met a wide variety of

small business owners. from the standpoint of the summit, it was very enlightening and educational. i hope it will be educational back to the administration. host: the president indicated that he wanted to take the ideas from this summit. he is going to give a speech next tuesday to outline more details to try to improve jobs in the u.s.. what do you think that president and congress need to do? caller: first of all, there was a broad cross-section of people in the room, from small businesses to large businesses, economists, academics, unions. and then it was broken out into work sessions. i heard only the ideas in the work session. but the one thing that i spoke about yesterday on your show

yesterday is just one, not a panacea, but one way to work against the problem of joblessness is to help increase the exporting of goods from the united states. the more that we export our goods, the more jobs it creates in the united states. there were a lot of ideas that came from the work sessions. host: you are the vice president of finance for air tractor. who else was in your session? caller: our session led by karen mills and timothy geithner. as far as participants, i do not have a complete list, but there were numerous small businesses. people like eric schmidt,

kaufman enterprises, and nobel prize-winning economist. very much a cross section of the united states. host: also available online, we can get more information on the company there. thank you for being with us. the headline this morning from "the wall street journal" "ben bernanke in power. one of the issues that came up, the impact asñr it moves from te recession from the recovery to the u.s. economy."

>> the first line of defense should be regulation. if there are risk controls that stop the banks from piling into overcrowded positions, which look at emergence -- emerging asset price increases across the system. i think that that is the best way to address, i said it should be regulation of supervision, even if you are not sure about the increase in asset price bubbles. unfortunately we do not have that system. i think that monetary policy has to pay attention to the situation. let me be careful -- i have said

in the past and continue to believe that it is very difficult to know in real time if an asset price is appropriate or not. but given that caveat, we are doing our best to try to look at the major credit and stock markets, using the valuation models that we have, the standard indicators that we have, looking for misalignments. host: we are going to continue our conversation about ben bernanke with john hilsenrath, who has the front-page story this morning on "the wall street journal." this notion of the bubble economy, you have been writing about this, but the senate chairman trying to defend action from the fed, you say that he has been trying to stave off criticism that the fed has been wounded because of recent actions. can you elaborate?

guest: there is a reconsideration going on as a part of the regulatory reform on what the feds should look like after the crisis is over. there is movement to increase congressional oversight in the house bill proposed by ron paul to suggest that -- subject the fed to auditing. the head of the senate banking committee wants to take away the fed possibility to regulate banks. on many different levels congress is looking at reining in the powers of the fed and its authority. host: hearing this yesterday in your reporting, the vote may not, until the first of the year. why the delay? caller: the chairman has strong opposition in the senate. i should say, it looks like he is slowing to be reconfirmed.

but some of these senators appeared to be putting out holds for misprints on confirmation votes, the process is going to be slowed down, we will probably see this chairman get more no votes than any chairman in a quarter-century. host: what was the biggest mistake he made with aig? guest: it is interesting, when he acknowledged that they made mistakes it is worth focusing on what he acknowledged and what he did not acknowledge. he acknowledged that he dropped the ball on regulating financial institutions in leading up to the crisis. they did not deny it -- demand enough capital or liquidity. he actually defended the actions on aig. for months he said that this was not something that he wanted to do and he was of said he had to do it, but he said that they did

what he had -- and had to do to keep the economy from going through another depression. he was pretty defensive on the aig part. host: why is ben bernanke so scared of an audit? guest: a very good question. we have been talking about that a lot. his concern is that at the fed is subjected to audits of its monetary policy you will have lawmakers calling for audits with congress looking over his shoulder, demanding audits every time a decision is made, and that that could influence policymaking. what he would argue, and i am here to tell you what he is saying, not arguing his defense , is that the fed is audited on

many other levels already. he is fighting hard to avoid having interest rate decisions audited. host: what is an economic model -- bubble denn how are they created? guest: one of the really problematic issues between economic and financial bubbles is how they go hand in hand. tech stocks, housing in the last few years, rising above the fundamental valuations and what they suggest they should be. a bubble is when people start diving into assets. there is a lot of concern inside of the fed about what they can

do to stop them. the point of view going into that bubble was that there was not much that the fed could do from a monetary policy perspective to stop these things. they are rethinking that now. host: are we seeing that with gold? guest: certainly when you look at what has happened to gold prices you have got to start wondering, but there are other legitimate concerns and risks. the fed has been getting complaints from policymakers in asia for months. you have to start wondering if commodity prices are going to run higher. certainly even in credit markets it is remarkable, the spread of the discounts that you see on bond instruments since last year. host: for more than one decade john hilsenrath has been writing

for "the wall street journal. he graduated from duke university, spent time in hong,. we will get your phone calls, twitter comments, and e-mails. the issue came up yesterday, the jobs summit at the white house, joe biden referred to it. host: we have -- >> we have never faced an economic dilemma like this in a lifetime of the people in this room. a new and invigorated platform that we can lead in the 21st century, that is what this is about at rock bottom. no more bubbles. you cannot sustain a world leadership based upon a housing bubble or a .com bubble. host: if you take a vice$zmñpr'u

make sure? host: it is interesting, larry summers has been saying all year that he is worried that our economy has been nothing but bubbles for the last decade. first there were tax stocks, then housing. part of the political platform here is to talk about creating an economy built on a more stable foundation. it is worth saying that there was a tech bubble, but it is was not a solid foundation for the economy. it got overdone in the late 1990's, but it is an important part of the economy. host: we have one chart that has four different grafts, bigger booms and busts, housing and tax

stocks -- tech stocks. explain this graph. host: the first chart leads the last three charts. there are big differences between the technology boom in housing boom. it was really driven by borrowing, financial instruments that sold off these packaged securities. there was a huge borrowing boom that accompanied the housing b oom. people thought that the world was changing for the better, fundamentally, and they went out and purchased tech stocks. what we see, because of that borrowing boom, the consequences of the collapse were much more severe. we have seen a much bigger

decline in output. there is a third piece on their, much bigger declines in wealth. one of the things that policy- makers are trying to figure out is how they can advance the kind of over borrowing that led to the bad economy that we had. host: lincoln, north carolina. good morning. caller: i cannot understand how the fed can just turn their backs and not know, looking at journals and what is going on, and not even know or just ignore what is going on without an acknowledging it. they had to have known. also, no one ever speaks of the builder burger brothers group. part of the economy, part of the

fed is in this group and they are controlling a lot of this. not one person will talk about it, they are scared. host: i do not know about the berger brothers and that controlling point, but i will say -- how could they not have known? anyone paying attention had a sense that something out of ordinary was going on and that things were overdone. there was a lot of debate at the fed over the last decade. their point is that it is hard to know if something is a bubble until it is too late. ben bernanke has been worried that if you prick a bubble big can be more trouble than leaving alone.

in the late 1920's, the fed pricked the stock bubble and in the end they sent the economy into a depression. it is one thing to identify a bottle, another to figure out how to identify it. host: this goes into something that you wrote in your peace. guest: frederick [unintelligible] is a former fed governor, he left about one year ago. he is now an economist at columbia. his point is that if the fed decides that there is a bubble in gold and decides to do something about it, it is a dangerous time to prick new bubbles. do you really want to be raising interest rates by an environment like this? it is interesting, with every

bauble that we go through, the consequences become more severe. host: he went on to say that you do not want to be fighting "celeste war." -- the last war." guest: his point is that if we become overly occupied with the the bubble, because we saw the consequences, it is worth pointing out something that ben bernanke talked about yesterday. a lot of the process we are seeing right now are happening in asia, outside of the united states. policy makers have been complaining about interest rates being too low, but the obvious retort is -- what are you going to be doing about it? in china and hong kong in particular, they have pegged their currencies to the u.s. dollar.

they could simply unpeg and let their currencies appreciate, but they do not want to do that. host: our guest at the table this morning espy john hilsenrath from " wall street -- at the table this morning is john hilsenrath of "the wall street journal." please turn down your television set volume. caller: i wanted to ask a few questions real quick. our bobbles only characteristic of our economy and system? is there something systemic about the system that allows these to occur in history? xddo other nations have the same propensity? or is this strictly an american phenomenon? oguest: is certainly not stricty

an american phenomenon. i lived in hong, in the late 1990's. i remember writing a story in 1999 about how hong kong was a petrie dish for baubles. they were constantly having excesses' there. the asian economy went through a big correction in the 1990's. one of the issues that play is that there is so much excess data floating around out there in the financial system, which caused global financial success. host: our next call is chris from rockwell, south carolina. caller: good morning. i want to get off of this topic, i am looking at this ability and having to get on adult medicaid.

because i am out of work and i can i get a job because i am not able to work right now. i am dealing with depression. i keep hearing about the state of this country right now. that depresses me even more. i am sure that others out there feel the same way, except for those that are probably still working. i woke up this morning with a thought about where this country is headed. i can see that we are not building this country up. we have relied on the private sector for a lot of things. ñrthis wall street that i keep hearing about, relying on wall street for the economy, i live in florida before i came here,

probably three months ago. florida relies on tourism. it is almost like what we are doing here, we are relying upon a faulty source. host: thank you for your comments. couple of issues here. one, obviously one of the great challenges for the leadership in the country is dealing with the unemployment problem that we have. it is worth knowing that you are not alone out there. we have 10% unemployment. we have got 17% underemployment. a lot of people right now are struggling with all of these changes that are happening in our economy and financial system, certainly it is something that the fed is concerned about. one thing that i think is worth pointing out is that the

american people and the american economy are really resilience. we have seen it time and again throughout history, after the great depression, after the 1970's, when we had a terrible shock of deflationary. it looks very bleak. we turned it around. we have an economy, and economic system very much driven by innovation. we certainly haveñr many probles right now, but the government -- government in particular has a debt problem. i do not see why that natural innovation of the american people should not help to get us all through this very difficult time right now. from and gossip -- optimistic point of view is worth pointing out that while unemployment is bad, the productivity of the

american workforce is increasing in leaps and bounds, something that helps to drive growth. it seems to me that over the long run we should be able to work through these problems. host: we have a comment from your colleague -- "they seem to keep the money in their family." "alan greenspan, including a reference from jim bunting, referring to ben bernanke as mr. greenspan. did you want to respond to either point? guest: i thought you said that david was twittering in.

host: no, but does he? guest: he does. host: we will try to track him down this morning. guest: this question from the twitter is a critical one, this question of trust. this crisis has damaged, in my view, the trust that the american people have in our financial institutions. not only the fed, but also the congress, the credit ratings, something that i think is going to linger for some time. something that ben bernanke is going to be battling with for some time. explaining hourly his actions, but his predecessors actions as well. something similar happened in japan when they had their lost decade. there was a breakdown on major economic policy.

host: and the to the point about alan greenspan haunting the room? >> absolutely. his comments were as much if not more about greenspan than ben bernanke. one of the reasons ben bernanke is getting a second chance right now is because a lot of people feel that maybe many of the big mistakes being made before this crisis were made by ben bernanke's predecessor. interest rates were held low in the later stages of the greenspan era. more importantly, they took their eyes off ocpáhe regulatory ball. they were not aggressively regulating financial institutions. greenspan had a lazy fair -- was a fair -- lasse fair attitude

about institutions looking after themselves. that it would be i am and institutes self-interest not to drive itself off of a bitch, but it did not work. -- off of añi ditch, çóbut it dd not work. caller: i remember parties in the 1990's where people were bragging about the textiles that they were buying. same with real estate. the problem with real estate is people borrowing. once those loans go under, of the problem becomes worse. looking at the current market and what the fed is doing, they will lead to anything with separating banks from investing.

afterwards, in a normal market he would say that you took a big risk and you lost and we will not bail you out, but now they have to. i do not see any measures trying to prevent these investment firms, which is what less steel was all about. we have never had problems like this until that happened. is anything happening to reinstate sanity into the market? guest: there is a real debate that started in the last month or two about what to do with these institutions that are too big to fail. citigroup, jpmorgan, bank of america. there is a difference of opinion right now that will be sorted out, but you have the bank of

england, for instance, paul volcker saying that these banks should be broken up. there is also an argument that we should take the trading businesses out and leave them to the lending and let the hedge funds to the trading. the views of the fed and the treasury are still taking shape. they feel that the big banks play a role in a multinational corporations managing finances globally. there is a sense that this trading helps them to hedge other activities. i think that this is an issue that is on the table. what should you do to break up these banks that are too big to fail? should you pullout on the operations like trading? we could be seeing more on this position. host: ken is joining us this

morning. go ahead. caller: good morning. good morning, mr. hilsenrath. one of the things, you are not part of the liberal media, you are " wall street journal." -- you are "the wall street journal." what grade would you give "the wall street journal" in covering the lead up to obama? how well did you do when a lot of these conservative stories came out, even from alan greenspan, what grade would you give "the wall street journal" in evaluating the lead up? ben bernanke, obama, those people, that is easy, but i want

to find out how well your paper did it. guest: i have got to say, you are asking pretty biased observer. guest: when greenspan said in 2005 or 2006 that you could not have a national housing bubble, i and a couple of colleagues wrote that there was a global housing bubble. we wrote a lot about these

financial his chance, tha -- wee about these financial incidents that broke up the wall street banks. we did a series in 2007, i think, that was called "debt bomb," and i like to think we did a pretty good job. obviously we did not do enough. if anything, perhaps we did not connect the dots aggressively enough and see clearly enough the amount of leverage building up on wall street that was ultimately going to bring this all down. we could have done more, but i like to think that we were pretty aggressively on this story for many years. we were writing about fannie mae and freddie mac problems well

into the beginning of this decade. that is another one where i think we can take a little pride. but i am not going to sit here and say that we saw it all coming. certainly not the severity of it, or that we should be congratulated. host: yesterday, our guest john hilsenrath had a piece posted online at washingtlaw street jol but come. we have a twitter comment saying of a " history will show that low interest rates caused most bubbles." guest: that is something that has come up a lot, and it came up at bernanke's confirmation hearing yesterday. it certainly looks like that on the face of it, that the fed kept interest rates too low for too long.

bernanke's argument was that if you compare what happened in the united states to would happen in other countries, then the logic of interest rates too low does not hold up because the british, for instance, had higher interest rates than the u.s., and they had a housing bubble as we did. you had other countries like the germans, who had relatively easy monetary policies, and they did not have a housing bubble. i think it is fair to say that low interest rates in the u.s. probably did play a role, but i do not think it was the whole story. i think there were a lot of other things going on. the fed controls short-term interest rates but not long-term interest rates. long-term interest rates were very low, and we also had a boom going on on wall street that was not completely explained by lower rates. but i think the writer is correct that it was certainly part of the mix. host: we have a minute left.

mark joining us from loss of a desperate a question for john hilsenrath, please? caller: in order to find out about this making homes affordable program, which is a government program, you have four different tiers of people, four different departments to talk to. when you call up, there is a recording saying some of the calls are randomly monitored. why are a lot of people working for bank of america also asked for political affiliation? if you refuse to answer, they hang up. bank of america is asking for political affiliation. i thought everybody qualifies for this. host: thank you. guest: i have not heard anything about that. it is certainly very surprising and interesting. you would not think that that should be a part of the questions one would ask when trying to decide if they are going to rewrite their mortgage. i cannot say i know anything about it, but i will ask a

couple of reporters in the office of they have heard anything on those lines. host: prediction with the final senate vote will be for ben bernanke when it comes to the floor? guest: paul volcker got 16 no- votes in 1983. that was the most that anyone has gotten in the last 30 years. i think ben bernanke will probably get more no votes, but he will probably get the 60 yes votes that he needs to be on that seat for the next three years. host: thank you. please come back again. the list cover of "time" magazine has this -- "it is his war now." retired general george joulwan will be joining us in just a moment. later, the chief economist for the national federation of independent businesses, as we talk more about the jobs and the economy and the president's summit yesterday, and his trip

to allentown pennsylvania today. first, an update from c-span radio. >> president obama travel to pennsylvania today to talk about the economy and job creation after speaking -- and whether president focuses on the nation's economy, his secretary of state, hillary clinton, is meeting with her counterparts in nato, telling them an infusion of allied troops in afghanistan is crucial to turning the tide of the war. nato secretary general enters rasmussen says 7000 nato troops will be added next year with more to come. the united nations says iran will not answer to the u.n.'s nuclear watchdog group about his plans to build -- about its plans to build 10 new uranium enrichment sites. it comes to is days after

iran's president, mahmoud ahmadinejad, says the country is considering scaling back cooperation with the iaea. more on the uninvited guests at last week by state dinner. democrat loretta sanchez of california says someone from the white house social secretary office should have helped the secret service clear people into last week's state dinner, saying, "even walmart has a greeter." ms. rogers did not appear yesterday at the house home security hearing on the matter. >> senators are continuing their debate of the health care bill through the weekend. our regular "book tv" schedule will be pre-empted during these senate sessions paired with "book tv" programming continuing

after the debate. on c-span2, the only that were worked the full debate, unedited and commercial free. to read the senate bill and the house version, plus watch video on demand, the one line to c- span's health care hub. host: next guest is general george joulwan, who served from 1993 to 1997 as the supreme allied commander at nato. first of all, you heard the president's speech tuesday. will the new strategy work, as outlined by general mcchrystal and others in the military? guest: the jury is still out. it depends on the execution and implementation. but i think he laid out some clarity that is extremely important on with the goals are and what is required of the afghans in particular, in order to get their security forces up where they can provide for their nation talks on security. the jury is still out, but i think the objectives are clear.

that to me has always been an important requirement. host: there is a meeting going on in brussels today. this morning, the secretary general of nato, rasmussen, spells out specific points. he says, "to be clear, transition is not a code word for exit strategy. it means transitioning to a different role." can you elaborate on that point? guest: if you read the present's speech, i think he makes it clear. with it -- if you read the president's speech, i think he makes it clear. he says that will allow us to begin the transfer of our forces out of afghanistan. we will execute responsibly taking into account conditions on the ground. so i think what we are seeing here is we're saying we will excess -- we will assess where

we are at that point, and how we get out depends on where the afghans are. i think nato is very important there, and he can help transition, in this training of the afghan forces. host: secretary-general rasmussen says it is not just president obama's war. "time magazine" says it is his war. guest: it is not. when i led the operation for nato back in 1995, we had 37 nations with us. 2/3 of the force were other than the u.s., of the 60,000 forces that went in. there are 43 nations on the ground now in afghanistan. most americans do not understand that. they are in the north, some of the more involved in operations in the south, combat operations. but how to consult with those 43 nations, particularly the nato nations, to get this trust and confidence that we need, we have not done a good job consulting.

i think that it is important to get nato involved in this. i think what hillary clinton is doing there today will help make that happen. host: another point of view from the op-ed this morning of "the new york times," by max hastings, former editor of "the daily telegraph" in london. he says most decision makers on both sides of the land is privately believe we are in the business of managing failure, and that is how the surge looks. guest: i do not agree. you will find there are parts of afghanistan now that can be turned over to the afghanis. there are secure areas and afghin afghanistan we can build. i think what will happen is the training of the afghan forces will be down at the province level, the state level, not at the national level. i think the governors will have a much more robust play in how

those forces are trained and will be under their control. so i think that it is not a recipe for failure. i think it is a carry for how we go forward for success. host: the other story and we were reading, on the front pages of " the new york times," "expanding its strong results in afghanistan, the cia," sharpshooters killing eight people suspected of being with the taliban. there using remote-controlled drone target the suspects and taken down. what do you know about this? guest: i know nothing classified about what is going on, but i have had some experience, particularly in places like el salvador where we had ambitious insurgency in the early 1990's. what you need to do is go after the leadership. the leadership of the insurgency is extremely important. that is what i think the drones

are being used for, because they are across the border, hiding in parts of pakistan. the other part of this that is going to happen here, as part of the plan, is to bring the pakistan and nato coalition forces closer together along the border with pakistan and starting to coordinate their actions. i think this is absolutely essential because this is much more than just an afghan problem. it is a strategic problem for the region. i think you are going to see more of that and the drones are part of that. you're going to have not just counterinsurgency strategy, but also counterterrorism. you need to blend both together, and i think that is what is going to be happening in the next several months. host: ann joins us from bonita springs, florida, on the democrats' line. caller: i just do not understand why this is america's war, and i do not understand why we have to put up the brunt of money and forces. it seems to me when bush talked

about in iraq the coalition of the willing, and there was very little support, it was our war. i just do not feel we belong there. i think we need to spend our resources in the united states. host: thank you. we will get a response from general joulwan. guest: nato really has responsibility for afghanistan. that is why we have an international security force there. there is a un resolution. it has been neglected for eight years, and now we are coming back in to try to say how do we really get what was the source of the problem for 9/11. it came from afghanistan. we got our eye off the ball, in my view, by going into iraq to early, and we ended up to a degree neglecting afghanistan. if we want to take afghanistan away from being a source of training for al qaeda and other terrorists, if we want to get

some stability in that region, if we want to stop the momentum of the taliban, it is not just wheat, the united states, it is we, meaning 43 nations, to work together. secretary of state clinton today will hopefully get the consensus required to get nato, and i am predicting there will be several thousand troops committed by nato to this operation over the next several months. host: cnn's john roberts saying the secretary of state is saying she is pleased by the efforts of natal, and nato top officials are saying of the count of troops will be 7000 additional troops with more to come. guest: that is what consultation does. we never consulted to the degree we needed to with nato. i spent my and time behind the

iron curtain, and we never really consulted with them. when you do, you get some degree of consensus that is required. when you do that, you make them part of the solution. that is what we are seeing now. they have a saying -- the mission sheet that is coming out general mcchrystal is a nato officer as well as a u.s. officer. how to get nato, 28 nations come to understand that -- by the way, it is not just troop assets. we have trading, military developmental stuff that needs to go on. -- we have training, military developments of that needs to go on. i think nato has the resources to do it. host: good morning, from wyoming, on the republican line. caller: good morning, gentlemen. host: go ahead with your question for the general.

caller: the comment i have is i was drafted into the military in the early 1970's, and i was on board a nuclear submarine in the manchurian. we were working with the -- in the mediterranean. we were working with the iranians than, and i know what the situation was. i am in support of president obama and what he is doing. i have reservations and some of the things, but my question is, are we adequately supplied going into this war with afghanistan, with the 30,000 marseille, but do it -- or do we have to put it more troops -- with the 30,000 we are saying, where do we have to put more troops, and is the objective going to be met? guest: well, i think that is up

to general mcchrystal and others to address. right now, from my understanding, there are 100,000 troops there now. before you add the surge troops. they're about 60,000 u.s. forces, 40,000 nato forces, and we are going at anywhere from 30,000 to 34,000 u.s., and 5000 to 10,000 nato forces. i think that is sufficient. you are going to create stability in certain areas of afghanistan. i think one of the key areas is in mazar-i-sharif in the north. that could be an area that create stability in the region, allows development of command. you raise the militia, national guard, the military in that region under the control of the governor. then you start from that success spreading out. that is what at least i hope is the plan, but there is

opportunity. i think he has enough resources to do it, and it would be useful and helpful if nato would do what i think they're going to do and at 5000 -- and add 5000 or 10,000 troops to it. host: you graduate from the u.s. military academy when? guest: 1961. host: these are the cadets listening to the president in the eisenhower facility. during the coverage, chris matthews referred to west point as "and in the camp." guest: i did not know that chris that -- "and menemy camp." guest: i did not know that chris did that. i do not know what he meant by that. the have fought in every one of

our wars, and i applaud that. this is not the enemy camp. this is the source and strength of america. these are the men and women that have to carry out the orders of the president and the national security team that puts them in harm's way. i do not know why chris mention that as enemy camp. i think it suggests a poor poorest -- a poor choice of terms and i disagree with it. host: jake joins us from silver spring, maryland. good morning to you come with general george joulwan. caller: i want to say as a follower of christ, i do not hold much hope for the armies of the world to bring peace in our time. i see what is going on now -- it is going to be perpetual war. my only hope in this situation is that america can get its head

on straight for the sake of my children and bring our troops home. guest: well, you know, i understand where you are coming from. i have been involved in this for many years. i would share your concern that hopefully we can build a peaceful place, but when, in the region, in a different type of war, terrorists can inflict serious harm on american citizens and on our territory, then i think we need to have a strategy to be able to stand up to that. part of the problem is when these terrorists get momentum -- and i have fought terrorists in latin america, africa, europe, and elsewhere -- once they get momentum, it gets much more difficult. these attacks go all the way back further, but go back to the 1983 bombing of our troops in lebanon.

so there has to be a way. i think what has to happen is we have to adapt to the threat that we face. it is not what we did in the cold war against the soviet union is a new type of threat. we are learning, painfully, as we go along. i think we have got it right now. it has taken us several years to get it right. but i am optimistic here that we can prevail. america must prevail if we are going to preserve civilization as we know it. host: your background in the military, the president referring to the $30 million price tag -- the $30 billion price tag for afghanistan but did not outline a way to pay for it. one congressman suggested a war tax. guest: i would leave that up to congress to decide. i understand it is a painful time for americans given the economy we are in right now. all i would say is if you are going to put troops in harm's

way, they have to have the resources to match the mission, the requirements that you give them. i think it is important that we do that. i hope we can take that into consideration with our own economy. we have got to find ways to pay for it. i am sure the congress, they can be convinced of the importance of this mission. they have always found a way to support our troops, and i am not doubting that they will do it this time. host: in the first four years of the clinton a ministration, general george joulwan was the chief of nato -- >> i have asked that we be joined by contributions of our allies. some have already provided additional troops, and we are confident there will be further contributions in the days and weeks ahead.

our friends have fought, bled, and died alongside as in afghanistan. now we must come together to end this war successfully. what is at stake is not simply a test of nato's credibility. what is at stake is the security of our allies and the common security of the world. host: did he make the case? guest: i think so. later in that speech, he talked about the objectives in afghanistan -- deny al qaeda's saving, reversed the taliban's momentum, strengthen the afghan security forces in government. i think those goals are worthwhile goals, and i truly believe that nato will rally around because they have been consulted now -- not just by hillary clinton today, but by the president, the secretary of defense committee chairman of the joint chiefs of staff.

the secretary of defense, the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff have been consulting with our nato allies. they need to have a say. host: in a column this morning in "the washington post," "as the casualties increased, effective implementation of this strategy will matter more and more." guest: i think it is always a requirement. in bosnia, we got the conditions right and the three vicious warring factions, and we took not one casualty then and not in 10 years. i think he has got the conditions right now. i am not that pessimistic as the article you just read is. i think we're going to have an opportunity here to create a situation in afghanistan that cannot be used by terrorists

again, and i am more optimistic host: glenn joins us from east hartford, connecticut. caller: steve, i have to say this before i close my comment to the general. -before i pose my comment to the general. i have watched the news in their report on this war ever since it started. when the first troops when it to afghanistan, i believe it was somewhere in the neighborhood of tens of thousands. if we had put in 68,000, i think the situation in afghanistan would be much greater right now. no one criticized the bush administration for how they spend all our resources to iraq. that burns me up. as a veteran, i saw friends of mine died in vietnam when the president did not do the job that we were sent over there to do.

i just feel like the media in this country takes every negative thing that our president now does it just blows it out of proportion. we have sent our troops over there, volunteers, mind you, to fight this war because we thought it was something we needed to do. i just feel terrible that the media can now criticize president obama, who has only been in office for 12 months. host: glenn, thank you. we will get a response from general joulwan. guest: first of all, i spent two tours in vietnam, so i know with the troops are going through here. my whole life has been trying to prevent the sort of issues that we had in vietnam, the lack of clarity of what our mission was, etc. i would agree with you that when we went into afghanistan initially in 2001, after september 11, we were

successful. there was unity in the country. there was unity in nato brigade of declared, for the first time in its history, an article 5, that an attack upon one is an attack upon all. they were ready to support what we were trying to do. in the middle of all that, when we were successful in afghanistan and had to have follow-on forces to do the job, we switched to iraq. i would agree with you there that we should have spent much more time stabilizing afghanistan. but unfortunately we are what we are. where do we go from here? i think the president, as commander in chief, made, i believe, a very thorough analysis of where we need to go forward. he consulted with his military, and we are now committed. i would hope the american people would rally around that and support the decision and hold us

accountable for achieving the results, the military, that is, achieving the results that are required here. i would hope, and i am praying that we are successful, but i think it is an excellent chance for us to reject and and i this area as a training ground for more terrorists. host: a -- who exactly is the u.s. and nato fighting in afghanistan? guest: in my view, there is a good taliban and a bad taliban. i think the idea of trying to split, just like we saw in iraq, the insurgents were split to a degree of some who were there for different reasons. you have taliban that are there for much different reasons than other elements within the

taliban. and how to try to get those that are willing to work with the government and talk to the government, i think it would be a worthwhile thing to do. i think it is a good move. i think you need to talk. i remember in el salvador we talked to the insurgents there. that are about the peace treaty in 1992 -- that brought about a peace treaty in 1992. host: brett joins us from ohio. caller: i cannot believe i got through on the first ring. host: we are glad to hear from you. buy a lottery ticket. caller: i'm concerned about the boys over there, that the taliban is watching their televisions and reacted with glee. we are bogged down in a war that we cannot win. their mission on attacking the twin towers was to bring our

nation to economic collapse. they have done more than that. the nation is completely polarized right down the middle. i can only see -- we are going to be in a civil war of our own the canoed -- between the haves and the have-not before it is over with. guest: i hope not. i think at the presidential level, at the commander in chief level, you have to make decisions. if his decision was to pull the plug and pull everyone out, the military would comply. his decisions with clear objectives, limited in scope and time. that was the right way to go. we owe him a shot in doing this correctly. the military will do all it can to make this successful. but does hope the american people will support this in a way that sends the right signal to our troops, that they are being supported, and then will make some determination that. if the afghans do not measure up, then i think the president

and his team of evaluate that and make the proper decisions a year or two from now. host: a follow-up on my earlier question with chris matthews. chris matthews apologized for the enemy camp statement the next evening. guest: i know chris, and i did not think it was right to me. i figured it was a knee-jerk reaction, so to speak. our military academy is the source of our strength. their leaders commit themselves, many of them, in my case, over 37 years of service to the nation. i just hope that they have the support of our american people. they are outstanding young men and women. host: house and senate hearings over the last couple days from defense secretary robert gates. this headline in "the washington post" pretty much summarizes his message to congress, which is "there are no deadlines in terms of when all of our troops will be out of afghanistan." guest: that is the point i was

trying to make. we will look at it in july of 2011 and begin the transition out. it does not mean everybody comes out. it depends on what those conditions are, and i think if we have some success -- i think this gives a clear signal to the afghans -- get your act together, get some training going, get your security forces up, get the corruption and the narco-traffic under control. show some signs by july of 2011, the next 18 months, and there will be a reassessment. if you can see some success, i think you can reinforce that success. but it is going to be the afghans' that are going to be the ones that have to provide the security and the police and military for the way ahead after that time. host: i want to share this photograph from "time" magazine. how much weight are the u.s.

forces carrying? guest: we had the same problem in vietnam. the technology is better today, but they are carrying over 100 pounds on their backs, some even more. sometimes they drop those rucksacks when they get ready to deploy, but they are taking a lot of weight, and they have body armor on and everything else. it gets tough, particularly in the heat and the dust and all that. host: again, these photographs from "time" magazine, in newsstands today. annie, joins us. good morning. caller: thank you for your service, general. my question is about the clarity of goals and afghanistan. i would like the president to tell us exactly why we are there. if we are there securing some special mineral or pipeline, just tell us that. my problem is, and the problems of many billions of america, is that many of us to not believe

the facts as they have been given us surrounding 9/11. i think that we have not been given anywhere near the truth surrounding the 9/11 attacks, and it is time to have a real and sincere investigation into 9/11 to where we can understand what really happened to drop those two towers. host: thank you, annie. guest: there has been enough written, a study about 9/11 about what caused it and what did not. but i can tell you, i listened very carefully to the positive because one of my first conditions for success in my career in the balkans and latin america was clarity of mission and purpose. he made it very clear. he said we must deny al qaeda a safe haven in afghanistan. that is very clear, and we need to develop the intelligence to be able to do that with the afghan as per the only way we are going to do is to get the afghan government to a stage

where they can provide for their own security. we must reverse the taliban's momentum and deny their ability to overthrow the government. that is very clear. we must strengthen the capacity of their security forces in government so they can lead responsibly in the future. those to be seen to be very clear, and i know our military commanders will take those and build on them, then do measures of the effect of this to say how are we doing over the next year, year-and-a-half, and evaluate all that as we go forward. so i understand the frustration about 9/11, and i would hope that would go forward, whatever needs to be done. we have troops committed now, and we have some, i think, a clear signal by the president of support of the national security team, and i would hope the american people would try to give our troops to support they need to carry out these objectives given to them by the president, and then we will measure periodically up to july

11, 2011, and then makes the decisions there. but i for one having been in this in a long time and optimistic that the military and the afghan government, if they get their act together, they can pull it off host: your biggest concern is what? guest: is the legitimacy of the afghan government as we go forward. can they build capacity in this government to gain legitimacy with their own people? that is the challenge. that is why i think we are going to seek more push down in the province levels. there are 34 provinces or states in afghanistan. but president karzai has a real mission here to clean up his act, if i can be that blunt, and provide the sort of leadership for all afghan people to build a better future for them, to take this opportunity, which is an opportunity for him, and build

on it. if he does not do it, then his country, the afghan people, and the entire region, which includes two nuclear-powered in pakistan and india, and china on another border, all of that region then becomes unstable, and i think that is not the afghans' best interest or the world. host: general george joulwan, thank you for joining us. in just a moment, we're going to turn our attention back to politics. as tip o'neill said, all politics is local. there is a new book out by lou frey. we will learn about what he and other members of congress have to say about washington and capital hill. a sign of the season, so that they expected the coolidge administration, is the lighting of the national christmas tree. it took place last night with the aba was and members of the family. "washington journal" continues,

and we are back in a moment. >> as we get better at what we do, we run into the ever increasing risk of overconfidence and arrogance. >> four of malcolm glad well's books currently sit on the new york times best-seller list, including the latest, "what the dog saw." >> american icons, now available on dvd, a unique journey through the iconic homes of the three branches of american government.

see the exquisite detail of the supreme court through the eyes of the justices. go beyond the velvet ropes of public tours into those rarely seen spaces of the white house, america's most famous home. explore the history, art, and architecture of the capital, one of america's most symbolic structures. "american icons," a three-disc dvd set rate is $24.95, plus shipping and handling. order online at c- span.org/store. >> "washington journal" continues. host: lou frey, former member of congress, the author of a new book. why did you put this together? guest: when i got elected, there was nobody. you got sworn in, and you go do it. i started asking people, where are the rules cup how does it work, and so forth. i got intrigued about the different answers. i spent 20 years talking to different people -- presidents,

vice presidents, secretaries of defense, etc. -- and put together 714 different rules from 172 people representing 2000 years of congressional experience. no one had ever done it before. would we put all the rules together, it was amazing because you could fit them in categories like edmund burke -- his address to the electorate of bristol, how a congressman member should act, should you represent the people or the district? 26 people and to that. they all said, look, do it yourself. the constituency is important but it is not as important as what you believe that what you feel. you have been put in to exercise your own judgment. there were some funny ones, too. host: we will share those with our viewers lou frey served in the 1970's as a republican representative from florida "of the people who wanted to be my

special friend, all the invitations i receive suddenly disappeared." it was as if i had forgotten to take a bath and no one really want to be close. when you were up in politics, you were sky high. when you were down, you are in the pit." guest: that is the way it is. one of my friends said politics is not been bags. if you did not like the sight of blood, especially your own, you probably should not get into the business. it is a tough business and you ought to understand that. and when they blow smoke in your years, do not get too carried away -- in your ears, did not get carried away. there are a lot of acquaintances but not many friends, and that this is the way it is. host: "did not get into a fight with someone who buys ink from by the carload, the press, and once you have to explain, you are in trouble." guest: ask tiger woods.

secondly, when you start splitting, and especially at home, you are really in trouble. that is a will that is not only true in politics but in our personal lives. we just have recently seen how those two rules apply, and in a week somebody went from the top of the world where there is going to be a new agreement between husband and wife that is going to be pretty costly. host: this is from former congresswoman pat schroeder. she says, "tell the truth. did not do anything you would not want to read on the front page of the paper. if you did something that looks awful of the front page of the paper come and go back to world wide." guest: there were a lot of responsible that trade index one was on this particular one, and there was total agreement on this. the secretary of the interior, elizabeth holtzman, a lot of people did this. but this rule is the rule that is the most violated rule of all the rules i think that we have in politics or that we had this

book. it is ignored. people know this stuff. they note today with internet and with facebook and that what is going on, but they continue to violate it and they continue to pay the consequences. host: we welcome your phone calls as always, are said as a twitter comment. former congressman lou frey, also on the association of former members of congress. the book is called "political rules of the road." guest: stephen, there's one thing. i'm shamelessly promoted his book, i want you to know. but i do not get any of the proceeds from it. the proceeds go to the former members to teach. we have a congress to campus program there. to buy university of the university of central florida, the sixth largest in the nation, headed by president john hit. we have symposiums, and we do a lot of stuff with young people. i can go out and push it.

it is a great book, but i want people to know tsit is not a grt book because of my pocketbook. it looks inside congress. it humanizes the congress, and, boy, this covers need to be humanized. host: "no one ever got defeated on a vote he did not cast for a speech he did not make." guest: president bush said basically the same thing. he also said nothing is off the record. and gene mccarthy said, "do not trash the press." host: i will not comment on that. we go to anthony. good morning. caller: good morning, steve. good morning, mr. frederick steve, first of all, congratulations to your father for getting a new contract with the debdodgers.

host: well, thank you, but he is not my father. he is not even related. go ahead with your question. caller: what do you think of the republican party today. there is a very fringe part of the party today that i do not agree with, and i saw a lot of editorials in different newspapers and politico. i just with your thoughts on that, mr. frey, because i think the fringe of the party is making it harder for people to agree with republicans. they are at 20% right now. guest: the fringe in both parties make it harder, and they usually control the state party. your more conservative people are part of it, and they turn up the primary voting. both parties have a problem with that. the thing that worries a lot of us in the congress, i had friends -- i really had close friends -- one was the chairman

of the communications committee, a democrat from california. we worked closely together to pass significant legislation or work on it. we do stuff. we know each other, we go down and play basketball. we talk, we have a beer. we had severe disagreements, steve, on vietnam. very serious disagreements come a lot more violence than we have today. but it was never personal. you could be for something, and that did not mean the other person was wrong or you put a label on him. that is part of the problem today. everything is really personal. both parties have got to get their act together. the republican party has to figure out what it believes, what its base is, and i think both parties are going through a period of time where they are not sure where they are going, and for the good of the country, i would like to see some legislation come out that has both parties are in the on that. remember, members of congress did not take an oath to their party, but to the constitution. somehow we seem to have drifted

away from that. but do not give up. the congress is a great institution. it is a hallowed place, in my beliefs. when you come in there, you practically have a sacred duty in terms of what you're trying to do. it is really worthwhile to do not give up on our country. we are going to get there. we will bumble somehow in the right direction. host: another quote from the book, george mcgovern, saying, almost every time i have tried to get government public statements to the top the mood of the following my own instincts, i have gotten into trouble. i believe it's at the merc that the greatest gift a public service can give to constituents is his judgment." guest: i happen to agree with it. there is one thing you have to understand. all those are unequal. there are quotes that you are going to bleed to death on. there are also those that you have to go out of office on.

the health care, a cap and trade to the baby immigration. there are those -- or maybe immigration. i am not all that aware about the subsidies for wheat in the midwest. that is not a vote i am willing to go out of office on. i'm going to vote on it, but i will not begin as a run be overcome in the heck with it, because i truly do not know much about it. when it comes to the critical votes, those are the votes you should be willing to say, look, this is what i believe in, this is why i believe in it. george brown, babes from the past, the congressman from california. -names from the past, the congressman from california. he was a good friend of mine. he was very opposed to vietnam. his district was not. he told what he believed new york, and he is survived close elections early on when vietnam was a lot more popular than it was prett.

a lot of people have the courage to be for something and tell everybody about it. i read that thing and thought about it, and you cannot work backwards. something that is really good today politically may be a disaster tomorrow. so, you know, it just makes sense to be what you are for. if you win , fine. but at least you're comfortable in your own skin. elizabeth holtzman got elected in 1972. she said you have got to be able to look in the mirror. she said if you can look in the mirror and not be ashamed of what you have seen, you have done a pretty good job. by the way, one of the historic things about this book is before president ford died, he sent me four pages, basically, of his rules permit some of them hit me right between the eyes. he said, "i was in the leadership during the time that this was -- we were talking but nixon. president ford said, "do what is

best for the country even if it costs you personally." i had argued with him about the pardon. i said, mr. president, i can see you pardoning him, but please do not pardon during the midterm elections, because you will kill the republican party. he took office in 1974. he killed us. the watergate babies came in. i think we lost 52 or 72 seats. it was a mess. there was not enough people to have a caucus. we pleaded with him to do it, and he said, no, we have to get this behind us. we said, mr. president, it is going to cost the election. he did not care. it had to be done. it did cost us the election. we were 33 points behind in the convention and close within one point. carter's campaign was absolutely falling apart. and, of course, that did cost him the election, he was very proud of it.

he wrote that. the other thing -- host: livni refer to someone else in the book. "the ultimate test of leadership is not the polls to take but the risks you take. political courage can be self- defeating, but the greatest defeat would be to live about courage for that hardly would be living at all. let's bring in leak from little rock, arkansas. caller: good morning. politics now is just so -- i do not know what it is. i want to know what foreigners think of us when some people get up and say, "i hope the president fails." this kind of stuff. and then everybody says, well, that is the way of politics. i disagree. i mean, if you disagree -- we

have a democratic commander in chief, it is by a republican, i can disagree with him but i will do my best, everything i can to work with him to get the job done. guest: lee, that is hard to argue with. i was in the service, was a captain in the navy. i do not agree with everything my commander in chief says. i hope this plan works. i truly hope this plan works because there is a lot in it. but the other side about that is this is a free country. we have the first amendment. people say what they want, and that has been true in the political world since back in revolutionary days. host: from 1969 until 1979, our guest, lou frey, representing a florida congressional district. this is from monty, who says, "do you think the american public is as politically educated as europeans to make right decisions in all

elections?" guest: as a nation, we are severely illiterate. 40% cannot name the three-we are severelcivilly illiterate. 40% of students cannot name the three branches of government. how can you have a country making decisions and people making decisions where they do not know what we have? we are cynicallivically ignoran? the other thing that is worse than that is the dropout rate and high schools. in florida, is one in three kids not making it through high school. that is the biggest problem we have, that people did not know what we have. we have got to do something

about getting 6 back in our educational system. host: the book is called "political rules of the road." our guest is lou frey, jr.. our guest is mark from michigan. caller: good morning, mr. frey. it is an honor to speak with you this morning. guest: thank you. i hope you feel that way when i'm done. caller: my question is, how do you feel on the moral turpitude have meaning in congress today -- happening in congress today? the tax cheats -- i hate to use that term, but it is true, especially when it comes to charlie rangel. the acts the behavior with our speaker of the house, nancy pelosi, harry reid, barney frank, which to me are the trifecta of what happened with the housing market. guest: unfortunately, and i say unfortunately because i mean

it, both sides have had plenty of problems. it really hurts. i believe in santa claus and the easter bunny. i really believe people who come to congress want to do right and they really care. if those that differ with me, fine, they differ with the brit every time something like that happens, it erodes the congress. it is like a dam. you are taking another little part about -- you are taking another part out of it. people say there they go, you have for the 20 people in the house working hard, good staff people on both sides. i think it is a shame because i believe you have a higher responsibility, a higher duty when you are in that office. there are higher standards you live to, and i do not think that is being done. it is very frustrating, and you know what i would like to see? i would like to see a two-year house member, a one-term senator, in a four-year president. i would like to see people

running for office, say, i am going to fight for that, i am going to do something about social secure it, they have to increase the age or some of the spending. people are going to be pretty angry, but i am willing to go up there and do it. i might not be there a long time, but in that time i will be effective. i think if somebody did that, they would be reelected. by the way, that " you give from ford was the ending of the book. the other thing i wanted to mention that the end of the book was rodgers' rules. written in 1757, i believe, at norwich university is where i got from. really a good way to end the book. host: i saw them. there are so many, we could not put the ball on the screen. but they are in the after word of the book. frank joins us from victorville, california. caller: good morning,

congressman fray. i am quite old now, world war ii vet and retired steelworker. during the war, i got a spaceship and went to radio school and ended up at a radio coast -- i got off a ship and went to radio school. i remember that a lot. we were a radio monitoring station that. i wanted to ask you -- i am sure going to read of a " political rules of the road." i am retired. we could sure use some political rules of the road for the southern california housing crisis, and i just read a book that maybe you would like, "the abc's of the economic crisis,

what working people need to know." guest: i will try to pick that up. i think we not only need the abc's, but the xyz's of where we are going. i have been through three of these in florida, and this is the worst that we have been through. the florida economy is really hurting like it is run the country. 13% unemployment in our state, and just -- you know, obviously it is a tremendous problem that we all hope we can get the heck out of in a relatively short period of time until. -- in a relatively short period of time. host: former representative donald rumsfeld, "stick with one of three responses. i know, i can tell you, i know and i cannot tell you, or, i do not know."

.

guest: 1 is don't do a live advertisement with an animal. no explanation of it. that really piqued my interest. he is now the chancellor of texas tech. i said, "where did you get this thing? he said, "don't you remember george mcgovern? he had a deal where he had a life advertisement going and he had a dog in it and he got mad at the dog and took a swing at him, allegedly." that incredible negative impact. i had forgotten about the thing. the other goal is always asked for the vote. that came from tip o'neill. he had this lady and he said, "how are we doing?" she said, "here is the list, nine votes for you." "your name is not on the list."

"congressman, you never asked for it." host: former congressman lou frey, thanks for stopping by. guest: that you very much. by the book. buy -- the book. we need to teach our kids about six. hos -- about six. -- civics. host: we will come back to the question we asked at the top of the program, for those of you out of work, what is it like for you try to find employment in this economy? first, a news update from c-span radio. >> the first major afghan military operation since the president announced the troop surge has begun. a military spokesman says about 1000 marines and afghan troops launched operation in helmand province. it aims to cut off tell -- cut

off taliban to vacation routes -- taliban communication routes. as mentioned, the economic numbers just in. the government reports that the jobless rate dropped from 10.2% last month but the economy shed 11,000 jobs last month, a better showing than the wall street economists had expected. more economic news from the administration did transportation secretary ray lahood is to announce that more than 30 will many factors and suppliers have committed to establish or grow -- rail manufacturers and suppliers have committed to establish stations and grow jobs with high-speed rail lines.

$800 billion of high-speed rail awards will be announced this winter. >> c-span's 2010 studentcam contest is here. the top prize is $5,000. just create a 5-to-eat-minute video on one of our countries greatest strengths or a challenge the country is facing. must incorporate c-span programming and show varying points of view. winning entries will be shown on c-span. grab a camera and get started. code to studentcam.org. >> "washington journal" continues. host: we want to welcome william dunkelberg. thanks for being with us. you are not at the white house yesterday for the jobs summit. guest: my invitation was lost in the mail, i think. host: if you were there, what would you have asked the president or advised the white house? guest: the real key to the economy is the consumer.

70% of gdp is consumption. if you look at retail sales, they are terrible. if you talk to our members, 33% tell us that their most significant is this problem is just weak sales. nobody is coming in. if nobody is coming in the front door, you don't need to hire people, you don't need to buy inventory, which we have not been doing, and we certainly in this environment are not going to buy new equipment or delivery trucks, if you don't have somebody to deliver to. i would say do something to help the consumer and get back on his or her feet and come back shopping. host: you wrote in a recent summary about the state of the economy that the small business job machine is "in reverse, and still in reverse." guest: we talk to our members every month, and we found that in our most recent survey we were looking at three percentage points more still planning to reduce employment relative to the percent who are planning to increase employment.

we have not crossed the zero line. we have more folks saying that it will keep cutting employment but i am trying to survive, i have to keep costs low. we have seen the most dramatic reductions in employment that we have ever seen in the 35-year history of the survey just happening in the last year and half. host: the president is traveling to allentown, pennsylvania today. one of the places he is going to, a bakery called out in the lehigh valley, with 40 employees. one of the owners says that she is constantly getting applications for jobs. in that economy, 41,000 people out of work in allentown, what does that mean for somebody trying to hire somebody in tons of the income that they will be able to make and that competition to get the select number of jobs? guest: if you are in lehigh

valley and you want to hire somebody, you obviously have a great selection. that is true for the economy as a whole. 15 million unemployed people now compared to 7 million in good times. we always have a bunch of people who are unemployed. but if you go back just a year or two, one of the top complaints our small business owners had was finding qualified workers. not anymore treed nobody is complaining about that. -- not anymore. nobody is complaining about that. you could hire them relatively inexpensive flee. you don't have to compete for them. from the workers put it, not so good. but from the employer's point of you com-- point of view, now ise time to hire. when is the best time to start a small business? i always respond facetiously, the day before the recession and. -- the day before the recession

ends. everything is an expensive. and then the next day you get what everyone needs, cash flow. host: is this a v recovery, w recovery? explain the different types of recoveries. guest: it is definitely a v so far. output is down 6.4%, a huge decline in gdp. in just nine months we of got from -6.4 to 2.8, which is stunning, a very steep v. the w o, if we suddenly falter and take back down again and we get the w shape. we have a very big w in the 1980-1982 period, were in 1980

the economy crashed significantly and that the economy grew -- then the economy grew and it fell again and did not start growing until 1983. it usually takes a major policy mistake or something like that to send us into nw. there is no real reason to go into eight w unless you scare consumers to death or use of the else that drives down spending, business spending, and then you can get a w. but we should not really be looking at a w. host: the president was meeting with business leaders and economists at the white house, and minority leader john boehner was holding his own summit and met with reporters after his conversation. >> the nation's largest organization representing employers, and the fact that they are not at the white house, gives some indication that they are considering policies that are not going to help employers be more competent about the

future of the economy, and therefore, but employers in a position where they are not going to hire more people. i used to run a business before i stumbled into this political arena. i'm beginning to scratch my head and wonder why. but i know what it takes to meet a payroll, what it means to create jobs. without certainty, without some confidence about what tomorrow is going to bring, i am not going to move. when you look at all of these policies that are being proposed and the tax rates that are so uncertain, it is no surprise to any of us that employers continue to do nothing. host: bill dunkelberg, what policies and it is right now are hindering small businesses? -- what policies in place right now are hindering small businesses? guest: we usually have the tax problem, and they are going up. regulation is always a problem. that certainly does not help

either. if you look at the typical response, owner optimism usually release source at the beginning of expansion. we presumably bottom out in the third quarter and everything should look rosy now. the opportunities are there, the competitors are gone, the recession has filtered out. you should really be optimistic. normally we see that happen. coming out of the 1982 period, our optimism was at an all-time high, 35-year high, in 1983. this time it is not happening. the economy has turned and you have growth in the third quarter, but pessimism seems to continue to prevail. i think that is because we look forward and ask ourselves what is coming out of this town that would look -- help us out and make us more optimistic? it is just tax, tax, tax, we are going to tax, redistribute, take this, mandate that. there is so much uncertainty there for the small business owner that they are just sitting back and say, " i will wait

until this results itself." i think the consumer feels the same way. what is going to happen to me, what is going to happen to my health care? consumer optimism has not picked up either. we are sitting and waiting to see what happens. uncertainty is always the enemy of the financial markets but obviously of their real economy as well. host: bill dunkelberg is a graduate of the nervous the of michigan. today in "the detroit free press," president, saying, "we will get through this." why is this recovery so tough? guest: the consumers are not picking up their share of the deal. if you look at the 2003 to 2007 period, we brought this economy around at a 0 savings rate with cheap credit.

we overbuilt and we're looking at hundreds of billions of dollars of retail sales gone that we were having before. now we have too many stores, too many restaurants, and infrastructure that is really built around a consumer that lives on the debt rather than some kind of saving program. now we have all this excess capacity. we have too many workers available, lots of strip malls, all kinds of other stuff that we really don't need. if the consumer is going to have a 5% savings rate, many people have been characterizing this as what is the new normal? where is the consumer going to take us? 50% of consumption, 70% of gdp, comes from the top 20% of the income distribution. they got whacked on their houses, the stock market, which is 70% back now, but still there is bad news. and of course, it tapped all their credit availability and

spent it. they are the ones that we really need to get back to the shopping mode. we went from 16 million cars a year down to 9 million, that was not unemployed people not buying cars. it was people like us who are still working and just deciding no, this year i will just keep the car a little longer. i will not buy the newest and greatest tv. that is what took the economy down in the third quarter of 2008. host: cafrom the republican line. -- fred on the republican line. caller: the main problem is congress, period, senate and house. the louisiana governor did a $3 million put off -- $3 million pay off. don't you think the american people are tired of being bent

over and getting the finished product? host: he was referring to mary landrieu, a point well taken. -- but a point well taken. guest: in the people have been complaining about congress for a long -- a lot of people have been complaining about congress for a long time. the health care bill -- passing it is more important than what it actually does any more. we know that votes are bought. it is unfortunate that once the representatives get elected and come to washington, they seem to stop representing us and start paying attention to special interests instead of our interests, and we are the ones that sent them there. i agree with you. it is very unfortunate. one of these days, if we get angry enough as of voters, we will change that, but we've not done that yet. host: deborah is joining us from new jersey.

welcome to "washington journal." caller: mr. dunkelberg, we listen to economists so often tell us that getting us out of american crisis is american ingenuity. it seems that over the last 30 years, all the ingenuity has been focused on not creating product, but financial instruments to create profits for a very select few by shuffling debt to around. for too long, our manufacturing has been disappearing from this country, and jobs have been lost, and the consumer that you are talking about who is not doing their part for not only jobs -- not only jobs disappear, but their wages are frozen, and the standard of the quality of life, using a homes as atm's and racking up more credit card debt that they will

ever live to see paying off the interest on. i was thrilled by the talk of the greek economy, and heard of this project in -- green economy, and heard of this project in texas where they would make wind farms, and thought, great, we would produce these turbines and create jobs, only to find that we were creating 3000 jobs for the chinese and 300 jobs for ourselves in this project. guest: well, you know, you covered a lot of territory there. let me first begin with the financial system and the banking. yes, that really got out of whack. financial institutions accounted for too big a share of our market cap here, and certainly the earnings were outrageous. all they were doing was creating a very complicated products and selling them to each other. when i saw a headline last year that said, "credit markets for some, banks won't lend to each other," i said, wait a minute, i

thought banks were supposed to lend to consumers and small businesses. what is this lending to each other and the fees the regenerating? -- the fees they were generating? on the manufacturing side, i think manufacturing output as a share of gdp has really been pretty steady. we of course use fewer people all the time because productivity is so high in manufacturing, and we do different kinds of manufacturing. if you look at your cellular phone, that might be assembled overseas in china because it is very simple, and it might be worth $20, but the thing that makes it valuable is the chip that goes in it, and that is the kind of stuff that we seem to do here in the u.s. it is different kind of manufacturing. we did a lot of the ingenuity side of it, the innovation, and that does have a very big pay off. that is the value added. what worries us is that now, a lot of that can be done in china and india, because for years we

have been training lots of their people in our universities, and we have the best university system in the world, but a lot of ph peace -- ph.ds come here and leave. if you look at places like out in california, you'll find that half of the high-tech firms were founded by people who came from another country and got their education here and then started those firms. complicated process, but i believe fundamentally that american ingenuity can get the job done. what we worry about is the government getting at it with high taxes and regulation, telling us what to do rather than letting us figure out what works and what is most profitable, what will create the most jobs. host: from the reporting of elizabeth williamson in "the wall street journal," she points out that the mack truck in allentown, pennsylvania, a shutdown in 2008. the will be a 100-worker branch

of the lehigh valley health network, the largest employer in allentown. what was what bethlehem steel is now up million dollars casino. -- now a 30-million-dollar casino. and fewer than 13 employees make up 13,000 -- fewer than 50 employees make up nearly 13,000 of the valley's 14,000 employers. guest: paying social security for a least one worker have under 20 employees in the u.s. did small business is important to job growth and job creation. we employ half the private sector employees in the u.s. and reproduce have the private gdp, a small firms to -- and we produce half of the private gdp, a small firms do. what is nice to see is that -- this is what the system does.

bankruptcy is that from a personal point of view, but the whole idea -- if the resources you have are not making money, meaning doing something that people value, then you have to replace those assets -- reprice those assets and try another experiment so that you start making money. when companies go out of business, they go out of this is because you and i put them out of business. we don't like the reston, the barbershop, we withhold our money, and they go out of this and they repress the facilities and try something else. -- they reprice the facilities try something else. with gm and chrysler, let's take them apart, take the good pieces, sell them to somebody who will do something good to them, and sell off the pieces that don't work anymore. that is how we state growing

over the long haul. but if we get saddled with inefficient firms that don't get the job done, like a state owned enterprises, not a good deal. host: our guest is bill dunkelberg, the chief economist for the national federation of independent businesses. john is joining us from hartford, tennessee, an independent line. welcome to the program. caller: thank you, steve. mr. dunkelberg, all this stuff you saying don't make no sense to use a 10% unemployment is more like 18 to 20 -- you say 10% unemployment. it is more like 18% to 20%. the u.s. bank stole $60,000 out of my lockbox and i went under. -- stole $16,000 out of my lockbox i went under. i'm glad that those people putting his chips together that you were talking about, because

manufacturing has gone down. you manufacturers -- all my people that come in my store are friends of mine and they're not going to spend their money, because the big banks and wall street people got all the money and they did not send us -- they said us $300, which will not by a tank of gas -- sent us $300, which will not be why a tank of gas. guest: if you ask yourself, where would i rather be, california or texas -- texas has grown immensely, added 2 million more new jobs, maybe 1.6 million, but the point is that it has been very, very successful. it has really taken advantage of the fact that many markets opened up and you could have trade between mexico and, of course, the united states. they have done very well with that.

free trade between countries works just like free trade between new york and pennsylvania or any of the other 50 states which are the countries in the united states. free trade is really good. i don't know what happened to your lockbox, so i cannot help you with that, but small business is the r&d of the u.s. economy. if you have a new product or you have a better way of doing something, you can start a business. if you are right, you'll be rewarded with customers and money and it will make profits and it will finance her growth -- finance your growth and it attracts copycats. if you are wrong, you may have a bad experience and lose your business, but we did not lose you and we did not lose the building and the stuff. we repriced the assets and started a new experiment. i know stories entrepreneurs who started businesses 15 or 20 times, just kept coming back until they finally get the right formula. that is the real essence of u.s.

economic growth and why we have outperformed our competitors globally for decades now. host: susan is joining us from north carolina. good morning. caller: good morning. i just want to say one thing -- in north carolina, we have factories, 6200, i know people who go to work on these factories and inspect them. an american will come in and seek a job and they don't have any jobs, and then somebody from a different country will come in and they will hire. one place as nine americans and the rest 2200 is from a different country. they have food places where they can buy their food, and they can buy their clothing there, that i

have a business and does not help our economy. grocery stores or anything. i just wonder why nobody looks into that. you know, that hurts the whole economy. i bet you there is about 15,000 jobs around this area where americans to be working. they're spending gas money on and nothing because they're not going to get hired. the have like five fake id's, they have hit and runs and leave all their fake ids in the car. we are trying to straighten out our economy and we cannot even give our own people jobs. host: thank you for filling in. mr. dunkelberg? guest: well, certainly, that is

an issue that a lot of us all worried about. the whole border and having so- called illegal immigrants or illegal a-list or however you want to characterize these individuals -- illegal aliens or however you want to characterize these individuals affects our economy. there is the whole issue about legal immigration versus illegal immigration. legal immigration is very important for us but we get 1 million people this year because half of that group will invite and a half of that will probably come in illegally. they contributed to the economy in many ways and we worry about keeping out to many of the skilled people that we would invite under the normal immigration rules. illegal immigration is a problem that we have not been able to effectively deal with in washington.

hopefully, as time goes on, we will get some better solutions for dealing with those problems as we go forward. host: dening is joining us from louisiana. a -- good morning. danny is joining us from louisiana. good morning. caller: i cannot disagree more with the gentleman who is now speaking. i watched this whole thing collapsed. it all started with when we changed the economic models. basically, keynesian economics goes along with henry ford, and when they asked him why he waited employees so much, he said, "i want them to buy cars." and then you have the freedom and model. -- the friedman model. and during the reagan

administration, i had my taxable on the same income. -- tax doubled on the same income. which is used to keep up with inflation. wages have been kept down. with this deregulation and reaganomics, the people of america has been taken for a ride. as far as your business, i sympathize with you, but you start out all your customers, sir. guest: that maybe true from some perspectives, but as you look at the whole economy and how it has done over the past decade, wealth increases all the time, real incomes increase all the time, over the last 12 months, wages are up 2.8%. your experience may differ from that of the whole economy. certainly, the economy is changing all the time the. the mix of the economy is changing. those kinds of adjustments

happen. wal-mart is there because consumers put it there. if you don't like wal-mart, you don't shop there, then they would go out of business, just like kmart went out of this is for a while before it was taken private. uni, consumers, drive the market, -- you and i, consumers, but the market, who stays in business and who does not. on the tax side, lots of different issues we argue about at the polls every years -- how should -- how big should the government sector be versus how big the private sector should be. it is an important argument, what we will have again in 2010. we will see how it gets resolved. host: cleveland, ohio, for bill dunkelberg.

caller: good morning. i listen to c-span quite often. i am 74 years old. i have worked in manufacturing all my life. i was an electrician at to the equipment running. they're always talking about unemployment, 10%. actually, on a plan -- unemployment is begun in this country. we have to people or three people in this -- two people or three people in the household working that they should not have. two people working to support this. number two, u of christmas coming up. -- you have christmas coming up with everybody is going out and buying chinese toys instead of american products. and they wonder why we are out of work.

guest: you make some very good points. when i started out, my house was this big, and the time i am now in my late fifties, i have a nice house or nice stuff, so i come from the day when people talk about "the good old days" one that could go to work and mom did not have to work and could take care of the children. but we now want everything, we want it now. my son started off in a house about 10 years ago that is bigger than the one i was living in, and he got the new cars and credit may all this possible. they have to work very hard to make all payments and keep up. you are right, those are personal decisions that we make. they are ill-advised in so many cases, as the housing bubble bursting showed us. people reached too far and tried to get too much. we should not let that happen. that is really unfortunate.

it does mean that you do have to have good people working to pay the bills if you are going to make those kinds of commitments to the lifestyle. we will have to see whether the new normal, but we start saving more money, means that we are going to adjust our expectations and little bit. maybe not the 5-bedroom house -- maybe only 3 is fine print you don't have to of a new car every year. -- maybe only 3 is fine. you don't have to have a new car every year. those decisions will shape what the economy looks like. from 2003 to 2007, we built an economy based on those savings. we built too many strip malls where you could buy those toys, too many restaurants, too many of all this stuff, and consumers are saving hundreds of billion dollars less in retail sales. a lot of those were empty spaces now. we will have to make an adjustment of the next couple of years. it will just take some time to

reassert all this and we will see what the new consumer thinks about the future and whether or not they need to have a meeting today. maybe they will be willing to save a little bit and get it tomorrow. host: last call for this segment from tennessee. caller: i think it -- the people -- i think the reason people are not spending is that they are scared to death of what this president is going to give us with the health care bill and the penalties and taxes. there is no experience in his cabinet for growing jobs in the business. it is all government. only employment around here is people being hired to work the christmas season, and they know they will be laid off. people are saving the money. the three weeks ago you said there were going to take 400 million out of medicare. it is $500 billion. i know it figures the matter to you democrats, but it matters to -- i know figures don't matter

to democrats, but it matters to people like me. this president is going to rob medicare to pay for his health- care plan. he is doing nothing to help the consumer and people are scared to death. host: with all due respect, we referred to $400 billion. caller: you said $400 million, steve. i take it. -- taped it. guest: they are such big numbers that it gets confusing. but job -- but government job creation is an oxymoron. it does not have any money to do this. as i hire you to become president, whatever you were making in the private sector we lose and we have to tax the private sector to pay to get yourself as a that you can buy stuff that the private sector is still making. the private sector as to generate jobs.

what we need is a set of policies that try to empower the private sector to get back to doing what it does best, create jobs, not run social institutions, and get government out of the way of the small business owners out there so that they can do what they do best, which is create jobs and wealth. host: bill dunkelberg is the chief economist of the national federation of independent businesses. thanks for joining us. guest: thank you very much. host: please come back again. we will come back and hear from you. tell us what is on your mind as we hear the news of the day. you are watching c-span's "washington journal," and we are back in just a moment. 8ba

>> centers are continuing their debate on health care bill through the weekend. our regular book tv schedule will be preempted it during these rare senate sessions. with book tv programs resuming after the debate. watch the senate debate on health care, live, gavel-to- gavel, on our companion network, c-span2, the only network with a full debate on edited and commercial free. to read the senate bill and the house version, and watch a video on demand, go online to seize that cost -- go online to c- span's health care hub. >> as we get better at what we do, we run an increasing risk of arrogance. >> four of malcolm gladwell's books are currently on p "new york times" best seller list. he is the guest this sunday on "q&a." >> a unique journey behind the

iconic homes of the branches of the american government. see the supreme court through the eyes of the justices. go into the rarely seen spaces of the white house. and explore the history, art, and architecture of the capital, one of america's most symbolic structures. "american icons," a three-disc dvd said. -- set. >> "washington journal" continues. host: the latest jobless picture showing the 10% of the work force officially unemployed. a slight drop from 10.2% reported in october. for the next 20 minutes or so, we want to hear from you. if you want to talk about the economy or afghanistan, the president traveling to

allentown, pennsylvania -- or send us a twitter comment at c-spanwj. a demonstration took place outside the white house yesterday. this is the picture from "the philadelphia inquirer." also this morning from "the pittsburgh post-gazette," the president say he wants ideas and private help in creating some of those jobs. and the president in an interview with "the detroit free press" and "usa today" saying "we will get through this." in foreign policy, an attack that took place in pakistan, and now the death toll is reportedly up to 40, outside of a mosque in pakistan. we want to bring your attention to a story on the front page of

"the new york times." "two weeks ago in pakistan, a cia sharpshooters killed eight people suspected of being militants of the taliban and al qaeda and wounded others in a compound that was said to be used terrorist training. it was the latest strike by the program to kill the purpose of al qaeda and the taliban using hellfire missiles fired from predator aircraft." what is on your mind today? caller: i would like to speak about the upcoming terrorist trials in new york. there are things that really bothered me about it one is that -- bother me about it. one is that gov. bush of texas -- the people from afghanistan

-- i'm so nervous, forgive me -- host: no need to be nervous. caller: taliban over at his ranch for a barbecue. the bushes and bin ladens have been in business together for years. then i watched the hearings before the senate of the jeff sessions and lindsey graham grilling attorney general halderman, saying that these terrorists in cuba have admitted that they were guilty of participating in 911 -- in 9/11. well, if jeff sessions had been tortured every day for four years and was reported 180

times -- and waterboarded 180 times, he probably would have admitted to being involved in 9/11 also. host: thank you. you were referring to the attorney-general eric holder. there is a report about his deputy. stepping out in february. the individual involved is david ogden, who was also chairman of the administration posture justice department transition team. "he oversaw nearly every time sensitive issue in justice affairs. the attorney general and his staff expressed repeated of frustration when the matter is that popped up in mr. -- bogged up in mr. ogden's office." mike from san antonio, what is on your mind? caller: hello, thank you for c- span.

i just want to make a comment on the power of words. the american people are always referred to as consumers. perhaps if we refer to ourselves as producers, it could become a true. thank you. host: thank you. a related stop with the jobs at the auto industry in "the new yorker times," and the headline in "the detroit free press," "general motors and chrysler are facing pressure from congress and offered to reconsider the closures of three dozen dealerships but the announcement in flint and already toxic distrust between on makers and retailers -- in flames already toxic distrust between our makers and retailers." new york. caller: i always see what are

two kids when it snows, but it competes with somebody like me when they hire an illegal labor force. i live in new york and we are a sanctuary state. and you are trying to get a job and you were competing against a guy who is hiring illegally. there is plenty of work here, but our government does not do the right thing by stopping them at the border call or they give these people -- the border, or they give these people a state they can run to, and they take jobs from these people. i can go all about my town, whether it is the laundromat, commercial laundering for people, and it is all mexicans. they cannot speak english. spitzer was glad to give them a driver's license and they cannot read signs, cannot read english.

they are hiring these subcontractors, the go to the parking lots and pick them up. i run my business on the up and up. i have ogle seven deep in my business, insurance companies -- have uncle sam deep in my business, insurance companies deep in my business. it is almost as if it you open up a company, that is why they go overseas, because if you hire union labor, between benefits, packages, and pay, and you what the business owner with wear and tear, you have $4 left on the 100 . host: thank you for making your points and sharing your own experiences from long island. the house will hear from labor department officials this morning and we will be covering that event there is also a transportation department event looking at high speed rail and the impact, with gm and

kawasaki, a japanese road transportation manufacturer. jim, good morning. caller: glad you could take my call. we got the wealthiest capital in the united states and we have so little to look forward to. i have seen a lack of services and all the all levels of government. from the ground up enough problems and no one represents a spread -- represents the spirit as soon as the immigrants -- no one represents bus. as soon as the immigrants arrive at our front door, they receive a check and are given status as responsible individuals.

host: jo is joining us from florida. what is on your mind? caller: you could not have opened me with a better statement. i run a vending machine business, and just to make a quick statement, last year it was a very, very productive. money was being given to people to buy big ships and have the metal chips bill -- have the metal ships built. my vending machines were doing well. all of a sudden, this year the money is tight, the banks are not giving money out, and my vending machine business is suffering. four machines are doing nothing. maybe $10 a week. that is in total sales. there is no one there. we were looking at 50 employees

last year. now they are looking at maybe five. that has a lot to do with the fact that our very -- the mayor of tampa purchased a big boat that would have been built right here in florida for roughly half the price, but it was sent to canada. i believe there of politics involved in that. -- there is some politics involved in that. host: headline, "secret service admits 'mistake.'" during the interview with "usa today," he said that the system did not work the way it was supposed to bree. tom is joining us from hartford, connecticut.

caller: good morning. thanks for taking my call. i would like everybody to take the focus off the white house and realize that it is the houses of congress that are to blame for the mess we are in. they have been in power for so long that they no longer understand -- [unintelligible] if you are happy with the way things are, keep reelecting the same people, and if you are not, put new people in there. caller: i wanted to pick up on a couple of calls. host: about a week ago, we interviewed when the organizers of the protest happening tomorrow in new york, and you will be able to see that on this beat -- on the c-span networks. caller: i think it should be the state of washington, but that is not what i call.

my other main concern is he was waterboarded something like 80 times? nobody can stand almost drowning to the point where you pass out that many times and not suffer some kind of brain damage. i'm not trying to feel sorry for the men, there is no way that he can participate in his own defense. he needs to have some sort of the mental status exam. i hate to put it this way, but he has lost a few iq points. host: the confirmation hearings for the renomination of ben bernanke -- a story inside "the washington times" with a photograph of the fed chairman. in opening remarks, senator chris dodd said he is expected to support the renomination but did say that he is eager to distance himself from criticism

that he is too cozy with wall street coul. the senator is calling for changes to the fed pause to regulatory mission. -- fed's regulatory mission. california. caller: i'm calling in because i have been a republican for 20 years or better. i've been married for 23 years. we make less than $50,000 a year. twice in that 23 years, we have paid off all of our debt. we have not ever filed bankruptcy, we have paid our debt, what we know, we did not borrow more than we could afford. now because of inflation and everything going out, our house is six months in foreclosure, we filed bankruptcy, and we have nothing. the bailout that all the government gave the first time, they sold us out.

i am so angry, because we did the right thing. we did not borrow more than we could afford, we live in a little crappie house -- crappy house. host: how much is it worth? caller: it is upside down and now. where received a letter saying it was 80,000. host: how much as the mortgage? caller: we owe $140,000 on it. host: even if you sell it, you will lose a lot of money. caller: there is nothing in the. we live in. we live in a mountain community in southern california. nothing is selling. 3000 people showing up for a job. it is incredible. and yet there is no help for us. i have been working with my mortgage company. because i owe less than 200,000, they are not working with me. they're giving me every run

around to the point where i have to go file bankruptcy. i am 43 years old and i've never had to file bankruptcy. i don't expect anything from anyone. and yet we have come to a place where if we don't file bankruptcy, they are just glad to come and take everything. host: i'm going to stop you there, because we have others who want to weigh in, but thanks for your call from southern california. "usa today" has a new poll, with 54% supporting -- 51% supporting the president's plan in afghanistan. according to the president the other day, it will cost $30 billion. john is calling us from texas. caller: i want to let everybody know about something i saw the other day on the stock market.

every time the dollar gets weaker, the stock market goes up. therefore it makes me think that over on wall street, they are working against us. when the value of the dollar goes down, they like it. everything that we buy costs us more. host: thanks. of you were saying -- a v were saying -- roger from a virginia on the democrats' line. caller: i have been at noticing that the stimulus package and the tarp with billions of dollars left over, the money could be reallocated to community banks and to fund small businesses. we have construction projects in my area, mostly working offshore. it seems to me that the money is

going towards individuals or not legally allowed to work and the country, and workers who are maybe able to be trained for jobs in the industry, that puts us at a disadvantage. i thought that maybe somebody would suggest that issue. host: roger, thanks. the house is not in today. they will be back next week. the senate is expected to be in session tomorrow and possibly on sunday, according to senate democratic leader harry reid. for those of you watched c- span2, and the book tv programming, that will be pre- empted during our live coverage of the senate debate on health care. you can watch it gavel-to-gavel on c-span2 over the weekend we will continue with more conversations with members of the senate on the health-care issue next week. the could be a vote, according to "the washington post," may be as late as next week. senator harry reid says he wants to pass the health care bill before christmas, and the next step would be to go through the

conference process between the house and senate. walter from indiana. caller: thank you for taking my call. i appreciated. i moved from new york city years ago to a northeast indiana and joined the militia, and i am pro-american and i love my country dearly and i serve my military for 13 years and i have a tremendous this day for the government, and that has to do with republicans and democrats -- tremendous disdain for the government, and passed to the republicans and democrats alike. once you allow a porous border and allow us to lose our identity, we are losing jobs and there will be millions of displaced americans wandering the streets and the government will take over and they are going to use that for control and we, the militias, the americans that of our country and our patriots, are going to stand there and defend and with the lifeboats are needed we will provide them if needed. it breaks my heart to see it.

i wish i did not have to belong to it. but i feel like a big storm is coming. america is collapsing, and it is collapsing from within. and criminals of the state, people who did not love this country, and it is not just have to do with republicans and democrats -- all these politicians, once they go from a regular joe street to wall street, they become elitist and they look out at americans and they treat all of us like we are fools. host: this comment -- that is his view. mike is joining us from pennsylvania. caller: good morning. i want to ask you, how did you get "the pittsburgh post- gazette" in your studio? host: thanks for asking could we get it from the newseum. it is located midway between the white house and the capitol on pennsylvania avenue, just a few

blocks from when we are at. caller: i just wonder, because they do not deliver any more 30 miles outside of pittsburgh. it used to be my newspaper. host: it is a whole new era with getting news on line. it is not the full paper. just the front page. caller: thanks. host: we will go to california. good morning. caller: please don't cut me off. i'm a veteran. i wonder why it is that the congress of the united states gets a raise and now they are not giving the veterans are race, and we are the backbone of the whole country -- veterans a raise, and we are the backbone of the whole country, from george washington. they'll try to hold back the money on us, and yet the representatives and senators and the congress give themselves generosity raise and we don't get nothing. and then the

incorrect to say that technology