>> the chairman of the national transportation safety board will talk about federal safety investigations of accidents in aviation and public transit. we look at how micro loans can improve the economy of developing nations pit bull "washington journal"is next. .

for christmas the senate will also vote to increase the debt limit by $290 billion. essentially a two-month extension giving the senate time to take up more details on the debt when they return next year. we will focus on the senate, the health-care debate in the first hour, and ask whether or not you think the process is working. as always, we divide our phone lines -- host: some of the heads wednesday morning. "the philadelphia inquirer" this is above the fold. but also from "the washington post" is an interview with scott wilson. obama defending his first-year

record. talking about his efforts on the economy and financial overhaul. from the jump page, including a photograph of the present. he said the president vigorously defended the legislation, saying he is not just grudgingly supporting it -- i am enthusiastic about what we have achieved. he goes on today -- say -- host: we will hear some of the debate on the senate floor and some of the comments from democrats from the news conference. the chairman of the finance committee max baucus. but mark is joining us from philadelphia on the democrats win. good morning. caller: how were you? host: fine, thank you. caller: i think it is working. it is not pretty obviously. there are certain things i am not happy about. being a liberal democrat here in

philly, a blue city and state. i would like to have seen a public option. unfortunately that has been negated. i'm a retired federal employees and now they want to in effect model of the employee health benefits. the only problem is what i see, on my plan, a lot of that elderly federal employees and up in blue cross, the one planned, therefore the premiums are rising steeply and i thought the whole purpose of the whole exercise was to control health care premiums. i don't see how you can control premiums without a public option. host: some of the comments from the editorial appeared "orange county register." technically the senate could be in session as late as tomorrow evening, christmas eve, a vote that could happen 7:00.

we, of course, will have live coverage both here on c-span with more on your comments and the expected result, 60-40, the democrats say they have the 60 votes necessary to end the filibuster and bring the final vote to passage tomorrow. of course, live gavel-to-gavel coverage. tonya from martinsburg, west virginia. has it worked? caller: no, it hasn't. it made me mad. this is not change you can believe in. my senator jay rockefeller, they all gave nice speeches and then they vote when you don't want them to compromise. it should be change you can compromise for. every issue, a single pair off the table. public option, medicare by end. you cannot keep your same

insurance have last year if you are on hunan a plus in 2010, and if you call them they will charge $70 out of your souls security for a better plan you had this year. we would deny liberals -- war crime arrests, bank bailouts, escalation of the advanced and war. how many times you tell the liberals of your party to shut up and keep quiet and expect them to keep coming out and vote when you take their voice away on every issue -- war crime arrests. the same people who were in the bush administration are allowed to come back in next year. host: we will leave here. thank you for the call. neil king has the impact on businesses -- business is brisk for health care costs. the essence is this, with all

eyes turning on health negotiations next month, a corporate lobbyist to jockey for modification double buffer the impact. host: you can read it more this morning from page 84 of "the wall street journal." scott from gaithersburg, maryland. republican line. caller: first of all, thank you for c-span. i think it is a great program.

host: thank you, scott. caller: i am on the republican line but i think the republicans discredited themselves for a lot of people like me. the spending they did under bush years. we need something new that would be less corrupt. i think the health care debate -- my point is, if you go back to another principle -- medicine, like food, should be equally distributed among everybody. that is how we have to think. if you give everybody housing, if you give everybody food, if you give everybody medicine --

why are people not entitled to transportation? host: california cactus is the code name for this twitter comment, he says -- maureen dowd inside "the new york times -- is there a real mccain? host: here is part of what senator mccain said yesterday.

>> your president said during the campaign -- we are a little bit cynical when we read about politics and campaign promises. but time after time the president said, i'm going to have all the negotiations on a big table, doctors, nurses, administrators, insurance companies, drug companies, they would receive at the table. they just won't be able to buy every chair but what we will do is have negotiations televised on c-span so people can see who is making arguments on behalf of constituents and who is making arguments on behalf of the drug companies. of all people, he recognizes the drug companies who got the best deal of all -- formal? who spent the most money? pharma. and who is going to cause the american consumer $100 billion because the good of the saved by the consumer if we had been able to report prescription drugs. host: 1 of a number of

editorials. "usa today." but it goes on today that revolution over the last-minute dealmaking should not obscure the fact that something enormously worthwhile is emerging from the sort process. host: which is what we are focusing on, did the process work in the senate? keep in mind after the vote tomorrow that will happen at 8:00 a.m. eastern time the house and senate will get together for

final passage, not expected until january or maybe early february. sue is joining us from belgrade, beach, florida. good morning. caller: thank you, and happy holidays to you and yours. i don't think the process works. i have voted on both sides of the aisle -- senator mccain's last grant. at the beginning of the process everyone was on the table, it was on line, c-span, whitehouase.gov, too, but my issue is there is so much compromise. can look at and posted the differences between both bills. there is a public option in the congress will, in the house bill, run by the house and human services which is so security and medicare. there is a public option in the

senate bill. run by the same overhead people that covers the federal employees. there are good and bad things about both bills. one thing they don't tell you is in the public option what will be the bottom line you will have to pay. i do have insurance through my employer. it went up for my children 41% starting the first of january. i now pay over $750 a month. i wish this part would be enacted soon because it is getting to be almost 40% -- host: for how many family members? caller: my employer pays for me and i pay for two children. my oldest one who is going to college part-time was kicked off because he is 22. my husband was working for a motor company, not going to say, but would commission went down a

got a second job and when the car industry flat line he took the second job full time but lost his insurance. when i went to open enrollment that started in the september through november -- i found out by children's insurance was going up 41% and i could not have him on so now he is stuck without insurance and he is not making as much as it did before and he cannot afford it. he is borderline diabetic, and that is on his records of this policy is going to be expensive. host: have you been following the date? caller: i have been following debate. i will put it mostly on republicans because they have not been honest. the democrats i was they would come out and put their point forward. i think the best because we have seen so far is debbie stabenow. host: democrat from michigan.

caller: i'm floored by all of it. i have never been that active in politics but i know we will work twice as hard to get people who will work for us in 2010 election. host: appreciate the call. mike freeman has this twitter, -- host: that is our focus, but the process work on the health care debate? from "the wall street journal."

host: we will hear from him. in a moment. but first, damon from georgia. -- we will hear from harry reid in a moment. caller: i think it is ridiculous that we in america, one of the largest industrialized countries cannot get health care like everybody else has. i watcheds iicko"and it was kind

of disheartening when michael moore -- i watched "sixcko." and went to do a different election. it is not about health care. this is just the beginning of how we do business in america there when they refinanced gm a while back, they had an ad that was out about how they will restructured gm and how they will do things differently going forward. the health care is the beginning of how they will start doing that all of our businesses hemorrhage money to a certain set of people in this country. we are -- economically through the money. if you trace -- what they're doing, if you trace where it is going to or who it keeps to be

on top that goes along those same party lines as far as you see the politicians fighting to keep the things going. expos those people for the money they are receiving and then you can get rid of the problem. host: if you go to sideburn news -- cybernews.com -- bart stupak, as as white house and leadership in house of representatives have been pressuring him not to speak out about the compromise abortion language in the senate version of the bill. this is a quote by congressman stupak -- they think i should be expressing my views until they get a chance to sell me the language. well, i don't need anybody to tell me the language. i can read it, i have seen it, i worked with it. i know what it says. i don't need to have a conference with the white house. i have the legislation in front of me. commission democrats succeeded getting 64 house democrats to join him attaching the pro life

amendment to the house bill. the stupak amendment, it would prohibit the federal government from allocating taxpayer money to pay for any part of health insurance plan that covers abortion except in cases of rape, incest, or when the light of the mother is in danger. the process work? specifically in the u.s. senate? harry reid talking about what is happened thus far in previewing the vote tomorrow in the u.s. senate. >> we are focused on one thing and one thing only, and that's is passing this bill. we hope to have it completed tomorrow. certainly this storm's coming in the midwest, we hope we can finish tomorrow and do whatever is necessary. we are focused on passing this bill. we will work with our house counterparts and the white house. but our focus today and tomorrow is to complete this legislation. host: a reminder, but vote

tomorrow at 8:00 p.m. eastern time on c-span networks and c- span radio and also online c- span.org. caller: merry christmas. host: merry christmas, sammy. caller: i have been waiting on the line 70 minutes and everybody you -- calls has been democrats and you don't identify antibody by party. all the other monitors, they identified the callers by party and you are the only one -- and everyone so far has been democrats. host: that is an error on my part. sammy of the republican line, the forum is yours. caller: let me say one bush was in office, every time his poll numbers went down, c-span, all

you would hear, bush's poll numbers were going down. never do the same about obama. why don't you give out obama as poll numbers, the lowest of any president who has been in office -- host: we have, we talked about all the weekend. caller: what are his poll numbers now? host: it has in down to about 45% approval rating and others have been in the low 50's. caller: right, and the democrats going off the cliff, forcing it down our throats and going against the people, and they are going to lose big time next year and we are going to give republicans back in and i say go mccain and thank goodness for the republicans saying that no.

steve, i wish now you would identify each caller by party, if you would, if that wouldn't be too much trouble. host: appreciate. have a nice holiday, sammy. next is the jury, mich., chris on the democrats' line. good morning, chris. caller: how are you doing? host: listening to the discussion and the last caller, that was a very interesting point he was talking about, but you know what, when president clinton tried to initiate in 1993, he lost a lot of seats in congress in 1996 but still became president the second time. his polling numbers were down also. president obama numbers are down right now, too, and probably will lose a lot of seats in congress this year but he will

get the health care plan in place. clinton tried, but could do would. but obama will get it in place and i love it he is actually getting legislation passed -- pre-existing conditions, that will be declared illegal and we will have a health care plan that says pre-existing conditions are not going to be illegal no more. he is telling the health care and insurance companies you have to cover these people from this point on and i really appreciate this healthcare plan. president obama in one year he is actually getting a health care plan in place to cover every person in the united states of america and all of these people, everybody criticizing him and putting him down and speaking evil, that's not right. he is caring for the whole united states of america. everybody is going to be covered from this point on.

i just wanted to be fair that we are now about to get a health care plan that is going to take care of everybody and i am glad. host: a comment from this gentleman -- this story inside "the new york times." host: terry is joining us, independent line from new orleans.

caller: how are you? ok. nice to talk to you. i am a writer for examiner and let me tell you, i just wrote this piece today. in this and -- in the senate, special interests and lobbyists hijacked the health care plan that obama originally was looking for. to begin with, first of all, we don't have a health care option but most polls will show you that more than 50% of americans wanted a health care option -- health insurance option. what happened to that? special interest happened. there is a report, and you have probably seen it, the nearby the

northwestern university noodled service and the tribune newspaper and center for responsive politics -- >> mcneil news service -- host: mcneil, that is out even now appeared caller: are they friends of yours? host: please go ahead, i understand your point. caller: that is not a word in english dictionary. they found 166 former aides of congressmen that are in congress and the senate right now are part of the lobbyist groups that shaping this health care legislation. when obama got in office on january 21, he instituted new

ethics rules where his whole administration would not be involved and it could not -- they had to sign paperwork saying they could not be lobbied or receive gifts. and they help themselves to that. the problem is senators like steny hoyer and max baucus are virtually running a whole industry on the side where all of the former aides are bankers, they go make millions of dollars from health care company where senator steny hoyer is supposed to be working for constituents. it is a conflict of interest. host: if you are interested in there is a story on politico.com yesterday, and impact of all of this on k street. it said k street had a very good year with health care being the no. 1 source of lobbying money here in washington.

caller: right. k street, a look appeared $635 million has been spent so far -- i will look up. $635 million have been spent so far -- host: and that was the first nine months. check it out. leslie miller has this twitter comments. a piece in the business section of " the new york times." moving the process forward, what happens when the house and senate comes back next year.

host: you can track all of this, including details of the health- care bill by logging onto c- span.org and clicking on healthcare hub. the debate that ensued the last year, the town hall meetings, legislation and floor debate, all there on health care -- c- span.org, healthcare hub. brandenburg, kentucky, on the republican line. go ahead. caller: good morning. how are you doing? host: how are you doing? caller: i'm fine. the ohio valley, allergies around here. i have ms and i'm on disability. my husband is a private contractor. he builds about 12, to 20 houses

a year, or he did before the recession. we are on private insurance. all of my disability goes to pay for my insurance. and then i have about -- my medicines cost about $98,000 a year. host: $98,000? caller: that's it -- generic medicines. in july will have to go on medicare. host: how old are you? caller: i'm 51. i am not going to be able to go back to work at any time. i'm a registered nurse, or i was a registered nurse. i have no short-term memory. i take that little test to give

you -- three words to remember and i cannot remember them. not really anything very long. so, my biggest concern is, i have a great love for this country and i just feel like we need to do something for health care, but this is not the time to do it. we are so far in debt, and my youngest daughter, she is putting herself through law school, and i asked her, i said, what will happen to this country if we go bankrupt? her response to me was, i don't know, this country has never gone bankrupt before.

we have not discussed that and host: class i have to go -- but how value of for $90,000 and prescriptions? caller: in kentucky, we do have a program called kentucky access. it does allow me to have $15 co- payments, and if i take 30 medicines a day -- host: out-of-pocket is how much? caller: $15 on each prescription. they add up really quickly. host: you take 30 a day? caller: i take 30 a day. host: have to stop you there because with others weighing in, but i appreciate your time and merry christmas. mike, also from kentucky, democrats line.

caller: good morning. on the hall -- on how the process worked, i tried to watch most of the debate the last 20 days or so. it seems like the democrats, any time they are talking about health care they are talking about people and any time the republicans are talking about health care they talk about cost. but now i am 60 years old, disabled for about 12 years. when i worked -- my wife never worked. last year she had a heart attacks and either one of us -- i of one medicare but she could not get any health insurance. the end up going to dr. and you can't tell the doctor the truth because he orders to many test and right to many prescriptions. a minimal amount -- that you can

stay alive with pared -- a live with. the trouble of going bankrupt and how much it cost, if your personal health is affected, you're going to die. host: your senior senator recent -- recently reelected, mitch mcconnell, how has his performance been on this debate? caller: i think any time mitch mcconnell talks he is just obstructing and delaying everything. host: thanks for the call. this editorial from " the philadelphia inquirer." the essence is from this paragraph --

host: this twitter comment saying -- take hunter from cq and roll call has been tracking this and she joins us this morning. thank you for being here again. guest: thank you for having me. host: the senate committee at 9:45 a.m. this morning, one more procedural vote. what you looking for? guest: it looks like the outcome is more or less all but assured. democrats have twice got and 60 votes to break republican filibusters on various parts of the bill. and the final one of those so- called cloture votes is coming at about 2:00 or shortly thereafter. that would set up a vote on final passage of the bill it

o'clock a.m. tomorrow. host: this is the third of a series of votes to end cloture. can you explain why this took place and why the process happen based on the reid amendments. guest: republicans have been saying for weeks they are opposed to the bill. they remain unified opposition baird 60 democrats in the senate and 40 republicans. under the senate rules it takes 60 votes to break a filibuster and the way the bill itself the structured to there are three aspects -- manager's amendment, to introduce on saturday, and then the base bill and then action because of the constitution the bill had to have a house bill no. so there was a shall build used as a vehicle in the senate. under the senate rules, the republicans were able to filibuster all three levels of the bill and therefore democrats had to get 60 votes 3 * to overcome each of the filibuster's. guest: may be the last two and a

half to three weeks has been congress 101 in terms of legislative process particularly in the senate. can you explain what senator john ensign introduced yesterday which recalled constitutional point of order. what was that all about? guest: once the first cloture vote was over, the writing was on the wall for republicans. they realized it was a matter of time democrats in all likelihood would be able to stick together. they were looking at different tactics they could use to try to delay or make political messaging points or substances ideological points. what senator john ensign it is introduced what is called a constitutional point of order. claiming the bill, specifically the individual mandate to purchase health insurance, he is claiming that is

unconstitutional, that it violates the powers clause in the constitution and the takings clause. under the senate rules you can make a constitutional point of order. it is a non-debatable motion so it is submitted automatically to the senate for a vote and it takes a simple majority, 51 votes to prevail, which makes it different from other points of order that have higher threshold. this is a tactic republicans have used several times this year and is not usually work and legal scholars for the most part think that the constitutional claim senator john ensign is making does not help much validity or would not really prevail if it would go to the courts. but he is going to get a vote this afternoon on his constitutional point of order and in all likelihood democrats have the votes to overcome as so it is highly unlikely it would prevail, but it allows republicans to force yet another vote on the issue and also to delay the process a little further and to underscore a

point they were making about the bill for several months, one of the many reasons they don't like it. host: kate hunter is part of a team of reporters with congressional quarterly and roll call and you can read by it logging on to congress.org. during the debate in the senate and as it moves to conference and final passage, we will continue to get the expertise of kate hunter and others explaining the process and digging in the details of what the legislation means. kantor says -- this deal, called the cornhuskers kickback and the louisiana purchase as some republicans called the agreement merely landrieu had for always and it is in a senate bill. will this be in the final bill? guest: it does not necessarily

mean that. assuming the senate passes the bill, which it is looking like it will tomorrow, the measure has to go to conference in the house of house and senate have to meet to resolve differences. however, it took a lot of negotiation in the senate to get all 16 democrats on board. conferees need to be cognizant of the fact that the votes may not be there when it comes to the senate as a conference report if they don't keep these types of measures in. host: what is to prevent the 49 other senators from saying, wait a minute, we want the same deal you give the nebraska senator ben nelson? guest: i guess in some way, nothing. but i guess the question of some point comes which democratic senator is going to be willing to stand in the way of final passage because they don't feel they got as good a deal. it is worth noting that much has been made of the $300 million that senator landrieu got for

louisiana and specific, medicaid expansion and nebraska. however, there are other provisions in the bill that are tailored toward of the democratic senators but just not gotten as much attention. the other point probably worth making it is majority leader harry reid made the point on monday -- and i think it is somewhat true, congress regularly and that's earmarks and appropriations bills. the idea that carved out for individual senators is somewhat unusual is probably not correct. these sorts of things happen fairly often. the leader went as far to say if there is a democratic senator who doesn't have something for their state or did not get something they want, then he sort of insinuated they are not doing a good job as a senator. host: i should point out, that is the subject of an editorial

and "the wall street journal." tyler is joining us from independent line from stillwater, oklahoma. your question for kate hunter. caller: first, i would like to thank you for taking my call. i would like to ask, i guess in a question form, how is it do you think that what needs to be done in terms of what president obama was elected, the platforms that he said, this is what needs to be done, this is what i will do and therefore people voted for him -- so how are the compromises in the process such as this nebraska kickback or louisiana purchase we are calling it, these deals that basically designed to get congressional figures reelected, how are these corrupting what needs to be done in a sense that we need a strong figure who can correct this type of a flock?

host: thank you for the call. in a way to segue what tyler was talking about, let me refer to the editorial of "the wall street journal." the box is called your senate at work. the source is the senate finance committee.

host: just some of the examples "the wall street journal" points to. guest: it is true. there are things of this bill tail 0 -- tailored to individual senators. i think what democrats would say that, a, it is part of the process. b, these things are coming to light before the vote. i think we are seeing it already, there could be political fallout potentially. the public can decide whether these things are proprio are not in the next election. host: ken is joining us from cincinnati. good morning. republican line. caller: thank you, merry christmas to all. first of all, i don't think people are going to get what they really want. they think they are going to get free health care, it will not be free. the keep saying it will be affordable but i have not heard anyone, nancy pelosi or anyone, define what is affordable. what is affordable to someone

who just got a pink slip? i know they are going to have subsidies but if you are trying to put food on the table, pay your rent or mortgage, health care is down the list. i don't think many congressmen or senators even read the bill. finally, i think it is unconstitutional because my understanding, the way federal law is, it should be uniform -- whether cincinnati, ohio, it should be across the nation on the federal level. when you have different deals like ben nelson -- i don't think it is fair because you have a federal law that is not uniform. i think ultimately you are going to have people with health problems because they are going to basically go to nebraska because they no picnic and go there because ben nelson has a paid for forever deal, and i think someone would challenge it in court. i think it should be deemed constitutional because the laws are not uniform from state to

state. guest: well, senator kay bailey hutchison, republican from texas, made an argument and this could be one of the votes we see later today that the bill is unconstitutional for essentially the reason the caller said, because the bill treats states differently, and therefore she is making the case and violates equal protection clause under the constitution that deals with, neb. treated one way for medicaid expansion and another state treated another way. that it runs afoul of the equal protection clause. one of the things, there is likely to be up to five votes on these types of points of order. potentially all raising constitutional issues. it does seem as though some of the john ensign said on the floor yesterday that he would hold of this bill is enacted, someone would file a lawsuit or someone could bring a court challenge against the individual

mandate. but it does seem like republicans are potentially -- no one has done this because the bill has not been passed yet and there are no signs specifically doing this, but it would stand to reason there is at least a reasonable chance that someone could file a lawsuit challenging this. republicans seem to be laying the groundwork with these constitutional points of order. guest: 1 process and one legislative question. the process question. this boat could have taken place christmas eve at 7:00 p.m.. -- this vote could of taken place christmas eve at 7:00 p.m.. why the earlier time? guest: there is a snowstorm in the midwest. senators, all 50 states. they are eager and anxious to get home. republicans have been saying for weeks that they were going to insist on debate as long as possible. that would have put a final passage of vote probably at 7:00 or 8:00 p.m. on christmas eve.

however, there seems to be some weakening of that resolve yesterday, starting in the morning as people were looking at the rather reports and thinking about what it would mean to be in the senate -- i mean the senators themselves. so it looked at -- as though yesterday afternoon there was a potential for a deal and about 3:00 yesterday they did strike a deal. when the deals are struck in the senate on procedural issues, all 100 senators have to sign up. all 100 senators signed off on moving the vote up to 8:00 a.m. until 7:00 p.m. and that allows them to get out earlier in the day. it seemed like a good middle course because it allows everyone to leave town the way it wanted to and get home for the holiday but it also allows republicans to kind of say they insisted on a vote on christmas eve, the last possible day. it kinda seemed like both sides were happy with that outcome.

host: one of the photographs is from "the new york times." senate democratic leaders, including apple -- max baucus, the park and, harry reid, as they move from talking about the votes they had to try to sell the package. meanwhile on the other side of the aisle, senator mitch mcconnell talking about what the bill means and how republicans continue to respond to this. guest: one of the things that is interesting is that idea at that senator mcconnell is beginning to make the point that this bill is being enacted with only democratic support and we expected to continue. host: here is what he said yesterday. >> and the american people expect us to continue to review the contents. we know what they feel about the package and overwhelmingly opposed to it. but they are still interested in what the details are and we are going to continue to read and

expose the details of the bill that have not actually got as much attention in the early stages. we will be here until christmas eve, completing work on this bill. and i think it is important that we take the time to analyze it and everywhere we can before the final votes. the final vote in the senate is not the final vote. there are substantial differences between house and senate bills. this debate is not over. a month so i guess to weigh in to express their concerns about this package. host: kids hunter -- that was senator mcconnell yesterday. we are also learning that tomorrow, and addition to voting for the health care proposal there will be a vote to extend the debt limit but only by two months, $290 billion compared to the 1.2 trillion dollars

extension voted by the house earlier this month. what a difference? guest: again, the senate is bumping up against this christmas deadline, the end of the year deadline. the house has already adjourned for the year. the way the senate decided to handle it was due the short- term, two month extension, which would prevent -- basically something we need to be done to the debt limit by the end of the years of this is a short-term breather, a short-term fix. as part of the agreement they got, because republicans were going to say they will draw that out and as part of the agreement they got to expedite the process. having the final vote tomorrow in the early afternoon on a short-term extension, the short term fix. the republicans secured a commitment from the democrats that come january they will take a larger bill and the republicans will be able in january to offer up to -- well, they got a list of about a dozen

amendments that would be deemed to be a broader fix, january. host: 8 twitter comment -- no. 8 is joining us from rancho cucamonga, calif., democrats line -- julie is joining us. caller: i love c-span and i truly believe you might be part of our last hope for any real democracy in this country because of the influence of big, corporate money on legislation just like this. but i'm a democratic activist. i'm a strong supporter of the president. as much as i hate losing the public option and the medicare by in, i also think a lot of good things in this bill. i wanted to ask your guest, ms.

hunter, who incidentally, one of the best i heard -- you always have good guess but she is wonderful for us political geeks. and i correct that if the house can be persuaded to accept the senate bill, presumably to pass tomorrow, without any changes, but that mean it does not have to go back to the senate at all? that it would stay -- go straight to the president? a quick second question -- i as an active pay attention who democrat as willing to go take this bill as significantly better than nothing at all rather than lose after all of this. 1. i would like to see on the senate bill, i would like a restoration of the repeal of the

antitrust exemption for the insurance company. i am wondering if the guest has an opinion on outside possibility of being put back on the senate bill because that is the only thing that would make it easy for me to be on the phone and push to have the house to anything i can to try to help the house agree to pass the senate bill the way it is. host: thanks. a first on the second item. guest: the antitrust exemption, for those who are not familiar, is a proposal, the lead sponsor of it is senator patrick leahy, a judiciary chairman from vermont. it would repeal an anti-trust exemption the insurance industry has enjoyed for i think for decades. there is a lot of support for that in the senate actually -- a co-sponsor on the bill said he

would like to have seen it on the bill. although he did not included in the base bill that he unveiled in late november. the regent -- reason why is among the moderates, specifically nebraska's ben nelson, there is not the support for it. senator ben nelson was, in addition to being nebraska's governor he was the state insurance commissioner and he kind of brings back perspective on the table. because his book is so critical to democrats getting sick devotes and getting it through the senate it seems unlikely there would be this support to put back in just from a practical standpoint because that would lose a critical vote that they do in fact made. just from a procedural standpoint, that passed the point in the senate debate where they are able to take her with the bill. the bill that they have right now, barring something extremely and racine will be the bill that passes. -- barring something extremely

unforeseen. but on whether the house could agree to it what the senate passes, yes, it could procedurally happen. but it is pretty unlikely because of both chambers like to exercise prerogatives. the likelihood of the house just accepting what the senate sends them is pretty unlikely. if they were to do that the bill itself would not include a repeal of the antitrust exemptions. >host: didn't steny hoyer from maryland sell the newspaper that it would not have been, that they would have the conference process in january? guest: senator max baucus, finance chairman, was talking about the idea of the conference yesterday. it seems as though the informal preliminary talks about conference or pre-conference negotiations will get underway fairly shortly after the senate passes the bill. host: state of the union scheduled for when? guest: i don't think they

scheduled it actually, but it is usually the last tuesday in january. it does seem to be the deadline for when democratic tradition in congress is looking to send a bill to president obama and have it signed by the state of the union. host: paul king has a story, from page of "the washington post." 92-year-old senator robert byrd. a spirited eye, the headline. host: this quote from senator chris dodd is its next to him and the chamber, he took note of the senators cheery attitude. "he looks a lot better, seems a lot better than a few weeks

ago." he added senator byrd is clearly aware of this colleagues, families and the legislative interests. cape kundra, your reaction. guest: there has been a lot of questions -- political reporters like myself, we like to sometimes imagine, speculate about all the things that could go wrong. senator byrd has had health problems. he is 92. he has had health problems in recent months, in and out of the hospital. there was some question about whether he would, given the snow, the late hours, early hours, whether he would be able to work it -- -. sitting in the chamber and seeing him, he does look as though he is doing very well. host: will from olympia, washington, independent line. caller: i would like to ask your guest if she is familiar with the united states public health

service commission corp. host: why did you ask? caller: i ask that because the commission corp was established in 1798 and a mandate was to provide health service to the united states public. over the last 200 years, that has been their goal and that has been what they are doing. their mandate has changed over the years to include more and more citizens but that is the goal, to provide public health care service to the country and people go to them and they will pay a fee because these medical practitioners, be it doctors, nurses, are government employees. host: if you want to respond to that -- and while he was making that comment, joe was saying when private health insurance is crushed people clamor for a government run single payer system. maybe that is the plan.

comment on any of this. guest: it seems as though one thing we have not talked about is that the public option -- the idea was jettisoned from the plan. there is definitely a many people out there, many democrats, liberal democrats especially, who believe in some idea of some system of government run health insurance option is something that is desirable. but it does not seem like it is going to happen in this bill. host: the president sitting down with "the washington post." this photograph from all of us yesterday. he talked about his first year in office, including the health care bill. the president was scheduled to leave later today for hawaii. he will stay in town through tomorrow morning until a final vote is cast and according to the white house, his plan is to leave for his christmas vacation.

he will stay through new year's, probably later tomorrow. take hunter, does it surprise you? guest: i noticed that yesterday during a press briefing yesterday out of the white house. robert gibbs said the president was going to make his holiday departure plans based around the senate vote. i haven't heard anything about the present planning to come up to the senate. he has done a number of times during this debate to try to rally support. senators went to the white house a few weeks ago to meet with the president's duties of the president can _ the idea of passing it this year. the it seems as though there is the idea the president should stick around until the deal is signed, sealed, the liver, -- delivered. i am sure republicans would criticize him for going off to hawaii on vacation if he did that before the senate completed its work, and also potentially the president would want to be

around to perhaps issue a statement or deal with last minute problems that could arise. . the democratic party is committing suicide.

they have all three houses and are trying to get it done. host: thanks, michael. guest: it is definitely true and in the mid term elections if the bill which polls is host: are we moving from getting the votes to selling the plan. is that what we expect over the christmas recess and when they come back in january? guest: definitely. in the coming weeks i'm sure not all of america will be paying attention to the politics of washington over the holiday season but it seems like in the coming weeks once the senate passes the bill it will be competing message wars with republicans talking about the problems they see with the bill, the back room deals and

democrats talking about how great the bill is and all the good things in it and whoever wins the message war we may see gaining enough political capital going forward. host: kate hunter's expertise is available online at congress.org and part of c-span's healthcare hub. we will check with her and her colleagu colleagues. thanks for being with us. have a merry christmas. guest: you doo. host: the vote is scheduled tomorrow part of "washington journal." gavel-to-gavel coverage on pap 2. we want to look in the next hour at the incarcerate of u.s. citizens and look at it from the perspective of victims and also former inmates. that is our subject in the next hours "washington journal"s on this wednesday morning december 23.

c-span christmas day a look ahead to 2010 politics including eric cantor and david gregory. buzz aldrin and fellow astronauts on the legacy of apollo 11. a discussion on the role of muslims in america. then a former c.i.a. intelligence officer on the strategy against al qaeda in afghanistan. and remembering the lives of william f. buckley jr. and senator ted kennedy. all next week a rare glimpse into america's highest court through unprecedented on the record conversations with 10 supreme court justices about the court, their work and the history of the iconic supreme

court building. five days of interviews with supreme court justices starting next monday at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. now available c-span's book abraham lincoln great american historians a perfect gift for the history buff. a unique and contemporary perspective on lincoln from 56 scholars, journalists and writers from early years to the life at the white house an its relevance today. abraham lincoln in hard cover now on digital audio to listen to any time. learn more at c-span.org/lincoln book. host: we want to welcome will marley the executive director of the organization for victim assistance. let's begin with statistics looking at the so-called crime clock. if you look on the screen you

will see that a violent crime is committed once every 22.8 seconds. a murder one every 32 minutes. forcible rape every 5.9 minutes. what does it tell you? guest: we have a problem with crime in the country. more than that for us it tells us that there are many, many victims. host: so, from the perspective of the victims and we will want to look at the next half hour from the perspective of those incarcerated what rights do they have? guest: they have rights. we have rights at the federal level through the crime victims rights act. also at many state levels they are in the state constitutions. so, there are crime victims' rights. we have been loworking at that years and enforcement of the rights is enforcement. host: our phone lines for democrats, republicans and independents are up also if you

have been a victim. 202-628-0184 or miami us e-mail twitter us does many system work for the victims? guest: it depends on the situation for sure. many victims don't feel like it works, don't feel like they get justice. the system itself is not particular particularly compassionate. it is a system of the law and it means processes that are not necessarily serving the victim. it the perpetrator versus the state and when that happened that pulled the victim out of the system and basically made them a nonentity unless they were a witness for the state. we have been working to change that. host: are there specific cases in your years with this organization that come to mind that are egregious? guest: well, there are plenty. not long ago we have a srpl

assistance line and a come called. she had been raped and in the process of that prosecution of that the person caught, prosecution, she received her subpoena to testify, showed up at 9:00 according to her subpoena. the case had been handled at 8:30 and because witness was not present it was dismissed. host: in today's age where we have cell phone technology, we have e-mail capacity, we have the iphones and i-pods, but with all of the technology is it making it easier to track down criminals and put a case against them? guest: well, i don't know if that is the case. you have to have the personnel to do this, and certainly there are complexities to that especially from the victim's standpoint. host: one other statistic this from the department of justice in terms of property crime there is a burglary every 14.2 seconds

-- guest: the one that is striking to me is the home, one every 33 minutes. host: what can we do to change this? guest: we have been working to promote victim advocacy and victims rights is inculcated as we talked in many state constitutions. we would like to see that at the federal level. what about a federal constitutional right amendment for victims. and enforcement. we are working to see that the rights are enforced. host: norma joining us from lancaster, texas. what your story? caller: when i first came to texas i was kidnapped and raped and helped captive for three days and drugged. the system works. the problem is we fought for 0

years to change the way the questions were asked. when we first had cases in texas it was a [inaudible] when a victim is put on to testify they used to ask questions like what part of the rape did you enjoy? did the person do the exact same thing that your significant other or the husband did? did he do anything that you would like that you would probably end up marrying him later? that is one of the worst problems that we have here. then they hire people expecting the district attorney's office to assess they are for the victims. and i have had so many cases where women have come to me saying i don't want to testify any more. doctors and advocates talk to us so bad and tell us you should not have been where you were and we fought so hard to get the marital rape law. host: let me jump in. can you explain the

circumstances without getting into the specifics that led to your abduction and when it happened? caller: i was working at a recreation center in dallas, texas. two of my supervisors had been raping me for years and i was leaving the recreation center one day, the person overheard the supervisors talking about what they had been doing to me and i was only 14 at the time. so, they snatched me coming from work, took me to a hotel and kept me blindfolded and the blindfold slipped and different men and women i saw had been doing things to me. they drugged me up. left me in the hotel an left me for dead. the district attorney's office did not prosecute the case support the simple reason they said that ok, you had been raped by your supervisors for two years, how do we know they

didn't take part in that. and they were city officials. we couldn't go back and sue them because they were city officials. so, my case went unsolved for years even though i was able to identify them, i left marks on them. they were called in, the marks were exact. i remember birth marks, a person had a stab wound in the chest that had not healed quickly. still the case went unsolved. host: when did this take place, how many years ago? >> it was 1994. host: thank you for sharing your story. guest: that is not an uncommon story for sure. i hope things have changed in 20 years. it is a common misconception of blaming the victim. host: amy joins us from frederick, maryland. caller: hi, good morning. i just had a question. i was wondering what your thoughts were about [inaudible]

-- host: amy, you are breaking up. are you still with us? caller: i was wondering what you thought about the innocence projects where so many african-american men are jailed for 27, 35 years, do you think they are victims? even when it comes to latinos, victims of rape, i think even the way it handled by the criminal justice system there is some racial disparity. guest: the issue for us is the victims, focusing on the victims and making sure they get justice because that is the starting point. certainly most victims recognize the need for justice at every level. they want the person who perpetrated against them to pay for that crime. so, things like the innocence project are important. but with a murder every 30 minutes roughly, we have lots of developments there but we have

perpetrators that need to be held responsible and accountable. that is our focus specifically, making sure that the millions of victims that exist in our country get justice. host: one of our viewers wonders why is the rate of crime so much higher in the u.s. than any other industrialized country? guest: that is a social question i wish i could answer but i can't. host: mike joins us from phoenix, arizona. go ahead, please. caller: i have a question for your guest there. what kind of -- what would you think about felons being able -- i'm a felon myself and i wonder about being able to vote but i have to wait a certain amount of time then petition for my rights to be able to vote. i have seen a lot of elections. as far as obama i wish i could have voted against him but what

do you think of that? guest: what we try to do is emphasize the needs and rights of victims and there is a disparity between victims as to what they perceive should be the rights of people that committed crimes. probably a case-by-case basis should be a starting point. that is a discussion that others are taking up and of course we would commend the discussion but what we would like to do is be part of it as victims. host: donald says the prison system in america today is what he calls the new slavery. they selectively prosecute to jail who they want and if you don't have money bye-bye. your response. guest: with every crime what overlooked is the victim. maybe we are trying to find the right perpetrator and we appreciate that. but there is always a victim in these violent crimes and again how to we serve them in terms of

justice? host: our conversation is with will marling. the national organization for victim assistance. we are looking at this from the perspective of victims. later former inmates and inmates. donna joins us. caller: good morning. i have been listening to the house debate throughout this whole thing and i just wanted to say the thing about the malpractice thing that the republicans are pushing, but they only tonight stop the trial lawyers on the victims' side. they want to cut out that part of it. now, there have been so many cases where a person has had the their, the wrong leg cut off. i lived in tampa, florida, and went to the same hospital that that actually happened.

lots of things like that. but yet you have republicans pushing for these trial lawyers for had to be stopped when in fact there are many victims. granted there are some that just want to sue just to get some money. but there are true victims out there. i myself not farce medical but i have been a victim of crime from early childhood from infancy, molested by uncles, aunts, boy friends, cousins. my mother's husband. in fact, went to court and testified and nothing was done to these people. it was done to me. i was sent away to an institution. it is horrible. and there is not a day that goes by that i don't relive some of

those things. it has affected my live. host: let me ask you this. why do you think the system didn't work for you? why do you think this continued and you continued to face this abuse? caller: well, you know, i didn't know what to do. we were very poor. i didn't know what to do. i reached out to certain people, but they didn't know what to do either. then finally i ran away from home and that is when then he was picked up and put in detention center and then it was investigated and i mean there were other kids in the home that were in fact his kids but i didn't know if he was molesting them. i knew he was beating them. we were all beaten with horse whips and things. he worked in a steel mill and we were beaten with these belt from the steel mill that he would bring home. the abuse was horrible.

host: did you ever confront them? caller: yes, i did. i went back later and confronted him. it was the scariest thing. he was huge. i'm tiny, i'm still very tiny and it was very scary and my so-called mother, the woman that gave birth to me, left me in the room alone with him and went upstairs and just left me there with him. and i mean, i was cared to death what he was going to do. but i was in my early 20's at that time, you know. but some of the same things are going on. thousands are being abused. right in this town i'm appalled, these different groups and agencies to tell them about things that are going on. but nothing is ever done.

it is never done. and i understand they have to have so much proof. but everybody is scared to talk or what? i don't know. it is just such a problem. host: done in, thank you for calling and sharing your story. guest: steve, that is just horrible. i'm so sorry for her. just a dreadful thing. one thing we can emphasize from her story is that we realize there are folks working on the injustices within the system, incarceration rates and so on. but for everybody crime there is a victim and these folks are still dealing with the aftermath. she is a testimony to that. whether people were prosecuted the perpetrators had a choice to hurt somebody. the victims do not. host: based on that monty is sending us a lot of conversations on the website if you want to join at twitter.c twitter.com/c-sp twitter.com/c-spanwj.

guest: the discussion, the sentences is probably in another category and another time for us. if you are told -- if you are telling victims this the penalty, this is the crime, the penalty should match the crime, what we say is follow through with that. that is justice. we can debate and argue about the penalties and what they should be. the problem is that they are not applied correctly. host: sarah joins us from lincoln, nebraska. good morning, sarah. caller: going through mental health. host: we missed the beginning. caller: there are people with mental illnesses going through mental health courts where the judges have broad authority and people don't have the same rights as in what we think of as regular court. what they have committed are not crimes. yet i understand that your organization is working with the council for state legislatures

to bring that situation under the victims rights act. could you please comment about your rationale for doing that? guest: i'm not aware that we are doing that, to be honest. caller: very good, then. i will be in touch about your office. host: the web address is t trynova.org. dan is joining us from south boston, virginia. good morning. caller: good morning, how are you doing? host: fine. guest: hi, dan. caller: the first thing i wanted to comment on is the recent unfortunate circumstances with the little girl from north caroli carolina, shania davis, there are so many more situations like that that go on is there a way that your organization or any other organization that you are

affiliated with can try to push more strict laws for pedophiles or child rapists or killers because at the don't suffer the just penalty. they get a slap on the wrist or are too easily let off the hook. maybe we can try to work together to enact a law that can go that you congress and work them to do something right for a change. guest: good question. great comment by dan. working together to solve that problem. host: we will show you again what the so-called crime statics looks like courtesy of the u.s. justice department as we listen to john from los angeles. good morning. caller: good morning. tkpwhr what is your story, stkpwhropb? stpwhrao i have been assaulted by the police twice. i have a degree in political science and my only crimes were

nonviolent drug offenses. five years ago i was hospitalized after being knocked unconscious in the city of torrance, california, in custody, and sent to the wrong hospit hospital. the rules of the jail said i was to be sent to harvard. anyone who was injured i was sent to harbor ucla but i was sent to the hospital next to the police station and i came to there and had my driver's license suspended because i had lost consciousness from being beaten up by the police. then i got arrested for what was a ticket in march of last year and transferred to the twin towers in downtown los angeles. and i apprised another inmate of his constitutional rights to accuse his accuser in an assault

case and two guard came and attacked me from behind and stauf stomped on both of my feet to trip me. they were large, 6'3", 240, linebacker sized people. and they drove me into the concrete floor and one guy, the officer on my right, they had me in hammerlocks, dropped two knees into my books and cracked ribs and i lost toenails on each foot from them stomping on my feet, slipers with their large shoes on. and what can be done -- i'm not a minority. i didn't do anything violent to anyone. the perpetrators of the violence have been the police. and i heard this from other people who have been in custody here in los angeles and i know that the l.a.p.d. had a federal

supervision for quite a while until a few months ago for several years. but the entity that is in charge of the custody of prisoners in los angeles county jail is the l.a. county sheriff's departm t department, didn't have any federal supervision and the city of torrance has its own police department. host: does john have rights? guest: well, he does. i presume it is as one accused element have rightsment unfortunately it is not my area of expertise. host: when you are dealing with so-called abuse from law enforcement officials, how easy or difficult is it to prosecute them? guest: i guess it can be difficult. we empower people to enforce the law and if they violate that, this is no question that it is complicated. host: mary has this point.

guest: well, yeah, and victims. host: our guest is the executive director of the national organization for victim assistance. bill is joining us from schenectady, new york. caller: good morning. my question to your guest is that with all of the resources that law enforcement puts into enforcing the drug war and i don't really see them as being victims, you know, just possibly hurting themselves, do you think the drug war is a wise investment in the criminal justice system? guest: well, the drug war involves victims. there are really no victims crimes no matter how we lies it. that is a different angle in terms of our focus is typically violent crime. host: john from palm beach,

florida. good morning. caller: good morning. a couple of comments. the last caller just said there is a drug war, there should be a war on poverty but the congressmen don't care about that because they don't want to pass the public option. you look at your make-up of congress they are mostly white males. that goes back to the constitution. what we really need, we need to have laws like the bahamas and things like that. you have one in the trigger of the chamber you go to jail for the one bullet in the chamber. so, over there the police walk around with night sticks and no guns. they don't need a gun. we are so advanced over here we don't know how to govern or rule. and about the catholic churches, all those rape victims that have been done to those little boys in the catholic church, they are like acorn to me in the catholic

church should be disbanded. tpwhr thank you. did you want to pond to any of that? guest: i guess not. host: you hear from some of these victims especially those dealing with rape and reign by family members and relatives. how often do you they're that story in which they let it continue, that they don't feel as if there is a path for them to prosecute a stepfather or go after an uncle or deal with the abuse they are facing? guest: it is a common challenge that the trauma itself is not factored into the issue, especially with children. how do children know that they know they are being violated but who do they go to? their power sources, their parents are potentially perpetrating on them. we recognize the need and we understand there could be years that go by before they can muster the courage or strength to do that. host: will marling thanks for

joining us. we will continue looking at crimes in america and also the incarceration rate among african-american men and women and also other minorities and what it means for you as we continue on this wednesday morning december 23. "washington journal" continues. >> c-span christmas day a look ahead to 2010 politics including republican congressman eric cantor and nbc's david gregory. buzz aldrin and fell owe astronauts on the legacy of aapproximately 11. a discussion on the role of muslims in america and the world.

a former c.i.a. terms officer on u.s. advantage against al qaeda in afghanistan. starting at kw p.m. remembering the lives of william f. buckley jr. and who are ted kennedy. all next week a rare glimpse into america's highest court through unprecedented on-the-record discussions with 10 supreme court justices about the court, their work and the history of the iconic supreme court building. five days of interviews with supreme court justices starting next monday at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. >> america icons on d.v.d. c-span's three original documentaries on the iconic homes the three branches of american government. the collection is only $24.95 plus shipping and handling. for this and other gift gifting id ideas go to c-span.org/store.

tkpwhr as we continue our look at the crime rate in america and victims we want to look at the sentencing guidelines for some of those and we want to welcome to the program the executive director of the sentencing project. good morning. guest: good morning. host: let me share one statistic with our audience. for a male born in 2001, if he is black chances of are one in three that he will be incarcerated. for hispanics it is one in six. for while males one in 17 fp. guest: i think those are shocking figures particularly the black males, hispanic males. to think that the message we are sending to children growing up today black, male child you have a one in three chance of going to prison in your life. there is something wrong with that picture. we can debate where that comes from, what it means. but this not a good future for our children. host: so, part it is society. what is wrong with our society

that we are seeing this crime rate? is it education? the unemployment rate? guest: it is a mix of things. part of it is a question of opportunity. most of the way we deal with public safety is providing opportunity to people. kids who grow up in a household and community where there are good schools, where they have parents who can provide a good home, recreation, educational opportunities, most of those kids will do pretty well. we have had a growing divide between the rich and poor in our socie society. that is a real problem in terms of opportunity. we have also focused our criminal justice on building and filling prisons at the expense of opportunities to invest in prevention and treatment and i think we are seeing the result of that. host: from the justice department this other fact. looking at 2008 one in 131 americans incars rated in pitcher or jail. the number of --

guest: it has been a remarkable rise and unprecedented in the history of this country or anivillized nation. if you look at it internationally, the united states now is the world leader in a rate of incars raeufplgts we look -- incarceration. we lock up citizens five to eight times faster than canada or france. it is very much out of control in a nation a prides itself on democratic traditions. t host: we have heard the line put them in prison and throw away the key. do the tougher sentencing guidelines reduce the crime rate in guest: putting people in prison has some effect on crime. if you take charles manson or a serial rapist and incapacity them clearly we are somewhat saf

safer. what we have been doing the last 25 years is locking up lower level drug offenders and property offenders, the whole massive approach of the war on drugs. we000 have half a million people in prison or jail for a truck offense and the vast majority are not the kingpins of the drug trade. they are the lower level players selling drugs on the treat corner and what happens is they get arrested, sent off to jail, 0 minutes later somebody comes on the street corner to replace them. unless away address the demand for drugs we are merely filling up prisons, we are not doing anything about the real problem. host: by the way, if you have served in a pitcher or you work -- in a prison or work for a correct al factual call 202-628-0184. what is the solution? guest: i think it is multi-facetted. within the criminal justice system we need to reassess the

mandatory sentencing policies of the last 25 years. doesn't mean substance abuse is not a problem but putting a low level drug offender in prison five, 10, 20 years as many of the mandatory sentencing laws require, $25,000 to keep somebody in prison we can do better. we have treatment programs that can be successful in curbing drug abuse. we have a range of drug courts that divert people with drug problems and it is treatment rather than incarceration. we should make soming the problem the first approach we take rather than assuming that incarceration is the first approach. it doesn't mean we don't need prisons. clearly there are people that present a threat to public safety. but we need to be more judicious about how we use prison and invest in problem-solving approaches. prison has lots of negative consequences. it separates people from families and communities. it is very difficult to recover from a prison sentence so we

should use it as a last resort. host: based on that let me put a hypothetical. you have a male, black or white, age 15 or 16, robs a 7-11. caught with drugs, convicted. ste sentenced to jail and in jail eight to 10 years. don't finish high school. don't have a college education, get out in their mid 20's and he is rehabilitated. what kind of future can he expect? guest: not a very good future. one thing we have all learned the last 10 careers or so is this whole concept of prisoner re-entry. that both liberal relies and conservatives are coming together to recognize while we can debate how many people should be in prison, the fact is that 95% of the people who go to prison are coming out some day. so, it is in everyone's interest when people come out of prison they be better prepared to make it in the community.

that means they need to have education, some vocational training, deal with a substance abuse problem or mental health problems. we need to address that in prison as well as the transition back to the community. if we just put hem in prison and throw away the key, it may make people feel good but it doesn't make us safer. host: all of that costs money. so is it part of our society that feels we don't want to spend money because they are in jail, why should we help them? is that part of the mindset? guest: i think it has been the mindset of far too many political leaders the get tough movement which is basically saying let's get tough on crime by putting more people in prison, keeping them there a longer p. i think the public wants to get tough on crime. all of us who have been victims or have close friends or family that have been but the way we do it needs to be smart. we should not put people in

prison indiscriminately and forget it. if the goal public safety we need to address the underlying issues and will need to be consequences for breaking the law. we need to combine those, not just say we are putting people in prison and we solved the problem. >> our guest is the executive director of the sentencing project, the website is sentenci sentencingproject.org. what does your organization do and where does your funding come from? guest: we are a national n nonprofit research and advocacy organization. we look at the impact of sentencing and policies and work for reform of laws we think don't make sense. it is from private foundations and individual contributions. host: robert joins us from pittsburgh. caller: good morning. well, my question is partly a statement and partly a question. you compared the united states to other industrialized

countries. personally the united states has the largest population of any industrialized country. so, it stands to reason that we would have the largest population in pitchrison. host: let me stop you and i will go becoack. you had 200,000 in 1970 and in excess of 1.5 million. how does that correlate with the prison population? guest: the prison increase is far greater than the population increase. if you look at the number of people in prison per capita, in other words take into account the population that is where we see the disparity. when i said we have a rate of incarceration five or eight times that of other nations that is taking population into account. so it is both more people in prison but a greater percentage per population as well. caller: population in the united states cannot be compared to any

other industrialized country in the world. we have third word pld populati due to things like immigration, lack of education. we have one of the worst education policies in general in the world compared to other industrialized countries. we try to send everybody to college when maybe 25% of the kids that go to college really should go to college and the rest should go to some kind of trade school like germany, england, france, they have programs. even canada does that. but we think a everybody is supposed to sit behind a desk and a computer where maybe they should be learning how to do plumbing and carpenterry and other trades that are needed in

the society, too. host: thanks, robert. let me use your point to share with the audience information you put together. pass host: crime rate is not up? guest: what we have seen the last 30 years is the crime rate has gone up, the crime rate has gone down but most of the increase in prison population is from the sentencing policy. across the country we have adopted mandatory sentencing policies, three strikes and you are out. a quick example california has the most extreme form of three straoeubikes and you are out. the first two strikes need to be serious. the third one can be any felony. in the cases that went to the supreme court one man's third strike was dealistealing three clubs. the other stealing $153 of

video. one is doing 25 to life and the other 50 to life. i don't mean to suggest those are typical but that is an example of what these policies have produced. host: a 28-year comparison on the prison population if you have a drug offense. in 1980 about 41,000 jailed because of a drug offense and half a million in 2008. guest: right. this is the impact of the war on drugs. and if you went down the street and asked 10 people do you think we are winning the war on drugs i think nine will say no. i think that is because we have made investments in incarceration without providing the treatment resources to prevent. host: our guest is mark mauer. phillip joins us from port charlotte, florida. republican liene. caller: i'm calming more so for a statement. i have been a reserve deputy and

i have also been an inmate. my son right now is an inmate. host: what was your offense and what is your son? >> caller: it was drug related. i was severely burned and fought addiction from painkillers but jumped from one drug to another. i have wrestled with that for years. but i sat back, i have had six children that were molested by a friend of their mother's and i went to p.d. in illinois and the attorney general said he didn't have enough evidence. the state said -- the city said they have a case and the state didn't want to go forward. he is still walking around. i had my stepson had a shotgun stuck in his mouth they blew the back of his head out. one guy got 55 years for pulling

the trigger. the other guy who was there only got eight years because he turned state's evidence. being when i was locked up i have only been to the county level but i firmly believe in my hea heart, it goes back to the basics of how that child was raised or what was her parents' situation. were the parents addicted? what is the social economic problem in the family? it is a big, big thing and when kids out this see people making mo more money selling dope on the streets than working at mcdonald what are you going to do with that? there is so much anger. and i challenge you to do this, i'm a written, i'm not a fanatic al christian but i heard one other person that did this. survey. when they took spirituality out

of the schools, stopped everything, check out from the decades when they started in the 1960's to where we are at now how the crime increased with the young people and i will tell you what your mouth will drop open. i'm not saying fanatic al christians but basic moral things. we won't tale, murder. you take it out and you have trouble. i have seen enough of it. host: thanks for the call from florida. guest: you raise a lot of questions, a lot of social issues. i think one of the key points is of right now what we are seeing because of the fiscal crisis at the state level is states are recognizing that the prison expansion the last 25 years has really cut in funding for services like higher education and other kinds of supports we need. and governors of both political parties are grappling with can they afford to maintain such a large prison system and looking for ways to reduce the

population in ways that don't compromise public safety but provide more funds for intervention early on. absolutely, we need to work with children as they are growing up. there are a tvariety of things. if we do that successfully we won't have a need for so many prisons. host: we are looking at the crime rate in the population and prison population. another point to bring to the audience is you are writing about the consequences of incarceration. hos guest: we have seen and have laws in almost every state that take away the right to vote when you have a felony conviction. 48 states and district of columbia take away the right while in prison, about two-thirds of the state prohibit

you from voting if you are on probation and parole and in 11 states you can lose your voting rights for life even after you completed the sentence. for example, if you live in virginia or kentucky you can be an 18-year-old convicted of first-time nonviolent drug possession, the judge sentences to you treatment and you complete it successful tully yet you have lost the right to vote the rest of your life. the only way to get it back is if the governor gives you a pardon which is not very common. so, these consequences really are life-long. host: john joins us from pennsylvania. calming us on the democratic line. caller: i was a victim of an attack walking in the city of philadelphia and was surrounded by a group of -- i'm a white, older individual, and was

surrounded by a group of, i guess six or seven african-american young men who proceeded to assault me, punch me, knocked me to the ground, kicked me, rifled through my pants, took my wallet. called me all kinds of racial epithets. all kinds of curse words and the like. one guy pulled a knife out. fortunately somebody was driving by and started pwaoepg there their horn and kept pwaoepg in and they ran off. the police were spb full and a -- the police were unsuccessful and really didn't show the level of interest or concern that i had expected and consequently he was a pretty angry fellow. so, to raise the seriousness of the crime i insisted that they consider it to be a hate crime. and i was informed that it didn't apply to me, only applied

to minorities. and i was just in shock and disbelief and proceeded to go to the district attorney and whatever and was repeatedly told it just didn't apply to you. and there had been other similar incidents and it was never solved and no one was arrested and i was never even brought in to see a lineup. host: when did this took place in frpblgt it was season years ago. but, if i could finish, please, i don't think the listening audience is aware that there was an additional hate crime legislation just passed recently that was attached in the senate to the defense appropriations bill because it couldn't get through on its own. and it was extended to sexual --

homosexual and transinvestigate tights and -- transvestites -- i don't know what the word would be. but i saw on c-span testimony by attorney general holder where he was testifying to the senate about the pending legislation. and senator sessions specifically was asking him questions and he readily acknowledged that the legislation only applied -- didn't apply to white people. that it only applied to what he called traditionally discriminated people. so, consequently, what you have is the hrlaw applies to the wealthiest jewish people community in the country and most violent, west the african-american country. host: do you have a response?

guest: first of all i'm very sorry to hear what happened to you. nothing that should happen to someone. two points quickly and i don't know the details of the case or what the police response was. first, nobody can prosecute anything as a hate crime unless you find the perspetratorperpet. why the police were not able to i don't know. that is the first issue, can they find the people they believe did it. if so, then they can consider whether it is a hate crime. the hate crime issue i'm not an attorney, my understanding is that hate crimes can be committed against white people as well as people of color, too. typically for a long time in our history many hate crimes had been committed against people of color but i don't believe the legislation limits it in that way. we would are to look into that more. host: our guest is mark mauer with the sentencing project. mike is joining us from sacramento, california. what is your story, mike?

caller: i'm an inmate, or i used to be an enmate. i think that part of the problem is when you go in there you can't get anything. you can't get any education. you can't get any job help, any nothing. so, when you get out you have nothing and you go back to nothi nothing. you get out here and you don't have money, you go right back to doing the same thing you were doing before. people don't want to help you or give you any jobs. it is really an economic issue to me. host: how old are you, michael? caller: i'm 39. host: what were you convicted of and when? caller: i was convicted 20 years ago over drugs. and when i get out here i'm still being hassled over

ex-felons right now. right now in these times it is hard and it is really frustrating and makes me feel like i really want to go back and do the same thing i was doing before. host: how are you surviving in caller: my wife. that is the one thing about it. your wife or your family members. when you are in there, when you make the calls on the phone and they charge you all this money and your family really doesn't want to have anything to do with you if you are putting a bill on them, you know? when you get out of there you really don't have any contact, or when you are in there you don't have contact with your family. host: how long have you been out of jail? caller: i was sentenced in 1990 and i have been out of jail 20 years. host: mark this guest: i'm sorry to hear your story. unfortunately i think it is far

too typical. we hear stories like that every week in our office. i think it does get back to, as you point out, yes, there are some prisons in parts of the country that do a half decent job of providing education, counseling, vocational train. but they are usually the unusual ones. what we have seen is the prison system has expanded so enormously there's been money to build pitchers but the programming never keeps one that expansion. in far too many states the day you get out of pitcher as the caller knows what you get is a bus ticket home and usually $25 or so and somebody says good luck, we hope you make it after not addressing many of the factors that contributed to the person being in prison in the first place. this is not just about mike or people getting out, this is about public safety. if we want to encourage people who are in prison to refrain from coming back to prison we need to create opportunities and give them the skills they need and of course they need to live

up to that as well. but unless we create some of those opportunities there is a set of vikes against you the -- strikes against you. host: we encourage you to join the conversation. a lot of you are on the website at twitter.com/c-spanwj. one comment from emma. guest: it has not been eliminated but cut back significantly. the fiscal crisis do not help. many of these areas we didn't do a very good job to begin with. you look at member health and illness one of every six people in prison has a history of mental illness. we are talking about more than a quarter million people in prison mentally ill. yes, they committed a crime but part of the problem many of them is they are living in a community setting, they were not getting the services they needed

to try to cope with their problems. they committed a crime and end up in prison which is a terrible place for anybody to be but certainly anybody with mental illness. host: you can log on at sentenci sentencingproject.org. jeff joins us from stevens point, wisconsin, on the independent line. caller: good morning. i think we have to have a new conversation about what we call a drug. i'm a christian. i believe in god. i believe the only thing that will get you away from crime and getting back into the prison system is to have a focus in your life to give yourself a little bit of pride and respect. so, we go to religious organizations to do that. we read on page one of the bible that we are supposed to eat every sea bearing plant and there are four. so we look at drugs and say

cannabas is supposed to have thousands of uses to replace pollution. we are not talking about crack or coke. those are all chemically induced products. we are talking about cannabis and the fact that it is a gift from god and because we called it a drug we have incarcerated people and violated the first amendment, trashed the constitution, we have a drug state, a police state. violent and crime, trplgs of dollars wasted doing nothing. the d.e. afpa. spends $1.5 bill and you make a big bust but the amount on cannabis alone each year is like $20 billion. you can't have a pitcher system based on justice and truth unless you go back to the original laws and say we need to look at what plants are plants and produce things and are good for people and not just do the same old thing saying it is a

dr drug. the only thing that is different from crack, coke and cigarette is smoking cannabis which comes from god. so unless you address that issue you are going to be back and forth in the same stupid argument. and right now in any city in america you can go to wal-mart and buy a h everyoemp product. until we just the laws everything else is fake. host: thanks for the comment. also this from donald says the c.i.a. is pumping the drugs into the cities and i get arrested for smoking. yeah. guest: well, i don't think that -- when we look at how we use our resources i think the drug war has been very much overblown and overextended. it is not in faculty the case that will is tens of thousands of people in prison for marijuana offenses.

but if we look at the area of law enforcement we made something like 1.# million drug arrests every year. of them about 40% are for marijuana offenses. so whether or not anyone thinks marijuana is bad we need to look at the scale of harm we are talking about. . passno carrierringconnect 2400 

caller: it is an awful thing for her. what i like to see is that the victim agrees and the defendant agrees that they be sterilized and forget about the whole thing. guest: well, that is a provocative statement, but i think there are alternatives. there are very significant -- there has been a very significant movement in that direction. judges have been increasingly using community service, having offenders do unpaid labor, or making restitution to the victims. sometimes there are programs that bring victims and offenders together to mediate the conflict that they have. we need to do so the other than

rely on jails and prisons. host: thiws tweet -- guest: i think many judges would agree with that. many judges feel their hands are tied and they have to sentence with the legislative body has decided. that does not tell us something about who the person is and what the crime is all about. host: thanks for joining us. guest: thanks for having me on. host: when we come back, a composition with the head of the ntsb, as "washington journal" on this christmas eve eve. you're back in a moment. -- we are back in a moment.

>> c-span, christmas day, a look ahead to 2010 politics, including republican congressman eric cantor, an nbc's david gregory, buzz aldrin on the legacy of apollo 11, and later, a former cia intelligence officer on u.s. strategy against al qaeda in afghanistan. and starting at 8:00 p.m. eastern, remembering the lives of william f. buckley and senator ted kennedy. all next week, a rare glimpse into america's highest court, through unprecedented on it-the- record conversations with 10 supreme court justices upheld the court, their work, and the history of the iconic supreme court building. five days of interviews with supreme court justices, starting next monday at 8:00 p.m. eastern

on c-span. >> just about a month left to enter c-span's 2010 studentcam contest. the top prices by thousand dollars. just create a five-to-a-minute video on one of our countries greatest strengths, or a challenge that the country faces. it must incorporate c-span programming and show varying points of view. winning entries will be shown on c-span. don't wait another minute. go to studentcam.org. >> "washington journal" continues. host: we want to watch and the chairman of the national transportation safety board, deborah hersman. -- welcome the chairman of the national transportation safety board, deborah hersman. let's talk about the plane that overshot the runway in jamaica. a couple of serious injuries. no fatalities. when you have a situation like this with an american airline on foreign soil, what is the will

of the ntsb? guest: we have international agreements that govern how we handle international investigations. the safety board sends an accredited representative and invested it is to help authorities with the investigation. -- and investigators to help authorities with the investigation. there are american manufacturers involved. as a tradition, we send investigators to help the country when the accident occurs. host: typically, they say let's look for the black box. what does that tell you? guest: the great misnomer about the black boxes that they are not really black, are orange. that is to help investigators find that after an accident. typically are a cockpit voice recorder and a data recorder. it will work with the last 30 minutes come up to two hours, of conversation and the cockpit,

and the data recorder records the parameters, pricking, outthrust, directional contzom. -- breaking, thrust, directional control. host: the mid-air collision involving a single-engined plane in new york city over the hudson river, not long after we saw that miracle in the hudson with the u.s. airways jet that landed. in a situation like this, what is the role of the ntsb? guest: this if the board goes to investigate the accident and we try to figure out whether the outcome is good or bad and if there are lessons to learn. in a situation like the hudson, where we had a fantastic outcome, there is a lot to learn from the accident. with a mid-air collision, it is a little different. everyone in that accident died. we are looking at that accident to figure out how to prevent something like that from happening again, and also what

we can learn within three weeks of the act -- what we can learn to hit within three weeks of the accident, we issued changes for air safety on the hudson, coordination between atc. the faa has taken very quick action. charts have been changed and the airspace over the hudson is safer now because of those changes. that is exactly why we exist, to make transportation safer. host: the metro accident that killed nine people over the summer -- what was the cause of the accident, and what did you learn? guest: that accident occurred in june and it is still under investigation. the safety board will hold a hearing in february on that accident, and we will determine the causes of the accident and issue the final report. we've already issued two rounds of recommendations, not just to wmata, the local authorities,

but to transit operators nationwide about looking at the system. we found something with the metro accident that led us to believe that there are concerns not just with this system, but systems around the country. these systems are aging and need to be monitored very well and make sure that the signal systems are working properly and that there are no anomalies that create an accident like this again. host: i cannot generalize this next question, but when i ask this call -- when i asked what caused this accident -- specifically, mechanical, weather-related, man-made -- can you break that down? guest: in all modes of transportation there are a lot of factors. we do find similarities across the modes. on our most wanted list of safety improvements, our top 10, we of made recommendations about fatigue. we know that human beings that tired, we are diurnal, and people need about eight hours of sleep a day.

whether you are a pilot or air traffic controller or ship captain or driving a truck on the highways, we know that fatigue has played a role in a number of accidents that we have investigated. we also look at mechanical issues. i think that the good news there is that the vehicles, whether it is an airplane or a bus or a locomotive, have gotten sicker and sicker over the years, and there are fewer and fewer mechanics -- safer and safer over the years, and there are fewer and fewer mechanical errors. a lot of accidents are caused by human failures, and it is important for us to understand why people make mistakes. that is probably the most difficult question of all. you have people who are professionally trained, conscientious, and our focus on the duties, and they do something that is out of character for them. every time they fly, they do something one way, the correct way, and then on one day they don't do it thatç way. and you try to understand, with a tired, preoccupied?

what was going on, what happened that day? host: our guest is served on the ntsb board for more than five years and since the past summer is now the chair of the national transportation safety board, deborah hersman. our phone lines are open and you can send us an e-mail. whether it is a bus, train, airline accident, what are the first questions your team on the ground will begin asking? guest: we are always looking to gather the perishable evidence first. we get the accident site secured and make sure that all of the evidence is maintained, and look for those black boxes, if it is aircraft. there are reporters on the vehicles. we that event data recorders on larger vehicles. we are always looking to capture sq%ei+ we don't want it to be written over, recorded over, and so we want to capture witness interviews, or survivors, or operators, that might have been involved. it is kind of a timely and we

want to capture that right away. drug tests, drug and alcohol testsok -- these happen every single time we go, trying to go back and construct a history leading up to the accident. it is usually not just one thing that causes an accident. it is a chain of things that actually lead to an accident occurring. we have a very robustç system f safety in the united states as far as transportation goes. it is usually not just one thing. it is several things that occur to allow an accident to happen. host: 1 accident this past winter just outside of buffalo, new york, a plane that was traveling from new york city to buffalo. in essence, what we have been hearing is that the pilots may be were ill-prepared to fly the plane. guest: thet( safety board looked at that accident with 50 fatalities, and within three months of the accident, we held a three-day public hearing, and

there were a lot of issues that came out during that hearing with respect to training, with respect to the flight history of the pilot, with respect to their experience in certain conditions. also, the commuting. these pilots were based on the east coast and the captain was commuting from florida and the first officer was commuting from seattle. i think there has been a lot of attention since the public hearing focused on some of these issues. i think we think that that is very important. the captain was older, the first officer was fairly young. we are looking very closely at their experience. we are beginning to wrap up that investigation and we will be holding our board meeting on february 2 to release the probable cause an additional recommendations for the accident. host: our guest spent a number of years on capitol hill, a her master's at george mason university. okour first caller is doug from tennessee. caller: i know you put a lot of

work into security and everything, but people flying and things -- well, it is not really -- i know it is for the best interests of everybody, fliers, but it is really more of an inconvenience. i am sure a lot of people who fly would just say, "man, if that guy has got aç gun, just t him on the plane, because as long asç that means where i am goingç quicker -- -- and maybe you should test the pilots and everything. you don't know what they are doing. just recently i saw on tv -- host: i think he is referring to the flight that overshot minneapolis and as a result -- they apparently were on the blog

receiver -- the wrong receiver and on laptop computers. guest: for the color, i want to let you know that the safety board is looking at accidents and determine the probable cause so that they did not happen again. tsa is a part of the department of common security. with respect to the overflight of minneapolis, the safety board is investigating that incident, and the pilots when they were interviewed indicated they were on their laptops at the time. the safety board is looking at distractions at all modes of transportation. host: patty is joining us from alexandria, virginia. caller: good morning, and thank you for taking my call. this will sound corny, but i want to thank ms. hersman for her service to the american people. every time there is an accident,

we see ntsb there, and i think it is something we should say thank you for. i understand that ntsb is up for reauthorization this year. d.c. special challenges? gues -- to use the special challenges? guest: patty, thank you for your comment. it is an honor to represent all the employees of the safety board. we are going to jamaica and san diego and looking at a collision between two ships. they worked very hard. thank you for that complementary i will pass it back to them. we have -- thank you for that compliment. i will pass it back to them. the senate has passed a bill for reauthorization, and the house is going to be considering that in the coming year. i don't foresee any specific challenges. içó think that our responsibiliy is to be responsive to the congress and the american public that we serve. if there are changes that need to be made to improve the way that we do our jobs, i think we

are happy to receive that guidance. host: the ntsb was created during the johnson administration. how to fit into the larger picture of the department of transportation? guest: that is a great question, because the safety board was part of the department of transportation in 1967 when dot was created and the safety board was created. but congress realize that it was probably not a great idea for the safety board to be housed within the department of transportation when one of our main jobs was to do oversight over the department of transportation, the faa, the federal railroad administration. and so we were made wholly independent, separate from the department of transportation, and we exist as an independent investigatory agency, with a separate budget, and we have a dual report to the executive branch and congress. host: our next call from queens, new york, for deborah hersman.

good morning. caller: i'm actually jamaican, and i'm very disappointed in what happened in jamaica when i heard about that last night. you are from the safety board, is that correct? you are the director? guest: yes, ma'am. caller: why is it that the plane overshot the runway so much? it has been such a common problem becau. i do not think you deserve a thanks or a boost for that . the airlines have to take a strong responsibility for the fatigue of the pilots. there was a recent hearing in congress, and one of the pilots testified that there has been a lot of fatigue with pilots. they don't allow -- they don't get a lot of rest time,

pfirst of all. something should be done to actually help pilots. i think that has been ignored, a large part. what is going to be done about that, and how are you going to help my homeland, my country, jamaica, with the cleanup and helping to reimburse them for what happened from american airlines? i would really like to know what is going to happen with that. host: thanks for the culprit we should point out -- thanks for the call. we should point out, preliminary information from the associated press, but what might happen with jamaica -- the caller is indicating that this is not uncommon for the airport. guest: this if the board investigates accidents and make -- recommendations make --fá the safety board investigates accidents and makes recommendations to prevent them. i agree that the safety board has made recommendations about fatigue for pilots, and that is one of the issues that is on the most wanted list for

transportation safety improvements. we have asked the faa to revise hours of service for pilots. we think is important for them to get adequate rest, and if they are fatigued, to be able to call in and and report off-duty. we think that fatigue is an important issue, not just the pilots, but for air traffic =i-zez . i think there was another question in that it in their regarding the incident. -- questiohn embedded in their regarding the incident. excursions are not uncommon. internationally, worldwide, we think about 30% of incidents internationally in fall excursions -- involve excursions. and this did excursions with contaminated surfaces -- we have investigated excursions with

contaminated services, and other incidents. we look very closely at the incidence of excursions. that is also on our most wanted list of runway safety. we have looked at incidents and accidents and we try to learn from them and make recommendations. still very early with this investigation regarding the incident in jamaica. our investigators are en route right now to assist the jamaican authorities. host: jack is next on the republican line from north carolina. caller: good morning, how are you? guest: good morning. caller: i want to complement you, one of the few agencies in the u.s. government that i believe is universally respected. my question is, the black box and other archaic methods -- one

i just used transport data through the satellite -- why not just use transport data for the satellite and downlink it to earth? we can capture everything there is rather than that ju -- rather than just the last 20 minutes. guest: that is a great question, and there are a lot of people asking questions like that. there is technology that has existed for some time. some manufacturers, a smaller business jets, are actually doing that direct data link, as far as looking at the help of the engines and monitoring the aircraft. -- health of the engines and monitoring the aircraft. this past summer, they were unable to locate the black boxes in the ocean. there have been a lot of additional questions about whether or not we ought to have longer life on the transponders, the beacons that are on those black boxes, that they should last longer than 30 days. as well, people are asking the

same question that you are, is there a way for us to download or have a data link with information about the aircraft? there was information that was received in the air france incident, and so i think there is a lot of people trying to understand if there is a bandwidth, a capability. we have hundreds of thousands of aircraft in the air at any one time around the world. we of got to be able to have the right kind of bandwidth to get that information from them and to catalog it and save it in a way that is protected and that we can get access to it. all of these issues are very important, and i think there are folks at our agency exploring that right now. host: your resume includes a certified child passenger safety technician. what does that mean? guest: a lot of people wonder what that is. i am the mother of three boys,

and five and half years ago, i want to go take a vacation. people make recommendations about appropriate sizes for children, car seats, and i wanted to make sure i understood this issue and i was doing it appropriately. i have advanced degrees, and after i took this course, i had to go home take out all my car seats and reinstall them after becoming a certified technician. one of the challenges for parents is that there are so many different models of car seats. you might have bucket seats or a bench seat in the back. we have made recommendations to make it easier for parents to install these seats, whether it is having a sitting stations, a lot of fire stations and police stations do this for free, or to have better designs of these seats. we have in your system in cars that are about 10 years old, and you can just kind of plug -- connect the hook -- that is what

those hopes are for. but there are still challenges. i want to look at what was the size-corporate strength for the chop, that i understood the science -- size-appropriate strength of the child, that i understood the science of it. host: and the shoulder belt is often dangerous for toddlers. guest: that was from the insurance institute of highway safety, and they're talking about the models of booster seats. the most important thing for parents to know is that children are much safer in a booster seat that without one. seat belts are made for adults. but a chat with a seat belt on, it usually comes across -- when a child puts a seat belt on, it usually comes across the neck, and they can get spinal cord and neck injuries, can become paralyzed that way. you want to make sure they are pushed up a little on the booster seat, and that the belt comes across the bony parts of their body.

host: and to keep it that way. guest: that can be a challenge. as parents, we have to make sure that we model behavior that is good, because if parents buckle up, kids are much more likely to. host: anthony is next, joining us from long island, new york. caller: good morning, mr. scully, good morning, ms. hersman. i want to wish the c-span people behind the scenes a happy holiday season as well. i have an important question, pertaining to those orange boxes, or black boxes. it seems as though when they are found, they are sometimes kept from the public eye. i just wondered, why is it that if it is taxpayer-funded, what you don't have full access to those boxes? more importantly, on 9/11, four plans crash, and not one set of

black boxes has been revealed. you might say, well, the boxes were never found, but that is not true. the boxes were recovered, and yet they are kept from scrutiny from either the media or from the scientific community to expose exactly, precisely what was on those boxes. host: or the boxes down? -- were the boxes down? guest -- >> found? guest: in most of those cases they were found. that was actually a criminal investigation. with respect to what is revealed on the boxes, i want to make it very clear that there are two sets of data. one of them is the cockpit voice recorder, and that is the last recording of the voices and the comments of the pilot. the safety board, when these are recovered -- we make a

transcript of those recordings and we put those on the public docket. those are available for everyone, published with an appendix or report when we release our report. however, we are barred by law, we do not have the statutory authority, to release the audio recordings. so you will not hear the audio recordings of the last conversations or last minutes of those flights, because congress has explicitly protected those and told us that we are not permitted to release them. with respect to the flight data recorder and information on that, that is also on a public docket, and that is downloaded. it could be hours, 32 hours of data, and we do put that on our public docket. i think that the good news for folks is that we are becoming much more transparent. since this summer, we began putting all of our public dockets on our website. you do not have to come to our

reading room anymore or make a request to get that information. you can search it on the web. since this summer, we have been putting forward all of our investigations on the web site, and we are working our way back through historical investigations to put those public dockets on the web site as well. so hopefully that makes it easier for everyone to see that information for themselves. host: will there be a point when the recordings will be released from september 11? guest: that is really up to the criminal authorities that are looking at them. from our perspective, we don't have any authority to release them. we are prohibited in our statute from releasing the data recordings -- the audio recordings. there is criminal proceedings, there may be limited audition pursuant to how the judge is going to proceed. but really, that is not our area, and we stay out of the criminal side of it. host: there is a perception of

commuter planes that they are less safe than the commercial airliner, a larger boeing jet. true or false? guest: i would not say that is true. what is important to understand is that all of the airline operations -- any scheduled service you buy a ticket for, they come under the same rules and regulations. they're expected to have the same level of safety, one level for everyone. there might be more flights taking place. if you have a large carrier, a 747, they are going to make one long international flight, or if you have a 757, they might make a coast-to-coast flight. whereas if you have a regional jet, they will make six flights during that same time, because it will go up and down, up and down. is it different exposure, differed workload, -- it is a different exposure, different

workload, and the weather conditions may be different. we have looked at regional carriers, and we have had a number of incidents involving regional carriers. most of the fatal accidents that the safety board has investigated since the five -- in the five and half years since i've been with the board had involved regional carriers. we want those folks to make sure that they have at the same level of attention. if there is a fatigue policy in place, we want the same one in place for con air. we have made recommendations to make sure that some of those things change. but everyone is supposed to be complying with the same rules and regulations and oversight from the faa. host: michael is joining us from detroit. caller: good morning. mrs. hersman, i don't know how long you been with the safety board -- steve, i think you might remember this -- at the end of

the clintons administration, president clinton asked al gore to come up with recommendations for improvements in airline safety. one of the recommendations he came up with was putting locks on cabin doors. this was pooh-poohed by the airline industry and the republican party, who were in charge then print in hindsight, that would have been a great recommendation to do. i am just wondering, when is the transportations -- what has the transportation safety board done now about blocking cabin doors and improving safety as far as somebody getting into the cabin? guest: i think the focus of that is security rather than safety. i can tell you that there are requirements after 9/11 for cockpit doors to be locked and secured. that is not something that the

safety board is responsible for. that is something that the department of homeland security is focused on. host: i want to go back to something -- a ruling by the transportation department that if you are on the one way for more than three hours, it has to go back to the gate. if you are on a plane or bus or train, and you have concerns, you think you could be headed for potential trouble, what rights do passengers have? what can they do? guest: i think that is a great point in very important. a lot of times, in certain operational environments, when you have a lot of cockpit doors -- we have seen an accident where we have bus drivers who were sleepy, it was actually the passengers who recognized that the bus driver was fatigued, they work try to talk to the driver and were concerned about their own safety. people are taking an interest in their own safety and making sure that the speak up if their concerns, if they're

knowledgeable, and to address it is important. we have made sure that there are 1-800 numbers that people can call if their concern. and a slower speed is not just people who are passengers, -- and whistle-blowers. it is not just people what passengers, but people working inside. host: deborah hersman, thank you for taking our calls on c-span. guest: you are very welcome. host: we will look at microloans and the attacks that have on board will countries. you are watching -- the impact that they have on third world countries. you are watching "washington journal." >> c-span, christmas day, a look at 2010 politics with republican congressman eric cantor and nbc's davidgregory, buzz aldrin on the legacy of apollo 11, a former cia officer on u.s.

strategy on al qaeda in afghanistan, and at 8:00 p.m. eastern, remembering the lives of william f. buckley and senator ted kennedy. all next week, a rare glimpse into america's highest court threw unprecedented on it-the- record conversations with 10 supreme court justices about the court, their work, at the history of the iconic supreme court building. five days of interviews with the supreme court justices, starting next monday at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. >> now available, c-span's book "abraham lincoln -- great american historians on our 16th president," a gift for the history of in your life. from lincoln's early years to his life in the white house, and his relevance today. in hard cover at your favorite bookseller, and now in digital audio to listen to any time available or digital audio downloads are sold.

>> "washington journal" continues. host: as we focus on a party around the world, we want to welcome alex counts, president -- focus on poverty and run the world, we want to welcome alex counts, president and ceo of the grameen bank. we hear about microloans. what are they? guest: they are ways of finding finance for the poor, who cannot find jobs in the marketplace and have to create their own. microloans give them the investment capital to get started some basic activity -- raising livestock, setting a small type of shot, something like that. host: it you are in africa, haiti, how does this work? how'd you get the contact, would you get the money -- where do you get the money, how to pay

back the individual? guest: when i was in bangladesh -- they started a process that has been replicated around the world. they said a local organization staffed with local people that goes into the urban community, the village, and say to someone that if you want to create your own job, we can create finance for you, and we will make it easy for you to repay it come over the course of a year in many cases, and that will give you time to get your capital rotating and grow your business. host: is that the message of your book, "small loans, big dreams"? guest: exactly. i spent time to see what happens when a number of women who get the finance that they need to create their own jobs, and the ripple effect throughout the community, and throughout that time period, a look at what was happening in the urban

environment, chicago, how it was being applied there, and that is what the book covers. host: i want to show the audience some the photographs from the book by our guest, alex counts, the president and ceo of the grameen foundation. if you look to these cases from -- faces from indonesia and bangladesh, quite often the officials in these countries are corrupt. guest: absolutely. the petty corruption that is common in these countries is something that might grow finance has to guard against -- microfinance has to guard against. the measures people go to to keep the systems clean are quite extraordinary we have been working in the terminology area -- technology enables microfinance to guard against corruption and keep it clean.

host: in terms of the mechanics, if you want to start a business, and you get the loans and you pay back with an interest rate? guest: you pay back with the market interest rate. grameen charges 20% interest, more less with a businessman -- what the businessmen is paying. one of the genius things that has been developed is requiring a people to join a support group of other entrepreneurs in their village to agree to support each other if they grow through the process of expanding the business. this creates a pressure and support never to make sure the people invest the money as a -- they promise pressure and support network to make sure that the people invest the money as they promised. host: you can join the conversation either on the phone or online, or send an e-mail and. -- send an e-mail comment. how do you measure the success

of these and endeavors? guest: more than 90 research studies have been done over the last 10 years, and we try to do a study of studies available on our website. is the family growing their asset base, is the income increasing? and women, the focus of most microfinance -- is she playing a larger role in decision making in per community? host: are you seeing that? guest: we see that consistently with the best practices that have emerged over the last 20 years. host: you take, for example -- we talk about is corrupt governments, but if you give it to the government, the chances of it going to the individual is pretty slim. host: the founder of grameen bank in bangladesh, kind of a

mentor to me -- government- financed microfinance almost always fails. what we have always supported, and what the grameen foundation has done, is find local positions -- local organizations and help them to grow. in the policies from the government to thrive, but my for credits provided by the government -- microcredits provided by the government itself is usually unworkable. host: conversely, creating change and the governments of these countries, will it create a more empowered middle class? guest: i think that is what we're seeing.

i have been in bangladesh for years, and what you have been seeing, in the cities and villages, is that there is a more robust middle-class, it is a democracy now -- it was a dictatorship when i went there the first hybrid as a result, you have a more responsive government and -- when i went there the first time. as a result, you have a more responsive government at all levels. host: we have a twitter comment. guest: well, one of the strategic areas be a focus on is information technology, and how it can in power -- empower microfinance. we started an office in seattle, and we feel that with new operating systems for microfinance, an open source

developers around the world, and putting it technology in mobile phones enabling commerce and bringing telecommunications services to the rural poor. host: is collateral required to receive microfinancing? guest: by virtue of the property, they don't have much to offer. the group mechanism replaces that. some people call it social collateral. if you want to maintain your standing in this society, you want to make good on your loans, because others are dependent on how you perform. if there is a default, it normally happens where the people come around the village and they figure out a new payment plan where you can get a replenished loan for your business and pay the old one over a longer period. that has proven to be the best way to get people back on their

feet. people don't default normally because they're not trying to they normally have a health crisis -- because they are not trying. they normally have a health crisis are some sort of crisis. host: our guest is alex counts, and he is also the author of " small loans, big dreams." he is a graduate of cornell university and a fulbright scholar. detroit, good morning. caller: hello? ok, i wanted to ask you a question bec. with all the anti housing in america, how come we cannot but -- but peoplethe m -- the empty housing in america, how come we cannot put people in those homes? guest: what i was working on my book -- when i was working on my

book, the publisher asked me to go and see how this could apply in the united states. i was skeptical at first, actually what i found in south chicago, one of the earliest micro lenders there, was that they could get going in a push cart business, day care, something that could help them earn money. host: gary on the republicans' line from indianapolis. caller: i have a question for you -- i have been a republican -- i am 72 -- basically all my life. my question is, we said all this money overseas, and it seems like the leaders there are corrupt and the money never really gets to the people that need the help. but i guess, too, what really bothers me -- every 10 minutes, someone in the united states dies.

probably before i finish this conversation, someone is on their way to pass on. why can't we help the people in the united states? the other part, if i can get it in real quick, is this health care. there is a lot of people that need help. i am a contractor and i help senior citizens, and i go to homes where they are living in one room to have their sheets up, the gas is off, and they're living in that one room with electricity. i mean, this is the united states of america. we need to help out people. guest: in terms of a foreign aid and businesses in the emerging and developing world, if money goes to the government's, particularly in countries where there is a lot of corruption, it is not going

to get through. whether it is foreign aid or a more business approach that we favor, it is really about working with private sector organizations, for-profit and non-profit, that can meet the financing needs of the poor. we feel that is the best strategy. here at home, there is obviously some tremendous needs, especially in the wake of the financial crisis could we feel that micro finance can be part of the solution to that. that is what we are trying to champion. there are many other positive solutions to the poverty problems we have here. we are in favor of any that are workable. in my home town, new york city, there are several microlenders that are trying to help people get back on their feet. the process itself is the most sustainable approach to dealing with poverty, whether it is here or overseas. host: jeffersonville, indiana, independents' line.

caller: yes, this is kirk. the reason i'm calling is about poverty and overpopulation. i've not seen a lot done concerning over population throughout the world. any conferences or anything. the last one i can remember was in argentina in 1978 under the carter administration. i wonder if you could address that. guest: sure. there are serious population pressures in developing countries, just like there are declining populations in the north. that is why immigration is such a controversial and important issue. microfinance, through empowering women, as the spillover effect of putting them more in the driver's seat and helping them determine their reproductive behavior and health.

one of the studies on our web site says that the adoption of family planning amongst borrowers is double the national average in bangladesh. we see this and other countries as well good people feel more control over their destinies and their lives, -- other countries as well. people feel more control over their destinies and the lives. host: if a woman has chickens that produce eggs, and she can sell them and they make money, the $50 may seem a minimal amount. it is amazing to think about $50 for you in the versus somebody in bangladesh -- you and me versus somebody in bangladesh or ghana. guest: it is amazing to think that the money we might spend going out to dinner might put some on a new life course. it only costs about $50 to capitalize the business in one

of these countries. this is why i tried to write the story in my book, to make that real for people, what it looks like to start a business for $50. in the united states, i was surprised about what you could do with $1,000 or $1,500. one of the people i met when i moved back from bangladesh was the founder of subway restaurants, the ubiquitous sandwich chain, started with a $1,000 loan from a relative. we have a history of businesses in this country starting with a very small amount of capital compared to what many people aren't. and yet, that is often what is needed. host: what is the grameen bank? guest: it is the original prototype for microfinance in bangladesh and around the world. it started in 1976, and it has

spread nationwide. we have tried to take the breakthroughs there with the grameen bank, which only exists in bangladesh, and spread it on a global basis. host: gail is joining us from blacksburg, virginia. caller: good morning. host: turn the volume down. we're getting some feedback. caller: sorry. i think that this is a very good idea. i think it is a brilliant idea to do this. i am curious to know, first of all, how much money do you have out in these loans to these places? i wanted to know how you go about selecting how much for

people on the monthly basis, and what kind of mechanisms to use to repay loans? guest: people repay the loans principally with profits they earned from their businesses, and that usually comes from a year or more of running the business, generating cash flow, repaying debt, and at the end of the year, they receive a larger loan to take the business to the next level. for example, i was a few months ago in indonesia, where the tsunami hit five years ago, and we have loans they're out, nearly $2 million to 16,000 women. this is a typical kind of profile, much smaller than grameen bank in bangladesh, but growing quickly. we have used a loan guarantee program that in an aggregate across the world. almost $200 million in loans -- has guaranteed almost $200

million in loans. host: from -- guest: well, ethical microlenders would never encourage the kind of behavior. what we like to see is the community coming together, and if someone has difficulty repaying the loan, to restructure the business. the poor in a village need to restructure their businesses. that is what we do with the micro finance process. host: our guest is alex counts, and the topic is the issue of microfinance and the attack on third world countries. chelsea -- impact on the third world countries. chelsea is joining us from washington. caller: use a that is often -- a

healthyou -- you say that it is often a health crisis that hurts the ability to repay the loans. i wonder what grameen is doing to address this crisis. >> guest: there is no one solution, but it is the single biggest reason that people happens -- that default happens. what i saw last week in bangladesh, and i was in haiti in may, is that number one, many micro finance organizations are starting alliances with health clinics, right next door to the lending operation, so that people can go and get good care when they needed, affordable care, and do not have to decapitalize the business when they get sick. the other is to have a loan

product that allows people to borrow quickly, again, so that they do not have to decapitalize the business and have difficulty paying. host: photographs from the book as we listen to michael from west virginia. caller: good morning. good morning, mr. counts. is your organization curley private fund -- purely private financed or is there public financing? guest: our organization is almost entirely privately funded in the past week received a few small government grants, but 90% of our financing is private. grameen bank, the original model for microfinance, is about 3% owned by the government of bangladesh. the leadership of the bank keeps trying to buy them out at that

small portion. it is a very innovative structure, almost like a cooperative. host: leslie miller with this tweet -- guest: in a few cases. there are some faith-based microfinance networks and organizations that often times at a christian orientation -- have a christian orientation, trying to bring christianity to microfinance. we particularly see that in the philippines. many of these organizations have a strong faith element to what they're doing. microfinance combines the principles of all the privileges of the world, islam, christianity, judaism.

you find that principles of self-help if you look for them. host: go ahead, don. caller: this capitalism that we try to spread through microloans, whatever -- in america, we have a totally screwed up -- if you look at athletes, entertainers, they have no obligations politically. all they do is make their money. there is no age restrictions, the note certain levels -- no certain levels, gatekeepers -- if you are an athlete, basketball, baseball, you can turn professional an early age. but academics -- we are not

funding our most gifted students, and they have a rigorous bureaucracy to have to go through to be accepted. guest: i think the caller makes a couple of good points. access to education is a key part of economic empowerment. grameen foundation has put together educational scholarship for the children of the clients. in terms of entertainers and various types -- certainly, you cannot generalize, but i would say that last year, i traveled to haiti with the actress yeardley smith, the voice of lisa simpson. she grew up in the washington area, and her father was a

journalist, and she has had a lot of success and entertainment, and wanted to give back, and has gotten very involved in microfinance, with our programs to assist the ultra -poor and with microfinance in haiti. a lot of people in entertainment have given to support self-help. host: does it create other examples -- teaching them how to farm or fish -- does that spread throughout a village or community? guest: the short answer is yes. microfinance -- the studies seem to indicate that it not only empowers the woman who borrows, but it has a spillover effect on other women, who start taking charge of their own lives even if they are not a client.

last week, when i was in bangladesh -- it changes the whole dynamic over a couple of years. who is likely to become a political and economic actor in the future of the committee. host: you get the last word, wisconsin. caller: what i am concerned with and have always been concerned with -- i am a 51-year-old american laborer -- all my life, i have not watched my government said all this money overseas come out -- which is a wonder have -- have watched my government send all this money overseas, which is a wonderful thing. but what i did not understand, you have this young man on today, who is an american -- why can't