host: good morning, everyone. we want to begin with a debate happening in the white house as well as between democrats and republicans on what to do with that extra tarp money, troubled relief asset -- troubled asset

relief program. what are your thoughts? here are the phone lines -- host: frontpage of "the washington post." obama preparing new push to add jobs and tackle deficit.

the story continues in a "the washington post." host: that is "the washington post." your thoughts -- pay down the debt or create jobs? the jobs . what kind of jobs? caller: yes, good morning. for certain, infrastructure. i also am very interested in the

electric grid and anything that we can do to eliminate importing oil. there is plenty of avenues available if the people will get busy and start creating jobs. i don't feel it is that important to have money to pay down the debt just yet when people are working and paying taxes, that will also help pay down the debt. right now we need jobs. holst, when do you think the president should turn to the growing debt? caller: when our economy is up and running again. when people are back to work, and like i say, paying taxes. then we could turn to reducing the debt. host: raleigh, north carolina.

another idea, what is it? caller: my impression is if the democratic plan goes through and it creates jobs, it will create a lot of low-paying jobs and markets are up and down, a lot of these people will lose the job state had created. host: what is a low-paying job? what amount? caller: a lot of service industry jobs in general. and if they create jobs in most sectors to get people off the streets, a lot of that may fall apart. i think in the long run, not to pay off the debt necessarily but invest in ideas to create other alternatives. i think they ought to put a task force together to look at the development of growing businesses themselves as opposed to just creating -- the

international picture as well. over the next year with what is happening in afghanistan and changes there, public opinion and markets in europe, not looking too good right now. sitting in weight and, with an alternative plan. i don't think we should rush to judgment. host: cleveland, tennessee. they should pay off the debt first. caller: we've got more problems here than a man could shake a stick out. a lot of things are going on because we've got troops in the middle east and then all of these problems in the united states. the situation is getting to a point where a mandell know if there is going to be a job there next week or the other week or something. my god. it's better around here. host: a little bit more from

"the washington post." host: about the tarp, they say since it became law in 2008 about $139 billion of the money has not been allocated to any programs. host: lincoln, illinois. you think the money should go toward jobs. why is that? caller: there are just too many

people out of jobs. we need the jobs in order to pay the taxes and taxes would ultimately pay down the debt. we need to create the jobs because there are too many jobs going over to other countries. we need the jobs here at home. we need to create manufacturing jobs here at home. host: what kind of jobs are there? caller: none. we have lost several manufacturing jobs. lincoln used to be a city that had -- we probably had a dozen factory jobs. i think we have only four now. my son works at a factory, who

has just gone through a lay off process. they are now calling a few back but i know how long it is going to be. we just lost so many manufacturing jobs. host: what kind of manufacturing companies are there? what did they make? caller: we have a box factory. let me think -- we lost that one. hammer -- i think it is called something else now. we have a bottle factory. we have, where my son works, they make yard card set, which yet -- they had just got them.

those are few and far between. host: we will move onto luis in baltimore who thinks we need to pay down the debt. -- louise. caller: i think we should be paying down the debt, just as we all have to look at paying down the debt i think the government must do the same. the unemployment situation is dire. i see this as two different things. i don't think the tarp money should be used to pay short-term jobs. but long term we need to look at paying down the debt and not just keep borrowing and borrowing and not looking at how to pay that down. host: "the washington post" has two stories, one on creating

jobs and one on debt. here is the jump page on the debt story. host: new jersey. deerow, you have another idea? -- darrell.

caller: mike first inclination is to pay off the debt. if they were going to spend it, they ought to spend it on small businesses that are showing promise and have good ideas and their innovating, may be filtered through small business that ministration. but what they ought not do -- they shouldn't use it to pay for entitlement programs, they should not use it for some federally run jobs scheme that will only create short-term jobs. last week you had a guy on there -- i can't remember the company but it was in the southwest and the president of the company attended the jobs summit and apparently -- i think they are doing something with -- host: their tractor. caller: air tractor. apparently they have market shares overseas and a need to expand their business. we need to look at companies

like that that can bring some of the manufacturing base back to the country. host: you said not to extend programs -- benefit programs. here is "the new york times." many unemployed will not have access to health care insurance. in the first stimulus, if you were unemployed you could tap into the cobra program and still get health insurance -- your employer had to pay 65% and you paid 35%. is that a good idea? caller: we pay jobless benefits or extend cobra benefits to people for another 30 days or 60 days or 90 days and then what? in other words, we are either going to have to pay down the debt or invest that money in companies actually creating jobs

and putting people back to work. i don't see how it benefits us in the long term. they keep extending unemployment benefits. believe me, i understand the pain. i have been unemployed and i know what it is like. but ultimately people want to work. people within the workforce, have been working for five, 15, 30 years, they don't want to sit at home and collect unemployment. and the sooner we get those people back to work the sooner they will be paying taxes into the system and if we are not going to do that, invest in small businesses, pay down the debt. host: i misspoke. the health subsidies under which the federal government pays 65% of insurance costs under coburg up to nine months have expired and not available to the newly unemployed. jennifer, be think the extra money should be used for jobs? why is that? caller: basic economic lot.

when we experience recessionary gap, government spending will reduce the debt so it will increase the disposable income and automatic stabilizers will gradually increase the taxes which we could use the tax is later to reduce the debt when our economy can support it. it is very important looking toward creating medical jobs as we look toward nationalized health care rose it will be counterproductive to create the legislation in the first place because there will be such a huge demand for medical professionals it will drive up the cost of health care and our government will not be able to support those -- host: are you in the health-care industry? caller: i am not. i am going to school to be an accountant. host: what does the job climate look like to you? caller: thankfully did to some

legislation as to how records have to be kept for corporations, it is not looking so bad for accountants right now. we are experiencing an 8% growth rate, which is not so bad. host: a little bit more about the debt from "the washington post." washington, pennsylvania. julie, you think we should pay down the debt? caller: i feel we should pay down the debt. i don't trust the government's to decide which jobs are going to stimulate the economy. in a nut shell, they have not had a real good track record and i would pay down the debt -- basic economics would tell you that is what works over all. it lowers taxes eventually and

it loosens up businesses, big and small, to hire more people. i say let capitalism work and that is will worsen as country. host: baltimore, maryland. kenny, you think jobs. why jobs? caller: we need jobs, we need states to go straight to the unemployment line, get the people of the unemployment line. corporations are hiring people who do not pay taxes. we could use a stock tax to pay our debt down because if we don't pay our debt down china will hold us by our throat and we will -- you know, everything, if we pay our debt of we could tell china to go somewhere else.

it is important we get the stock tax passed and we get people straight off the unemployment line. i'm a democrat and i have been trying to call obama's office -- everybody who is working, the corporations are hiring people from this country and they need -- not from this country and the need to do something about that. host: if you want to send comments via twitter, c-spanwj. you think we should pay down the debt? caller: absolutely. i will tell you why. this administration and the administration before has spent more money combine from world war ii up until now, and if you notice something through history, the economy always bones after a big world war. we are talking about all of

these jobs. back in the 1980's, -- the remember mr. patrick buchanan? you do remember him? remember when this started the three trade agreements, gatt and nafta, patrick buchanan was the only man running around in the wilderness like john the baptist saying this was going to destroy the fabric and the economy of our country. as you look at this, at the whole picture, it has done exactly that. it destroyed all of the industry in our country and all of these jobs people are talking about, these green jobs -- i don't have a problem with the green jobs, but the stuff is so expensive now, like solar heating and solar lighting, average people -- we are not working now, the average people and average people who are working are not going to be able to afford this kind of equipment because the technology has not gotten to the

point that it could be viable and cheap enough to be bought by the average citizen. host: john from los angeles. you have another idea? caller: i think we need to come to grips with what treasury secretary geithner said in a hearing i watched on c-span july the 10th when he said that the size of the credit default swap industry and the response to a question, it is how big our shadow banking industry was and geithner said at face value, the value in which the counterparties have been paid back, the credit defaults what industry was $600 trillion. and the tax revenue to washington was $2.20 trillion with obama spending another $1.40 trillion in deficit. that is less than $4 trillion compared to $600 trillion, which

is just the insurance side of the equation and then the collateralized debt obligation on which the the swaps are written is approximately equivalent amount, which makes it it quadrillion 200 trillion dollars. it is impossible to reconcile that monday are setting, it is 1200 trillion dollars and obama is saying he wants to spend less than four. bernanke, when he was testifying, i believe it was yesterday, was saying he wants to get the shadow of banking industry going again, the so- called securitization market provides over a third of all american financing, is not functioning properly. this is money synthesized on computer screen and on banking

statement on like bernard madoff's ponzi scheme. they never acknowledged as much money ever existed, so we have two economy's going on simultaneously. we have the serial one on wall street that is in the hundreds of trillions of dollars. then we have a lot of people work and pay taxes and the government is sweating paying less than $4 trillion won everything that we need. host: we are going to leave it there so we can get some other voices and show of the headlines. "the financial times" frontpage.

host: that is "the financial times." here is the marketplace section of "the wall street journal." it shows how much estimated annual co2 emissions by industry and pounds per square foot. starting with petroleum refineries, 2500, iron and steel mills, 1,200 pounds per square foot, chemicals, 530, food, 150, and offices, 3 pounds per square foot. that is "the wall street journal." baltimore, maryland. joe on the jobs line. caller: i think the government

should create jobs. the jobs they create should be a decent job. in addition to be like mcdonald's jobs. -- they shouldn't be like mcdonald's jobs. they should be jobs that pay decent wage. host: what is a decent wage? caller: a steel company in baltimore, what they did is gonna read of people and then they called back certain people and they did not go by seniority or nothing. i don't think that is right. i think the government should do something about that. host: let's go to chris in houston, texas. caller: you which is reading about copenhagen. all i can say is what a complete disaster. not only is our country going in the wrong direction these days with obama as our president, the problem is we are not paying off the debt, and we're not create

-- creating jobs. we need to do both. until we can come to this realization we-will take all of that money and give it to nasa. host: how we do both? caller: we could lower taxes, capital gains, fica taxes, coming to the realization that entitlements will not be for our generation. the baby boom generation retiring will right now -- crisis these we are faced to deal with, we will not be able to accommodate all the issues. we have to make some hard decisions. the way i see it is we need to know or taxes, help create jobs. if we don't do that we might as well use the money to send astronauts to mars. host: more on the copenhagen summit. "usa today."

host: on the associated press, the world's weatherman says this decade has very likely been the warmest on historical record and 2009 will likely end of one of the warmest years, according to the world leader of logical association -- meteorological association. last fall call here on what you do with the extra money. lexington, ky. you think jobs. why is it? caller: i think john's -- i would put into research and development. this country is changing. you hear the calls talking about manufacturing is gone. we need to turn to a new era.

the green jobs, i don't know where that might lead. but i have been on and lloyd since 2002. i was in management. i am educated. and now i'm working at kroger's 4 $7.50 an hour. all of this anger, we have been in debt for years, but just coming about sense of the financial crisis. i think we need to get our fiscal responsibilities in order, but i call on each one of the callers, look at your home state and see what your congressmen are doing there. here they are doing the same thing. you know, start at home.

that is all i've got to say. host: david dricker on roll-call is giving us an update on the health-care debate in the senate. let's begin on the front page. negotiations in closer. your story this morning. there is a group about 10 senators, moderate democrats and some liberal democrats, working behind-the-scenes to come up with some sort of deal on the public option. what are they looking at now? guest: it appears that are looking at creating something similar to what federal workers have access to, and exchange and offers a range of plans to choose from. but the senators and the group are being really tight lipped. even once they reach an agreement among themselves, if they do, they have to sell its before there are any popping of

champagne corks. what they are trying to do is come up to the alternative to the public option in the existing bill. it does not appear there were 60 votes for that plan, and therefore not 60 votes for that bill. host: this morning, it says they are also considering expanding medicare programs to include 55 and older. what are you hearing about that? guest: there is a continuing struggle to figure out how to expand coverage for the uninsured. so, medicaid is a major way they are planning to do that. they are just continually playing with other ideas so that they can expand coverage but it can be paid for in a way that is a little bit easier on the state.

again, not too many details, but we could be hearing more about this this week. host: let's talk about what is on the floor today. there is an amendment by senator ben nelson addressing the abortion issue. what does this say and what of the prospects for passage? guest: process -- prospects for passage the current liberal pro- choice democrats are not good. they have boats to the beating. co-sponsored by republican orrin hatch, mirrors the language that was inserted into the house bill that was pushed by rep bart stupak, a pro-life democrat from michigan. essentially it would make clear that no federal funds could be spent for abortion procedures as part of health care reform package.

it would more directly codify that idea on the books and make it a little bit stronger than it already is. then nelson -- ben nelson has said it would not vote to end debate in the senate without language like this. we will see what happens if it does fail. the debate started last night and i expect some sort of vote next week. host: 51 not vote for passage without the abortion language included -- if he would not vote for passage without the abortion language included, harry reid would be bought -- one both shy. guest: some speculation as majority leader will put it in a catch all amendment with a bunch of stuff, legislative proposals, that will be voted on at the end. i have some sources telling me that what the majority leader will do is put compromise's

language in the and then it -- possibly, not as strong as stupak but stronger than what is on the books now and that will be seen as a way to satisfy conservatives in his conference like ben nelson but not scare away the liberals. host: if our viewers are tuning in yesterday watch in the health-care debate, it probably have heard harry reid make comments about republican strategy. let us show the viewers and we will come back and talk about it. >> instead of joining us on the right side of history all republicans can come up with is this -- slowdown, stop everything and start over. if you think you have heard these same excuses before, you are right. in this country belatedly recognized the wrongs of slavery. there were those who dug in their heels and said, it is too early, let us wait, things are not bad enough. when women spoke up for the right to speak up, they wanted

to vote, they said simply slow down, it will be a better day to do this. when does body was on the verge to guarantee equal civil rights to everyone, regardless of the color of their skin, some senators resorted to filibuster threats we hear today. history is repeating itself before our eyes. there are now those who don't think it is the right time to reform health care. if not now, when? host: david, republicans responded saying they were insulted by that comparison. what did the senate majority leader say about his comments? guest: i haven't heard his response to all of the outcries from the republicans. as you know, harry reid tends to let his tongue get away from himself from time to time. so use to which i almost did not pay attention.

but -- i am so used to it i almost did not pay attention. but from a public perspective outside the beltway, it is better off not saying. probably something that has legs. it could hurt him publicly, could hurt him in nevada but will not necessarily affect the health-care debate. chronically most of the things he mentioned, it was a different democratic party at the time and it was democratically controlled senate often that was resisting calls for change that he mentioned. a very ironic statement. very over the top. and it matters because he is the majority leader. but i think is the kind of thing that will blow over and will not really affect the health-care debate because things here are so self contained. but publicly it is a problem and i think republicans will mill default it is worth because they should because that would be the demillo it for all it is worth the -- they will milk it

for all of his work and should because that will be the smart thing to do. host: next might johan is joins us. we will be right back. -- mike johanns. >> american icons. three original documentaries from c-span now available on dvd. a unique journey through the iconic homes of the three branches of american government. c. 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. and explore the history, art,

and architecture of the capital, one of america's most symbolic structures. american icons, a three disk bbb said, $24.95 plus shipping and handling. order online at c-span.org /store. >> ," washington journal" continues. host: let us begin with some of the lead story is about the health care debate and what is happening behind the scenes. the headline in "usa today." it says the 10 democratic senators, liberals and moderate democrats are working behind the scenes to instead of creating what has been known as a far as the public option rather have expand medicare to allow 55 and older to join that as a so- called public option. what is your reaction? guest: you know, the problem with that -- but i have not seen any details.

the problem with that is medicare by everybody's agreement, everybody's analysis is due to be insolvent by 2017. clearly this program that is a safety net for seniors over 65 years old runs out of money. in fact, pieces like this, -- pieces of it, but hospital, is spending more than is coming in. so all of a sudden we opened this program up to a whole new list of beneficiaries, it does not serve anybody's purpose as well. it is not good for medicare, it is not good for the people who depend on medicare. we could spend a whole year debating medicare changes to try to fix this program and it looks to me like what they are doing with that idea is making the problem worse. host: there is also in discussion of having the public option based on the federal employe in model. your reaction. guest: again, however going to

administer that? conceptually this idea that people get insurance just like somebody in congress gets is a popular idea, well received. difficulty is how you administer that, how you pay for it. all of those things come in here. i think what you are seeing is they are just struggling. they don't have enough votes for the public option. senator lieberman has made it clear that i don't like the public option. it is there i will join the republicans and filibuster. so, they keep trying to figure this out. an additional idea is they were going to expand medicaid to 150% of the party level. well, states are going to go ballistic over that because, of course, states pay a share of that cost and they are struggling with special sessions, budgets they are balancing. so there is a very serious problem with the expansion of

medicaid. and medicaid reimbursement rates are just deployable -- deplorable. and a doctor's office or hospital would go broke and medicaid reimbursement. if you expand the population, you've already got 35% to 45% of the doctors to just do not take medicaid patients. you'll have a crisis of access, all of these millions of people showing up with their medicaid card on saying i am covered now, you don't have the personnel, the doctors out there to handle that. these ideas -- i just wonder who they are talking to. they can't be talking to doctors or hospitals. this would be a serious problem. host: what is the economic status of nebraska right now? guest: we faired better than most states. we have a solid conservative government -- governor who has been tight with the dollar.

our state, we don't borrow money. our constitution prohibits it. what an unusual idea? literally nebraska has no debt, even for highways or roads. but they just did, and of a special session where they had to cut over $300 million which is a huge number for the brass got just because the recession has impacted people. they are not earning as much, therefore they pay less in taxes, not spending as much, lest sales tax. you add more burden, more federal unfunded mandate to any state, including nebraska, and it would be a crisis. host: on the floor, and expected a vote on senator ben nelson's amendment, the abortion language. it says an "usa today" that it mirrors restrictions in the bill approved by the house last month of more restrictive than what is in the senate bill now. currently the senate measure would require insurance

companies to segregate public and private money and use only the latter to pay for this procedure. you have been a vocal on the issue. what does -- where does the bookstand in terms of how many senators are so-called pro-life and pro-choice? guest: i said a few weeks ago that i really thought the motion to proceed vote was the pro-life vote. maybe i will be proven wrong. maybe there are 60 votes. i think senator nelson is working hard to get the 60 boats. i hate to be pessimistic on the morning of the vote. i think we will vote on this today. i can't see how you count to 60 on this amendment. it appears to me it will be defeated. the pro-choice forces in the senate have rallied, the pro- choice forces out in the country, if you will, were thrown under the bus and house bill. let us be honest about it. they are angry, fired up and will not let it happen in the senate.

the dynamic leads me to the conclusion it will be hard to get 60 votes -- everything is a 60-vote hurdle. no matter what side offers the amendments. i just don't count 60. host: what are you hearing about the timing of the vote? guest: sometime today is what i have been hearing. i appreciate a flexible answer to your question. these things can't slip. people talk about nuances, could you accept this and this -- these things can slip. they take time. i think we will have a vote sometime today. host: what about amendments that you have offered so far? what are your goals? guest: we focused on a number of things. medicare cuts would be the first effort. there is $465 billion in medicare cuts. those are very, very serious cuts to states all across the

country. cutting reimbursement rates to nursing homes and hospitals and home health-care. defeated on saturday, was said to see that. home health care is such a wonderful program, so cost- efficient and keeps people in their home which is much cheaper and sending them off to a nursing home or hospital. when these cuts are implemented, if this is the final piece of the bill, and that is what the democrats are trying to achieve, you will see home health-care shutdown in many parts of our state. it is not going to be built to survive these cuts. host: wasn't there a similar amendment from a democratic senator past 100-0 i believe that protect home health care? guest: it doesn't. they argue it does. it says we will protect the guarantee program -- let me explain quickly how what works. i can say to you, here, look,

here is the law, the guaranteed program is still there. and you say, all, my goodness, it is. you are right, mike, there it is in black and white. then i say to you, by the way, we cut the $40 billion out of that program. the program is still there, the guaranteed program is still there, but guess what, if you are a beneficiary in lauro nebraska or some other part of nebraska, you are out of luck -- in rural nebraska or some other part of nebraska you are out of luck because there have been somebody cuts you not get the services. instead of the home health-care providers, nurses, what ever going up to some place 50 miles away, they will just say, look, we can't serve you 50 miles away, we can't serve you 20 miles away. so these programs will consolidate in more urban areas and if you happen to live and a smaller community or law rule.

you could be out of work. -- rural area, you could be out of work. host: fred on the republican line. caller: food stamps -- it has been a great program. in doing so we do not take the rest of the people who cannot afford food and put them in a universal food program where we ration their food and put everybody on the same government food programs. and retrospect, why do we have to take everybody just because 10% of the people can't afford their payments for health care and put everybody in one program where the government tells of riding what to do and who could they can shop with and what kind of health care they can get? i hope the analogy holds true. i just wanted to say you are able to keep the republicans in an demand the best program for the american people. -- keeping the republicans in

line and a demand of this program. guest: it is interesting you ask the question because you are speaking to someone who is that responsibility administrating the food stamp program when i was the secretary of agriculture and that is a program that has really worked quite well. but your analogy is correct. we did not redesign the food distribution system for the whole united states. we targeted that population that needed a food supply through food stamps and we tried to do everything we could to administer that in a way that made sense and was cost- efficient, etcetera. that program just continues to improve, incidently, and it continues to serve more people. what you are saying is true, there are tens and tens of millions of people in the united states will look at their health plan and say, you know, i am satisfied with this plan. now, i was the premiums would

not go up as much, this, that, and this thing. the president cannot consent that if you like this plan, you are not dull -- came out and said if you like this plan, you'll not lose it. guess what? there are so many things about this health care initiative that changes that. he can't keep that promise. you will see people who will lose their home health-care benefit. you are going to see difficulty and serving the population -- in serving the population. why are we taking this a step at a time and focus what the problems really are at? host: your home state, omaha, nebraska. sue on the democrats' line. caller: good morning senator johanns. i have tried for years to turn in two businesses that committed medicaid fraud, charging thousands of dollars in my name

appeared these businesses are still operational. i have not even seen that they have been prosecuted. the office told me after two years their office was not interested. if i want to see them prosecuted i would have to hire my own attorney. i'm on disability for epilepsy and i can't do that. but when i see people are stealing taxpayers' money, i want something done. i don't want to be given excuses. that is all i have been given from -- you can go from the cities to the county and to the state. when i was sending my letters to senator hagel. apparently he didn't want to deal with it because magellan was involved, you have health and human services involved. these providers are charging, sir, enormous charges for

services that are made up. guest: here is what i would offer to you. please reach out to our omaha office or anywhere -- any of my offices, but you live in omaha. " taking a look at what you claim to be someone getting away with federal money that they should not be. i take that very, very seriously. we will take up that. we will pursue that. we will do everything we can to get that information in the hands of the right officials. i could not agree with you more, whether health-care reform or something other than that, we should not have a system where there is so much waste and fraud and abuse. i don't think anybody is doubting that there are parts of this medicare system, medicaid system, where there is significant abuse. it needs to be fixed. we are glad to help you. contact the omaha office. host: myrtle beach, south

carolina. good morning. caller: i just have a couple of comments. it just amazes me that when it comes to health care, there is almost no question -- i apologize, when it comes to war and spending there is no question of the amount the taxpayers of this country are asked but when it comes to caring and loving and nurturing the people of this country with health care, all of a sudden everybody is watching their budget. the second, and of course is that it just amazes me -- and i hope independents and democrats in the senate can look past this diversion because there is no bigger intrusion the federal government can get in anyone's life, telling a woman when she cannot and can have a job. that is not the government -- nothing but sex is appeared guest: vincent, in terms of

your statement on the budget. here is what i would tell you. under the most rosy picture of this year, the obama administration will have a deficit of $1 trillion. i am not talking about the total deficit of this country. i am talking about how much this budget this year does not match with the revenues coming in, $1 trillion. as far as the eye can see the obama administration projects that their budgets literally over the next decade will run an annual deficit of $1 trillion. now, vincent, here is an important point, somebody has got to face the music. i'm a man who is 59 years old. god willing, i will be on this earth some more years. but the reality is, my productive years are going to be somewhat limited at some point. what does that mean?

it will fall to my children and grandchildren to worry about the debt that i have piled up. i think as americans we owe them more than that. and, yes, we want to care for each other. i think we are a caring country but we need to start paying attention to that deficit. in terms of your statement on abortion, here is what i would offer. i really do believe that government has a role in protecting the most abominable, and i see that role -- the most vulnerable and i see that in the issue of life. even getting beyond that, this nelson-hatch and then it i think it's reflective of what the country believes and that is public funds from the taxpayer dollars, should not be used for abortions. pro-choice-pro-life, they seem to agree on that. any analysis i have seen of people's attitudes about their, very overwhelmingly people do

not want their tax dollars used directly or indirectly to finance abortions. host: earlier this morning we asked our viewers what should be done with the extra tarp money. there is a debate, the use it to create jobs or pay down the debt? guest: pay down the debt. here's why. when that legislation was passed, it was very controversial. there were probably elections lost on boats -- votes on that. the past administration -- bush administration and obama administration said it has to be done. we are going to buy troubled assets. if we don't do that, we are in the crisis. guess what? tarp money was used to do all measure of things that was never presented to the voters to be how the money would be used. we bought general motors with tarp.

had i been on the program to one half years ago as candidate for senate and said, i know, i think the president has the power to buy general motors without congressional approval, no hearings, just do it, i think everybody would have laughed. i think across this country people would have been falling out of the chairs laughing at senator de-candidate might johanns, and you know what, the president bought general motors and using that money with no congressional vote, oversight, little -- literally bought general motors. this is not with this money was intended for. and very clearly, i believe, when the money is paid back the legislation calls for the money to be put back into the treasury to pay down the debt. that is what we should be doing. host: shreveport, louisiana. sherry on the republican line. caller: i unconcerned about the

health-care issue. i'm a home health nurse -- i'm concerned. idea what a lot of they all the population. it makes up 4% of health-care yet we continue to have to take enormous cuts to take care of our aging population. our population that is dependent on government funds like medicaid, state funds, and yet we still get reduction after reduction. i want to know that our boys will be heard because not only are our aging population needing care, our care providers really want to provide for them. yet time and time again home health is hit continuously. is it something we actually have a voice as a public and care providers to redirect from these cuts? host: senator? guest: i wish i had better use

-- news. yesterday i offered an amendment that was voted on the senate floor and basically it said very clearly, take out of this bill the cuts to home health care because i agree, it is a great program, it has suffered cuts in the past. that amendment was defeated. it was defeated almost on a pure party line mode. not quite but pretty close. democrats voted to cut home health-care and republicans voted to keep home health care and protect it from the cuts. now, they offered an amendment that really was bogus. again, it said we will protect the guaranteed program. that means nothing because the cuts would still go forward even though the program is still there. i just think what is going to happen when these cut impact our states, when they hit our state, you are going to lose home

health-care agencies. they just will not be able to function without this medicare reimbursement at that level. it is heartbreaking to me because it is a good program, i always believed in the program, it does keep people out of nursing homes. i have had instances, i pointed out on the senate floor of a gentleman who came home after a leg amputation out of -- from diabetes, he gets home health care. it is better having someone coming to take care of the wound rather than putting in a hospital for ever. much cheaper to have him in home health care if you are looking at dollars and cents. we had a gentleman in nebraska, we still do, waiting for a heart transplant and he is still home. that is only possible because home health care helps him with his congestive heart failure. story after story after story like that. unfortunately we lost on that vote. those cuts will be made and you will feel the impact in your

state and i will feel the impact in my state. host: allen hearst, the jurors appeared jane on the democrats' line. -- new jersey, jane on the democrats' line. caller: where were you when there were tax cuts for the top 10% one we had two military occupations, off budget, medicare reform bill off budget, and we were running up the debt. as far as medicare, the cuts being discussed have to do with waste, fraud, and abuse and in home health care there is no less fraught waste and abuse then there is an medicare advantage plan that was privatized and cost us as taxpayers 14% more for basically the same coverage they would receive under the original medicare system. you talk about most malmo rubble -- vulnerable, they are

out of work. rather than dealing with the deficit what we should be concerned with is job creation. one thing that would do that is tariffs, if we produce it here we manufacture it here i don't think it is isolationist i think it is survival. and i beg to differ on this -- my views -- and i do respect the views of people on the other side, but abortion is a legal medical procedure and win a private plan is restricting that medical procedure i feel that is an infringement on civil rights. guest: i just simply disagree with you. i know what role vs. wade said, i know what the supreme court said about abortion, but we as a nation have a right to decide what we are going to pay for and what we are not going to pay for.

the reid bill said we will pay for abortions, simply and straightforward. the nelson-patch and mend and says no, we won't. i think it is really reflected of the vast majority of how americans feel about this. the fact majority of americans do not want to pay for abortions. you asked where was i during the tax cuts. actually i was not here, i was the governor of the state of nebraska and happen to be governor on 9/11. what i personally witnessed was that the economy tank. 9/11 frightened the people. it caused them to lock up their pocketbooks, if you will. they did not want to spend. half -- as that ratcheted down, jobs were lost and it was just a very tough time. i think i had six special senses -- sessions to cut the budget. then all of the sudden congress

got together on and -- well, let us leave more money back in the states. let us allow people to keep more of their money which is really what the tax reductions did. i would just tell you from my personal observation the economy started to improve. why is that? because i just fundamentally trust that if people have their money, they can invest it in their small community, they can expand their hiring. but, you see, what this administration is doing very simply with its deficit is it is burdening not just this generation but future generations. a what this administration is doing with health care, saying to small businesses you will have a new mandate, what it is saying literally to every citizen out there is that outshout do it our way, the washington way, or the highway. so you will have a government- approved plan now and too bad

about the cost, you are going to have to pick it up or you will be penalized. and if you don't pay the penalty, we will use the in -- internal revenue code to go after you. it goes on and on. and that is not even talking about cap-and-trade. i talked to a business outside of a community in nebraska and they said our greatest competition is china. if the united states puts these burdens, these cap-and-trade burdens upon us, our jobs would be lost. here is the impact. 1000 jobs in that company, their average salary is around $70,000 a year. if they are accurate in their assessment -- and i believe there are -- those jobs are lost and they go to china, and guess what? we have a community that is in a serious problem immediately. .

host: senator, we know that you need to get going. thank you for your time. up next we'll turn our attention to the house with barbara lee californiof california.

>> as mentioned, president obama focuses on job creation today in the speech of the brookings institution, unveiling a plan that includes new tax breaks, is your credits for small businesses and incentives for weatherizing homes. some of it could be paid from repaid bank bailout funds. defense secretary robert gates is in afghanistan on an unannounced trip this morning he met with karz earlyai year and told him that the u.s. will not abandon the country. the war in afghanistan is the focus of a hearing on capitol hill this morning. general stanley mcchrystal testifies before the armed services committee this morning. here live at 9:30 a.m. eastern on c-span radio. more violence in iraq. at least 90 people have been killed and more than 115 wounded in a series of coordinated blasts around baghdad.

the attack comes ahead of parliamentary elections. earlier today a panel announced the elections have been pushed back to march 6. that is nearly seven weeks later than the original date. it is after lawmakers spent months considering a new law to set guidelines for the iraqi vote. "washington journal" continues. host: congresswoman barbara lee is the chairman of the black caucus. let me show viewers the headline from last week. about 10 members boycotted the vote in the house financial services committee over these issues. the president today is outlining a speech on jobs. specifically, what you want to hear from him about what he will do to create jobs for african- americans? guest: when you look at the and implement rates in the community

there twice that of the white community. of course, the president was dealt a rough hand. the last eight years he has been doing a great job figuring out how to dig ourselves out. we're working with the administration and leadership to come up with the jobs bill. so we can have resources targeted. we believe if we have a jobs bill that is robust many of us in the last stimulus package would $1 billion -- we could not get that vote, so we want to see a strong and robust jobs bill. that would also provide for job training. so that there will be prepared for the new world. that is the green industry, the

technological revolution. all the jobs that will be sustainable over time. host: the president responded last week and said "i will tell you the most important thing i can do for a the african- american committee is the same thing i can do for the american community. that is to get the economy going and to get people hiring. it is a mistake to think of this in terms of particular ethnic segments. " guest: the president is the press there. we represent constituencies who are suffering. as members of congress we are their advocates. 28% of the community now on food stamps. when you look at the foreclosure crisis the financial-services

industry targeted minority communities. so, as members of congress we have to come up with legislative proposals to present to turn this around. that is exactly what we are doing. i believe the president, i know he gets it. he understands he has to fix the economy for everyone. i'm confident he also believes that every group in our country, every young person deserves a job, adequate education. but as members of congress we have to focus on those who could be left behind if we do not have a targeted response to create some equity and justice in these initiatives. host: one of your colleagues has

put forth one of these legislative proposals in the financial regulation bill being considered in the house this week. barney frank who is chairman of the financial services committee has signed on. it would propose to target $3 billion from the tarp program towards jobs relief. it would designate another $1 billion for grants to state and local governments to purchase foreclosed properties and use them for more productive purposes. host: does this do enough? guest: it is an excellent example. congress will men waters chairs the housing committee of that committee and -- congresswoman waters. she is looking at strategies to address the problem, making the

country stronger. this is a great first step. it is an example of what we're trying to do in every area. to uplift everyone. the economy as we all know is in shambles. - digit unemployment, twice that in the black and latino communities. host: does that mean when the bill comes to the floor that cbc members will direct even more money towards black and latino communities? guest: we're looking at how to create job training and jobs. each legislative measure coming forward, we have our agenda.

we looked at our legislative efforts within that framework. on all of our bills that is our focus and we are determined to help the president turn this around. host: the first phone call comes from illinois. caller: good morning. as a piano, this has not just started since president obama has been president. we have always been the last ones to get jobs. that is why affirmative action was greeted. -- that is as you know. guest: there is some history here. the president in his speech in philadelphia on race without some of the historical context, but we have to move forward. we are talking about to creating an american dream for everyone. we have to do that within our role as members of congress to make sure that every bill we

were concrete opportunity for all. host: you talk about education and training. what does this say about the level of training for african- americans and how that relates to the number who are unemployed from that group? guest: first, when you look at the jobs rate in the african- american committee -- look at the drop out rates with young men, it is turn this. -- it is horrendous. it is over 50% in some districts. when you look of the college graduation rates, the fact that you are african-americans get jobs, the numbers are there. when you look these gaps, moral gaps in our additional system, and even when individuals get an education, there are still a host of issues that post barriers. education is the key to success

in our country. when you look at what is taking place in urban areas with minimal resources, there's a lot to do to turn this around. host: new york city on the republican line. caller: i have lived in new york city for most of my adult life, not all. all your words some fantastic, but the reality -- your programs have been an unmitigated disaster for the black community. start with the fact that the black community has largely supported the programs that have caused a meltdown with the fannie mae and freddie. freddie talk about the programs that have encouraged the breakdown of the black community. i did tremendous work with a group called new york youth at risk who work with the most at risk members of community. the stuff that held these kids back had nothing to do with the programs you are talking about

the greatest metric you should focus on is single-parent families. it has nothing to do with government progress. it does have a tremendous moral program -- breakdown of morality within that community. hollywood encourages that. here is an interesting statistic. if you take away the metric that has to do with single-parent -- primarily the mother families -- correlate that with incarceration, the difference between white and black incarceration disappears. when you look at that statistic and say that society is broken do to racism, no, it is broken because of single parents in the black community. guest: we're members of congress. we're public policy makers, not members of the clergy.

when you talk about life style and morality -- those are dollars we must have, but as members of congress it is our job and responsibility to make sure all of the livthe legislate efforts provide opportunity for all. that is why we have to make sure that health care passes and health care passes with disparity provisions. when you get infant mortality rates of the african-american community, much greater. our jobs as members of congress is to make sure we have public policies to address these disparities and moral gaps in our country. host: ohio, jeff, on the

independent line. caller: many times economic stimulus is passed for jobs programs, one of which the small kitchen cabinet company i have worked for has been involved on a rehabilitation effort to put kids in programs and they create living which is based on the prevailing rate. the cabinet companies not paying the prevailing wage. it is my understanding is the law, but no one in the business will open their mouth because their job is online the line. i have a job putting finishes on wood and i asked if the job pays a prevailing rate -- and i was passed over by someone to get a lot less per hour. nothing was said.

no one approached me. there is no enforcement on the guideline. they did the jobs on a per bid basis. the lowest bid wins the job. if there is any profit the company owners putting that in his pocket and the worker does not get it. guest: sir, prevailing wages and prevailing rates should prevail. when you know of a violation, my suggestion is to contact your member of congress immediately so they can contact the department of labour on your behalf so that an investigation can take place. i certainly do that for my constituents. i urge you to call your member of congress and discuss this. it is so important that workers be paid the prevailing wage so people can take care of their families. companies should not get away with cheating workers. host: the next phone call comes from the democrats line in

newport news, virginia. caller: i am very nervous. miss barbara lee i respect the cbc and all the stand for, being a young black male myself. my call is not on whether obama will make good economic decisions. i'm not the most politically astute. i am not very politically educated like some prior callers, but as a young black male and you being someone who represents the young black caucus i want to look at how obama sees a young black males and sees himself as a young black man and how that relates to how you might come up with problems that affect young black males. keeping us off the street. when i look at barack obama's background as a young black male it does not really seem to fit what the average young black male that i have been around has

been around. him being raised in kansas, hawaii, going to harvard. young black males often strive for those things but never seem to get there. barack obama has. been that he does have a white mother and that he is only half black, and i don't mean to offend the president because i do see him as a black man, i just don't see how a lot of those social ways he has seen in life and the privileges from his white side, being that white people do have quite privilege in america -- how he can directly relate to with the average black male is going through? what about private-owned prisons? what about addressing issues that could be revolutionary? guest: president barack obama is a wonderful role model for our young african-american men. secondly, i know the president

gets it. when you look at the president's policies as it relates to the criminal justice system, for example. when you look at the people he has appointed such as attorney general eric holder who understands the disparities in crack cocaine sentencing. the president has put in place people to begin to try to turn this around. it will not happen overnight. president obama along with john conyers are doing a fine job together to try to unravel some of these very horrible criminal justice policies that have put more resources and are focused more on incarceration rather than prevention. i know the president is working

on policies through the department of education to try to help young african-american men stay in school. this is a big job. he is beginning to help turn around this economy. we're talking about trying to make sure the entire country, all of the population really benefit from this economic turnaround. i believe a young african- american men have a wonderful role model. president obama worked as an organizer in chicago. i know that he gets host: it if he gets it and is doing a great job, then why did 10 congressional balack caucus members decide to boycott this vote? guest: understand, we are

members of congress. we have a responsibility to make sure that our legislative proposals are put into place. oftentimes there are ways you have to make sure that happens. i am very proud of the fact that 10 members decided they were not going to vote on a bill. they had specific reasons. i don't believe any member has said anything negative about the president. those have been a primary headlines in the press. we're talking about working together with the president to make sure all the economic issues which the financial services committee has jurisdiction over are dressed in an inclusive way. host: weather concerns that the white house was not listening enough? did that prompted the boycott? we were their concerns? guest: i believe that the

boycott is very clear. some of the comments have been that we wanted to make sure that the unemployment issues, the gap in the economic security of our country was addressed, that minority and women-owned businesses -- very few contactcs are left with those kinds of companies. when you look at the dollars spent through the tarp and stimulus funding, those come through the financial services committee. it is a very important committee in terms of the economic infrastructure of our country. these resources have been slow to get to our communities. the members of this committee are not only focused on the

bill, but talking about economic empowerment and security. nothing was said in terms of a negative message to the president. we're talking about working with the president to make sure that as legislators and members of congress that our policies are included in the bill that is being put forward. host: dee on the republican line. caller: good morning, the black guy from virginia who called in, he i sounds like a great americn to me. he is center-left. i'm on the other side as an average white american, center right. i think we are of the same mind. a quick comment -- if there were a congressional white caucus in congress, can you imagine the outrage across this country? host: do you want to address

that? guest: first, the congressional black caucus was founded 40 years ago and has always been a conscious of the congress. it was formed because there were very few representatives as advocates for the african- american community and other committees to have been shut out. we only received, were granted the right to vote in the mid 1960's. housing discrimination laws were in effect. jim crow, segregation, lynching. i remember many times with my father as a military officer, a lieutenant, him wearing his uniform with my mother and three girls, been told i'm sorry and using the "n" word. my father fought in two wars.

i cannot go to two schools because they were segregated. my mother died giving birth to me because the hospital would not admit her because she was black. there are many issues which are historical, the legacy of racism that we must address. we have to do this in a big way. we work with the congressional hispanic caucus, and others, the blue dogs, and others to address certain needs. it is the duty of democracy. we come together united around president obama because we want him to succeed. we have a lot of work to do to make sure the american dream is real for everyone. host: bob on the democrats' line. caller: i think we have a problem with our government,

especially with the civil action lawsuits filed with lawsuitseeoc. this is a very high rate problem. i have looked on the internet. i see where people have filed charges with the eeoc. it is the mismanaging of documents. the freedom of information act should take care of those situations. a lot of these are sent to the eeoc and mishandled. some investigations do not go through the procedures. it gives companies leeway to discriminate. these problems have got to be addressed. guest: unfortunately, through

the last eight years under the bush administration the eeoc was really dormant without much compliance. i agree, it has been a problem. the last eight years have been dismal. now i have a ray of hope that the eeoc will bring justice to individuals who have filed complaints. host: one last call, sylvia, on the independent line. caller: good morning. ok, i just want to thank c-span for allowing individuals to call in from all around the u.s. barbara lee, my name is sylvia, and i live in brooklyn.

i think that you and maxine waters are doing a great job being members by heading up barbarathe black caucus there in california. this makes my fifth time calling in the note it takes about four months. what i'm concerned about is, what because individuals have some many questions to be answered, what will they do about the housing crisis? where are the grants? guest: the housing crisis has wreaked havoc on the lives of millions of americans. part of what we're doing as members of the congressional balacblack caucus is to make sue

the resources are there for counseling, principal reduction, and to make sure that people can reset their loans. the pew research shows that the black community and minorities were targeted for these subprime loans. the only way people, the majority of americans accumulate wealth and send kids to college, start a small business is through equity in their homes. because of the targeting of these scam loans we're losing a goody, the ability to live lives the american way. it is important that all the measures we have been talking about going back to the financial services committee -- that is the committee that addresses housing policy. we have to make sure people's lives are stabilized. to make sure that the

foreclosure crisis stops. host: thank you for your time this morning, barbara lee. when we come back we'll open up the phone lines and ask you about a new proposal in the senate health care debate to expand medicare. we will be right back. >> general stanley mcchrystal testifies before congress for the first time since the troop increase was announced last week. he will be joined by ambassador eikenberry. in the afternoon the two will be before the senate armed services

committee with live coverage on c-span 3 at 1:30 p.m. eastern. >> cspan's 2010 student cam contest is here. the top prize is $5,000. just greed to a 5-8 minute video. it must incorporate c-span programming and show the varying points of view. the deadline is january 20. grab the camera and get started. "washington journal" continues. host: here is the headline today, momentum builds toward public option, new talks of medicare buy-in picks up steam. centers working on a compromise indicated momentum is building for a series of alternative

proposals include letting people under 65 buy into medicare -- that is senators working on this compromise. about 10 senators, both moderate and liberal are working behind the scenes on some type of compromise. we want to hear from you. we are dividing the phone lines by age. a little bit more from the headline which says that

senator chuck schumer from new york says the group is considering raising the income threshold to allow more people into medicaid. these are two proposals being talked about behind the scenes this morning. the group working on it is expected at 10:00 a.m. eastern. the senate majority leader harry reid has said he wanted them to come up for some type of deal by the end of today. first caller, 65 and older line. caller: just like the representative who spoke, i think the equity has not been dealt with in america.

from the standpoint of different people groups in this country, equity has to be having a level playing ground. just becoming 65 myself, i'm really looking at my children and grandchildren, and this kind of thing talking about social security and medicare -- this negative talk is so pessimistic. it is so tied into our dna as americans. host: we will leave it there. for the next 25 minutes we're talking about the idea floated in the senate to expand medicare as an alternative to the public

option. it is also part of the house bill that passed earlier this year, last month. we want to hear from you this morning about the idea of expanding medicare. from "the washington post quoting a december analysis found allowing certain individuals aged 62 and up to 64 to buy and would cost about $1.20 billion over 10 years. belvidere, ill., good morning. what do think? caller: i really support the extension. i have never really had health insurance. i am now retired from my business, but through my 35 years of business i never had health insurance. lucky for me i was not with

major medical bills. i still have some bills that i had to pay on my own, but if i had had an affordable health insurance, perhaps even private or government, i would probably have been able to make it through my business with all of less stressed, a few things to worry about. host: do you have any idea how much health care has cost you? caller: if i had bought health insurance through private insurance -- i thought about it -- i have a family of six -- i would say $50,000 up to $60,000.

host: how did you pay for doctor visits when the kids got sick? caller: i struggled, talked to the doctor. i said i don't have health insurance. maybe you can give me a break? a lot of times we stayed at home and took our own medication. we watched our help a lot. we were very fortunate that we did not have major surgeries. my ex-wife had a surgery about a kidney. we were able to pay for it. it was not like everybody was a sick or anything, but we were able to make it through. it was not easy. by last cartridge and airborne at home. lucky for me would not have major complications. if i had major complications i

would have been down in my business, probably would have had to look for different kind of lifestyle. my point is that it would certainly make a lot better for a lot of businessmen and business people to be able to deal with their business, an independent business. host: md., and james, calling on the line for 65 and older. caller: i would sure like to see that happen for other people. i'm 75 years old. i have always had insured because i worked in the government. the government is one of the greatest things you can be involved in. i retired when i was 55. my point in this -- i did have

too much sickness. prole one or two minor operations, but since i have been in my seventies i have had two major operations -- probably only one or two minor operations altogether. it has really caused me some money. being with medicare and all that it has not cost me anything. i go to the doctor and i don't have co-pay. if i can get this kind of treatment i would like to see it go back to people 55 to also have this opportunity. host: charles, on the line for people between 55-64. caller: the government should run this house and this country like reminding a charity starts

at home. when my family has food, when my family has medical care, a roof over their heads, then when i'm done with them i help others. we spend billions overseas for other countries to give them health care. that is all well and good and what america is all about, but we should take care of our people first. the congressman and the senate, they go to the hospital. it does not cost them anything. they go to the pharmacy. it does not cost them anything. and of this for a fact. i am on a medicine that is. $345 per is i have to pay four out of my pocket. there's a congresswoman here in my state that does her prescription medicine at the same pharmacy that i do mine at. her medicine and a 4 factor

talking to the pharmacist does not cost her a dime -- i know that for a fight. i expect no less than what they get as a citizen. host: one thing being discussed also in the senate is base and a public option on the federal employees model. it's as the health plan offers workers an array of different private insurance plans including preferred provider networks and lower-cost hmo's. newburg, new york. caller: i'm thrilled about this proposal. there's an old saying that says you can always count on americans to do the right thing was they have exhausted all other possibilities. this is exactly right. we should continue the trend to

lower it by five years every few years until eventually everyone is covered by medicare and there we go, it will be a system to take care of all of us. i hope all lot of people support this. host: raleigh, north carolina. caller: yes, i am against that. i am against that and i'm for all americans been covered. but i am livid because they have decreased our benefits. they have rejected [unintelligible] and we're suffering, yet they put out these billions of dollars for corporations who have scandals from the beginning. host: good morning, frank. caller: well, i'm pretty

radical, i think. in 61 years old. i think they ought to take the medicare coverage down to age 0. lowering it to age 55 and older is a step in the right direction. host: allentown, pennsylvania. barbara, good morning. caller: i have to agree with a lot of your other callers. it seems like a great idea to expand medicare to 55. i think that would suffice for the public option, but i also think that one gentleman called to say to reduce it every so often by five years, lower and lower. i think it would work beautifully. host: some other headlines this money. the front page here, u.s. man named in india plot.

another headline for you from " the new york times" -- millions in the u.s. drink dirty water, records say. also this morning, within "the usa today" the obama team launches its internet interactive openness policy with on-line access. it is part of a planned national contest to help kids eat better meals.

if you want to read more that is "the usa today." good morning. caller: i'm glad you took my call. i think the president will get a bill. congress will get it together with the help of the independents. without the independent voters we're not going anywhere. there are a lot of other good things coming down the road. as a matter of fact we are working on a plan, a community- based plan called obama care plus. they will get it together eventually, and god bless everybody, have a merry christmas. host: senator joe lieberman with this headline -- he riles many with the healthcare debate. many are privately furious that

he says he will not vote for bill including a public option. they added it is unlikely that the democratic caucus would take punitive action. at least not in this congress. there are advertisements that accused joe lieberman of acting in self-interest. for your thoughts, donna? caller: i think it is a great idea. i receive medicare. i just began last year. i'm 57, disabled. i am legally blind. it has been absolutely wonderful. it makes me feel so bad that there are so many americans without insurance. to see these senators up there joking like mr. john mccain joking about how much fun he is having been there are people

without insurance. they need them to stop stalling. get this done. medicare for all is fantastic. host: albany, new york? go ahead, we can hear you. caller: my name is betsy. thank you. i am 73 years old. i have medicaid and medicare. these little insurance people have been opposed in every way they can. i almost lost my second toe foot because i had gangrene. now i have it gangrene on my left foot and it is going away. thank god for the democrats and the president who want to see this health care go through.

do not let anyone take your medicaid and medicare because once they get you in the program they take the money you are supposed to have. they don't allow you to have home visiting nurses like i have had. when i came out of the hospital every day the nurses came to attend my wounds, but if i had any of those insurance companies floating around i would not have been able to get that service. host: an update on copenhagen. $10 billion per year asked to wealthier nations to offset the costs of environmental damage. also, here is the new jersey paper this morning. they have a graphic here showing 41% of the world's population seeing climate change as a

serious threat. good morning, rufus, in north carolina. caller: i think some form of this is a good idea, anything except for those 2000 page or more monstrosities. they have a pretty good federal

program and i don't see what they can clean that and the medicare and medicaid programs up. get rid of some waste. just one little example that i'm familiar with, medicare will rent a wheelchair for a patient for up to one year at about $150 per month and set of just buying a wheelchair for about $300 and giving it to the patient. such as that. i know that many of us believe that some of these medical programs are favored-giving programs. you have to know someone to get these programs and you get rich. some of the stuff they do is completely a regis.

host: minnesota, edie. good morning? caller: hello. host: i'm sorry -- eddie. caller: i would like to see medicare for everybody. if everybody got on it for maybe $120 per month, then i'm sure we could probably get medicare back into solvency. it would probably be a lot cheaper. you realize that people spend $350 billion per year to an insurance company to just level the risk? they don't do anything. there is no hospital or doctor. why would you pay a guy in las vegas to level your risk? it is total insanity. they only do things for

themselves. host: the latest on h1n1. the flu pandemic could be mild. it says the toll is likely to be lower, but vaccinations are still encouraged. the estimated number of u.s. deaths is in the thousands. it is estimated 6000 up to 45,000 with the best guess being 10,000 up to 15,000 deaths from h1n1. westport, mass., steve. caller: i'm under 65 and a veteran of the vietnam era. i did not go to vietnam, but i'm from that era. i use the veterans hospital in providence, rhode island. it is incredible. if everyone could have what i have, everyone would want a

government-run operation. i'm totally for extending medicare to everybody. i have seen how works. i have seen that it has been very efficient. host: alexandria, va., scott, on the under 55 line. let me put you on hold. this is the headline -- financial bill hits big banks the hardest. it says the house is likely to take up this legislation wednesday with the vote expected on friday. the legislation has several measures aimed at pleasing big banks. regulators would be able to block a healthy bank from practices, even order it to shrink if variables were deemed to pose a risk to the u.s. economy.

albuquerque, new mexico, on the line for those under 65. caller: good morning. host: what are your thoughts? on expanding medicare? caller: i think it is great. i have been on medicare cents 2007 and i cents50, retired. i think it is a degree plan. -- i have been on isince 2007.

the fat cats need to spread the wealth and the people need coverage. host: minnesota, with david. go ahead. you are. 55-64. caller: yes, i like to remind all these pie in the sky in the if you have calling in this morning that medicare in its present form is going bankrupt. it will be insolvent by 2017. if you add the people down to age 55 on to the rules, don't you think it will become insolvent a little sooner than that? and if you add people under that, then it will become and solvent the day for yesterday. host: brooklyn, new york. caller: good morning.

i am so grateful to see -- yes? i'm so grateful to see that change is coming, but it has been too much nonsense for so many years. the big fish want to eat the little fish all the time. i will be 79 on my next birthday and have had insurance my entire life. i have used very few doctors in my lifetime. i'm grateful to be, and i watch my health myself. it is the fault of the people who do not care enough about themselves to watch the way they should be and take care of themselves in advance. that is why we have these medical problems. they don't care about what the heat. host: let's go to floyd on the

line in virginia. caller: i don't think you should expand it. we spend enough now on so many things better grand kids -- i have eight grandkids and they will never get out of debt. a lot of the money they make will probably be taken for taxes. i would like to thank bill for introducing the thing against the abortion, paying for abortions because there are a lot of us christians out here against abortions that down think our tax dollars and should go for that. host: they are expected to vote on that amendment. no. richland hills, texas. caller: as far as abortion, if you don't want one, don't have

one. but i have been on many health insurance coverages over the years while i was working. the premiums go up, the coverage d would theown. the co-pays would go up. for about one year i was on the taxes risk pool which caused me a fortune. i'm on medicare which is about the best i have ever had. if congress would keep their hands out of the funds for medicare, it would be fine. what blew me away yesterday was old john mccain of their ranting and raving like a two-year-old child. taking money from these insurance companies -- when he is one of the very ones taking money. there is something wrong in congress. until we wake up and see what is

happening -- it is just this contending that they have got to somehow be turned around to work for the citizens, not for the congressmen. host: here is a message from twitter -- i think of the pros and cons of expanding medicare to 55 would be beneficial in taking the cost of the backs of small business. good morning, paul. caller: good morning, i am in favor of everyone to receive medicare. also, one way to fund medicare is for every dollar that a lobbyist expense in washington, d.c. they should be made it to donate $1 into medicare. host: another message from twitter. it says that medicare for all does not scare me. the easiest reform would have been to allow people to buy into medicare.

next call, 65 and older. caller: good morning. i lived in germany, france, with a socialized medicine. they have good medical care there. what we have -- they don't do anything. will you explain to them that they are the government? . . aker

pro tempore on this day. signed, nancy pelosi, speaker of the house of representatives. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the order of the house of january 6, 2009, the chair will now recognize members from lists submitted by the majority and minority leaders for morning hour debate . the chair will alternate recognition between the parties with each party limited to 30 minutes and each member other than the majority and minority leaders and the minority whip limited to five minutes. but in no event shall debate continue beyond 9:50 a.m. the chair recognizes the gentleman from oregon, mr. blumenauer, for five minutes. mr. blumenauer: thank you, madam speaker. this is one of those rare occasions where congress can put everything together for a holiday gift for americans. people in this city and across the country are obsessed with the concern to create jobs. it's appropriate and imperative that we do so. all the objective evidence suggested that the economic

recovery package made a huge difference, but not enough. as my friend and colleague, mr. defazio from the transportation and infrastructure committee, has documented the economic recovery package had only 4% dedicated for infrastructure. but it created 25% of the jobs. mr. oberstar and subcommittee chair defazio have been working for three years on the re-authorization of the biggest infrastructure package that we will look at, the surface transportation act. the evidence is that they are literally just weeks away from the opportunity to bring this legislation to the floor. at the same time, we see the consensus building, at least on the democratic side of the aisle and with the administration, that it's time to revisit efforts to

revitalize the economy, that the original economic recovery package simply wasn't big enough considering the problems that we were facing. there is an opportunity to take unused tarp money, part of the hundreds of billions of dollars that was set aside to try and help the financial sector recover after it brought our economy to literally the brink of collapse. we've seen at least that area stabilize. some of the money is being repaid, and the balance is not likely to be needed for economic emergency like we saw last year. being able to take a significant portion of that unused tarp money, instead of sending it to wall street, sending it to main street and your straight to be able to front load the re-authorization

of the surface transportation act, to be able to have the six-year certainty. this is a very important opportunity that we should not lose. because there is in a time when we're concerned about deficits in the federal budget, there is a yawning deficit in the highway trust fund which simply is not going to be able to meet the current needs of america's highways and transit projects, let alone its future. at the same time, there is an opportunity for us to improve the federal balance sheet. there is support for the concepts of having user fees that are available to be able to shore up those trust funds that funds infrastructure. for instance, the administration has placed in its budget the reimp significance of the superfund

-- recombo significance of the superfund -- reimposition of the superfund. the previous folks who ran the place would not enable us to consider its re-enactment. well, it's in the president's budget. one example of where example having polluters play will be able to have the economic activity from cleaning up superfund sites while we are suring up the federal budget. madam speaker, if we move forward with re-authorization of the transportation act, if we deal with water infrastructure, if we beef up our economic recovery efforts, re-enact the superfund tax, we will have an opportunity to invest in america's future, put millions of americans back to work and unlike other areas of

investment, this is truly an investment in america's future which will generate other economic activities and help the long-term fiscal health of our nation while we strengthen our families and our communities. i hope there's a green light for floor time for the transportation bill. i hope there's a commitment to front load the transportation bill with tarp money, and that we can get a transportation bill passed next month and on its way to the senate so we can put america back to work. thank you, and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the chair recognizes the gentleman from oregon, mr. defazio, for five minutes. mr. defazio: the president brought the jobs summit to a very unfortunate and unfortunately ill-informed close in a summary statement. the president is skeptical about shovel ready projects.

he said the term shovel ready, let's be honest, it doesn't always live up to it. if he's talking about infrastructure he's right. the department of energy, they managed to commit a tiny fraction of the money in the stimulus bill, and that would save thousands of jobs. yeah. unfortunately, there are jobs in china making windmills that will be shipped to the united states of america. not exactly what we had in mind. maybe the tax cuts. all across america people every week are greatful for their tax cut. no, actually they don't know they get a minuscule reduction in their withholding and that's supposed to rebuild our economy. there were seven times tax cuts than there was for transportation. i think the president is very ill-advised by a predged group of economic advisors for -- by

a prejudiced group of economic advisors. the fact is, as the previous gentleman said, 4% of the funding that which was spent and is already committed and is under way in infrastructure is created -- has created 25% of all of the jobs. all of that money will be spent out by next summer. there are hundreds of billions of dollars in other programs that aren't being spent out so well. but the shovel ready transportation and infrastructure projects are going forward. we had a report last week, there's $49 billion more in bridge and highway projects. we have 160,000 bridges that need reconstruction across america, that steel, that concrete, that construction job, that engineering work. there is no lengthy review.

we are replacing or building things that are already in place. in addition to that, there are many other roads and highway projects of great merit. that can be committed within 120 days, $49 billion. it could take place next construction season. and then perhaps this would get the attention out of the white house, $20 billion in transit. we're killing people on our transit systems because of the decrepit infrastructure we have. when you begin to fill that backlog, what you can do within a day in some places like the chicago transit authority who spent a quarter of a billion dollars in 30 days, that's all the money they got, they spent it in 30 days because they have a decrepit system. they created jobs across the system. transit vehicles, buses, then people who make parts for buses have jobs. the jobs are not going to cheap

like the d.o.e. grants are. these are the kinds of investments we need to be making. these things work. now, why won't his advisors wake up and tell him the truth? most of the jobs, the real jobs, the private sector jobs that were created by this last so-called stimulus were in transportation and infrastructure. the money has been successfully spent and obligated. we can give him those statistics. i defy them to go to any other part of that bill other than the money that kept teachers working and other things that help the states or the tax cuts where the money has spent out at such a rapid rate. so it's time to reorient the thinking down there on the economic team at the white house. if we want to put america back to work next year we need to dedicate more funds to rebuilding our decrepit infrastructure across this country. get the huge multiplier effect we get with that. we have a total of close to $80 billion of projects ready to go

in 120 days. these just aren't your resurfacing things like we saw last year. bridge replacements, major works on transit systems. shovel ready to go. no lie there. i hope some of his advisors are listening, they'll look at the facts and send the president a corrective memo on these issues. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the chair now recognizes the gentleman from kentucky, mr. yarmuth, for five minutes. mr. yarmuth: thank you, madam speaker. this weekend my senator constituent, mitch mcconnell, made a statement on the floor of the senate that was pretty remarkable. it was special because it was not passionately delivered or because it was well constructed because it so perfectly illuminated just how disconnected from reality the senate's opponents of health care reform are. the minority leader said, and i quote, i am sure there are

people in kentucky who are for it. i have not met one. end of quote. not one? these are to say that this kentuckyian found it hard to swallow. my senior senator made a claim despite poll after poll showing that the majority of the american people are for it. including not one but more than one million kentuckyians. the minority leader read the same polls i have. i would venture he heard from many of the same thousands of louisvillians for whom i got calls, faxes from families and businesses. from the v.a. hospital to community cookouts to the aisles of kroger, i hear from people with valid perspectives on both sides of the issue and we were elected to listen to all of them. yet my louisville resident took to the floor of the senate and bragged that he was ignoring his constituents. half of them at least. he denied as though a desire

for reform is some sort of a pre-existing condition that entitles him to advocate his responsibilities to us. but, senator, you don't have to take my word for it and i won't ask you to go searching through all your mail. if you're listening i'd like to take this opportunity to introduce you to a few of your constituents and mine. then maybe the next time you exert your considerable power to stop something that you know is a vital poshes to many of your constituents -- importance to many of your constituents you'll take the time to consider their concerns as well. one wrote, i'm a single mother of two children. i am offered health insurance from my employer. i don't always have enough money to go to the doctor when i need to. health insurance companies have had at least two decades to get it together and fix the system they have in place. but they've chosen not to. please do not place the citizens of this country at the mercy of some of the wealthiest companies in this country. bobby wrote, as a veteran and recent unemployed worker, i

would like to thank you for taking a stand on health care reform. i lost my job and coverage in may of 2008. do we need health care reform? you bet. mary of louisville wrote, i'm asking you to support health care reform. we need a public option plan. my brother is a 59-year-old diabetic and unable to get health care coverage. and another wrote, please don't let health care reform fail. i've worked as a case manager at a local hospital. i've seen private insurance deny patients acute rehab after a stroke whereas with medicare we would have seen them. elizabeth of the east end wrote, i'm behind health care reform 100%. i am worried about our young children and how they can afford it. i have a child who had cancer. i told her she needs to have a job that provides health insurance when she graduates. insurance companies needs to provide those who need it most, not just the ones who are healthy. greg of louisville wrote, today

i received my annual premium increase. my new premium has increased 32%. this is followed 18% to 25% increases in the last three years. andrea wrote, please vote for the health care bill. i am a heart attack survivor and i'm praying that i can stay with my company to keep my insurance. i will never be able to leave this company now that i have a pre-existing condition. sandra of prospect wrote, i am totally behind president obama's health care reform. i have insurance now, but was not allowed to have it for four years due to a pre-existing condition. i lived in utter terror the entire time fearing i would lose my house if i became sick. phyllis of the highlands wrote, i think we need health care for more people. for years i struggled as a single parent to pay for health insurance for my five children and frequently cost me more than 30% of my income in addition to co-pays. christian of crescent hill wrote, i know what it's like to not have the basic human life.

i believe that it is shameful that we are the only developed country in the world without a public health system and i'd like to voice my support of the president's plan. and finally, matthew, a 10-year-old boy from louisville wrote, my parents spend $50,000 per year for my brother's autism and i think it is a national crisis. it's just not fair, and this is a fair country. and everybody, no matter who they are, including my brother, eric, should be treated equally. senator mcconnell, these are your constituents, yours and mine and they are americans. they are deserving of your attention and not their scorn. please come with me to louisville and ilintroduce you to more of the people who support health care reform for america. i yield back. . the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to clause 12-a 6 rule 1, the chair declares the house

>> also on capitol hill today, the top commander in afghanistan, general stanley mcchrystal f u.s. ambassador to afghanistan, carla eikenberry testified -- carl eikenberry testified before the house today about the transition strategy announced by the president last

week. live coverage of both of those hearings, first up on c-span3 and the senate armed services committee have wondered p.m. also on c-span3 and fazul available online at c-span.org -- and also available online at c-span.org. in the meantime, a senator talks about the debate in health care in the house. continues. host: let us begin with some of the lead story is about the health care debate and what is happening behind the scenes. the headline in "usa today." it says the 10 democratic senators, liberals and moderate democrats are working behind the scenes to instead of creating what has been known as a far as the public option rather have expand medicare to allow 55 and older to join that as a so- called public option. what is your reaction?

guest: you know, the problem with that -- but i have not seen any details. the problem with that is medicare by everybody's agreement, everybody's analysis is due to be insolvent by 2017. clearly this program that is a safety net for seniors over 65 years old runs out of money. in fact, pieces like this, -- pieces of it, but hospital, is spending more than is coming in. so all of a sudden we opened this program up to a whole new list of beneficiaries, it does not serve anybody's purpose as well. it is not good for medicare, it is not good for the people who depend on medicare. we could spend a whole year debating medicare changes to try to fix this program and it looks to me like what they are doing with that idea is making the problem worse. host: there is also in discussion of having the public

option based on the federal employe in model. your reaction. guest: again, however going to administer that? conceptually this idea that people get insurance just like somebody in congress gets is a popular idea, well received. difficulty is how you administer that, how you pay for it. all of those things come in here. i think what you are seeing is they are just struggling. they don't have enough votes for the public option. senator lieberman has made it clear that i don't like the public option. it is there i will join the republicans and filibuster. so, they keep trying to figure this out. an additional idea is they were going to expand medicaid to 150% of the party level. well, states are going to go ballistic over that because, of course, states pay a share of that cost and they are struggling with special

sessions, budgets they are balancing. so there is a very serious problem with the expansion of medicaid. and medicaid reimbursement rates are just deployable -- deplorable. and a doctor's office or hospital would go broke and medicaid reimbursement. if you expand the population, you've already got 35% to 45% of the doctors to just do not take medicaid patients. you'll have a crisis of access, all of these millions of people showing up with their medicaid card on saying i am covered now, you don't have the personnel, the doctors out there to handle that. these ideas -- i just wonder who they are talking to. they can't be talking to doctors or hospitals. this would be a serious problem. host: what is the economic status of nebraska right now? guest: we faired better than

most states. we have a solid conservative government -- governor who has been tight with the dollar. our state, we don't borrow money. our constitution prohibits it. what an unusual idea? literally nebraska has no debt, even for highways or roads. but they just did, and of a special session where they had to cut over $300 million which is a huge number for the brass got just because the recession has impacted people. they are not earning as much, therefore they pay less in taxes, not spending as much, lest sales tax. you add more burden, more federal unfunded mandate to any state, including nebraska, and it would be a crisis. host: on the floor, and expected a vote on senator ben nelson's amendment, the abortion language. it says an "usa today" that it mirrors restrictions in the bill approved by the house last month of more restrictive than what is

in the senate bill now. currently the senate measure would require insurance companies to segregate public and private money and use only the latter to pay for this procedure. you have been a vocal on the issue. what does -- where does the bookstand in terms of how many senators are so-called pro-life and pro-choice? guest: i said a few weeks ago that i really thought the motion to proceed vote was the pro-life vote. maybe i will be proven wrong. maybe there are 60 votes. i think senator nelson is working hard to get the 60 boats. i hate to be pessimistic on the morning of the vote. i think we will vote on this today. i can't see how you count to 60 on this amendment. it appears to me it will be defeated. the pro-choice forces in the senate have rallied, the pro- choice forces out in the country, if you will, were thrown under the bus and house

bill. let us be honest about it. they are angry, fired up and will not let it happen in the senate. the dynamic leads me to the conclusion it will be hard to get 60 votes -- everything is a 60-vote hurdle. no matter what side offers the amendments. i just don't count 60. host: what are you hearing about the timing of the vote? guest: sometime today is what i have been hearing. i appreciate a flexible answer to your question. these things can't slip. people talk about nuances, could you accept this and this -- these things can slip. they take time. i think we will have a vote sometime today. host: what about amendments that you have offered so far? what are your goals? guest: we focused on a number of things. medicare cuts would be the first effort. there is $465 billion in

medicare cuts. those are very, very serious cuts to states all across the country. cutting reimbursement rates to nursing homes and hospitals and home health-care. defeated on saturday, was said to see that. home health care is such a wonderful program, so cost- efficient and keeps people in their home which is much cheaper and sending them off to a nursing home or hospital. when these cuts are implemented, if this is the final piece of the bill, and that is what the democrats are trying to achieve, you will see home health-care shutdown in many parts of our state. it is not going to be built to survive these cuts. host: wasn't there a similar amendment from a democratic senator past 100-0 i believe that protect home health care? guest: it doesn't. they argue it does. it says we will protect the

guarantee program -- let me explain quickly how what works. i can say to you, here, look, here is the law, the guaranteed program is still there. and you say, all, my goodness, it is. you are right, mike, there it is in black and white. then i say to you, by the way, we cut the $40 billion out of that program. the program is still there, the guaranteed program is still there, but guess what, if you are a beneficiary in lauro nebraska or some other part of nebraska, you are out of luck -- in rural nebraska or some other part of nebraska you are out of luck because there have been somebody cuts you not get the services. instead of the home health-care providers, nurses, what ever going up to some place 50 miles away, they will just say, look, we can't serve you 50 miles away, we can't serve you 20 miles away. so these programs will

consolidate in more urban areas and if you happen to live and a smaller community or law rule. you could be out of work. -- rural area, you could be out of work. host: fred on the republican line. caller: food stamps -- it has been a great program. in doing so we do not take the rest of the people who cannot afford food and put them in a universal food program where we ration their food and put everybody on the same government food programs. and retrospect, why do we have to take everybody just because 10% of the people can't afford their payments for health care and put everybody in one program where the government tells of riding what to do and who could they can shop with and what kind of health care they can get? i hope the analogy holds true. i just wanted to say you are able to keep the republicans in an demand the best program for

the american people. -- keeping the republicans in line and a demand of this program. guest: it is interesting you ask the question because you are speaking to someone who is that responsibility administrating the food stamp program when i was the secretary of agriculture and that is a program that has really worked quite well. but your analogy is correct. we did not redesign the food distribution system for the whole united states. we targeted that population that needed a food supply through food stamps and we tried to do everything we could to administer that in a way that made sense and was cost- efficient, etcetera. that program just continues to improve, incidently, and it continues to serve more people. what you are saying is true, there are tens and tens of millions of people in the united states will look at their health

plan and say, you know, i am satisfied with this plan. now, i was the premiums would not go up as much, this, that, and this thing. the president cannot consent that if you like this plan, you are not dull -- came out and said if you like this plan, you'll not lose it. guess what? there are so many things about this health care initiative that changes that. he can't keep that promise. you will see people who will lose their home health-care benefit. you are going to see difficulty and serving the population -- in serving the population. why are we taking this a step at a time and focus what the problems really are at? host: your home state, omaha, nebraska. sue on the democrats' line. caller: good morning senator johanns. i have tried for years to turn

in two businesses that committed medicaid fraud, charging thousands of dollars in my name appeared these businesses are still operational. i have not even seen that they have been prosecuted. the office told me after two years their office was not interested. if i want to see them prosecuted i would have to hire my own attorney. i'm on disability for epilepsy and i can't do that. but when i see people are stealing taxpayers' money, i want something done. i don't want to be given excuses. that is all i have been given from -- you can go from the cities to the county and to the state. when i was sending my letters to senator hagel. apparently he didn't want to deal with it because magellan was involved, you have health and human services involved. these providers are charging,

sir, enormous charges for services that are made up. services that are made up. guest: here is what guest: please reach out to our offices where you live in omaha. let us know where someone is going to give away federal money where they may not be. i take that very seriously. we will follow up on that and pursue that and do everything we can to get that information in the hands of the right officials. i could not agree with you more, whether we have health care reform or something other than that, we should not have a system where there is so much waste and fraud and abuse. i do not think anyone is doubting that there are parts of this medicare system, medicaid system, where there is a significant abuse. it needs to be fixed.

if we are glad to help you. contact my, office. host: myrtle beach, south carolina. good morning. caller: i just have a couple of comments. it just amazes me that when it comes to health care, there is almost no question -- i apologize, when it comes to war and spending there is no question of the amount the taxpayers of this country are asked but when it comes to caring and loving and nurturing the people of this country with health care, all of a sudden everybody is watching their budget. the second, and of course is that it just amazes me -- and i hope independents and democrats in the senate can look past this diversion because there is no bigger intrusion the federal government can get in anyone's life, telling a woman when she cannot and can have a job. that is not the government --

nothing but sex is appeared guest: vincent, in terms of your statement on the budget. here is what i would tell you. under the most rosy picture of this year, the obama administration will have a deficit of $1 trillion. i am not talking about the total deficit of this country. i am talking about how much this budget this year does not match with the revenues coming in, $1 trillion. as far as the eye can see the obama administration projects that their budgets literally over the next decade will run an annual deficit of $1 trillion. now, vincent, here is an important point, somebody has got to face the music. i'm a man who is 59 years old. god willing, i will be on this earth some more years. but the reality is, my

productive years are going to be somewhat limited at some point. what does that mean? it will fall to my children and grandchildren to worry about the debt that i have piled up. i think as americans we owe them more than that. and, yes, we want to care for each other. i think we are a caring country but we need to start paying attention to that deficit. in terms of your statement on abortion, here is what i would offer. i really do believe that government has a role in protecting the most abominable, and i see that role -- the most vulnerable and i see that in the issue of life. even getting beyond that, this nelson-hatch and then it i think it's reflective of what the country believes and that is public funds from the taxpayer dollars, should not be used for abortions. pro-choice-pro-life, they seem to agree on that.

any analysis i have seen of people's attitudes about their, very overwhelmingly people do not want their tax dollars used directly or indirectly to finance abortions. host: earlier this morning we asked our viewers what should be done with the extra tarp money. there is a debate, the use it to create jobs or pay down the debt? guest: pay down the debt. here's why. when that legislation was passed, it was very controversial. there were probably elections lost on boats -- votes on that. the past administration -- bush administration and obama administration said it has to be done. we are going to buy troubled assets. if we don't do that, we are in the crisis. guess what? tarp money was used to do all measure of things that was never presented to the voters to be

how the money would be used. we bought general motors with tarp. had i been on the program to one half years ago as candidate for senate and said, i know, i think the president has the power to buy general motors without congressional approval, no hearings, just do it, i think everybody would have laughed. i think across this country people would have been falling out of the chairs laughing at senator de-candidate might johanns, and you know what, the president bought general motors and using that money with no congressional vote, oversight, little -- literally bought general motors. this is not with this money was intended for. and very clearly, i believe, when the money is paid back the legislation calls for the money to be put back into the treasury to pay down the debt. that is what we should be doing. host: shreveport, louisiana.

sherry on the republican line. caller: i unconcerned about the health-care issue. i'm a home health nurse -- i'm concerned. idea what a lot of they all the population. it makes up 4% of health-care yet we continue to have to take enormous cuts to take care of our aging population. our population that is dependent on government funds like medicaid, state funds, and yet we still get reduction after reduction. i want to know that our boys will be heard because not only are our aging population needing care, our care providers really want to provide for them. yet time and time again home health is hit continuously. is it something we actually have a voice as a public and care providers to redirect from these cuts?

host: senator? guest: i wish i had better use -- news. yesterday i offered an amendment that was voted on the senate floor and basically it said very clearly, take out of this bill the cuts to home health care because i agree, it is a great program, it has suffered cuts in the past. that amendment was defeated. it was defeated almost on a pure party line mode. not quite but pretty close. democrats voted to cut home health-care and republicans voted to keep home health care and protect it from the cuts. now, they offered an amendment that really was bogus. again, it said we will protect the guaranteed program. that means nothing because the cuts would still go forward even though the program is still there. i just think what is going to happen when these cut impact our

states, when they hit our state, you are going to lose home health-care agencies. they just will not be able to function without this medicare reimbursement at that level. it is heartbreaking to me because it is a good program, i always believed in the program, it does keep people out of nursing homes. i have had instances, i pointed out on the senate floor of a gentleman who came home after a leg amputation out of -- from diabetes, he gets home health care. it is better having someone coming to take care of the wound rather than putting in a hospital for ever. much cheaper to have him in home health care if you are looking at dollars and cents. we had a gentleman in nebraska, we still do, waiting for a heart transplant and he is still home. that is only possible because home health care helps him with his congestive heart failure. story after story after story like that. unfortunately we lost on that

vote. those cuts will be made and you will feel the impact in your state and i will feel the impact in my state. host: allen hearst, the jurors appeared jane on the democrats' line. -- new jersey, jane on the democrats' line. caller: where were you when there were tax cuts for the top 10% one we had two military occupations, off budget, medicare reform bill off budget, and we were running up the debt. as far as medicare, the cuts being discussed have to do with waste, fraud, and abuse and in home health care there is no less fraught waste and abuse then there is an medicare advantage plan that was privatized and cost us as taxpayers 14% more for basically the same coverage they would receive under the original medicare system. you talk about most malmo

rubble -- vulnerable, they are out of work. rather than dealing with the deficit what we should be concerned with is job creation. one thing that would do that is tariffs, if we produce it here we manufacture it here i don't think it is isolationist i think it is survival. and i beg to differ on this -- my views -- and i do respect the views of people on the other side, but abortion is a legal medical procedure and win a private plan is restricting that medical procedure i feel that is an infringement on civil rights. guest: i just simply disagree with you. i know what role vs. wade said, i know what the supreme court said about abortion, but we as a

nation have a right to decide what we are going to pay for and what we are not going to pay for. the reid bill said we will pay for abortions, simply and straightforward. the nelson-patch and mend and says no, we won't. i think it is really reflected of the vast majority of how americans feel about this. the fact majority of americans do not want to pay for abortions. you asked where was i during the tax cuts. actually i was not here, i was the governor of the state of nebraska and happen to be governor on 9/11. what i personally witnessed was that the economy tank. 9/11 frightened the people. it caused them to lock up their pocketbooks, if you will. they did not want to spend. half -- as that ratcheted down, jobs were lost and it was just a very tough time. i think i had six special senses

-- sessions to cut the budget. then all of the sudden congress got together on and -- well, let us leave more money back in the states. let us allow people to keep more of their money which is really what the tax reductions did. i would just tell you from my personal observation the economy started to improve. why is that? because i just fundamentally trust that if people have their money, they can invest it in their small community, they can expand their hiring. but, you see, what this administration is doing very simply with its deficit is it is burdening not just this generation but future generations. a what this administration is doing with health care, saying to small businesses you will have a new mandate, what it is saying literally to every citizen out there is that outshout do it our way, the washington way, or the highway.

so you will have a government- approved plan now and too bad about the cost, you are going to have to pick it up or you will be penalized. and if you don't pay the penalty, we will use the in -- internal revenue code to go after you. it goes on and on. and that is not even talking about cap-and-trade. i talked to a business outside of a community in nebraska and they said our greatest competition is china. if the united states puts these burdens, these cap-and-trade burdens upon us, our jobs would be lost. here is the impact. 1000 jobs in that company, their average salary is around $70,000 a year. if they are accurate in their assessment -- and i believe there are -- those jobs are lost and they go to china, and guess what? we have a community that is in a

serious problem immediately. . it is a very fragile economy out there. we should be working with job creation. that is what the american people want us to do. and yet, here we are with cat and trade and here we are trying to remake 16% of the economy. i am very worried about where the obama administration is headed with all of this. it frightens me as a former governor and mayor and county commissioner and cabinet member who has worked on job creation, who has worked on the private sector. i think they are literally going after the private sector and they will crush economic growth. host: we know you need to get going. thank you for your time this morning. black

caucus. let me show viewers the headline from last week. about 10 members boycotted the vote in the house financial services committee over these issues. the president today is outlining a speech on jobs. specifically, what you want to hear from him about what he will do to create jobs for african- americans? guest: when you look at the and implement rates in the community there twice that of the white community. of course, the president was dealt a rough hand. the last eight years he has been doing a great job figuring out how to dig ourselves out. we're working with the administration and leadership to come up with the jobs bill. so we can have resources targeted.

we believe if we have a jobs bill that is robust many of us in the last stimulus package would $1 billion -- we could not get that vote, so we want to see a strong and robust jobs bill. that would also provide for job training. so that there will be prepared for the new world. that is the green industry, the technological revolution. all the jobs that will be sustainable over time. host: the president responded last week and said "i will tell you the most important thing i can do for a the african- american committee is the same thing i can do for the american community. that is to get the economy going and to get people hiring. it is a mistake to think of this

in terms of particular ethnic segments. " guest: the president is the press there. we represent constituencies who are suffering. as members of congress we are their advocates. 28% of the community now on food stamps. when you look at the foreclosure crisis the financial-services industry targeted minority communities. so, as members of congress we have to come up with legislative proposals to present to turn this around. that is exactly what we are doing. i believe the president, i know he gets it. he understands he has to fix the economy for everyone. i'm confident he also believes that every group in our country,

every young person deserves a job, adequate education. but as members of congress we have to focus on those who could be left behind if we do not have a targeted response to create some equity and justice in these initiatives. host: one of your colleagues has put forth one of these legislative proposals in the financial regulation bill being considered in the house this week. barney frank who is chairman of the financial services committee has signed on. it would propose to target $3 billion from the tarp program towards jobs relief. it would designate another $1 billion for grants to state and local governments to purchase foreclosed properties and use

them for more productive purposes. host: does this do enough? guest: it is an excellent example. congress will men waters chairs the housing committee of that committee and -- congresswoman waters. she is looking at strategies to address the problem, making the country stronger. this is a great first step. it is an example of what we're trying to do in every area. to uplift everyone. the economy as we all know is in shambles. - digit unemployment, twice that in the black and latino communities. host: does that mean when the

bill comes to the floor that cbc members will direct even more money towards black and latino communities? guest: we're looking at how to create job training and jobs. each legislative measure coming forward, we have our agenda. we looked at our legislative efforts within that framework. on all of our bills that is our focus and we are determined to help the president turn this around. host: the first phone call comes from illinois. caller: good morning. as a piano, this has not just started since president obama has been president. we have always been the last ones to get jobs. that is why affirmative action

was greeted. -- that is as you know. guest: there is some history here. the president in his speech in philadelphia on race without some of the historical context, but we have to move forward. we are talking about to creating an american dream for everyone. we have to do that within our role as members of congress to make sure that every bill we were concrete opportunity for all. host: you talk about education and training. what does this say about the level of training for african- americans and how that relates to the number who are unemployed from that group? guest: first, when you look at the jobs rate in the african- american committee -- look at the drop out rates with young men, it is turn this. -- it is horrendous.

it is over 50% in some districts. when you look of the college graduation rates, the fact that you are african-americans get jobs, the numbers are there. when you look these gaps, moral gaps in our additional system, and even when individuals get an education, there are still a host of issues that post barriers. education is the key to success in our country. when you look at what is taking place in urban areas with minimal resources, there's a lot to do to turn this around. host: new york city on the republican line. caller: i have lived in new york city for most of my adult life, not all. all your words some fantastic, but the reality -- your programs

have been an unmitigated disaster for the black community. start with the fact that the black community has largely supported the programs that have caused a meltdown with the fannie mae and freddie. freddie talk about the programs that have encouraged the breakdown of the black community. i did tremendous work with a group called new york youth at risk who work with the most at risk members of community. the stuff that held these kids back had nothing to do with the programs you are talking about the greatest metric you should focus on is single-parent families. it has nothing to do with government progress. it does have a tremendous moral program -- breakdown of morality within that community. hollywood encourages that. here is an interesting statistic. if you take away the metric that has to do with single-parent --

primarily the mother families -- correlate that with incarceration, the difference between white and black incarceration disappears. when you look at that statistic and say that society is broken do to racism, no, it is broken because of single parents in the black community. guest: we're members of congress. we're public policy makers, not members of the clergy. when you talk about life style and morality -- those are dollars we must have, but as members of congress it is our job and responsibility to make sure all of the livthe legislate efforts provide opportunity for all. that is why we have to make sure that health care passes and

health care passes with disparity provisions. when you get infant mortality rates of the african-american community, much greater. our jobs as members of congress is to make sure we have public policies to address these disparities and moral gaps in our country. host: ohio, jeff, on the independent line. caller: many times economic stimulus is passed for jobs programs, one of which the small kitchen cabinet company i have worked for has been involved on a rehabilitation effort to put kids in programs and they create living which is based on the prevailing rate. the cabinet companies not paying the prevailing wage.

it is my understanding is the law, but no one in the business will open their mouth because their job is online the line. i have a job putting finishes on wood and i asked if the job pays a prevailing rate -- and i was passed over by someone to get a lot less per hour. nothing was said. no one approached me. there is no enforcement on the guideline. they did the jobs on a per bid basis. the lowest bid wins the job. if there is any profit the company owners putting that in his pocket and the worker does not get it. guest: sir, prevailing wages and prevailing rates should prevail. when you know of a violation, my suggestion is to contact your

member of congress immediately so they can contact the department of labour on your behalf so that an investigation can take place. i certainly do that for my constituents. i urge you to call your member of congress and discuss this. it is so important that workers be paid the prevailing wage so people can take care of their families. companies should not get away with cheating workers. host: the next phone call comes from the democrats line in newport news, virginia. caller: i am very nervous. miss barbara lee i respect the cbc and all the stand for, being a young black male myself. my call is not on whether obama will make good economic decisions. i'm not the most politically astute. i am not very politically educated like some prior callers, but as a young black male and you being someone who

represents the young black caucus i want to look at how obama sees a young black males and sees himself as a young black man and how that relates to how you might come up with problems that affect young black males. keeping us off the street. when i look at barack obama's background as a young black male it does not really seem to fit what the average young black male that i have been around has been around. him being raised in kansas, hawaii, going to harvard. young black males often strive for those things but never seem to get there. barack obama has. been that he does have a white mother and that he is only half black, and i don't mean to offend the president because i do see him as a black man, i just don't see how a lot of those social ways he has