16 states are considering a ban for the use of credit reports as part of jobs consideration. we want to see what you think about that. banning credit checks on job applicants, that will be our topic for the first part of the program this morning. if you want to get involved in the conversation --

take a nip of those telephone numbers. we will ship -- take a look at those television -- telephone numbers. job-seekers higher hurdle. this is what they had to write from the associated press --

we will read to you a little bit more from that on the left side of the article, you can see a list of the 16 states that are considering a law that would ban the use of credit checks for job applicants bridge hawaii and washington already have those laws in place. what do you think of that? caller: good morning. i think that having credit checks for jobs is definitely going to hinder us from our progress. i understand that for certain high-level jobs or accounting jobs or jobs were there is some type of finance needed or a

money being involved, that is one level that is okay. if we are going to have credit checks for jobs in this economy, a few weeks ago, "the new york times" said there were going to be about 2 million more foreclosures in this country. we will have 2 million more people whose credit is going to be lowered. how can we possibly have credit checks when people have already lost their house, they have lost credit because of no fault of their own. who is going to be able to get a job? in this particular time, we do not need to have credit checks for jobs. we need to do everything that we possibly can to spur new jobs to get people back into work. that is why would like to say.

host: our next call comes from washington d.c. caller: in my personal opinion, i do not believe that we should have credit checks. in some people's predicament, it is like a snowball effect. host: what kind of business do you have? caller: we provide services. i do not think it is right. i do not understand how it determines if that you can pay your bills on time, you can come to work, work hard, get a good day's worth of work and taipei. i have to pay you so that you can pay your bills on time. i do not understand how a credit check determines how you're going to work at work.

host: the story that we are rest -- referencing talks about -- is from the philadelphia inquirer. over 4.5 months, he was turned down for eight positions which he authorized the employer to conduct a credit check. if your credit is bad, you will steal from me. sarah in atlanta, you are applying for a job. what do you think about this? caller: you need to check into the matter and see what caused the credit to be that way. past employees, companies, they have caused a lot of problems. i do not think that is fair for people that have bought a house and paid it off and do everything i needed to do, raised my kids and now i am looking at how we are going to

fix the problems they reported on my credit report. i am a former teacher and a presence substitute teacher, that is the income that i am using. i cannot use the income from the company. i have to fix that. it is not like the consumer is looking at -- when this happens, what happens? host: under federal law, prospective employers must get written permission from applicants to run a credit check on them. consumer advocates say that most job applicants do not feel they are in a position to say no to such request. in your situation, have your prospective employers ask you for permission to run at your credit check? caller: they do. i have to give them a couple of letters from the justice department as well as from the

federal financial fraud area. i think -- i think the people for giving me these letters, but most of the fraud that took place was co-workers at my own shop. host: james is an employer. caller: i think it is -- just because of something that happened over credit. it is not helping move the economy forward. host: what kind of business do you have? it sounds like you have not considered using a credit check on future employees. caller: when the chain opened up, they were asking for permission to check credit reports and character reports

with your neighbors. thost: references? caller: preferences and character checks. -- references and character checks. most of the practices i have seen -- we call the people back and recall the neighbors and it does not help. host: let's move on to pittsburgh, pennsylvania. caller: good morning. i just wanted to know how this got started. i do not understand why or how it was connected that if your credit is bad, how that is going to affect your work and your ability to get out of debt. it is so counterproductive.

i did not understand how it got started. host: this is a story that is based on what is happening with a guy named backer in wisconsin and wisconsin state rep drafted a bill shortly after hearing from him, and autumn mechanic, who struggled to find work. his financial problems started with medical bills that piled up 1 cent -- when the sun began having seizures as a toddler. he ran up $25,000 in medical debt. the article goes on to say that over four months, he was turned down for a least 8 positions for which he had authorized the employer to conduct a credit check. one potential employer told him, if your credit is bad, you'll still with -- you will still from me. what do you think about that? caller: i cannot disagree more.

that is absolutely ridiculous. we are trying to get out of a situation of debt. how do these employers think that an employee can get out of debt if you cannot give them the opportunity to work and pay it off? host: thank you for your call. next up is michigan. matthew is a job applicant. caller: i was just calling to say -- i am going through a rough patch. i am 40 years old. i have been in the job force for quite some time and i made some bad decisions at a young age. my credit release stocks. -- really sucks. what did you do in my position?

my credit is really terrible. how can i get a job in michigan -- the economy is really terrible. i am unemployed. my father is unemployed. my entire family is struggling to even survive. i do not believe that credit checks are viable as far as how people will work. host: in the jobs that you have applied for, has the prospective employer ask permission to run your credit? caller: one of them has. host: did you feel like you're in a position to say yes or no or did you feel like you had to just go along with it? caller: i have no choice. you want the job and you need the job and so you have to go with what it takes to get the job. if that's what it takes, that is unfair. i work harder than just about

anyone else and my credit should not be a part of that. host: thank you very much for your call. more from the article. it says most of the bills being proposed the shares resemble laws in hawaii and washington not prevent employers from using credit reports when hiring for most positions. the laws contained exceptions in cases where such information could be relevant to the job. if a person is applying to work in a bank or in an accounts payable office. on a national level, a tennessee rep introduced a similar bill last summer in congress where it is still bottled up in committee. back to the phones. athens, ga., john is an employer. caller: i do think that they should be allowed to. i have two different companies, a very distinct companies, one is a wholesale business and the

other one is a software development business. we hire both low-level warehouse workers and then we hire trained computer scientist. host: do asked to run the credits on both of those folks? caller: we do not on either. not everybody needs to. but they should be allowed to. we have had situations where we have had to fire a number of people in our warehouse recently for stealing. this is something that we have to address and figure out how to do, maybe a credit check will work. maybe it will not. host: do you think you would have hired those people in the first place if you had an opportunity to run their credit? caller: i do not know. the real issue is twofold. first of all, when you get in that situation and you have had this problem with that, it makes you more nervous about hiring the next person. am i making a mistake?

it is a tool that some people may use to try to help them make a better decision. to try and say, we are going to take this tool out of your tool box is one problem with it. the other problem with this that i see is that what you are basically saying is that we are going to take this to let of your tool box, but if you suffer the loss, you suffer the loss. on my software side of things, we have some customers who are banking customers and we have not used credit checks up till now. we have some real sensitive customers where we may use that in the future. i just don't know. host: thank you for your call. we have this twitter message --

back to the funds. nancy is an employee in atlanta. what do you think about prospective employers using credit checks? caller: it is one-sided because the applicants have no power at all. they have no ability to defend themselves. once you run a credit check from someone, that lowers their credit automatically. if a person is doing a lot of applying all over, every time there is a credit check, their credit potentially goes down. all the tools that this person just mentioned are in the toolbox of the employer. the employers hold all the power and all of the strings.

the people are already at a disadvantage if they have been unemployed for a while. naturally, their credit is going to go bad because their inability to have in common that would be able to make the payments. it is very -- it sounds like a pretty rigorous system and it is blatantly unfair -- lead to -- rigged system. caller: i have returned from combat in iraq. for a while there, i live in my vehicle. trying to find a job in michigan was very hard. i had a job and applied and got hired and was doing a test and the manager came in and said you have to stop doing this test because we cannot hire you. there had manager -- the there

had manager said that you are going to steal from us. host: did they ask permission to run a credit check on you? caller: yes, they did. why would they think i would steal from them? post the what kind of job was it? caller: at a gas station. host: have you been able to find work since then? caller: no. host: good luck in your job search. the article in the philadelphia inquirer goes on to say that the government affairs director said that someone who could not pay his bills on time might not be more likely to still, but might like -- not likely have the sense of responsibility to handle a job of processing

payroll checks. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. host: do you use credit checks on potential employees? caller: we have in a couple of instances. we do not typically. host: what is the difference? caller: it depends on if they are going to account payable or accounts receivable. most of our employees are longer-term. we do not have to do the credit checks on less skilled employees. host: what kind of business do you round? caller: we personalize on different products. i agree with the credit check. it is sad. the article that you have in front of you. i think it is very shortsighted.

you should not use to us that as a decision making tool. it is one other thing that they can look at it -- look at. if an employer chooses to decide that an employee is going to steal simply because they have bad credit, that is pretty sad. host: thank you for your call. headlines this morning on the front page of the philadelphia inquirer, their lead story, rays of hope in jobs report. jobless rate held at 9.7% with losses of 36,000 lower-than- expected. also on the front page of the financial times this morning, jobless data boost hope for recovery. unemployment rates hold steady at 9 1/7%, better than expected figures. it says here that the data could ease pressure on president obama

as he makes a final push to secure congress' approval for health care legislation. although mr. obama had said job creation was his priority the sure, he is expected to spend a good portion of this month trying to persuade lawmakers to vote in favor of the contentious white house health-care package. republicans did not soften their criticism in light of the employment data. the economy is not creating the jobs that american families desperately need. back to the phones and our discussion about banning credit checks in a job applications. georgia on our line for employees. caller: how are you? i agree to credit checks to a point depending on the type of job that you are applying for. for example, working in a bank.

however, i look at my situation and my husband and we have had excellent credit pretty much all of our lives. due to the economy and businesses shutting down here in georgia, a lot of people have lost their jobs or got laid off or got their hours cut. we have actually -- that happened to us. we wound up filing for bankruptcy because of it. i think about our situation and how many other millions of americans out there are going through the exact same thing that my husband and i just went through. people that have worked hard all their lives and have always had good credit and due to the economy, you have a setback. we have always paid bills on time. we have always worked hard, live the american dream. then we get out and start

looking for jobs and they start doing credit checks, they're going to base our credit history now on what the type of people we are? host: on the front page of the miami herald this morning, to hospitals, 4500 jobs on the hit list. the chief of the struggling jackson held system announced plans to close the north and south branches and lay off thousands of workers. next up is indiana, an applicant for a job. caller: i do not agree with doing a credit check. first off, 90% of my bad credit was caused by employers. as soon as i was in a financial position, stable enough to finance something, i would get laid off. it happened several times.

also, they do a criminal background check. why would my credit show them that i am a criminal if my criminal background check does not? host: thank you very much for your call. in the wall street journal this morning, energy secretary opposes the suspending stimulus grant. energy secretary steven chu said friday that an effort by democratic lawmakers to block federal stimulus grants for energy projects that use of foreign-made parts where could cost u.s. jobs. there are unintended consequences by just coming out and saying by american bridge -- buy american. i do not want a moratorium. you do not want to stop these projects if two-thirds of the hardware is american and one- third is foreign.

work with people in congress to explain the subtleties of the global wind energy market. we want to let you know a programming note on news makers this week. our guest is the health insurance industry key lobbyist in washington. she is the president and cc -- ceo of america's insurance plans. >> the men and women of our community that are providing health insurance services to over 2 million americans every day have a long track record with a great deal of affirmation on the part of working families and individuals and their communities that have contributed a lot. they've worked very hard. this is eight -- this is an issue of serious concern to people. we have been in front of those issues sounding the alarm on the

issue of cost containment and the fact that the legislation does not do enough on cost. in fact, it fails to hit the mark of cost containment. that has been our concern since the fall. we have been very actively communicating it. to hear the conversation now turn only to our industry as if this is the only place we're going to see any reform, it just defies credulity. there are significant issues with respect to our health care system. we have wide variation practice patterns. we have unit cost that are soaring. we're spending far more than any other country. those are serious issues. those are just several of the serious issues we need to confront. ago want to obesity, chronic illness, -- we could go on to obesity, chronic illness. we strongly support insurance

reform. host: you can see the entire interview on a new mate -- newsmakers tomorrow at 10:00 at 6:00 on c-span. it is also available online. back to the telephones and our discussion regarding banning credit checks for job applicants. our next call comes from charlotte, va. -- charlottesville, virginia. caller: that would be me. my name is cheryl. i live in the charlottesville area of. i am an employer because i wanted everybody to realize that each and everyone are an employer. we are all taxpayers, we actually employ air legislative branch and all of our government employees. tthat is my perspective on it.

in reality, i am a teacher. i am one of the thousands of teachers all across america. host: when you applied for that teaching job, did they ask if they could run your credit check? caller: i do not believe so. in the past, when i worked in the banking industry, i did have a credit check. host: corrigan, -- oregon on our line for employees. caller: i am a plumber and a member of a labor union. for the past -- since the 1970's, i have been working for the plumbers and i was active

duty air force in the 1970's and 1980's under ronald reagan. i find this just kind of shocking that an employer would pull a credit score when i come out of a dispatch poll and with me, i have never had a credit card. i do not have any real bills. in all my days, it has never been the question, and i the guy? when i dispatched to the shop, does the employer even have the ability to pay the gas bill for the van? i have gone to wholesale houses to the the material for a job and they say, we cannot sell you the material because the employer has not paid the bill. host: in some cases, the tables ought to be turned and the business that you're working for, you should be able to check out their credit. caller: i work for a big company now that has 207 trucks running in three states.

i know that when i go to the wholesale house to buy materials, the bill is good. i do not have to make excuses for some employers that probably should not be an employer because he is not up front and he is not honest. he is probably one or two shades from going behind bars. host: this is from the associated press. gordon brown is visiting his nations troops in afghanistan and promising them 200 new patrol vehicles that can resist roadside bombs more effectively. he made an unannounced trip saturday to camp bastion. he is also in the news with

comet he made on the iraq war. this is out of the baltimore sun. gordon brown insisted friday that the decision to invade iraq was justified, but told the major inquiry into the war that the u.s. dismissed warnings of chaos and violence what saddam hussein was toppled. back to the telephones and our discussion regarding the use of credit checks by prospective employers. california, lee is an applicant. iphone -- caller:. mainly my credit. i want to inform your public

about hal lot of this came to be. most of this stuff came from reporting agencies. in the '70s and 1980's, they flooded the market with credit cards. loans were sent through the mail to people. the credit cards without being aspirate in the 1990's, they told you to start to pure up your credit. i had to come up with some new ideas. we had credit scores. in 2000, the people that are not old enough to remember this stuff, they're caught in a catch-22. the majority of this stuff came from experion in places like that. -- and places like that. they have always had the ability to do a credit check, they just never had in the forefront. host: the problems that you are

having right now, is it because of credit card use? are there other factors involved? caller: other factors involved besides normal bills and a job loss and that kind of thing. they managed to sell these programs because they have the banks and lawyers coming up with information. when people started to clear up their credit, it started to get lower credit cards and they had to come up with some means to make up that money. just like now. this is -- congress allow them to do it. host: thank you very much. we will take a break from the calls for just a second to talk with josh gerstein. he is reporting in the " politico" this morning.

where are we in this process this morning? guest: as i understand it, the ball is still in the white house court. this is where the white house put it after they decided to dump attorney general plan of upholding this trial. host: who are some of the people that are saying that maybe it is time to reevaluate where these trials are held? why didn't the president take their counsel before he made the decision and before it was announced by eric holder? guest: it is unclear whether the

white house really had a robust debate on this issue in the first instance. they preferred to have the issue traded as a standard kind of prosecution decision. it is that the justice department. in any normal criminal case, the white house would not be involved in the decisions that the justice department made about where to send the case. in a normal critical -- criminal case, you would not even consider sending them to the military. there was a precedent that the white house said to have the justice department in consultation with the defense department and make these decisions in the first instance. it has been reported that some advisers within the white house, including the white house chief of staff, have thought from the outset that doing this sort of trial and a military tribunals setting was a better idea then try to press forward with a

criminal proceeding. essentially, attorney general was left to his own devices on the first session -- first decision. it seemed to have gone over ok, but it eroded after it was announced in november. it became clear that it was politically untenable to go forward in manhattan. host: in this morning's new york times, he writes that officials at the white house justice department and pentagon said friday that mr. obama had not made any decisions and that no recommendation had been sent to him. they said the state of play over the administration's deliberations about the trial was unchanged from where it stood for weeks. it does sound like there is a lot of back and forth going on between the justice apartment, the white house, and the pentagon. guest: what was new was that the washington post had come out and

friday's paper and said that essentially the discussions among the president's advisers were leaning strongly in the direction of moving this trial into the military system. it is not entirely clear. it was not reported weeks ago that this was the leading option. it was just reported that this was back on the table. we did not have a parade of officials come out yesterday's that said that the post report was wrong. the remaining question is whether there is some possibility that the president might step in and say that he disagrees with what his advisers are saying and still thinks they should stay in the criminal court. yesterday, you had a variety of civil liberties groups and other rule of law organizations coming forward to say that they

wanted the president to do just that and insist that this would stay in the criminal-justice system. i quoted number of books in my story. host: rather than keeping the nation and the city in suspense, barack obama must quickly pull the plug on what was a terrible idea from the start. let it be military tribunals for those who commit acts of force against america. is there any indication coming out of the white house as to how a sinnett -- how soon a definitive decision is going to be made as to where these alleged conspirators will be tried? guest: i know there are a number of people in the white house who are eager to get this issue off the table. no matter how it is resolved, it is not going to be a net plus for the obama administration at this point. there is really no reason they want to see it debated in the papers. they need to resolve it right

away or defer it for a few weeks in the hopes that the issue will simmer down for a while. when the president makes a final decision, it will come back up again. they have decided to leave it for a few weeks, it seems. i have to wonder whether this is the kind of issue that they might want to bury what he is abroad. the first announcement came as the president was departing on a trip for overseas. host: do you think that they would make this decision before the president leaves in order to take that down and smooth things over with some of the countries that he is going to visit? guest: it will be interesting. one of the countries he is going to visit is indonesia. that is a large muslim country. it has largely muslim areas. the president grew up for several years.

it might be the case that he would not want to have this decision a major reversal and terrorism policy and something that might upset folks around the world to a been concerned about previous u.s. policies on this kind of issue. it is possible that they might try to put that issue off until this trip to indonesia. i do not think the options here have been developed to the point where they are ready to go to the president. the white house is trying to turn the temperature down a little bit on this. host: we're talking with josh gerstein, white house reporter for "politico." return to military tribunals it came out early this morning. actually, early yesterday morning. you can read that as well as the other things that he has written on their website. thank you for being on the program. back to the telephones and our

discussion on the ban of credit checks for job applicants. a virginia is our next caller. cal then, an employer. caller: i feel that the credit checks should not be used and everything because i hire a lot of felons straight out of the present -- prison and i give these people a second chance in a coming back into the job market. i feel like a credit check would not allow these people a second chance at coming back and giving it readjusted to the work force. i feel that it is a hindrance on overall economy and production. host: what kind of work to have these guys doing? caller: i run a handyman service and i am in people's homes. i am around a valuable items and

personal items that belonged to homeowners. over the six years i have been running this company, i have not had one incident. i have had to terminate employees, but -- for not showing up on time for work. other than that, i have had no effect at all. -- no theft at all. host: our next call comes from louisiana. caller: i was calling to let you know that i live in oklahoma and i work for indian gaming. if it came down to -- i have worked in indian gaming for 10 years. if it came down to credit checks, i would have lost my job because i have chronic health issues and i have medical bills more than anyone could handle.

if it came down to that, i would not be able to afford anything. i think that if they were to start doing that, they would lose a lot of good people. honest, hard-working people. due to some unfortunate circumstance, they have not been able to pay their bills. with the economy like it is. host: thank you for your call. in other twitter message -- back to the telephones. ohio, john, on our line for employers. caller: i am amazed really. having bad credit does not necessarily mean he is a crook.

i have been an employer several different times. i own several semi trucks. it does not mean he's going to steal from somebody. host: have you ever used credit checks in employing -- employing the people that work for you? what kind of work you have them doing? caller: driving semi trucks. host: ok. caller: a lot of these people have trouble paying their child support. that does not mean that they are going to steal from somebody. host: thank you for your call. we're going to take a short break. when we come back, we will be talking with eric pianin. he is with the fiscal times. it is a new online resource and it deals with the fiscal issues and how it ties with the economy. eric pianin will be our guest to

talk about that in just a few minutes. >> the next journalism must be one open to blogs and to e-mails that are hammering like a fist on the door to be let into the conversation to add new information, to raise new questions, to suggest new context. >> winners of this year's national press foundation award talk about the rule of journalism in a changing society. tonight at 8:00 on c-span. >> we are in the business of trying to help our students predominantly young women and some of the older women and men understand that you should focus on achievement in your own life

and not be looking to grab headlines. sunday, meet the woman credited with turning around eternity washington university. present for over 20 years. patricia mcguire on c-span q&a. >> as "washington post international correspondents, t.r. reid has traveled the world. his books are not only about his travels, but about his global views on contemporary issues, including -- including the united states of europe. join our 3 our conversation with t.r. reid and your telephone calls. >> "washington journal" continues. host: eric pianin is the editor of fiscal times. tell us about this online publication and why you thought it was needed at this time. guest: we just launched it

several weeks ago. we had our formal launched this week. it is a digital news service that is focusing on issues that are most important to americans right now. that includes the economy, unemployment, budget policy on capitol hill, house lawmakers are wrestling with these big economic issues and what to do about the recession purses how to deal -- reverses -- versus how to deal with spending cost. we're also interested in international economics. we're following closely what is going on in europe and the euro zone as increase struggles with its bankruptcy -- as greece struggles with its debt problems. we have consumer related stories for average americans who are trying to navigate this crazy

economy, trying to figure out what to do with their investments. we're hoping to provide a pretty broad array of stories in areas that we think are sweet spot right now. that is currently getting a lot of attention on capitol hill. host: how was the coverage of these type of issues be different in the fiscal times than one -- been won -- than what one might read in the "washington journal or papers like that? guest: we are hoping to provide more coverage in key areas. we want to follow the president's budget to the process on capitol hill. we are trying to provide more in-depth looks at important areas, including unemployment. we had a big story on that this week. we are taking a close look at

the treasury department handling of tarp. we're doing a number of stories, including one that is very exciting. we published the first of several installments this week. we are looking at the end of life issue, the human toll and the budgetary implications of americans' view that's you should be spending money at all cost to preserve and sustain life. this is the issue that is never really debated on capitol hill during the health care reform debate last summer because it involved a fear of death panels and the controversy that was stirred up during the august town meetings throughout the country.

we are presenting this in the debate that was never held and now we are holding it for our readers on the fiscal times web site. host: there is also another debate that is going on over the last day or so. it has to do with this story in the near times." -- in "the new york times." it talks about the february unemployment figure being at 9.7%. still 36,000 jobs were lost and unease persists on the pace of recovery. what kind of coverage my back get in the fiscal times and what are your thoughts on the unemployment numbers and whether or not it is a signal that we may have seen the last of the recession? guest: you touched on some very important,. figures and statistics. some 15 million americans remain officially unemployed and more

than four out of 10 have been jobless for longer than six months. there's a lot of despair and frustration among americans as their reeling from this recession. everybody knows the story of a neighbor or a friend or a former colleague who has been laid off or is struggling to find another job. this is a very dramatic story. i think perhaps the most dramatic aspect of all of this is the number of americans that have sort of given up looking for work or have settled for part-time employment. over 16% of americans fall into that category. christina roemer pointed to that figure yesterday in assessing the ups and downs of these figures.

i hasten to add that a lot of economists see these numbers as encouraging signs. one thing to keep in mind is that while 36,000 non-farm jobs were lost last month, that is far less than the 90,000 that many economists were expecting. when you compare what was going on last month to losses of 650,000 jobs a year ago, you see some real progress, some signs of hope. some economists think that it could have been a lot worse, especially after the terrible snowfalls that we had. it is possible that we are just sort of going around a corner right now. i hasten to add that to there is

still a lot of misery out there. if you look at trends over the past 40 years, following any major recession, there is a sustained period of unemployment so we could be looking at unemployment figures in this range for quite some time. host: we're talking with eric pianin. we will be talking about the latest jobless figures, at jobs bills on the hill, other aspects of the economy. if you want to get involved in the conversation, give us a call. our first call comes from danielle honor line for democrats in tennessee.

caller: good morning. i am calling because i have several questions related to the previous topic on credit checks. since the gentleman is on, i want to ask him a question about any studies that have been done on the numbers of jobs employers terminated due to credit checks. what is the fiscal times opinion on employers using credit checks in this day and time of fiscal responsibility or promoting fiscal responsibility? guest: we do not have a position on that issue. to be honest, we have been operating for just a couple of weeks. we have not really explored that issue. we do think that there is some interesting activity going on on

capitol hill with the whole area of consumer protection and regulation. it is part of the larger debate on banking reform and financial restructuring. the administration has been very adamant about pushing for creation of some consumer regulatory affairs office that would regulate banks and their dealings with consumers on credit cards and other credit issues. i am sure that is a concern of a lot of policy-makers as they're moving forward. host: michigan on our line for republicans. caller: there are jobs out there for people to get. i do not understand why -- i can

understand if people go out and fill applications for jobs. maybe they are not going in the right direction it to get a job. i know there is an agency that will help you go out and get a job. they are not -- it may be the way they are looking for jobs. there are all types of opportunities out there to get jobs. you are either going to relocate and get a job or you are going to stay where you are to get a job. that is the bottom line. there are all types of ways to get jobs. maybe it is the way these people are getting jobs. guest: i think the caller makes some good points. in a very tight labor market, people have to be very aggressive in their approaches to networking and looking for work. on the other hand, a lot of

companies, manufacturers, retailers, coming off of one of the worst recessions since the great depression. they have really pulled back and have rethought their whole work structure and a lot of companies have concluded that they can get by with a much smaller staff. the can put more and more pressure on the remaining employees. as the economy bottoms out or begins to improve over the coming months, i think a lot of employers will think very hard about how they will expand their work force again and bring on new people when they seek that they can get a lot done with a downsized staff. having said that, it seems to me that as the economy improves,

as companies look overseas for opportunities for exporting and all of that, there'll be a pent- up demand for bringing on workers. at some point, the situation is going to turn around and it will -- there will be far more jobs available. manufacturers, businessmen in general are being very, very cautious at this point about expanding their work forces. host: our guest is eric pianin, the washington editor for fiscal times. one of the features is capital exchange. tell us what that is. you have a writing here called "a different take on the deficit." guest: it is a new opinion blog that we just launched. it reflects the views of a wide array of policy experts, budget

experts in washington primarily. it is occurring at an alarming rate. i notice in the congressional budget office had a new report that they put out yesterday which shows that president obama's budget would add more than $9.70 trillion to the national debt over the next decade.

a lot of that has to do with some of the tax breaks that he has promised for the middle class. also, spending to deal with the recession. there's all kinds of arguments and points of view on the seriousness of the deficit and the debt. there are some deficit hawks and fiscal conservatives on the hill and both parties who have reached a point where they are saying they have gone too far, they have -- is spinning out of control. we've got to do something about that. the presence of the united states shares in that concern and he just recently created an 18-member commission that will be studying spending patterns and deficit entitlements and coming up with recommendations that congress will be voting on

by the end of the year. to look at ways to slow the rate of growth of spending, to bring the dead down. that is -- the debt down. there are a lot of people on the left who are saying, wait a minute. . .

i want to make a comment about the credit thing later. i'm just thinking that a lot of this talk and a lot of this jobless recovery, it's kind of like -- it's being caused. it seems to be that the big corporations and republicans, the big business have all got a hand in trying to keep negativity gone. the media, too, it's always the negative side. i'm old enough to remember bad down turns to reagan -- i'm not old enough to remember the great depression, but i do remember a good part of these resessions that went bad. and there was never this negativity. now they make everybody afraid of everything. nothing can go right. the people who got the first pop is holding it. the little business guy and homeowner hardly get a dime. there's plenty money, but it's still up at the head where it

always was. and the second point, we have to take the credit things, it's just another message of discrimination of keeping people in control. instead of being able to discriminate by race and sex, they say, oh, you have bad credit. well, how many people do you know don't have bad credit? because they can't get any jobs anywhere. these people have the whole nation under control. it's another tip of making the small guy a perpetual slave. host: leave it there, ldelia. guest: well, you know, i think the caller makes a good point. there's sort of a feeding frenzy, media attention with this story, but you sort of have to put it in context of what's happened in the last year and a half. we went through an

extraordinary financial roller coaster. the u.s. economy was sort of teetering on a cliff for a while. a lot of financial institutions, banks, were on the verge of bankruptcy. the government had to intervene in extraordinary ways to prop up wall street and deal with the crisis and try to restore public confidence. and public confidence and business confidence in the economy were badly shaken. so i think that what we're seeing is the residual of all of this crisis in the last year and a half. and congress is spend ago loft time trying to figure out what happened, how poorly the fed and the treasury department,

tim geithner and ben bernanke bernanke at the fed dealt with this crisis, what needs to be done to restore public confidence in the financial institutions, what needs to be done to rein in the banks and financial houses, which engaged in irresponsible and reckless fiscal policies. and so, you know, if the public, the business community is cautious and nervous about all this, well, it's understandable, and i think that there's been this whole populist backlash, if you will, in which a lot of longstanding, you know, well trusted institutions, including the federal reserve, including the treasury, are now under a microscope, and people are questioning whether they have the tools and the ability to

manage the economy and deal with the next crisis down the road. and so all of this tends to make business investors fall back a little. they're very cautious about how they're going to be spending their money, how soon they're going to be expanding. guest: based on the headlines in a couple of the papers in the "financial times," jobless data boosts hopes for recovery, and in the "philadelphia inquirer," raise up hope in jobs report. what kind of investments do you see coming out of this? guest: well, i think that if you look at the at the numbers where the worst unemployment situation exists, a lot of it is in construction, schools, retail, and the publishing world, and this is something that you and i are probably very sensitive to, because

we've seen what's gone on, even online in the last year or so, and a lot of people are out of work, looking for work. so these seem to be the areas of opportunity, i think, once the economy begins to turn. you bring the point up about the publishing and the hits that some newspapers have been taking, and some might question whether this is the right time to be launching an online endeavor such as the "fiscal times." guest: well, you know, startups are high risk, there's no question about that, but a lot of it has to do with timing and the subject area that you're targeting. we think that you couldn't have picked a better time to launch the "fiscal times" than earlier this year when the economy, the budget, deficit politics, all of these things are front and

center in the national debate, so we want to be part of that debate. host: we're talking about all sorts of economic issues with eric pianin, wash for editor of the "fiscal times." he has also served as a correspondent for kaiser health news, their website, and that be a reporter and editor with, among others, "the washington post," the washington bureau of the mimbs tribune, the requests louisville times," and "the minneapolis star." guest: wousm you're going way back. host: absolutely. graduate of american state university and has a graduate school degree from columbia university school of journalism. back to the phones. wilmington, north carolina, dwight on our lien for independents. good morning. caller: good morning, rob and eric. gentlemen, you may have read a critical analysis of the world bank, going back to i believe the early 1980's. it was very thick reading. but the meandering of the world

bank and international monetary fund back then i think were a bit different, with a bit different results than what they are now. i do follow this, especially for those of white house don't have a whole lot of education, i follow it, and i believe i comprehend what is going on. we uselessed to refer to it as the builder, but i'm not a con spir cyst, and i am a one-worlder, but not through the corporate and military industrial complex way. let me fill another topic out here. the 1% gain in job growth, that center rate and left side, center right and left side academics predict over the next five years, 1% per year, very slow, i think as that settles in and people really realizes that you're more or less forward people, that's going to really be hard to achieve. and i'm wrneding, one of the things i wonder is if you believe that they will eventually go for what would be more of a republican quick fix

to do the tax cuts and the same old thing that they did in 1980 , and then the third thing i'll throw out there, if you dire comment on any of these, would be when they started this increase in productivity among americans and we began to study the japanese as far as their scommabts how they do things to try to get more productivity in the united states, they should have been able to understand some of the folks coming up and some of the ones that had been in the workforce weren't really going to drink that cool aide, and they were going to begin to work less and kind of hang on the side. them weren't going to buy into a whole new round of put your nose to the grindstone. so i don't know if you care to comment on any of those things, but i know you're very well rounded in this, and i'd be interested in hearing from you on any of it. >> well, a couple of points. janet yellen, the president of the san francisco federal reserve, gave a speech recently in which she gave a fairly

pessimistic view of economic recovery and joblessness for, you know, the coming years, and she said that it's going to be a very painful period as we try to move back into a more balanced economic jobs situation. and i think that there's a lot of concern that, you know, the economy, after sort of averting a catastrophe, destabilizing, you know, it basically plateaued. you know, it's not really going up, it's not really going down, sometimes it's moving sideways. it the stock market could be a symbol of that, a few gains, which you lose the following day. it's all sort of like right here. the question is when is it

really going to take off? and, you know, some pessimists are fearful of what they call a double dip recession, where we may be heading for another setback, and more in joblessness. i think everybody agrees that the unemployment rate is going to hover somewhere around 10% or maybe just below that for some months, if not the next year or so. and so i think people have to be fairly realistic about the prospects. it doesn't look like we're going to have a huge rebound. but that also gets into the question of what can the administration do? what can congress do? again, in an era of declining resources, it's not like we have unlimited money to spend, although sometimes it seems that way given the magnitude of some of the bills that came out, including the $787 billion

in stimulus spending that the obama administration got through congress the last year, which is very controversial and people are wondering whether it actually made a big difference in how many, you know, did it create two million jobs? who knows? but right now congress is dealing with a bunch of different measures, some short term, some longer term, some sort of on the cheap, some more expensive, that would deal with jobs, encouraging people to hire and retain. host: the house on thursday passed a $15 billion measure that would give tax breaks for companies hiring new employees. the senate may have action in the coming weeks on a one-year extension of unemployment benefits. sort of go through, if you can, some of the things that congress is doing, and if you feel that this is enough to jump-start the economy and get more people back working.

guest: i think you've got to go back to the president's state of the union address, in which he pift from healthcare reform and focused more on the economy, and the administration was getting a lot of criticism that it was so obsessed with flatting major healthcare reform that it was overlooking the more immediate need, which is dealing with americans, unemployment and all the suffering that's going on. so he, in a speech, made a bunch of proposals for essentially tax credits and incentives targeted to small businesses. and a lot of people felt that this is the area where we could get the most bang for our buck, where we could get some real growth. and i think that we're seeing several steps by congress to deal with it.

of course, you know, last week we had the spectacle of senator jim bunning of kentucky holding up action on a short-term, 30-day extension of unemployment insurance, and fixing medicare, reimbursements for doctors, and providing some funds for some transportation projects that could create jobs. so, you know, that sort of paralyzed congress for four or five days. and then once that problem was disposed of, they started moving on a $15 billion package, which, again, is important, and useful but of limited impact. there's this larger package that the senate is going to be dealing with next week, $150 billion for job measures, including a one-year extension of unemployment insurance, which is very important for

america. an extension of the cobra program, which provides emergency healthcare coverage for people who have lost their jobs. but extension of a number of expiring tax provisions that republicans and conserve activities think are very important and that could help stimulate jobs as well. host: back to the phones. jim, bay city, michigan, on our line for republicans. thanks for waiting, james. caller: good morning, gentlemen. guest: good morning. caller: you know, in the first place, president obama doesn't have an ounce of experience in business. he don't know nothing about it, period. and some of the jobs he's given out is all government jobs, and we're paying for that. so i don't understand how this man can judge.

how can the government spend themselves into prosperity? please explain that. thank you. host: go ahead. guest: well, you know, the president gets, in some ways, relatively high marks for coming in in the middle of or the beginning of a huge economic crisis, a worldwide recession, a situation where where banks are on the verge of going out of business, stock market was plummeting, there was panic in the streets, and people were being thrown out of work, so yes, he doesn't have a strong business background, that's true. he's more of an academic and a lawyer, but i think a lot of people will give him credit for stepping in and stepping up to

the plate and helping to stabilize a horrible situation and restoring some public confidence. but now, again, we're back to this situation where we're sort of stuck at this level. and things have stabilized, but they don't seem to be getting better, and there's all this speculation, fear, that things could back slide or could be worse. so, you know, everyone's entitled to their opinion, but i think that on the really important issue of what, you know, the president did at one of the worst moments in recent history, i think activities pretty good. host: our next call comes from laurel, maryland, on our line for desms you're on the "washington journal" with eric pianin of the "fiscal times." go ahead. caller: good morning, gentlemen. i had a question. i live in maryland, and the bank loans here are very specific, and i have a little

calls with the refinancing, and i've gone to my senator's sexoffs everything, and they've all said it was fraud. but the government, them won't do anything about it. now, they sent letters to those you see, which is another state for which -- i guess now i've figured out the state of maryland doesn't have texas law, so we're pretty much stuck. so in fact, this is how you're stuck with this is fraud and this right here, this paperwork, doesn't have anything about state law, and this right here, but just left hang. and this obama thing, i'm 34 years old. i have never seen anybody in the service disrespect anybody higher up in commain of command. so only thing is i can say he's black, and i would like people to start admitting it. host: all right, we're going to leave it there. do you have any response to that? guest: well, you know, i'm -- i'm sympathetic to the caller, and, you know, there are a lot

of unscrupulous business people out there trying to make the most of their situation and taking advantage of people, and, you know, it's an old story. and it helps to explain how the country got into the financial fix that it did during the housing mortgage bubble, where a lot of people took advantage of consumers who didn't read the fine print and locked themselves into houses and mortgages they couldn't afford and then lost everything. it's tough out there. host: we've got this email from john, who writes, what does mr. pianin believe that the commercial real estate crisis that is expected to hit later this year will be on the economy and the unemployment rate? guest: well, i think that there's been a quiet fear that

the commercial real estate industry could be the next big crisis, the next big housing bubble, if you will. and there are any number of regions that have been hard hit by the phenomenon, over building and limited demand, i think in the washington area, you know, they're able to kind of weather this crisis fairly well. there's sort of a built-in demand for commercial real estate. but in a lot of other areas in the southwest in florida, potentially this could be huge. guest: the same item in the "baltimore sun" and the "new york times," g.m. will reinstate 600-plus dealers, outlets as yet unidentified are among the 1,160 that are fighting the plan to drop them. and then in the "new york times," "eyes on sales, g.m.

offers to reinstate 661 dealers." is this a positive sign or a sign that the economy is starting to turn around with the automobile dealers with g.m. considering putting 600 dealers back online? guest: i think it definitely is. and the closing after lot of these dealerships was a huge blow to many communities throughout the country. a lot of these dealerships have been with the communities for decades. they were important members of the community. they created jobs. they generated sales. host: flex up is biloxi, mississippi. thanks for waiting. caller: thank you. i'd like to ask mr. pianin possibly three questions. i'll ask each question and allow him to answer. first of all, i'd like to know

how the unemployment rate is computed. guest: well, the labor department, bureau of labor statistics, is responsible for monitoring unemployment rate. part of it is statistical. part of it is simply interviewing employers about their hiring practices and then extrapolating from that. it isn't an exact science, and in some elements, it is guesswork. caller: ok. second of all, as far as the people that are actually applying and on unemployment, we have a group of people now who have run out of unemployment rates and dropped off the unemployment roll. but they're still unemployed. are they included in the

unemployment rate? >> yes, they are. their plight is a serious one, and that's why it was so important that congress, you know, end the silliness that we saw last week on the hill and apply a 30-day extension of unemployment insurance benefits so that, you know, americans who are like on the verge of being concluded off of the uninsurance roll could get at least another month-long extension. and, you know, one of the things that congress is looking at now is a one-year extension of unemployment insurance so that people will be -- so that people can qualify for the maximum number of weeks of unemployment insurance that they're entitled to. but this is really, really important, and without that unemployment insurance, you know, people are going to lose their apartment, lose their homes and will have trouble

feeting their kids. caller: so they are definitely included in that percentage rate? guest: right. caller: ok, thank you very much. host: all right. caller: have a great day. host: you too. next up, john on our line for republicans. thanks for waiting. caller: good morning, folks. kind of want to prep face what i say this morning by saying that i'm a real optimist. but i want to ask some questions, sort of tough questions for you to answer. i want to know why that 41% of all the profits from the financial services sector, which is a usery sector, these people are putting money in sectors that are unproduct i believe to the united states and moving the country in an area where the things that made the country great is the innovation and hard-working people and its magnet for immigrants around the world was

a great thing, ok? i want to know if you're going to look at what happened with the tarp, pumping more money into the usery sector, which essentially took all the bad mortgages and put them on the taxpayer through fannie, freddie, f.h.a. and that. host: thanks for your call, john. guest: it raises one interesting question, which is what was the rufflet whole tarp program, where the treasury and the fed basically were acquiring the tax is assets of banks and financial institutions and taking them off of their balance sheets or at least helping them to get over the hump. we did a story recently looking at this very question. and one interesting development is that the federal government has gotten a pretty good return

on its investment that a lot of these companies or banks that accepted the tarp bailout have repaid their loans and, you know, and the government has made a profit, if you will, on any number of these things, sometimes as much as 20% to 24% return on their investment. now, we have to wait to see thousand all plays out, and there are some loans or investments that they're never going recover, like a.i.g., you know, may turn out to be this huge money pit and loss for them. so, in the end, it might be an overall loss. but right now, they're doing pretty well on some of their investments. host: cindy on our line for desms you're next. caller: yes, thank you. tilled also like to thank our speaker for speaking with us today. i have a question. could the civilian conservation

corps being reenacted for eligible workforce immediately back to work? could the people on employment, unemployment, benefits, receiving that back to work? thank you. guest: well, i think that concept is a very good one, and obviously during the great depression, franklin roosevelt put millions of people to work, you know, in construction projects and other projectsly and all that, and it seems that there are a lot of people looking for something to do and feeling that if they can't get a permanent job, well, they want to do something in the meantime, so that sounds like a pretty good idea to me. there are a number of programs open to young people, to leaving college who can teach

for a couple of years in the inner city. there are other volunteer programs that the federal government has created that's very worthwhile endeavors. but i like that idea. are and, you know, maybe that's something congress ought to be looking at, some kind of a  revival of that concept. host: our last call for eric pianin comes from arizona. linda auto our line for independents. caller: yes, i think i have the answer to fixing some of this employment and consuming commercial real estate. if each person put 200 people together, takes all kinds from the boardroom to the mail room, to combine this money, buy these buildings or lease them, once you get them, you will be given an equipment home.

so if it comes from their other money, whatever. give the tarp money to the people locally this. has worked great for the military. to own shares, the money borrowed, the microlone will be paid back through payroll deduction. everybody would own shares. these companies last longer, up retire earlier, it is great because they change their euro. it saved the country. i'm always nervous. it has to be done locally in every state and give someone a chance to -- if you put 200 people together with $5,000, do the math. you could bipe a building, start a company. thank you. guest: i think it's a great idea. you know, the caller, her idea sort of underscores a new reality which is that people

can't wait for the federal government or the state government to step in and help them. sometimes they're going to have to help themselves. sometimes they're going to come with innovative ideas. they're going to have to be more entrepreneurial, if you will, because the traditional model for getting a job, staying with one company for, you know, much of your year pretty much out the window. so people are out there trying figure out lots of different approaches this. sounds leak a pretty good one. host: eric pianin, "fiscal times." you can find it online at fiscaltimes.com. thank you very much for october program. guest: thank you. noip just a few minutes, we're going to talk about secretary of state clinton's trip to latin america with michael shifter. he's the vice president for policy. but first we want to take a look at the past week through the eyes of a few of the nation's editorial cartoonists.

>> "washington journal" continues. host: michael shifter is vice president for policy at the inner american dialogue, and here to talk to us about secretary of state clinton's laint america trip. welcome to the program, sir. guest: thaufment it's a pleasure. host: was there an overall theme to this trip or a basic agenda for the secretary's trip to latin america this past week? guest: what i think the secretary tried to do is reengage with latin america. president obama went to april last year, and that's with all hips counter parts in latin america, the caribbean, and things got stuck, side tracked, and i think she wants to pick

up from where president obama left off, because there's economic issues, trade issues, energy issues. there's the issue of iran, which got the most attention with secretary of state clinton's visit to brazil. there's the drug issue, security issues, which were highlighted in a recent stay in guatemala, the earthquake in chile, show support and solidarity for that country. they've kind of been put off to the side over the last year, so she's trying to pick it up. host: let's pick up with the support or the lack of support from brazil to support sanctions against iran, reported, among others, including the christian science monitor. this headline, hillary clinton fails to convince brazil to support iran sanctions. what's going on down there? guest: brazz sill feeling very good these days. they're going to have the olympics in 2016.

they're growing. they're dealing with other major global powers, like china and russia and india. they want to get some distance from the united states and independence from the united states, and they're not quite convinced that the approach of the united states is pushing of tougher sanctions on iran is the best thing to do right now. they have a different idea. there are economic interests involved between brazil and iran, and they don't want to push this confrontation with iran right now. they want to let these negotiations be tried for a little more time, so there is a split in the united states and brazil on this question, and brazil is a nonpermanent member of the u.n. security council, so they do have a role and could even make things easier, more difficult for the united states. host: another headline, this from this morning's "washington post," clinton urges latin america to intensify drug corruption fight. guest: well, the secretary sight this in guatemala, which is very troubled, where

organized crime has really penetrated all spheres of society, both government and nongovernment area, and i think that this is a major, major concern. the drug issue is very, very important, and it feels criminality and violence, which a country like guatemala, central america, mexico, is a major threat, risk to the rule of law and to democratic institutions. host: this headline from "the times" online, argentina celebrates a diplomatic coup as hillary clinton calls for talks over the falklands a. loft folks here in the united states thought that the controversy over the falklands was over with. guest: well, i think it is for great britain. i don't think it is for argentina. they still occasionally bring up this claim. i think the secretary just said sort of a throw away line that we're going to -- that we hope that both sides talk this out easily, productively. i can't imagine the united states is going to spend a lot of time trying to broker a deal

, and for the u.k., this is not an issue. for argentina, there are sentiments of nationalism that come to the surface, and for the arjn tine government, they were very pleased that at least secretary clinton picksd this up. host: we're talking about secretary of state clinton's latin america trip with michael shifter of the inner america dialogue, vice president for policy there. if you want to get involved in the conversation, give us a call. 202-737-0002 for democrats. 202-737-0001 for republicans. and independents, 202-628-0205. our first call comes from north carolina. larry on our line for independentses. you're on the "washington journal." caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. i don't understand why america is the only country to think

iran is such a threat. nobody else seems to think that way. and also, why are we in america -- brazil, the economy, the economy is going up, is because they are not spending a lot of money on our military and all these little homeland security departments and all this terrorism stuff, that we are doing here, i don't think that we can sustain that. it seem like every time something happen, we spend billions and billions of more dollars, and we'll never be able to protect ourselves against terrorism unless we find out what it is that the people are doing, why they're doing this to us. nobody else seems to think that this is such a problem. and it seems like the american people, we used to be the home of the free, the land of the free and the home of the brave, and we're turning into the land of the chickens and home of the paranoids.

host: michael shifter? guest: thank you. i think the iran issue is not simply just -- i think the united states government perceives this as a threat or is concerned about this. there are european governance as well. even russia has begun to take a tougher stance, so i think this is a broader concern, and the united states has produced a report that said that iran is not complying with the standards and so this is the united states as well that's expressing a concern. i think it's a broader interest. now, there may be differences in how to approach it, and at what point does one become tough? maybe the united states is becoming tougher more quickly than brazil would like. brazil wants to give it more time and avoid a confrontation, but i think it it's a wider concern of what's happening in iran, from a variety of countries. host: helen on our line for

independents, calling from california. thank you for being up and calling the "washington journal." caller: i look at the united states foreign policy, oh, probably dating from the 1950's, maybe longer. our interventions in south central america, south america, have not been very noble. we haven't been treating those countries with respect. so now, when i think about venezuela and its active support for iran and the way brazil is kind of cool about sanctioning iran for its nuclear ambitions, weapons technology, is there a certain distaste for american foreign policy? i know that it's focused primarily on drug trafficking, but i think south america has only bloomed more from our war on drugs, and i think it's only bred more contempt within those countries.

and so i'd like to hear your response. do you think that south america has less or more contempt for american foreign policy, especially with the obama administration? host: thanks, helen. guest: thank you. i think that -- i'm not sure the word contempt is for u.s. foreign policy. what latin america feels is greater assertiveness, greater confidence, and defiance of the united states. latin america is considered america's back yard, taken for granted. they're thinking whatever the united states would do, latin america would come along, those drace over. there's a new moment now, and i think the latin americans are sending a clear message to washington that they want some elbow, they want some breathing space to design their own foreign policy. but it's not contempt. i just think they want to be treated in a different fashion than what has been the case over recent decades. host: one of the stops on the secretary's trip was uruguay. tell us about her stop there

and why that was put on her agenda. guest: well, uruguay, the secretary attended the inauguration of the new president, it a man of the left, and i think it was very important, first of all, for her to meet some other leaders, and the president of paraguay was there. the president of colombia was there. so she had an opportunity to see other latin american heads of state, and also, this was very symbolic. uruguay has a government of the left, but a moderate, pragmatic brand of the left, not confrontational, not contemptuousness of the united states, but certainlyness some distance from the united states as a important social agenda, social democratic orientation, and i think this is the kind of politics the united states wants to see, the obama administration wants to identify with in latin america. host: joan on our line for democrats, from akron, ohio. you're on the "washington journal" with michael shifter. go ahead. caller: hello. good morning. i would just like to tell you

in the paper, two weeks ago, it had a new regional ride. latin america and the caribbean leaders united to create a new bloc, excluding canada and the united states, but it was a spat with the colombia president, told the venezuela president hugo chavez to be a man. many of the 32 latin america and caribbean countries at the summit have long called for a new organization that would not be dominated by the interest of their two wealthy northern neighbors. they have voted to oust jobs, and they got all the oil. they have everything, and they are in bed with the russians and germans and who bombed america, and you're buying japanese cars, and they bombed us, that's who did it, but

y'all so stupid, ignorant, and socialist, thanks, and have a blessed day. host: not sure where that was going. let's take our next call on our line for independents. go ahead. caller: good morning, gentlemen. it was mention this had week that 42 cents is the number that we need to remember. 42 cents of every tax dollar we send in goes interest only on our debt. how does that influence our relationship with foreign countries, and at what point do -- how do we get out of this? thank you. host: thank you. how much of the secretary's trip dealt with expanding or republishing, re-establishing financial and economic ties with some of our neighbors to the south? guest: i don't think this has been a major focus of her trip and, frankly, of u.s. policy

over the last year of the obama administration. i think it's something that needs to get more attention. there are a variety of topics she signed with brazil. greater cooperation, science and technology, and a variety of other areas. but i think the economy issue is one that hasn't become a high priority, and i think the latin -- it's something that the latin americans would like. there's a lot of protection for u.s. products, agricultural subsidies and the like, and the latin americans want act accepts to the u.s. market. that's what they want more than anything else in the united states, and they feel frustrated that they can't get that. it's a free trade agreement that has been signed with panama and colombia, but hasn't been approved by the u.s. congress. those are pending. and so snares disappointment that the economic agenda isn't moving fast enough. host: the secretary of state also visited chile after their

earthquake. what kind of promises or extension were made down there? guest:ly can, the secretary distributed phones and other equipment that the chileans need. this is another devastating setback for chile, and chile is a close ally of united states, has been historically with the free trade agreement. very, very close ties. chile has been a good performer in latin america, both economically and politically. i think it was important that she made the stop, although it was very brief, to express solidarity with chile, and the outgoing president was somebody that the president knows well and has greatly respected. there's going to be a new government coming in in chile on thursday, so there is this transition in the midst of this very, very difficult crisis that the country is dealing with. host: michael shifter is director of the andean program at the inter-american dialogue,

also an adjunct professor of latin american politics at georgetown university's school of foreign service, and also a contribute editor to foreign history and a member on the council of foreign relations. our guest for another 30 minutes. providence, rhode island, william on our line for independents, go ahead. i'm sorry, democrat. caller: i just would like to say that i think we should pay attention to our country more than we pay attention to everybody else's crifment you know, we should show by example. i mean, everybody else can see what's going on in our country. try to tell them what to do in their country, and our country is messed up. we should just fix our house first before we try fix somebody else's. that's all. thank you. guest: i think that's an excellent point, and the president of brazil actually said the same thing. he said the united states, the best thing the united states could do for latin america is to put its own house in order, and that means reducing consumption of drugs, are controlling the arms that flow from the united states to latin

america, really get the country to grow, reducing unemployment. there's a lot of latin american countries to that depend on remittances sent by latin americans throifing their families, and the economy could begin to grow, that would be a big help for latin americans. i think the point is very well taken. host: mayor fight people writes this twitter mess sexadge asks, which latin american countries have a free market economy and which have mixed economy of government and private sector-run business? guest: i think latin american, most of them are mixed. the state has a role, but there's also a role of the private sector, some more than others. colombia, for example sarks country where the private sector is very, very strong. other countries, venezuela today under hugo chavez, the state is playing a much stronger role in controlling the economy. so i think you have a variety

across the spectrum. host: next up is abilene, texas, our line for republicans. good morning. caller: yes, hello. mr. shifter, i have been so concerned about what is going on in mexico and central and south america. it's like a boiling caldron of evil. i consider them not to be our friends. our laws don't mean anything to them. they're perfectly willing to break the laws anytime they can. and when it comes to free trade agreements, you said you were with the council of foreign relations. seems to me that there's an elitist group that think that, oh, free trade agreement just means everything. well, it didn't help mexico. and it's literally gutted the american base. but more than, that all of these people that come and here break our laws, and you talk about the remitt anti-s they send home, that also is a drag

on america. but colombia in particular, we're already getting their drugs and thufplgs they're not going to be buying a lot from us, and these free trade agreements always seem to jump up and bite us. host: your thoughts, snir guest: i think a lot of these problems are shared problems, and i think the obama administration has rightly emphasized, as the secretary did in her trip, that there's a shared responsibility of the united states, the biggest consumer of drugs, a lot of the weapons that are used in the murders in mexico that the caller talks about come from the united states, come from across the border. there's money laundering that comes from the north and south. so if we're going to tackle these problems effectively, and i think she's absolutely right, that they should be taken seriously, the united states has to do its part as well. i think latin americans are

law-abiding, americans are as well, but there are exceptions. there are problems. but i think they have to be dealt with together. and i think name calling is not going to be helpful because the two countries are so intertwined economically and in terms of migration and so many different levels. host: our next call comes from our line on independents out of new york city. hello. caller: hello. host: go ahead. caller: hi, good morning. i was calling because just a few months ago, the obama administration announce that had cuba is on the list of nations that is listed as one of those supporting terrorism. i was wondering how the administration can come up with that conclusion. i voted for president obama, and i really expected some drastic changes in the treatment of cuba and expected some positive changes in that regard. can you please answer that question?

thank you. guest: well, that's a good question, and i think this is an issue where there's a lot of frustration in latin america as well. ainge loft people expected president obama to come in and the embargo would be lifted and everything would be fine. obviously it's been very, very difficult. there have been a few steps the administration has taken. migration talks have started. they've lifted restrictions on travel for cuban americans. but this question that the caller raises of cuba on the list of countries that support terrorism, this is clearly a political hangover, inertia from cuba is the country that's not friendly to the united states, and so therefore, it appears on these lists. i think that the caller is right by saying that there's no really soiled argument why cuba is supporting terrorism and shouldn't have been on that list, but this unfortunately came up because there are on the list of countries that do not get along with the united

states. so i think this was something that the united states should take care of. i agree with that, because it creates a further irritant in the relationship with cuba. host: tell us, what exactly is the inter-american dialogue? >> inter-american dialogue is a policy for her sexum a think tank that works on western hemisphere affairs, and it covers a wide range of issues, economics, politics, social ears, education, for example. and it includes members from latin america and the caribbean, as well as the united states, and canada. and they get together to review the situation in the hemisphere and try to come up with ideas and recommendations to improve the relationship. host: where does the funding come from to run it? guest: we have funding from private foundations, some funding from some governments, and also corporate support as well. but the bulk of our funding comes from private foundations. host: latin american governments or the u.s.? guest: some from the u.s.

government and some latin american governments as well, and also canada. we've had some support from european governments as well. host: warren, pennsylvania. cam on our line for democrats. you're on the "washington journal." caller: good morning. how are you doing? guest: how are you? caller: fine. i have questions about the policies of the country. can you work in the other countries, like the other residents in other countries come here to work? that's the number one question. and another thing is, i think that our economy should become a mixed economy, pay down the derkts you know, like taking funds from large companies that are messing up, you know, to get them back on the road, and do other countries check their background checks to be able to work in their country? guest: i think those procedures

are off on other countries. there are many americans who live and work in latin america, and there seems to be a reciprocal relationship between the united states and latin america. obviously there's a big disparity between the united states and lats inamerica, some flows in the other direction, and it attracts a certain different level of socioeconomic level going one way or going the other. there are also background checks. that's routine practice in most latin american countries. host: next up is someplace in new jersey. his name is very long. robert, thank you very much for helping me out. caller: thaufment it's on the new jersey coast. mr. shifter, i placed this call before you got the question about the nature of your organization and its funding. perhaps it's a 501, not for

profit organization. guest: correct. sexoip you indicated that it is funded by a variety of resources, some funds and contributors and states. could you give some illustrations of specific philanthropies that support your organization? guest: sure. first of all, i could tell you for a complete listing of all of our sources of financial support, you might want to check our website. everything, every philanthropic organization that supports us is listed there, and it's all public information. so the ford foundation, for example, is one. the open society institute foundation is another. we've received money in the past from the hewitt town day, rockefeller foundation, so those are some examples. tinker foundation, which is the

foundation in new york that funds latin america. but there's a really complete listing of all of our sources of funding on the web same. you can find all the sources of funding on that. host: our next call is from detroit, ohio. ernie on our line for independences. good morning. caller: good morning. if he wants to do this with south america and foreign countries below us, the only thing i see that they export to us is illegal immigrants. now, the american people is getting a little fed up, and what's going to happen, we're going to play cowboys and illegal, and it's going to be a bloody mess all over this country. we got 15 million people out of work. how many illegals we got here working? take them out of here, we can get the jobs back. and as far as are concerned, i said i don't know how many times to show him how he can

create how many jobs here in the ohio valley, and it would be permanent jobs. it's a government job, but it's a permanent job, and i'm i get is air service. thank you. host: are you still with me? caller: yeah. host: when you call the white house, how far do you get up the food chain before they cut you off? caller: you can get to the secretary who answers the phone. is it&then when you ask them to put on -- i ask them to put me on with somebody with stimulus money, them did not know who to give me the number to. i've called my congressman and asked them the same thing. they don't who know has money for the stimulus. they don't even know who's in charge of the stimulus. host: thank you, caller. michael shifter? guest: the immigration issue is obviously very -- en gender a lot of sexags is very controversial. i think the immigrants who come to the united states from latin american have contributed enormously to the u.s. economy. there are a lot of private

businesses that are pressuring for immigration reform because they need that workforce from latin america, and i think thrar lot of jobs that are available that others aren't interested in, that are new and necessary in the service sector and other sectors of the u.s. economy. so i think there's a lot of frustration and anxiety in the country, and i understand that, but i think that without having an immigrant come from latin america, we might be in a lot worse shape overall in the u.s. economy. host: in the discussions that the secretary of state had with the various heads of state that she visited with, do you get a feeling that they were more concerned about opening up avenues of free trade between the u.s. and those individual countries or making it easier for their residents to be able to come to the united states and work and send money back to their countries of their origin? guest: oh, i think that they're interested in the economic development. i think that they want free trade. i think their preference would be for them to develop, to have

access to the u.s. markets so that they can create jobs in their own countries. that would be their preference. but clearly, they're also countries that their status is illegal, that they're not being dealt with within sort of the legal frame work, and they would like to see reforms that lead towards a path toward citizenship of their services. host: george on our line for democrats from pen pefpble you're on the "washington journal." caller: how are you today? my question is that, it off election, just coming off an election in american states, and i would like to know if you approve the use of election. i think they're working in favor of the less in south america.

host: where are you from originally? caller: i am from venezuela. they've been playing more to our leftist country in south america, and one of the -- in the american states is that most country have to be demographic election, and the last meeting in mexico, mr. raul castro was cuba was invited by the president of got mall, it he was elected by the people, wasn't invited. my question is, what do you think about that? .

i think it is important to remember that he is not the president of latin america. he is secretary general.

in dealing with situations like venezuela which is very troubling, he can only do what the other governor -- government instruct him to. he is limited in terms of his own actions. one has to understand how the organization functions that there really is a limit to how far he can go on his own. and others have to say, we have to really pay attention to this situation. that may be why some people are a little bit disappointed. host: what is the function of the organization and how has it been used as an ally with the obama administration? guest: it was created in 1948. it really is the principal, the

oldest regional organization in the world. they discussed many issues with the united states, canada, caribbean countries. it has been useful in terms of calling attention to human rights violations. when there are conflicts, it has helped try to diffuse the tension. it is really a conflict resolution organization. it is very hard to have constructor -- constructive partnerships with venezuela and the u.s. because of a distressed that is there. this is an organization where the united states and canada and the rest of the latin american countries can address a common agenda. host: brooklyn.

caller: i have made several trips to central america and honduras. what i have noticed is that the population there very poor in honduras. many canadians and americans are buying property dirt cheap on the coast. you would probably pay hundreds of thousands of dollars in america, and they are going fourth about $50,000 an acre. they are reselling this to other american to making a lot of money. those that live in honduras are not getting any of this mine. what can we do or the government can do to make sure the foreigners do not go into these latin-american countries in take the property? guest: you point out a trend

which a lot of americans are attracted to going to latin america and central america and fighting properties. i think is a limit to how much the united states government can have the responsibility of the local governments there in honduras. we have national laws that must be respected by american citizens. that is where the leverage comes in. i think there are lots of in terms of selling in reselling property that they have to get to americans that are down there. host: what would you say of the successes and where is there room for improvements? guest: successes or on the symbolic level. chile was a success.

there is goodwill there. there were some agreements signed in brazil. it is really the crucial factor. it needs to be a little -- a deeper relationship with the united states and brazil. i think the central america part of this was also useful. president obama will probably go to brazil and south america. but to some extent, this trip was to prepare that. i think this iran issue is a problem. i think the task is to try to go beyond that and work on that shared agenda. host: republican line, michigan. caller: i have a comment and

then a question. they are here because they do the job that nobody else does. my mom passed away where 80% of the staff were foreigners. -- my mom passed away in a nursing home where 80% of the staff were foreigners. another person, his work has been dissipated because of foreigners working. these immigrants are taking jobs from americans. they are jobs that americans do want to do. host: we will leave it there. guest: i think the immigration

laws have to be defended. this is an irrational system. there are these legal immigrants in the united states. it is the -- something must be done to deal with the reality of this issue. host: democrats, michigan. caller: white can be done to better the image in south america? many people forget that castro was on our side in the past. i do not know what happened between us and the cubans.

but can we do to bring cuba back into trade now that all of that is in the past? what can we do about american business with the way they have treated those other countries? can we bring it to a more humane level? like hugo's have a chavez, he wa strong man that took over a nation. he was put into power by the people. i think we can meet a common ground. guest: we have this situation where politically, there is a lot of attention. and the oil is flowing. chavez is more dependent on the

u.s. market than his president -- predecessors were. i think he makes a good point that the united states has to deal with the region more on equal terms. that is what the region is asking for. this requires an adjustment. it's an adjustment for the traditional approach towards latin america. this is going to take some time. host: the caller on the independent line from albany new york. -- albany, new york. caller: if we shifted our focus on america's problems and solve our own problems at home -- and not saying we should not spread the good will, but we have 9% unemployment in the york. i would hate -- they say

foreigners do jobs that americans do not do. when we first started -- wheat imported workers because americans are too good for that. unionized workers and make sure that we have a livable wage and benefits to take care of our health and then control the borders. we need to take care of americans first. elderly need to be taking care of with social security running out. foreigners come in and get free money for different programs. why can't we take care of americans and get us back to work first? i am not saying the heck with all emigrants, but come on. -- immigrants, but come on. guest: what is best for the united states and latin america is to get the unemployment rate

down and get our house in order. there are a lot of agencies that are working on those issues. my organization works together with others that are more interested in the domestic national agenda. host: did they task the agency for knowledge were suggestions on how they might handle policies? guest: we have the context with different officials in different agencies. congress works very closely with democrats. we have regular dinners to raise the level of awareness of what is happening around america. we tried to engage people who

are making decisions and people that affect the policy line. host: the secretary of state? guest:no. caller: our next caller. -- the think tanks, where do their allegiance line? -- lie? is their allegiance to the constitution? is that corporations, financial, resources? guest: the function of the dialogue is -- quick and not lobbying on behalf of certain positions. we have a space where people can express their views and have a

good exchange. the theory behind it is that if you have a good exchange, you can find areas of agreement in reduce polarization and try to push some policies where there is broad consensus. that may sound a certain way, but that is what we are all about. allegiance is to the idea of dialogue and exchange and really getting a diverse of perspectives hurt as much as possible. host: we have been talking about the latin american trip of the secretary of state. thank you very much. if you want to get more information about the organization, you can go to

their website. we will take a short break. when we come back, we will talk about the high-school dropout rate. we will be right back. ♪ >> the next journal must be open to bloods and emails that are hammering on the fist of the door to be -- blogs and emails that are hammering on the fist of the door to be heard. >> the winner of the national press foundation award talks about the role of journalism in a changing society. tonight at 8 eastern on c-span. >> we are in the business of trying to help our predominantly

young women to understand that you should focus on the achievement in your own right not to just grab headlines. >> president for over 20 years, she will be on our "q&a." >> correspondent, he has traveled around the world. he has global views on contemporary issues. during our three our conversation, we will answer phone calls live sunday on "in depth" on cspan2. host: this is the president and ceo of an alliance.

she is here to talk to us about the high-school dropout rates. tell us about the event that took place in the white house last week. tell us about your involvement in it. >> we were thrilled to join president obama as secretary duncan to launch our commitment to mobilize america to end the high school dropout crisis. it was not at the white house but at the u.s. chamber of commerce. that was an important symbol. it has a very big stake in the problem. host: how you figure to turn the crisis around? guest: i want to start with the facts. people do not appreciate that this is a serious crisis.

many kids are dropping out of high school. when you think about numbers of that scale, you realize it is not just a crisis and a problem, but a national catastrophe. we have spent the last 18 months raising awareness around the country. now we are working with the administration, the governors, mayors, we see this as a bipartisan issue. it is something that all of us need to pay attention to. host: let's get the phone numbers out for people that want to get involved in the conversation. they are at the bottom of your screen. if you have had any experience in high school either graduating or dropping out or dropping out and getting back in, by all means, give us a call and let us know your experience and what

happened to you. guest: the most important thing is that it takes a real solution focused inside and outside the classroom. the administration has put forth a budget. secretary duncan has put forth a game plan. it built on the work that has already happened in cities and in states. inside the classroom, we want to see rigour and relevant in the curriculum. many young people say they were bored and that is why they jumped -- dropped out. we need better quality teachers especially in our lowest performing schools. we need more accountability. the most important elements that we are focused on is a partnership and to bring the community in play. the real important issue that is exciting is that when you realize two dozen haskell

account for two dozen problems among people in color. -- 2000 problems among people in color -- 2000 high-school 42 -- creates two dozen problems among people of color. but -- high school creates 2000 problems among people of color. we have to figure out how to turn these schools around. host: are these 2000 schools you are talking about in urban areas? guest: they are in a role as well as urban communities. they are in -- rural as well as urban communities. they are in every state. the most important point is that we understand where the problem is.

with a focus, the community can pull together and we can support children and families and help turn those schools around and make a huge impact on the problem. host: we are talking about stemming the tide of high school dropout rate. we have the president and ceo of an alliance. the first call comes from our democrats line from california. caller: i have the benefit of of being able to watch this problem for -- from two world. -- worlds. one would you education through its academic accomplishments not through sports. look at the local newspapers and

see individuals will excel academically were held a in high esteem. that was in society at large. it translates to a number of students that want to achieve that type of accomplishment and stations school. here it is the opposite. here it is about sports or other non-academic pursuits. they do not see the value in academic excellence or achievement. my child experience is very different from the one i had in india. i will take your comments offline. thank you. guest: an excellent point. we have to make school the center of communities. we have to make it more important in the life of everyone.

we have to of the academic achievements -- we have to hold up academic achievements. we will not be competitive if we do not pay more attention to academic achievement. america has really lagged behind our international friends and competitors pension the global economy. we are not ready -- competitors in the global economy. we are not ready for competitors. we have that to have more rigor in the classroom. we have to make young people appreciate the importance of school. you mentioned sports. we are coming upon march madness. the nation will be distracted for a while. but we have to get back to school. every young peace -- person needs to not just finished high school, because that is not

enough anymore. they must be college ready. host: you mentioned earlier that some students do not feel high school is relevant to the rest of their lives. going back a couple of generations, haskell has never really been relevant to the rest of your life. -- high school has never really been relevant to the rest of your life. high school has been high school. guest: we have not been vigorous enough in updating our curriculum. there are exceptions, but this is the world of technology. it is the world of a global economy and an international community. i do not believe our standards and curriculum have kept pace. there is 48 of the 50 states have adopted are accepted the premise that we need a common course standing. we need to be internationally benchmark.

-- benchmarked. the administration has picked up on this. we must move fast and aggressively to turn this time around. host: illinois, republican line. caller: this ties up right back in to illegal immigration and supporting poverty. the name of the game in american business is to keep down labor costs. american businesses have let 30 million people into the country illegally that have very little education and produce children and do not educate them. the cycle continues. we need to stop the inflow of poverty and deal with the

poverty we have in america. we need to talk about the cultural differences between people and their attitudes toward education. if the good to a jewish or asian neighborhood, most of the children are very good students and could achievers. i have lived in albuquerque, new mexico which has a very heavy hispanic community. if you go to a shopping mall, you see a lot of very young teenage couples with babies. you know there is no way they have much education to support these children. the cycle continues. guest: i appreciate what you are saying in terms of the disadvantages that come with families that are struggling. one premise is that we would hope that america wants to be

welcoming to people who want a better future for themselves and their children. i would like every child to have every opportunity to realize their own potential. part of what we are trying to do is say communities have a great deal at stake. some people surrounded lowest performing schools, many of those families are at risk or under resource -- under- resourced. i think the young people will respond. they seek that kind of challenge, and they need it. i would come down on the side of this being the great civil rights issue of our day. we must really close the achievement gap for all choc an. every child deserves a chance. host: robert from tampa, fla. on our line for independence. caller: we are spending too much time teaching for winners of our

language and to mess up the schools by not teaching english in schools and american history and the industrial revolution of america. we are wasting time and money and hurting our children in this country to pacify the big corporations that want to encourage cheap labor guest: a couple of questions have focused on businesses wanting cheap labor. one comment i would make its business is aggressively interested in solving this problem. they want skilled labor. there are very few jobs in this country that are available through unskilled labor. that is part of the problem. every young person develops a

chance to develop marketable skills that will be self sustaining and support a family. companies are desperate for more skilled employees to enter their work force. i am not so sure that businesses -- if anything, businesses are leading the way saying we need better training and these young people deserve a chance to be trained for the 20% 3 workforce. host: our next call comes from virginia. -- chance to be trained for the 21st century workforce. host: our next call comes from virginia. caller: i like to know about this 50% drop out rate. guest: date and accountability for results is an important topic.

-- data and accountability for results is an important topic. we have been publishing reports about cities in crisis for the past couple of years using johns hopkins as a resource with its data as well as other sources. this is education that is research base. host: this was on the front page of the ""chicago tribune"."

this is talking mutt it been the only public all-male, all- african american high-school fulfilling its mission. is this specific to genders or racial groups? do they have to be that way in order for it to be successful? guest: not at all. there are solutions that work in the community for different groups. if this were easy to fix, we would have done it a long time ago. what we want is more freedom for the school system to find solutions that work and try it again and again. we are finding that more alternative schools or recovery programs to get kids back on track, charter schools are

important for finding solutions that work. we have to tap into the spirit of our school system just like we do in the business community dealing with entrepreneur worss. in an urban setting with a minority population, success is possible. with better teachers, more lifetime relevance, committee support, all things are possible. host: arizona, republican line. caller: i want is a first and foremost, i recently graduated high school not too long ago. immigration is not the issue. what the issue is, i have seen a lot of classmates that are not motivated, because their parents do not push them.

their parents give them everything. what is the school one to do to further motivate them? in this generation, the parents are not doing their job. guest: president obama speaks to that country. we are calling for more parental engagement. this is a tough time. it is an economic recession, the lights in which we have not seen for a long time. -- the likes in which we have not seen for a long time. we need parents more engaged in more supportive of students and the educational system. it should also be teachers, coaches. students look to their peers for reinforcement. young people can sometimes be the best motivator for other young people to stay in school. looking for role models and answers.

we have to provide them as a community and encourage parents to become more engaged in their child's life. host: there is the grad nation campaign from the alliance. tell us about that. guest: it is to mobilize america to end the drought crisis. we want to encourage a stronger school system and encourage every child to leave school ready for at least a two-year post secondary program. we have to focus on school turnaround and community action. our strategy, which we invite your listeners to be a part of, and is focusing on -- it is focusing on getting young people and parents engaged with those 2000 schools that we

talked about. we could have preschools, parenting education, after- school programs, health clinics. it is going to take inside and outside the class from to make this a sustainable new transformation. host: parents, educators, administrators can go to the website in find out about grad nation in get suggestions on how these different programs might work for their kids. guest: we have a robust website where you can learn to find information and help. mentors, tutors, people that can provide job shuttering opportunities, internships, service and opportunities for these young people so they can't feel the value of giving back. there are lots of ways to get involved.

host: jupiter, fla., thanks for waiting. caller: i know about the need for us to get the technology to be competitive in the 21st century. the dropout rate in the united states is of concern. i believe in your concept of getting communities involved. i have a couple of ideas in which we could achieve this. now that we have the technology to go anywhere in the world, we should give our kids access to other areas. after-school programs are based on developing skills such as

designing and engineering. it is not just knowledge of math and science but how i work with people. those are things i think will help. guest: two great points to make. technology, our curriculum has not kept place. technology is part of the solution. and people thrive. they are way ahead of us in technology. using technology is a great idea. technology-based learning can facilitate them getting college credit. and what they do when they are not in the classroom is important. we need to challenge our young people to be creative and explore science and technology and do service projects. there is a wonderful use of that

that is part of the learning experience. every young person needs to be exposed to technology and participate in an after-school program. host: democrats line. caller: i teach in a north carolina school. i am part of the old vocational department. i am in health science. students can be a certified nursing assistant when they graduate or a pharmacy tech. most of them do not planet as a career goal. it is a wonderful opportunity. they get out and have an internship. they can see what these careers are like before they make a final commitment, and they do not waste money in college pursuing a career that is not right for them. i think more should be done for

publication of schools -- vocational schools. it is a great opportunity for my students. and they get to see all kinds of things. guest: that is the point. relevance to the real world. and people need to be exposed to career opportunities. they need to see what the world a career is all about. this is a fantastic opportunity for them. i am not sure how we got away from vocational schools. it was seen as a dumping ground for poor students. we need to bring career exploration back into the classroom. that is a wonderful example of things we need to do more of. host: describe the race to the

top program and how it differs previous nutshell left behind. guest: i thought that might be asked. what we hope to have been with elements of secondary education act will be authorized. i think the it ministration will hope to turn the act of self -- let us motivate school systems. hopefully with the additional moneys to do the right thing. i know they had a goal that all students graduate high school, college. i know they will close the achievement gap for most young people.

they want to improve teacher quality and the use data and accountability as a way to stay on top of the work they need to be doing. we hope this will move forward. those that care about this issue, it is a bipartisan issue. we need the public to speak out. we need the resources. we must invest in the education system. governors and needed to hear from their citizens. we as a people must speak out. we must invest in our kids and strengthened ever school system. we must strengthen our community for the most disadvantaged. host: there is an article in " the houston chronicle" about a wall attributes of seventh graders shot to death.

how many students in your work do you find are leaving school because they do not feel like it's a safe place to be? guest: i am afraid safety is a factor. if you cannot go to school until say, that is very sad. i think it has to do with the lack of support from the schools community. -- school's committee. it should be a place of pride and community. this part we held in become a safe place and a part of the community where people feel excited and secure to be there. the parents have to be involved. the entire community must be involved and take ownership. host: republican line, virginia. caller: my question is the

education system -- i will they are capable of educating the children. the erosion of the family with separations and divorces seems to be a big issue on the social side. i would like an opinion on that as well. guest: i cannot fix the divorce rate. families need to be stronger cared deeply for their children and their education. what we hope to do is support young people and communities. it is so important to support of teachers. they have a very complex challenge. that is why alberta alliance

has 375 national -- that is why our alliance has 375 national organizations. we support our teachers for the hard work they are doing inside the classroom. week teachers, mediocre, underperforming teachers -- weak teachers, mediocre, and then performing teachers are affecting all teachers. we need to support teachers and weed out those that are burned out. improving teacher quality for every child is part of what we want to do. the a very committed to supporting our teachers. host: one of the programs they support is the collegiate scholars national society. tell us a little bit about that. guest: that is one of our great partners. we are about having every young person who wants to end is

capable to have a chance that post secondary education. it is encouraging more disaffected in people to go to college, helping them stay in school, provide support services for those young people. there is a scholarship money that we a become involved in. what we see in that model is the support starts in high school. the disadvantaged people, but the time they get to college, they understand the environment and are ready for the rigor that comes with a college environment. less than 20% of minority students who start college finish. support has to start early so they understand. host: independence line from philadelphia. caller: the big thing that needs to be done is teaching the kids, reading, writing, math, and technology.

history, music, arts, it will come a long as the kid desires it. first we have to deal with technology. every child you know just about has a cell phone. this is what they are in too. this is what will keep them interested. history can be boring and disruptive. like the vocational school, that is one of the best ideas to bring back. guest: the common course standards that superintendents are trying to adopt would speak to some of what you are talking about. we have to have strong running in the fundamentals. i think history is part of that. it is important to touch -- teach fundamental skills and statistic thinking. i think physical education needs

to be a stronger more consistent part of a child's learning. some of that can happen in an after-school program. technology is critical. every child s to fill technology is part of learning. in the social life, but they use technology. this is part of britney methodology in the curriculum up to the 21st century so kids do not feel board and begin to drop out. host: there is a traitor message here. guest: we have a strong partnership with teachers and school superintendents. we are in good conversation withrandy at a.f.t. teachers are partnering with us.

school administrators -- we have had dropped out summit in every state in the 50 largest cities. the teachers and principals and administrators or at the tables with business leaders and volunteers within every city. host: fort walton beach on our line for democrats. caller: good morning. i appreciate the program. i am here. the school system here has done a great job on encouraging parents and community involvement. we have a superintendent that is right on point. my slogan for the last 10 years goes like this, for kids sake --

kids' sake, we have to partnership and be on the same page. we have to be on the same page. when we have orientation, this is the time when parents come out and get unpaged and note their role. i am a business person. cable partnership. they have to be taught the basics. [unintelligible] guest: absolutely right.

there is no way, there is only we. we must own this problem together. we must find a solution together. we do these struck out summit and have 30,000 community leaders come together from every sector including the business community, educators, nonprofit leaders. there is no simple solution. we each have to own the problem. we have let it get away from us. now as the time. we must address this aggressively in every city and in every state. host: with the economic situation the way it is across the country and many cutbacks, how should we go about lobbying various states to keep education programs -- to keep funding does education programs so students

will stay in school? guest: i often say the best stimulus package is a diploma. if an unperson would stay in school, they're earning power is three times what it would have been if they had dropped out of high school. in the next 10 years, if we do not reverse this struck out crisis, it will cost our economy $3 trillion. this is an investment that we must make. we have to keep our school systems strong. the president put forth a budget in times of -- the increase education spending. we have to have investments in education. at the community level, there are a lot of organizations that try to help at a brisk children and families. these organizations -- at risk

children and families. these organizations need to come together. we have to integrate our efforts at the community level and collaborate more effectively and be partners with the schools, i think we could make better use of the dollar's. host: republican line. caller: midmorning. i am here in new york, and i watch fox. but glenn beck has been doing i think is wrong. how can this guy had the power to come on the air from new york, but nationwide because fox is viewed nationwide. i do not think it is fair for him to indoctrinate into the children the same sas chavez

does in venezuela. the judge and of american need help. i think the government any station should allow anybody to come in here and live this way. guest: this is the beauty of america. there is freedom of speech. there is something for everybody on cable television. on c-span, we can talk freely without getting into partisan rhetoric. the most important point of a like to make is that education is a bipartisan issue. there is no time for an ugly partisan rhetoric when we talk about our children and their future. we have to do everything in our power to keep this away from the

inflamed rhetoric on our airwaves. this must be a bipartisan if not a non-partisan issue. our kids need the help. our future is at stake. colin powell was launching this would ever chairman. he talked about this issue as a national security crisis. the pentagon report has found that only three of every 10 yen people that report to the recruiting stations -- of every 10 young people that report to the recruiting stations are eligible for status. host: what is being worked on by the house and senate in terms of legislation? guest: the reauthorization of the elementary and secondary act

has just begun to move. to make the schools the center of our communities, there is a bill that is keeping parents and communities engaged. it was introduced by the late senator ted kennedy. it is a stronger bill get parents more involved. makings calls the center of our community is important. there isn't every student account act. we can't -- there is an every student counts act. and there are at least four or five important bills for our

support. host: jacksonville, fla., independent line. caller: i try to get in many times when you have talked about education. i hope you give me a little bit of time. i would like to suggest that the real issue is economics. our schools should not be funded by property taxes. this woman, while i applaud her efforts, she knows that almost all of the ailing schools are in an economic areas. my brother is in las vegas and teaches at all the schools there. the discrepancy between areas of the affluence and poverty are startling. we need to fund our schools with a general fund, so that every public school get exactly the same amount of money. people in upscale areas would not tolerate the conditions

that exist if some of the areas of lower economic areas -- kit that do not even have a desk for every student. they do not have textbooks to take home. in areas where there is more affluent, you have women who do not have to work. they volunteer in the library and a fund can be used for other things. guest: she is right on point. i think a young person's chance at a grade education in that be an accident. we have a dysfunctional system of funding of rascals. many communities are tied to a property tax at the funding base. i think that has resulted in the great civil rights issue of our day. there are terrible inequities and disparities between schools

in one city. that is not fair to the kids. the accident of birth should not determined your opportunities for the future. bob hosthost: dallas, texas. caller: thanks for taking my call. i have a couple of things to say. i think it is a mistake to assume that all students are going to college -- even that all students want to necessarily go to college. i think we need more vocational high schools where kids can gain the skills while they are in high school and graduate ready to join the workforce with those necessary skills. guest: thank you. the important point is not every child will go to a traditional, four-year college. every child needs to be college

and career ready. there are skills that students are leaving high school without, that do not prepare them. we are talking about basic skills of communicating, writing, reading, literacy levels. we need young people to be prepared to enter the 21st century workplace. that is going to require more skills than a high-school diploma. host: president and ceo of america's promise alliance. thank you for joining us. guest: thank you. good to be with you. host: take a look at our program tomorrow. a guest will tell us about the health care proposal from the president. a author will also be here to talk to us about iraq as a kid closer to election day over there.