the obama administration's efforts in reducing home foreclosures. there will also be a discussion about the debt crisis in greece. we will also talk with the head of the alzheimer's association. . .

host: on this tuesday, march 9. here are the phone numbers for you. health care and or jobs. the front page of "the philadelphia inquirer" showing president obama's spirited plea for overhaul. he was there yesterday. here's a little bit of what he had to say yesterday.

[applause] >> how many people would like to give americans the same insurance choices that members of congress get? [applause] how many would like a proposal to bring down costs for everyone? [applause] that is our proposal, and it is paid for, and it is a proposal whose time has come. the united states congress owes the american people a final up or down vote on health care. [applause]

it is time to make a decision. the time for talk is over. we need to see where people stand. host: president obama yesterday, talking about health care, once a bill passed by march 18. that is next week. here is the front page of "the new york times" this morning. i want to show you from "the new york times" this morning, bob herbert's opinion piece.

host: that is bob herbert's column this morning, saying president obama needs to focus on jobs and the economy. first phone call, henry on the republican line. good morning. what do you think, henry? caller: as far as the economy and jobs, i think there needs to be a -- as far as people and their everyday lives, there is a hold on the rise in gas prices.

that would help us far as the economy moving forward. if gas prices continue to rise, especially coming into the summer season, you will stagnate the economy. if there is any movement in the economy right now, it will be erased if gas prices continue to rise. host: you may be interested in the front page of usa today this morning. they have a story that gas is likely to go up above $3 per gallon. fourth, texas, james -- fort worth, texas, james. caller: we need the health care

reform for the simple reason that health care costs are going through the roof. pharmaceutical companies are making billions after billions. if we can get this health care across american people, we will find that we can lower those big businesses and the big overhead that the big pharmaceutical companies are making. on the job situation that we have and that we need to focus on, we have passed in 1990 with bill clinton and the republican legislature -- we passed a bill that seemed to be unconstitutional to the people because it is taking away from american people. there is not supposed to be a bill that is passed by the senate or the house or the president of the united states that will harm the people in any

way. we can get this money back that we're sending out of our country. those companies that are overseas -- we need to put taxes on the imports. they're not taxing these imports like they're supposed to. host: the front page of "the hill" newspaper says "undecided chairman and to pressure on health care vote." davenport, iowa. caller: good morning. i feel health care is a very important issue. probably one of the most important issues from over a century. you have 45,000 americans dying

every year. if you present that over the last 100 years, you have had over four million americans die. this is the modern holocaust that we have had in america. i would like to see this pas sed, had it been proved so it is affordable for everyone, so everyone can get affordable health care. i would like to see someone set up a holocaust museum. i've heard stories of people who had good health, but because they could not get a doctor to see them, sit back and watch something take over their body. host: on the republican line, you our nexare next. caller: 50,000 people per year die in traffic accidents. i do not know what his point was.

when is this bonehead barack obama going to realize that he won the election? why is he still campaigning about health care? nobody wants this health care bill. it should be quite obvious to anybody who has half a brain. the american people do not want this health care fiasco that they're trying to force upon us. host: this is bob herbert's column this morning in "the new york times." world's president o"mr. obama as are being told that their narrative is not getting through. in other words, it is somehow not been recognized by the slow to catch on masses."

it goes on to say -- hollywood, fla., the democratic line. good morning. caller: good morning. how are you? if people are sick, you cannot go to the hospital and you will be dying. and also about jobs, we need the jobs because people are losing their houses. i am losing my house. my mother had a heart attack because of that situation. we need health care and jobs. host: do you think it's realistic that congress and the president can do both? caller: yes. host: why? caller: that is why people need that. if you think you do not have

insurance, you cannot pay insurance by yourself. if you do not have insurance, how are you going to the hospital? host: front page of "the washington post" this morning. newark, new jersey, seth on the independent line. good morning.

caller: yes, we need both health care and jobs, but jobs are the number one thing. we need small businesses to continue to build job growth. right now people are focusing on bringing things more so to a government controlled state. we need things to be focused on micro economics instead of macroeconomics. health care is something that does not move -- the bill that they have. if we do get health care, we need to have the same exact health care that the politicians have. what they have set up right now will cost too much. host: deborah is joining us on the republican line. good morning. caller: i am definitely for jobs spur. i do not believe anything the

government runs is sufficient. therefore, i feel there is a need for change in health care, but not for government controlled. host: getting a little bit of echo. let me remind you and our viewers to turn off the television when you call in this morning. below the fold in "the washington post" this morning -- as payments are extended, some critics fear programs may no longer be temporary. 11.4 million out-of-work people now collect unemployment compensation at a cost of $10 billion per month. on the jump page of that story inside "the washington post" it

goes on to say this. michigan, dan on the democratic line. good morning. caller: good morning. the number one thing that congress needs to do right now, they need to concentrate on jobs. forget about the health care thing for now and concentrate on jobs. they need to have a tax holiday for one thing. they need to get a fair tax going and stop taking money out of everyone's check. they need to create a demand. that is the only way they will create a demand, i stop doing that. they neit needs to be done immediately. the economy would turn around overnight if they did that.

host: this is the ""usa today" money section this morning. north carolina on the independent line. good morning. caller: good morning. i was talking about the jobs and the health care. host: what do you think? caller: i think obama is doing a great job with the health care. where i live in north carolina, i'm not eligible for any type of medicaid assistance.

i'm 21. that means that i have to pay out-of-pocket when i go to the doctor. i think he is doing a good job as far as trying to get the health care reform. it's hard to get certain health care for a lot of people being that they are not disabled or pregnant. they are trying to cut back on teen pregnancy. i feel like a lot of reasons teenagers are not going out there and getting pregnant is because, depending on what their parents the situation is, they are getting kicked out or they cannot get it. i think obama is doing a good job on the jobs. the unemployment line has gone up since he has been in office. host: st. louis, missouri. caller: i'm calling about both

jobs and health care. obama could have been done with the health care. they know what the plan is. we need both health care and jobs. once the health care thing is done, you have to live in a situation where you really need health care to understand what obama is trying to do. host: on getting health care passed, this is "the baltimore sun" this morning. with in that story, you can see what is going on behind scenes to get a health care bill passed. next to that is a possible deal on abortion.

baltimore, richard on the republican line. good morning. caller: yes, good morning. i just feel that the health care situation is more of a smokescreen because without jobs, no one will have the health care, period. the main thing is the overseas businesses are able to create and the ship to us the materials that this country requires. we are doing nothing about keeping the markets here. that is a whole reason why our job market has collapsed. there are no more businesses here. nobody can get any work.

without jobs, you cannot pay for health care anyway. thank you. host: dallas, texas, ken on the independent line. good morning. caller: i'm wondering where these people are coming from. we can do more than one thing at once. has anyone heard of multitasking? health care is the reason that gm went under, because they could not pay for the health care. the insurance companies should be sending money straight to the medical facilities. that fool who called in from tennessee this morning. he calls in from wisconsin, minnesota, and milwaukee. for him to call the president and it, he should be cut when he does that. he is totally disrespectful.

sure we need health care. that is what is breaking the whole country. have a good day. host: this is the "usa today" this morning. only his firm backers were present, including senator arlen specter. specter was optimistic monday afternoon hearing obama's fiery presentation. we are talking about health care

or jobs this morning. we will continue to do so. first, we want to tell you about a new poll that shows that three in five u.s. voters think that televising the supreme court proceedings would be good for democracy. joining us on the phone is professor peter woolly. professor, block us through this poll -- walk us through this poll. guest: this is a national telephone poll of randomly selected people across the country. the main goal was to find out whether people thought that tv was not just something they favored or did not favor, but whether it would aid in democracy or not.

we asked the question several different ways. for example, we ask them whether they thought that televising arguments in front of the supreme court would be good for democracy, or whether they thought it might undermine the authority and the dignity of the court. in that case, by a margin of better than two to one, voters said it would be good for democracy. host: what did you find out about whether or not they would watch the proceedings on camera? guest: we did ask them later in the series, if they were televised, how much they thought they might watch. 50% said they would watch regularly or sometimes. that is a clear indication that people are very interested in this question. or it made available to them, they would be curious enough

where they would watch it. host: how would you go about asking that question? our viewers will know that c- span going back to 1981 has asked for cameras in the court. if you go to our website, c- span.org/camerasincourt, you can find everything that we have requested. you asked about whether or not you would watch, based on whether or not people watch congress on c-span. guest: that is right. we did look at the work that c- span had done on this project. knowing that c-span was an interested party, we did not consult with c-span. we went on our own to try to validate some of the work that had already been done. we did ask a different series of questions. we constructed the series on our

own. i will have to say that we ride largely at the same results. the first thing we asked people -- i will say that we arrived largely of the same results. we asked how much they watched any proceedings on tv, mainly on c-span. we went back and ask, if it were televised, how regularly do you think you might watch those proceedings? in between, we phrased the question about the court and cameras intruding in the court a couple different ways. by the leg, we asked them -- by the way, we asked that question as it impinges on public opinion. one of the concerns would be the question of whether it would be too much democracy. that is to say, when you have tv cameras in the accord, if people in the living room are watching the justices at work,

would it make the justice is too sensitive to public opinion. -- that is to say, when you have tv cameras in the court, would it change the way they make decisions? if it changed the way they behaved, would that be a good thing or a bad thing? in that case, i think tv has won out. 45% said that the cameras, even under those circumstances, would be a good thing. 31% said it would not be a good thing under those circumstances. host: how does it break down along party lines on that question? guest: that is very interesting. generally there is a partisan split. democrats are more in favor of tv cameras than republicans. liberals are more likely to be in favor of it than conservatives. it has to be said that even under those conditions, the

majorities of republicans and majorities of self identified conservatives favor of the proposition. host: professor, where do the judges come down on this issue? on our website, we have synopsises of what the judges say on this issue. could you talk about that? guest: the justices are largely against this. some of them have spoken out very strongly against the notion of cameras in court. sotomayor probably had the most welcoming attitude about this. specter is a way out in front of this issue, pressing cameras on the court.

in the confirmation hearings, she was the one justice who seemed to be willing to accommodate the notion, and said that her experiences have been very positive, and that she would share those experiences with her new colleagues on the court. host: there's an article this morning in "the new york times" that talks about a few times a year, supreme court justices go out of their way to emphasize their unhappiness by reading a dissent from the bench out loud. the practice is on the rise and is suggesting an increasingly polarized court. what is your take on this? guest: it would be more interesting for the american public and for political scientists like myself if it were possible to see the justices read those decisions,

especially when they are expressing ayer against the majority of the court. would the novelty wears off sooner, or with the novelty we're off later, or maybe not at all? the court's language is not the language of everyday discourse in america. as exciting as it might be to have the cameras there, one of the questions might be -- at what point is it simply interest group lobbyists glued to the tv watching that? even if that were true, is that a good thing? even if it were a narrow audience, do you want them to be able to watch the court? host: professor, you know that we have asked the court several times to release the oral

arguments, the majority opinion, and the dissent, on different cases over the years. we've joined with other media to get those oral arguments released. two recent requests were recently turned down. when you did this survey, did you take a look at whether or not people listened to oral arguments? guest: no, because we know from our own observations that people are not really well informed about the court. they're not well informed about the proceedings of the court. as you are well aware, and your viewers are probably well aware, the arguments are held in the public room, but the public room is relatively small. if you want to get at the arguments of the court, then it is a matter of doing some

serious dating. -- serious digging. if you had the time and skills, you could do that. most people do not have the time and skills. to be informed of the oral arguments of the court, you really have to be dedicated. host: our website is c-span.org /camerasinthecourt. peter woolley, thank you. we will return to health care and jobs discussion this morning. we want to continue to get your thoughts this morning. angela on the democratic line in pearlanmaryland. good morning. caller: you cannot work if you do not have good health. that ties in. to the one gentleman earlier who

said 50,000 people die in car accidents, i would like to ask him if he could get rid of car accidents, what did he? that's what we can do with health care. i worked in the claims department in 1997. i went back to college full time and got a degree in legal studies. when i came back from college, i came back to the health-care industry and i worked in the appeals department. a lot of my time was spent when major claims came in, heart attacks, and things like that, and i would review their medical records for the last seven years to see if they had anything on the application that they forgot to list. for something simple as sinus problems, we could deny you from the beginning of your coverage for these kind of problems, even though the problems you are having now were totally unrelated. they did not want to pay of the

big medical bills when you got really sick. it's a real problem. it has to be addressed. health insurance is a big corporate scam. it really is. host: angela, let me get your perspective on this. the health insurance companies yesterday, the spokesman for the american insurance plan responded yesterday to president obama, talking about premiums going up. he mentioned health insurance companies 22 times. it says here that the spokesman said, "health insurance industry workers do not deserve to be vilified for political purposes." what do you think? caller: i disagree. when i was looking for a job in the health-care industry, on some of their web sites, they would brag about their profits. they are bragging about it.

now they want to raise these profits in the middle of this debate. that shows how little regard they do have for the american people. it is very in your face. it reminds me of what happened recently with wall street, with the banks. i do not see the health-care industry any different from the banks. i think they are greedy. even worse, they are dealing with your help and not your finances. cannot do anything about your health. -- even worse, they are dealing with your health. you cannot do anything about your health. host: dwight on the republican line. caller: good morning. host: good morning. caller: in a republican who has been unemployed since november 2008. -- i am a republican u.s. been unemployed since november 2008. i'm also a veteran. i'm so glad that i do have

health care because i am a vet. that is something i have not had to worry about. however, i do not have dental care. those people who are opposed to health care -- basically, people who do have health care are ready. i do not know why people would suggest that health care is not a right for everyone. i think the president is doing a great job, trying to ensure that all americans get health care. the previous caller was talking about the fact that being too sick -- that will be the situation for a lot of us. a lot of people are losing their jobs. cobra does not work. i could not afford cobra when i was laid off. most people who are out of work, the first thing on their list would be making sure that their

health care is taking care of. host: clyde on the independent line. good morning. caller: 85% of people have health care access. 65% of those people are happy with their health care. 70% of people work for small businesses. jobs are definitely more important. if people get jobs, then they will be able to afford health care. however, what people do not want -- three out of four people do not on this health care package. you can look at the government. you could look at the government's history and their past record with programs. look at social security. it did pay for itself, but now it is going broke. the government has been spending the money. host: let me jump in. the statistics that you gave when you first started talking

-- i think many people have heard those before. remind everybody where you saw them. caller: i got a lot of those from congress and from listening to the debate that we are going on about. even the democrats and republicans, when they say 85%, they're talking 40 million people. half of the 40 million people who do not have health care, they do not want health care. then you take half of that and you get just about the same without health care. first of all, all people have access if they go into an emergency room. it is the same amount people who are illegals in the country. i'm not saying that everyone without health care are illegals, but the numbers come out that way. this health care bill that we are talking about, that the president has brought forth, the people are against it because it does not address the serious problem of health care. it is not going to bring down cost.

hr-3200, even when the study by the congressional budget office, they said it would not reduce cost and it would not make health care more accessible, and it will not improve health care. warren buffett calls this bill -- it will suck the life and energy out of our economy. host: days onve, good morning. caller: one of the things i would say about those statistics -- depending on how you ask that question, people want affordable health care. we know that the health care system is too much for good insurance. it will bankrupt the country. we are twice as much as every other country. one of the things that is flawed

with those surveys is that many people are walking around with health care policies that they're happy with because they have not had to use them. when they get the night, which happens all the time -- i think the california stated that 30% get denied. there's a lot of misinformation. they should be able to do both. the biggest reason health care is not done is because of the influence of the insurance companies. they are doing everything to stop this. my message to the democrats is that this needs to be the best plan available. as it currently stands, it will get slaughtered at the polls. let's not be afraid to do the public option and move on. if they do the right thing, then people will support that. host: there is an article in "the wall street journal" this morning by david cutler. he is a harvard professor of

economics. he breaks down all the different aspects of the democratic bills, and talks about whether or not it bends the cost curve. that is a phrase that has been used a lot in this debate. bakersfield, calif., bar derek n the republican line. caller: i'm calling on behalf of the jobs crisis. whoever said that they should forget about the health care stuff right now is absolutely correct. every day that we focus on anything but jobs, our economy is just spiraling down to a point where we are not going to be able to come out of it. i guarantee that china and all these other countries are just

waiting for our economy to get to a point where they can pick apart our country like vultures. we owe china enough money right now for them to buy our whole economy. host: c-s"the washington post" with their story on president obama's speech yesterday in a philadelphia. it says that 28 states require health insurers to get to mr. approval for rate increases -- require health insurers to get commissioner approval for rate increases. the story goes on to say this.

if you are interested in reading that story, go to politico.com. atlanta, chris on the independent line. good morning. caller: good morning. can you read some more pieces

that may represent more of a democratic view? the pieces you are reading represents more of a republican view. someone said 36,000 jobs lost reduction was not progress. who would write something like that? that is progress. host: it was a column written by bob herbert, who is a democrat. he wrote it for "the new york times" this morning. i was not reading it as an endorsement of what he said, but to start the discussion of what all of you think on health care and jobs. caller: he mentioned the fire and the flickering and said that is not really progress. it is progress. you cannot get mynaiive and forget about what the bush

administration has left us in tree they left us in a big mess. -- you cannot forget about what the bush administration has left us. they left us in a big mess. you had eight years to get it right. now you are so smart that you have all the answers. you did not have answers before. people want health care. you cannot say that the people do not want the obamacare. people want affordable health care. the republicans take that mantra about what the american people do not want. the people want this. that's why they voted for him in the first place. host: washington, d.c., cindy on our line for democrats. caller: i am a registered nurse. i'm for health care. i work for an insurance company. one of my jobs was to make sure that i could do what i could to deny claims.

all of us americans need to know that everyone needs basic health care. in this country, we have what is called superbugs. we have infections, viruses, that cannot be cured by antibiotics. people who do not have health insurance will mix in with the rest of the population. people will get infected. we have a rise in tuberculosis and other communicable diseases. we need to have a basis of care for everyone to screen for different diseases and to help take care of disease. if not, we will all be affected. host: that will have to be the final word this morning on health care or jobs. we'll take a short break. when we come back, we'll talk about foreclosure prevention measures with john taylor. we will be right back.

this weekend, live coverage from the tucson festival of books. starting saturday, hear from authors on their experiences. sunday, panels on writing about history, the war in afghanistan, world war ii, and military and leadership. for more information, go to booktv.org. >> over 1000 middle school and high-school students entered this year's student cam competition. we will announce the 75 winners on march 10, and show you their winning videos.

host: this is john taylor, president and ceo of the national community reinvestment coalition. he is here to talk about foreclosure prevention measures. let's put some statistics on the screen before we start talking. foreclosure rates for january 2010. looking at home affordable modification programs, what congress and the obama administration supports. what needs to happen next in

order for the obama administration and congress to reach that goal? guest: the most important thing is that they need to remove the volunteering nature of participation by the banks to modify these loans. the program they have, the program the bush administration had, was to get the banks and services to voluntarily participate in the government program to modify loans. unfortunately, there are low levels of participation. we showed of the figures. with 300,000 foreclosures per month -- that used to be what we have for year. it is not working. of the modifications they are making, only one out of 10, or 90% are failing. they have to get serious and take off the gloves. they have to say no more

voluntary participation. you have got to work with us to stop these foreclosures because it continues to drive down the economy, drive down property values, and we have to stop this crisis. host: "the new york times" on sunday morning had a piece on this new approach. they will pay some home owners to leave. it will allow homeowners to sell for less than the zero and give them a little cash to see them on their way. how would this work? guest: the government is continuing to nibble at the edges of this program. they're trying to entice people to sell their homes for less money than the mortgage. they would give them a small fee, $1,500, to do that. the bank would have to take a loss on that, and then somebody else would buy this house at a

significantly reduced price. if someone is unemployed and have no options, that might be the option for them. for most homeowners, the property values have simply crashed because of the economy and because of the mouthpiece and lending practices that drove down this economy. -- and because of the malfeasanct lending practices that drove down this economy. we did not want to drive down prices by forcing a short sale. let's reduce it enough for people who want to remain in their homes, and continue to remain in their homes, and continue to watch the economy hopefully improve, and the property values will start to go up. i do not think short sales are the answer. host: do you think banks would participate in a short sale?

guest: i do think it would be in their interest to do short sales in certain circumstances, especially people who have lost their jobs and have no income. this may be the only avenue available for them. host: what about fraud in a short sale situation? is it easy? guest: i do think a short sale lends itself to fraud. four people were looking to just reduce their mortgage -- for people looking to just reduce their mortgage and sell it cheaply to a friend and then buy it back, but i think there are reasonways to show that the borr has tried everything, that they have depleted their savings, that they have lost their income. there are ways of verifying if it is an honest short sale.

host: what impact with a short still have on a person's credit rating? guest: under the president's program, i think they're trying to do in agreement with the bank that it would not have a negative impact. it would be treated as if the house was sold for almost their market value. theoretically, it would not hurt the credit score. host: you sound skeptical. you do not think the short sale is the way to go. you want the administration to be working more closely with those who want to stay in their homes. specifically, how should the administration go about doing that? guest: the same thing we said to secretary paulson and now secretary geithner. they need to purchase these homes. the best thing is to do is to no longer believe it to the banks or the investment companies, or

the government sponsored agencies, to decide to do something or not. go in and take these loans out. you get them at a reduced value. they are no longer worth what they were. just forced the modification, the refinancing of these loans. -- just force the modification. at least then we are no longer waiting for this voluntary participation from the lenders. you are going in and making sure that there are as many as possible. loans that are just morphed into these predatory loans -- you could immediately take all those of the table by refinancing those loans. the other piece of this is for people who are looking at their home and they are saying my home is nowhere near the value of

what i pay off my mortgage. i guess i should just get out from under this mortgage and leave this house. that's a big problem for the government. going in and taking these mortgages away from the banks using eminent domain -- they use eminent domain all the time to take people's homes for highways and other purposes. why not use it for the purpose of keeping people in their homes? take these mortgages, reduce the amount of the mortgage to be more in mind with the appraised value. give the borrower more incentive to stay in the home. host: we are talking with john taylor, president and ceo of the national community reinvestment coalition, about foreclosure prevention messagmeasures. we have a tweet from a viewer that says this.

mr. taylor? guest: the statistics are not good. i would not say they have not fix anything. they have obviously helped some people. if we were grading both administrations for what they have done, the bush administration would get a f. the obama administration would get a d. the numbers continue to escalate. 300,000 foreclosures in january. that is how many we used to get in one year several years ago. what we are looking at now, depending on whose statistics you want to believe, there are at least another 5 million to 7 million more foreclosures. if we're ever going to turn around its economy and get back on track to creating jobs and having a sustainable economy, we

have got to stop the foreclosures. foreclosures are what have gotten us here. they tilled the building industry. who will be building houses when we have a huge inventory of empty houses? -- they killed the building industry. we have got to stop the foreclosures. they're looking at too many on the horizon because of the kind of loans that were put out there that were allowed to be made in the early part of this decade. host: first phone call for mr. taylor. pat on the democratic line. good morning. caller: my partner and i sold off all our income properties and have no mortgage left. we would be lucky if we broke even in the sale of our house. pittsburgh is an extraordinarily

stable market, by the way. when i look at what is going on, especially on wall street, with bankers walking away with our money, and china is investing less in the military industrial complex than we are. they are investing 1.6. we are investing four. how do you think this will go on when you have an endemic prices across the board? -- endemic crisis across the board? the united states is ignoring its people. it is not a sustainable situation. host: john taylor? caller: i think he is absolutely correct. -- guest: i think he is absolutely correct. he is raising an issue that all

americans are concerned with. we have a congress, and their first job is to get reelected. most people think they are mindful and thoughtful about what to do to solve the nation's problems. when you look at the legislation that did not get passed, and you just had a very good show on health care -- we just do not have the kind of thoughtful, committed congress that is going to do fundamental things to make sure the interests of consumers firstcome first. we learned from the financial crisis that because we did not have protection measures in place, you had unscrupulous lenders who were able to do the kind of lending that toppled this nation economically. to this day, we do not have a consumer finance protection agency. we do not have a national

federal law that outlaws predatory lending to we have a credit card bill. the industry already made changes to go around the that credit card bill. the biggest change in the bill is that now credit card companies have to inform you before they're going to stick it to you. we have a congress, unfortunately, that is not willing to be honest and open with the people and say here's what it cost to build our infrastructure for the country. here's what we need to do to make sure we do not have these kind of predatory lending practices. here's what we need to do to have adequate and quality health care for all americans. here's what we need to do for education. instead, it is -- what do i need to say to the people to show that i'm looking out for them and i should vote for him in the next election? they get up and say i'm for

cutting taxes. ronald reagan with the eight worst words from the government is open " i am from the government and i'm here to help ." a long way from john kennedy who said, "asked not you can do for your countrwhat your country car you, ask what you can do for your country." people have to really ask tough questions and hold people accountable. i think this caller is right. if we do not change the situation, if we do not create jobs, if we do not ring in the financial-services sector, -- rein in the financial-services sector, i think we will be in for a long, difficult period. right now we have 5 million foreclosures. we should take care of that right away. we should go in and get these loans modified.

at least take care of that problem and then continue to deal with all the other challenges that we have ahead of us. host: here is an e-mail from one of our viewers. . their property values are going down.

is that the property market? even in the time of loan issuance that were unsustainable or were so expensive, it drove this market into the doldrums. remember, adam smith himself, the god of the free market, he felt it was the most important thing for a democracy, but he also felt that there needed to be ruled law. that is the part that gets thrown out the window with senator gramm and successive congresses, where they were not willing to hold the banks accountable, they all took a walk and left consumers to their peril and to the abuses that the industry created four great

profit, regardless of the bar was ability to pay. host: do you have any numbers about the impact of a neighbor who has a house that he is paying for, is paying the mortgage, fiscally ok, next to a neighbor that could either foreclose or get his loan modified or do a short sale and sell his property for less than it is worth. what is the impact? guest: if your next-door neighbor goes into foreclosure, your house will drop in value, on average, about $7,000. when multiple homes go down, you have multiple impacts. we have somewhere between 35% to

40% of value lost in the country. significant property reductions without that homeowner having done anything themselves to lessen the value. pretty significant. host: john, republican line. good morning. caller: you are talking to someone that had to put 50% down in 1986 to purchase his home. i do not know what the community reinvestment act did, all i know is that we had something called mortgage-backed securities and it seems like it did not matter if the person buying a home was worth less, it did not make any difference if they lied, as long as they got the material to bring to wall street to feed this appetite for -- i have no

idea what these investments were going to be, but if you ask me they were taken into the mainstream market and the mixing sawdust with hamburger. this is a crime to me and i do not see anything being done. it is like organized crime. host: mr. taylor? any thoughts? guest: republicans in massachusetts, you're absolutely right. i hate to say at, but we tried. this guy headed on the head. -- hit it on the head. we charge -- we tried our darndest, but in particular the republicans in control of the senate, tried to pass a legislation that would prohibit these practices. the caller is right. this was a ponzi scheme on the

highest level. investment bankers, many of them very young guys, whose salary and bonuses depended on them moving money in in and out of these mortgage-backed securities. they got $10 million per year, $15 million per year by moving these funds around. once you have exhausted these irresponsible loans, where do you put them? what wall street did was they said look, make any loan that you one. any conditions, we will purchase them. they went to the ratings agencies and said look, the folks that are making a fee on moving this money into the mortgage-backed securities, they

actually paid a fee of the ratings agency. so, they go to these agencies and say look, rate these mortgages. be sure to rake them good, we want people to invest in them, we want aaa ratings. that is literally what happened. people would be surprised to learn that these high-cost loans, 80 percent -- 87% of them had aaa reapratings. you are buying securities looking at these thinking they are terrific, but the underlying premise, no documentation, nothing down, premiums with prepayment penalties, it made these loans unsustainable. the problem was that the broker or the lender got their feet up from.

as long as the bar were paid for three months, they got their feet. the appraiser got their feet. being influenced by financial institutions, it was appraised at what it needed to be appraised at. they were highly influenced. the ones being taken advantage of in in his investors and owners who thought they were getting a loan that was sustainable because they did not think anyone would make a loan for them that was not sustainable. investors saw the rating and thought that they were getting a good investment. the gentleman is right. the republicans in massachusetts are right, we need to go after these people and put them in jail. host: john taylor is the president and ceo of the

national community reinvestment coalition. your annual conference is this week, what will you be doing? guest: we have about 600 organizations, they are community development organizations of people that build affordable houses, anyone trying to find a way to build wealth in their communities to make sure that the financial service sector addresses their building of wealth. if we do not find a way to get responsible lending back into these neighborhoods, there will not be much hope in america of reclaiming the community. but the smart people come to train a lot of smart people. from march 11 of the 14th, on

our website, for interested people, please register. we will be all over capitol hill trying to get members of the administration to appreciate that we have got to stop the foreclosures and pass laws, particularly the consumer finance protection agency. people do not realize that we still do not have in place a system of protection that will make place -- make sure the consumers never get abused, and never have to run the gauntlet of on safe -- unsafe lending practices. looking at what happened in this country, if we are willing to pass a law that says that in the same way that we protect banks, making sure they are safe, sound, and stable, that we have

monetary policies that help the nation as a whole, we need to make sure the average taxpayer does not have to worry that the loan officer is a step removed from being a loan shark. there has been such confusion about what all of this is. every civilized nation has protections to make sure that they do not allow for this kind of predatory lending practice. that is one of the important things that need happen. unfortunately, this congress is more concerned with being reelected in working out for the interests of the average person. people have got to get active on this. what is wrong with the notion of an agency making sure there are no malfeasance practices? >> quickly, the talk is to put this -- host: the talk is to put

this in the federal or will preserve. you are opposed to this? why? guest: ben bernanke has all but admitted that they really dropped ball, and forcing whenever laws they had on the books -- dropped the ball on in forcing what ever laws they had on the books. 1994, they did not pass any rules that would prohibit many of these practices. july of 2008, long after the horse had escaped the barn. they were so late in trying to protect consumers. i could go on about the bailout of aig and allowing the mergers

of bank of america and countrywide, world savings and all of these others, without having conditions to make sure that the delphis loans were modified. literally putting trillions of dollars into the market, bailing them out without making sure that the kind of malfeasance and bad loans that were made, that those things got cleaned up. the leverage that they should have had on the the bush administration and this administration was nonexistent. putting it at the fed is putting it with an agency that has historically had consumers as a secondary thought. i served in the federal reserve system. they were for the banks as their clients. not taxpayers, not you and die. that is who they look out for, that is who they should look out for, making sure that the banks

are not operating unsafely. but you need to manage the consumer protection agency with consumers. host: mr. taylor, we have people lining up to talk to you, we will go to wait twitter, then the phone calls. "why are we not holding the borrower and buyer responsible for buying property that they knew they could not afford? >> a very good -- guest: a very good question, there are a couple of assumptions in their. we actually have more financial literacy programs than ever in our history, but all of this bad lending occurred. it was not the bar wars were ignorant, it was that lenders were allowed to do things they never would have done 10 years ago, the agency would have stopped it. they would have done something about it.

this notion that bar workers went in and should have known better, that is ok to say, but we will always have folks who are not as educated. first-time home buyers, no one to guide them. we need to make sure that on the side of the equation where loans are being issued, that those folks are not allowed to practice on savory or predatory lending practices. host: fond du lac, wisconsin. mike? caller: you explain a lot of stuff i did not realize before, but what i still do not understand, the bailout money, where did that go? if it was because of bad mortgages, did they not pay for the bad mortgages when there

were bailed out? guest: unfortunately it was not that we will give you money, deal with mortgages. that is more what it is now under this administration, but when the program was created under bush and paulson, the money was really to stabilize the financial services sector. i agree, we had to step in. people said that we should let them fail. i think that if that occurred we would not be going through what people call this great recession. it would be a depression at this point, there would be even less confidence in investing in america. hindsight is always 2020, but i think the folks in the bush administration that made that

decision, if they were to make the decision again, they would think twice. it began a domino effect of a loss of investments in america that, by stabilizing the banks and preventing some of them from failing, it told people that your investments are still safe, america is still a strong economy. but there was not any connection to bailing out the mortgages. keeping enough capital in the institutions to survive long enough for the economy to turn around. we are beginning to see results. host: baltimore, democratic line. caller: this all gets me so angry. no one will ever go to jail, but this is not a violation of the

public trust? what is your take on people that make payments? we can afford this, but a lot of people that can afford their mortgages are walking away because they're under water. our home is worth $100,000 less than what we purchased it for. we can make the payments, but everyone gets away with doing wrong things. for the first time in my life it seems like no one cares about what goes on with regular folks that are really trying. we had jobs, we could make the payments, what is the point? there will be a bigger trend of people walking away. what are your thoughts on that? guest: the caller is right, there are people that can pay that are looking at walking away.

i would be careful that, as it will impact your credits for, but those are the bar words that should be talking to their institutions about whether or not the mortgage is too high and whether or not the bank is willing to refinance that mortgage at a lesser rate so that there is more incentive for the bar were to stay in the home. i would recommend that this person continue to pay and i would also recommend that those, if you can find a bank is willing to work with you on your mortgage, it is in their interest and your interest. they do not want to have to try to sell this on a down market. the bank will lose more than if they just reduce the mortgage some. maybe not for the current appraised value, but at least

the amount above the appraised value. yes, it is worth it to stay in because the property value will eventually rise to the amounts where it is currently above the appraised value. on the horizon we can see it going beyond it. it is a real concern, she raises a very good point. i do not think that there are a lot of -- the average person with a mortgage is not sitting there with a calculator, thinking of their mortgages to much given the value and that they should walk away. they are struggling with how to pay the monthly amount. that is the major problem for most people. rising unemployment is driving a lot of people into these situations where they go belly

up on their mortgage. citibank has a new program that i hope a lot of the other lenders follow, allowing six months where the bar work and pay a percentage of their unemployment insurance towards their mortgage while they stay for the sale of the house, rather than the bar were immediately going into foreclosure. there are things that lenders are doing to work with homeowners to keep them in the house, reducing the pain and suffering for all involved. there is much interest in working gathered. the government would be most helpful here to force lenders and consumers to the table. one of the things we have not mentioned on the program, there

was a lot of debate around bankruptcy for reform. hot -- bankruptcy reform. ironically, congress took this away a couple of decades ago, you cannot protect your home. if this protection existed, you would force everyone at the table to renegotiate to a more responsible level where the bar were is still on the hook, but at least it narrows the deficit that the bar were is suffering from, keeping them in their home, stopping foreclosures. host: carol, auburn, massachusets. caller: first of all, i am irate over this situation. you have used the word malfeasance so many times this

morning. all the talk about being inventive, using the programs they could to get the loans through, redlines and the threats made to the banks, but you have not brought up the idea that foreclosures take a long time to get through. these people are living in homes rent free, not paying utilities at the expense of everyone else that is. you have not mentioned the fact that there are people in multiple dwellings, not second mortgages. explain why these people have had adjustments in their mortgages, getting bonus tax credits after the adjustment? sorry i am upset about this, but this -- every american in young

couple that is paying on time, it is not fair. >> she brings up a lot of things -- guest: she brings up a lot of things, but her outrage is in the wrong direction. she should be upset of these a lot -- these kinds of loans were allowed to be made in the first place. we needed a government agency that said that these were predatory. in two years these bar wars will not be able to afford them. one of the things conservatives like to say in this country is that this is the government pushing people into home ownership. the caller mentioned the community investment act. the problem is that there is no factual support for that. you point your finger at something else and say it was the fault of that law.

let me give the example the that lady just said. the community reinvestment act was a simple law that out lot of red lining back in the 1970's, basically saying that banks have an affirmative obligation to loan to working class people, not just the wealthy. at one time, banks would rather make loans with the millionaires. the law also said that this had to be done safely and sound late. when you look -- safely and soundly. when you look at these laws, studies find that less than 6% of these bad loans came from banks regulated by the reinvestment act. these bad loans came from

independent mortgage companies, brokers, and other folks that were not part of the community reinvestment act. they had no obligation and were free to do what they wanted. the federal banking commission, which had all these people to manage the mortgage division, had no capacity to look at this , they allowed these practices to continue, the incentivizing of these mortgage companies to do these loans, this is what happened. no one, not obama, not bush, wanted people to get into an unsustainable home. that does not help anyone. you should be angry.

people should be held accountable, but do not blame the people that walked into a loan officer thinking that they were getting a sustainable loan. you would be surprised how many of them are white and educated. they were being told -- why are you buying this small house? we can give you a big house. little did the bar were realized that the person across the table did not care if you paid the loan back, they cared about whether or not you've got a big loan, the terms and conditions, prepayment penalties. they got a bigger fee if they talk you into those terms and conditions.

they had incentive to do these practices that were not sustainable. sold to wall street, they were gone. no one was sitting in government hoping that the industry would be doing the kinds of loans that are not sustainable. that lenders, that brokers. whenever you want to call let, it was deceptive lending practices. there was little or no oversight. host: our guest, john taylor,

this e-mails for you -- was no one talking about the effect of energy prices on the economy and how much they affected the people close to what? guest: these things are all connected. energy costs, health care. reconnecting highways and bridges, and job creation. the problem is that people in congress may not like my language -- let me use the language of the senator from illinois, dick durbin. "this is the best congress that money can buy." the cheap money folks are very upset with the current administration and the irony is that 95% of americans got a tax reduction. what they're not getting is a healthy economy, health care, quality education, roads and

bridges that are safe and sound , they're not getting a financial services sector that is treating them fairly. we should be lacking people who are the best and brightest, trying to make sure that we pass rules and regulations that can continue the free-market, making sure that the regulations do not have a disparate impact, requiring too much time and energy. regulations that make sure that sales are being done fairly, democratically, equitably. we need laws that address creating more sustainable energy. laws that make sure that people are now finding out once they

get really sick how bad did with the is. our food supply system, let me just say, we have difficulties in this country with the health of our nation. when congress does not lead people, healthy eating, exercise, we are 24 of in the world in terms of high-school education, which is ridiculous. people are so worried about jobs, we have a country where it is not the middle class, it is ball street and the very

wealthy. listen closely to what people running for higher office are saying about the average person, not just corporations. host: john taylor, we will have to leave it there, thank you for your time. guest: thank you. host: next we will talk with peter eavis. the greek prime minister is in washington, d.c. to talk to the president. first a news update from c-span radio. >> the president is meeting with the greek prime minister and senators from both parties. tonight there is a reception honoring greek independence day at the white house.

president of -- vice-president of biden says that -- is president biden says that in direct peace talks will begin in israel. the israeli prime minister will be met with by the vice- president today. one hard-hit battle units heavy losses have helped the u.s. began to push back in southern afghanistan. the striker unit has lost 22 men or the summer. the latest deaths came just a few days ago. robert gibbs spoke earlier,

saying that he thinks this is ridiculous. he says he was forced out by the administration because of his opposition to health care reform. his resignation yesterday follows a staffing complaint. that is one of the latest headlines from c-span radio. >> which four president lived past 90 years old? find out more in "who is married in grants -- who is buried in grant's tomb"? >> let's face it, you can tell a lot about people from the end of their lives. >> a resource guide to every

presidential race, get a 25% discount at the publisher's web site. >> "washington journal" continues. host: peter eavis is joining us from new york this morning. let me show our viewers what the greek prime minister had to say and then we will talk about it. gues>> billing without traffic lights would slow down the cars. let's make the market work for us.

greece, you're up, we have confidence, trusting in each other as partners. there was a debate about whether the european union would work, and then if it was better for it to be big or strong. even now there are debates or is it a nonentity disappearing off the map? up by view is of the world needs more europe today. host: the prime minister will be meeting with president obama today, as well as timothy geithner. peter eavis, what is he saying in have do you expect the u.s. to respond bella guest: i expect

he will try to find out whether or not there is any real evidence that greece has been made a target. use of the inquiry into the hedge funds that may be were colluding against the euro. look, we do not want anything that should be going on happening that could affect us negatively, it would make us -- make it more difficult. i do not know if he will get feedback on what is actually happening. i doubt he will come away empty- handed. host: is greece seeking

financial help from the united states? many people are aware of that situation in the country. guest: they are not even asking for that, not even from europe. at this stage they are not getting anything from the u.s. host: what does the prime minister want? why would he come to the united states at this point? guest: i do not know if this trip was timed to happen now anyway is, but it is coming soon after stories we saw in newspapers for currency speculation, investors targeting greece as a country. i think that he feels under siege because of that. if he goes to timothy geithner to say that this is to my -- too

much, he may get a sympathetic ear. he just wants to let his grievances be known. greece is in the spotlight, making a very difficult for that country to manage this crisis, which is not to say they have not put themselves in this situation, he is probably trying to get any help that he can. host: what is the united states proposing compared europe's proposals? host: with regard to what? host: financial regulations across the board. guest: a good question, we are supposed to be in this together. the problem with that approach is that it can take forever. what you see in the u.s. and the

obama administration is them moving forward on certain things that they want to be done. at the same time you have what is going on in congress. overall we are supposed to have something that takes place across two continents. that may very well happen over time. in terms of what they are supposed to do, they are trying to make the banks safer, making the markets safer and more transparent. how strong a reform? quite mediocre, but i do not think that they want to talk about that. host: you are talking about what the united states is proposing. is your of proposing something stronger? -- is your route -- you're up --

europe proposing something stronger? guest: on the contrary, if you look at what they want to do, it is not that radical. they are not going that far. the reason for that is partly because they believe that the banks are necessary to get the economy going, feeling that if you do too much you could sacrifice operations. philosophically i think they are against that. host: taking a step back, what is the situation in greece? what have they proposed to fix it? how has the european union responded? guest: it is one of those interesting situations where you have a very unhealthy fiscal situation that existed for a number of years. the budget deficit was growing, budget spending was going up,

and no one cared when everything was fine in the world. you could borrow very cheaply in europe in most of the 2000's. and then we had the credit crisis. it caused the economy of the world to slow down. all of a sudden, people started to focus on the government policy efforts across the world. they always looked at the weakest. greece is the weakest in europe. that country naturally became the focus. people wanted to look at what was going on and said it was unsustainable. europe had to stitch together some kind of solution. with all of this opposition to a bailout from strong companies --

countries, they have made greece to do all of the work themselves. telling them to cut as much spending as they could, collect more taxes, and get your house in order quickly. it will be particularly difficult for that country. there is an unfair factor, greece is not the only country with fiscal problems. as i said, markets tend to pick out the weakest. we saw that back then during the credit crisis. the weakest, the first to go, the same thing is happening with countries, schering a lot of people in europe. host: the greek president spoke at brookings, you can go to our website to watch the entire speech. he said he had plans to shrink

public-sector salaries, raise the retirement age. he said that fewer than 5000 greeks declare annual income of 100,000 euros or more. he called for increased transparency. how does the situation in greece and how the union plans to respond, how does it affect the united states? if at all. guest: let me say that that adjustment that he laid out is extremely difficult, there is a lot of opposition in greece. it could get done. the history of fiscal crises is that they take forever. the greece situation has not been taking care of. to answer your question, the problems here will flare up

again in europe. it will cause of the people to look at that imbalances in other countries. of course, they are already doing that. there has been plenty of debate that i am sure that you covered on your program. what happens, when you see one country with real problems, everyone starts to look for the next victim. they always look to the weakest and the strongest in the market. at some point there will be trouble for the u.s., bond issues will be hard to sell. there will be some attempt to cut spending. i do not know when that happened, but look at the numbers. look at how they can out over the next five years. unless something is done to rein in spending or raise taxes,

every country is going to suffer something similar to what greece is going through. maybe not as similar, but there will be reining in in significant proportions in every western country. host: this is from "the wall street journal." "plans for an imf-style lobby in the works at a time when this turmoil is spurning political integration. the european monetary fund was called a medium-term solution by some." "the financial times" said that angela merkel was said to have said "a new treaty would be needed." what is the likelihood of this? guest: various likely. they're basically saying that you can dress it up, using

jargon and a name, but it is basically a very large bailout fund. i do not think that there will be much support in a country like germany for that. if germany does not want its to happen, it will not happen. when push comes to shove, the countries that fund will not have the support. as you probably know, when you have a new treaty, you usually have to have a vote on it. without getting past these regular electorates, the other thing is that with this military fund it goes against the spirit of the original treaty set up, very much based on this idea that you do not let countries overspend.

on the one hand, you have the master treaty basically resting on fiscal rectitude. on the other hand you have this other thing designed around a bailout. they will wind up bailing some of the country's out, but not in something like this. host: fairfield, new jersey. go ahead. college health paying attention to what you are saying, i would like to know why you people have the staying over the victims of the fraud that was perpetuated by the people did you admire so much? the same people that raided our retirement plans, savings, homes, they're going after small countries. you speak with irony and the

disdain, you should be ashamed of yourselves. host: he is speaking of goldman sachs, correct? guest: they are, quite rightly so. you can believe in free markets and still want to see goldman sachs be investigated for what it did to greece. that bank, if it was involved in an attempt to mask the level of debt, it was not doing what it should have done. financial markets thriving when things are transparent. if it was doing anything to hide the greek that, definitely they should be singled out -- greet deatbt, they should be singled out. did is all what is going on in

greece, but the fact is that they put themselves in the situation where they need the bond market. no country should put itself in a situation where it relies on the kindness of strangers, affectively. if they want to fund a deficit that with themselves at the mercy of markets, just like that. host: on that point, "the new york times" wrote this morning that while greece successfully sold bonds this morning, it has more maturing. quincy, massachusets. you are next. caller: i would not look to the european union for any kind of recovery. a classic mistake, there should

have been a large investment factor. you will not get anywhere with europe. we need a global glass-stiegel. it was repealed in united states 11 years ago. it has led to a total collapse in any kind of regulation or protection for the population. last tuesday in texas it was the democratic primary. he sure rogers won the primary with 57% of the vote. her campaign was about the needs of protecting the consumer. if you have no investments

outside of monetary systems, like the british, they will go bankrupt. host: what do you think about the international bill they keep talking about on that level? guest: that would have been the wisest thing to do after the credit crisis. looking at the problems that occurred in investment banking, it was very heavily reliant on short-term funding of the unpaid balance sheets and derivatives on the books. they had an implicit government guarantee. nearly all of them were bailed out except for lehman brothers. they should have said look, because the government bailed you out, you have to separate those very volatile banking

units from your traditional banks. we do not want to give any more government backing ever again. not good for the taxpayer and the democracy overall. for people that do not know what it is, the ruling came after the great depression that separated investment banking operations from traditional banks. and it worked. what happened in this country is you had it for decades, there was prosperity in this country. it helped that prosperity, stopping investment banks from becoming too big. to go back to that, people say it is going backwards, but i think you would make the system healthier. you would not have government backing for investment banks like j.p. morgan chase.

host: arlington, va. caller: going to the root of the greek economic problem, we must ask ourselves, who is advising the greek government? we know that they were cooking the books. goldman sachs was pushing for them to borrow more and more money. we should see some e-mail correspondence between the top advisers. another issue was the hero. everything became so expensive. like in the argentinian conference from 10 years ago. a glass of wine was more expensive in greece than germany. financial institutions are pushing for drastic cuts. reductions in the health care

costs, and many other things. we must investigate, the same thing can happen in portugal and ireland. host: the headline this morning, "portugal sets of plans for deficits." guest: if there is a will to look at, it is what role the banks played in devising new government's. i would hope that that is being looked at. this goes back to the goldman transactions, they were helping a country in such a way that they made their debt looks smaller than it was, that is obviously wrong. that should be pro to see what was happening. i can kind of agree that there

is definitely a need to look at the role of the bank here, but freeze put itself in this situation with unsustainable spending. that is the main problem on the table. when you go to europe and a country like portugal, and lee, or greece, purchasing a glass of wine, in your head you convert it into dollars, it seems incredibly expensive. the reason for that is the hero. when you go to greece, like before, the conversion would have been more the price that you expected. what happened in the row is that their prices were higher than they ordinarily would have been because they were in a single currency zone. which is the other problem.

the previous caller talked about argentina, devaluing was one way to make their currency cheaper, making their economy recover faster. devaluation is the release of anything in the long run, but it gives you a break in which you can help the economy recover. greece cannot do that. that is why this is such a difficult situation for them. getting people off of the government payrolls, people not paying their taxes. that kind of adjustment is difficult, political in nature. host: two headlines from yesterday, "deerow will continue to weaken," and "the euro is a smashing success." what is your opinion?

guest: is that the weakest point it has ever been. i think it will survive, but it will survive at a big cost to the budget deficit of europe. therefore it will remain a relatively weak currency. now, currency valuations have always been relative. what is it begins to? at this point of politicians in europe have crossed a line, saying that they will effectively stand by the countries that have been troubled. they have basically said that if push comes to shove, they will bail them out, weakening the credibility of the euro, because it was never supposed to be like that. host: new york, richard,

republican line. your next. caller: i have a couple of questions, first as the greeks situation, but also this switzerland situation. i watch a lot of c-span, i get a lot of information from ron paul. ben bernanke said that he would not tell people where the money when. i used to listen to national public radio, where the world bank for gave 180 nation's debt. you have david rockefeller bankrupting america to bring everyone down and bringing the rest of the world up. lots of fraudulent information.

host: comments? guest: i think it is iceland, not switzerland that does not want to pay their debts. but i think that the greeks situation and iceland situation, quite a bit different. greece has a much larger economy, you know, thriving tourism industry. it can probably get itself back to a healthier state. iceland is much more serious. a very small economy with a very large debt. i think of the british will eventually backed off. host: texas, independent line. caller: yes, good morning, thank you for taking my call. i am calling because this is all

intertwined. the people that cause all of this, they are still giving money in bailout. i want to know when we are going to stand up as regular citizens? her right now it is greece, and now it is iceland. with nafta? hophead -- who is next? . .

guest: that is where we are at, and it is an awful situation to be in. but that is where these countries put themselves. host: in the opinion section of "the wall street journal," "the

only. -- only lever the greeks have to counter the austerity pressure is to threaten to drop the rope, or in other words, commit suicide. the result would never missed greece, which accounts for 2% of its total gdp, but greece would sure miss the wrote zone. our return to 'zorba the greek' living standards would be a prospect. there is always the imf offering on the sidelines hoping to find a new client." what with the imf to? guest: that is interesting question, greta, because the imf monitors things that greece is already committed to do, but usually, or often, the imf comes in when a country has devalued its currency, and greece cannot do it, because it is in the

euro. when they come in to help, i don't know, south korea in the 1990's, that country would have devalued its at that point, and made an economic and a -- made it the economic recovery and test process a lot easier. greece cannot do that. i do not know what the imf would do it different from what it european union has asked greece to do. they cannot take the easy way out. host: indianapolis, a bill on the democratic line. caller: yes, in the last depression, you know, the banks had a very little regulations. we did not have no fdic. well, when president had the courage, and that is what is missing in washington right now -- he had the courage to take on wall street and set regulations

on the banks, and a lot of the places you are refering, they started deregulating. all of these deregulations has brought this fraud in the banking business. host: peter eavis? guest: that is a very good point. we had a very long period where banks were allowed to do anything they liked, and they did. what it ended up as was the housing boom, were lots and lots of a very bad loans were written, and yes, a lot of them what had been stopped with better regulation -- a lot of them would have been stopped with better regulation. it has been a wasted crisis come in many ways, because we could clean it up and make sure such a crisis could never happen again. more important, to make it safer, much more safer, and i'm not sure the reforms that end up

being enacted will make that much difference. i don't know what will happen next. maybe 20 years time, maybe five years time, could be 50 years time. because of our failure to go further now, we will have another crisis like this almost inevitably. host: howard, on the republican line. caller: well, good morning. peter, i am a subscriber to your newspaper and i read it every morning, and if i were to recommend a newspaper for anyone, especially young people who might need another ankle -- angle, a view of business and reporting and of the opinion page, i would strongly recommend it, because might not really satisfied what you want to hear, but it is another side of the story, i think it is a great newspaper. but let's get to the issue of greece.

i think you said several times that greece was suffering from overspending. let's get down into the weeds of overspending for greece. i think that the majority of debt was created -- that the government of greece has created an cannot sustain comes from the fact that they have given their public employees incredible table and incredible benefits -- incredible payroll an incredible benefits. would you agree with that, peter? guest: that is one of the things, yes. host: howard, go ahead with your follow-up. caller: i would like to equate the greek problem with the california problem, and it is basically the same problem. the amount of money that we spend on, i like to call that a special interest, nothing more than the public employees unions

and so on and so forth, has ruined the state of california. i was born and raised in this state, born in 1940, and my state has just been trashed. add to the gentlemen in massachusetts who wants to bring back glass-steagall, i will make a deal with him. i am in favor of bringing back glass-steagall, but how about this -- how about outlying the davis-bacon act? that would beat a fair trade in my eyes. thank you, pete. host: we will move on to date on the democratic line. caller: i want to speak to something you said that had a lot of merit in it. you said the american government -- it would be wise for them to thdetangle cells frm supporting a large global businesses and allow them to be able to come if they make, and if they fail, they fail on their

own. i think that is a great idea, because i don't think the american people should be supporting a business with american tax dollars if they are our company that is going to fail, obviously. here is a larger point. i don't think that a lot of people talk about this, because the kind of throw it off as a weird question, but it has a lot of merit, and no one ever seems to really address it. they pose people to the conspiracy theorists, but the truth of the matter is that the rothschilds had their hands on a lot of different things. i have researched these people, and i'm telling you, the reason why governments are forced to spend a lot of money is because when these people come in, they come in and day for these central banks -- a former central banks and eight other people's governments, long and all this money, and when it is time to repay as a nation, these people cannot afford -- the

national debt, running in just on top of it, -- running in trust on top of it, and is how it went up running the natural resources. guest: it would be so convenient if there was one small group of people you could blame to it that always makes people feel better. but in this case is not the truth. host: down on the independent line, or next. -- dan on the independents' line, you are next. caller: i would like to follow- up on the last couple of calls. what we used to refer to as the folks out of bretton woods -- we had a new conservative, paul wolfowitz -- neocon, paul wolfowitz, and things have changed for people getting this machine. to accomplish something. a super private-sector is always

going to be better than government, can make better decisions. let me ask you a question. if in fact nations, by agreement, are not supposed be sovereign, the west, and as we bring everybody else in -- i don't know how you do that with malaysia, with all the patches on their - fascism there -- how does that work as you try to implement it with folks who are not that well educated and literally don't have an understanding of what the intent is? that is where you get into the politics of far left and far- right that we see in our country. host: rolef e world bank? guest: again, there is no evidence for a small clique of

people orchestrating the world economy through a bank or international institution. i don't know where people get that stuff. host: is the world bank have a part of this discussion about greece and the euro and the debt situation? guest: well, again, i think if the european union work this out on its own, -- does not work this out on its own, they may go to the imf, or grease may go to the imf. but i don't think that the world bank will be a big part of this. it is basically what you have here is a struggling nation looking for the easiest way out, and there is not one, and so they all try to get help from the european unit, try to do a lot themselves, and it may come to them going to the imf as well. we will see what happens, but unthinkable that will be part of

this. -- i don't think of the world bank will be part of this. host: vincent thomas reston, virginia, a republican, but you with us? one last call from vincent. all right, i will move to michigan, democrat line. caller: if they were to privatize the social security market and put the money into the stock market, where would we be at today? guest: we would be in real trouble. host: do you have a follow-up? caller: i hope all the republicans pushing for deregulation and privatizing social security hear that answer and put it into their six heads. -- thick heads. host: i just wanted to wrap up the conversation by asking you how the markets, how wall street

is responding to the situation in europe. guest: they are still watching it very closely. everybody knows it is not over. there is so much work to be done. there are other countries, and you mentioned a portugal earlier, greta, and you have the u.k., where i'm from, and all of these countries are in eight fiscally very difficult situation. if the economies themselves don't start to grow, these kind of a flare ups will reoccur, and the reason is that when economies grow, the governments can collect more taxes and they can start to pay down their debt. if they do not grow as fast pace, the deficit will get bigger and the situation will get worse, and we will have more greeces down the road. the markets are just watching for that. they are watching every countries -- every country's

fiscal situation any great detail, and they will bet either way, for the country or against it. host: peter eavis of "the wall street journal," thank you very much for your time this morning. guest: you're welcome. host: when we come back, we will turn to a report on alzheimer's. first, a news update from c-span radio. >> "the wall street journal" reports that new york democrat chuck schumer and south carolina republican lindsey graham are working together on immigration reform. under the plan, all legal u.s. workers would be issued an id court with indebted information such as fingerprints to tie the card to the worker. the two senators' plan to meet with president obama as soon as this week to update them on the plan. the russian foreign minister in remarks earlier today says that a new treaty committing u.s. and

russian strategic nuclear arsenals could be signed within two or three weeks. mr. lavrov spoke as representatives resumed talks in geneva over the nuclear reduction treaty. he says the main sticking point is the u.s. plan to build a missile shield in eastern europe. and today is the first day that same-sex couples can marry in the district of columbia. some couples opting for a quick ceremony in a gay rights group office or church, while others said it will wait for a more elaborate celebration. those are some of the headlines from c-span radio. >> which four presidents of the past 90 years old? they were john adams, herbert hoover, ronald reagan, and gerald ford did find these and other presidential facts in c- span's newly updated book, "who is buried in grant's tomb?" >> it is a guide book, a

travelogue, if you will, but it is a mini-history, a work of biography of each of these presidents, and let's face it, you can tell a lot about people at the end of their lives. >> our resource guide, with visits to every presidential gravesite and guides to their lives. it is now available at your favorite bookseller, or you can get a discount at the website, publicaffairsbooks.com. >> "washington journal" continues. host: maria carrillo is the medical director for the alzheimer's association. a new report out that african- americans are two times more likely and hispanics are 1.5 times more likely than white counterparts to have alzheimer's or other dementia. how did you find this out? what are the factors here?

guest: every year, the alzheimer's association publishes the report where we attempt to compile information on alzheimer's at how it affects our communities. each year we see rising trend in the numbers. this year we really focused on these two diverse populations, and that is because we know to in our studies, a compilation of several studies, actually, that we examined, and found that african-americans and hispanics are more likely, as you mentioned, to have alzheimer's. we looked at the reasons behind that, the research, and noted that were not -- there were not any conclusive genetic risk factors that could be attributed, but what we really focused on was to look at the risk factors involved. we found that hypertension, high blood pressure, specifically, and diabetes were the main contributors to those numbers in

terms of the increases. host: what causes high blood pressure and diabetes? guest: in these populations, african-americans and hispanic americans, they just have a tendency to have a higher risk factors. we don't know much about how race and ethnicity contributes to those factors, but we note that those are risk factors that very specifically contradict to an increased risk of -- contribute to an increased risk of alzheimer's disease. african-americans and hispanics are naturally at higher risk for alzheimer's. host: at what age? guest: generally, we know to that hypertension and high blood pressure in middle age contributes to alzheimer's disease at a later age. but research shows us that the good news is that modifying those factors early on, and perhaps avoiding them altogether early in life, or middle age,

you can see a difference in delaying cognitive declines, or maybe even prevent alzheimer's disease and the venture. that is the good news, that you can do something about and modify those risk factors. it is important, because these two populations are rapidly growing in the united states. we want to make sure we get the word out, because awareness of these is factors, modifying these risk factors, can have an impact on alzheimer's disease. host: what about across the board, the rise of alzheimer's? guest: we find that it is on the rise in the general population. 5.3 million americans are living with alzheimer's in the united states, by our calculations . every 70 seconds, somebody is diagnosed with alzheimer's disease in the united states. additionally, we know that by 2050, that number will rise to 60 million, if we do not find a way to stop the disease with medical treatment.

we know that that would translate to an american beat agnes -- being and i guess every 30 seconds and 2050. those are numbers -- an american being diagnosed every 30 seconds in 2050. host: how much in research dollars does the association needed to put forth its efforts? guest: we have launched a bill, we have introduced to congress, and that bill calls for $2 billion in research. currently, the federal government contributes about $460 million towards alzheimer's research through the national institutes of health, specifically the national institute on aging. we feel that the national parks are packed -- the national bricks or act -- national breakthrough act should really give us that push.

we know today that there are five drugs and three clinical trials for alzheimer's disease, and we are pleased with the five, but when you think of the epidemic proportions we are facing of people who are facing alzheimer's disease, that is clearly not enough, that is acceptable. that -- is unacceptable. host: you what the projected changes between 2000 and 2025 in alzheimer's prevalence by state. guest: there are more people that are aging, and we project out of the population so that we can no to where -- note where the changes in aging are by state. we want to make sure they have information for the future plans. we also want to make sure they noted that the increase by

state can vary, as you see by the map. also ensure the federal government and the state governments are aware of the changes so that they can make decisions by state. host: in what part of the country will it become more prevalent? guest: currently, florida, places that are much more populated, like california, the east coast states. host: first phone call for maria carrillo -- we are talking about alzheimer's disease and dementia, and a new report showing that african-americans or two times more likely and hispanics 1.5 times more likely to get the disease. first call from the independent line and connecticut. caller: hi, how are you? i am calling because i think there is misunderstanding in the

statistics come because if you compare the population to populations of african-american populations, and general country like south america or africa, the cases are very rare. the agency has the most people that are white. many of my friends, at least three or four have one family or relatives or friends that have alzheimer's disease, and they are white. i think it has to do with other kinds of signs that we see, or fruits or -- guest: great, thank you for the question, greta. i want to make sure that we

clarify that when we talk about hispanic and african-americans, we're talking about americans. we're not referring to people outside the country, although we do prefer to hispanics who come here from other countries. -- refer to hispanics who come here from other countries. these are people from many different countries, in south america and central america, mexico, the caribbean. but when we talk about the differences in statistics, you are absolutely right. the numbers seem to indicate that in the united states, hispanic-americans are more prevalent than when they would be living in their own countries. a lot of that has to do with the increase in diabetes that happens here, and keep in mind that many of these people are over 65 today. that means they have perhaps lived in this country for many years. that changes that happened in your health, when you come to the country and have a different

lifestyle and perhaps different eating habits, really contribute to the rise in cardiovascular diseases in the hispanic population in the united states. the main driver of that is diabetes. i will tell you that also these statistics come from members that we gather from medicare and medicaid, and many other cities across the country. they are not simply projections, they are actually counts of people. thank you very much for the question. host: our twitter page, of you are asked this -- a viewer says this -- maryland, austin, democratic line. caller: when you ask a question, what is the cause of alzheimer's, high blood

pressure and diabetes -- i did not get it. host: that caller and the twitter, or referring to -- guest: when the moderator asked if the question about the causes of the disease, -- asked me the question about the causes of the disease, it was referring to the increases in the disease in the african-american and hispanic population. the actual cause and the general population, for anyone, because it is a global disease, is actually not known. we know that there are several contributing factors, because there are many studies that indicated that if you have cardiovascular risk factors, like high pressure, cholesterol, diabetes, you are three or four times at an increased risk. if you add in stroke or obesity, that increases your risk factor even more. we have that type of data, and we know that those are contributing risk factors. but the actual cause of the

disease is not known. there are lots of dramatic risk factors that are being investigated because there seems to be some type of genetic link in the general population. not specifically linked at this time to afghan-americans or hispanics, but the general population -- not specifically linked at this time to african- americans or hispanics, but the general population. host: sara on the republican line. caller: thank you for taking my call. i wish i knew these things before my husband passed away. he was diagnosed with dementia. he lived for two years, and years after that, they never did name it alzheimer's. years before he passed away, he had chronic leukemia. that is what i was wondering about this disease. i wish i could study more on it.

do you think isolation -- people, when you don't get out or whatever -- that that contributes to a high risk of you being this way? guest: that is such a great question. that is absolutely very true. many studies have actually look at, for example, depression and isolation, and its link to alzheimer's disease. i am not sure that depression itself causes alzheimer's or the beginnings of alzheimer's disease causes a subsequent isolation, depression, possible with a drawl from social situations. it is understandable when you think of the early symptoms of alzheimer's disease -- short- term memory loss, the inability to remember your friends' names or where you have been for any given period of time did we stress that the association that we need to continue research in this area to find out more about

isolation and depression and alzheimer's disease, and also is stressing the fact that once a person receives a diagnosis of the disease, make sure that person stays socially engaged, active, mentally active. we have noted that that does help in the symptoms of alzheimer's disease. that is a very good question. host: what is the difference between demint and alzheimer's -- dementia and alzheimer's? guest: that is a very good question, too. dementia is an umbrella term. you need to think about what type of dementia. alzheimer's disease is the most common type of dementia, but after that, a vascular to mention it exists, and several other types of dementia. host: what is the overall cost of alzheimer's and dementia? guest: about hundred $72 billion

overall in total care, specifically medicare -- about $170 billion overall in total care, specifically medicare. unlike other diseases, and you actually require 24-hour care, and perhaps even hospice, because alzheimer's disease does not allow a person to remember when they eat, took the medication, or take care of themselves. the ability to take care of themselves on a daily basis is gone. host: michael on the independent line. caller: good morning, greta, good morning, ms. carlo. it seems that the main focus of your study is on the african american and hispanic populations, which are really the most downtrodden -- i will use that term. i would like you to give your opinion on stress. stress, as we know, causes many, many problems in the human population, and it seems like --

i hate this term -- caucasian people or more well off than african-american and hispanic. maybe you should focus on, with the economic downturn in the whole world, it's stress is the major cause of alzheimer's. guest: that is a very good question an interesting point. certainly there is a lot of research on stress and alzheimer's disease. we know that stress is not great for our bodies. i am a narrow scientist by training, so studying -- a neuroscientist by training, so studying stress has great interest the scientific community. we do need to put more research dollars into that. the alzheimer's association does sponsor much research. we are the largest private a founder of research, and to date have done it about $360 million to that. not only the biological side,

but the social side, in terms of the stress. but i will also tell you that the socio-economic factors you mentioned that perhaps work contributors in the african- american and hispanic population may not just be due to the stress, although that could be a part of it. we see indicators that in social economically -- so economic -- socioeconomoically disadvantaged communities in general, there is less likelihood to have access to good health care. going to the doctor and not having to worry about paying the doctor or approaching a medical institution, for example, if you are hispanic american, having a language barrier may be a problem but we feel that in terms of health care and access to health care, perhaps even awareness of the disease, being

disadvantaged socio-economic ally is a contributor. and many surveys and studies have indicated that african- americans and hispanic americans are in the lower socio-economic bracket, especially in that age group. these are wrapped up in complicated issues. host: another tweet -- guest: that is a very good question. certainly, inflammation is one of the leading avenues of research that we also fund, and the federal government does as well. inflation has been studied in several trials ibuprofen, which have been put for clinical trials for alzheimer's disease. they have not yet been successful, but there is quite a bit of research on anti- inflammatory research.

it is not good for us in our body, certainly not good in the brain, and it seems that where the protein deposits that happened in alzheimer's disease in the brain actually promote inflammation. we are trying to focus a lot of research on that, and in addition to that, recent findings show that people who suffer from general information in the rest of their bodies, systemic inflammation, people with the dow -- with gout, perhaps have an increased risk of alzheimer's. the disease may be a heterogeneous disease, meaning that there could be many causes of it, and it could very well be that in certain people, the perfect combination of causes come together to lead to alzheimer's disease. it's a very complicated question. host: do you see alzheimer's dementia happening at earlier

ages of the years? guest: absolutely, very good point. it is the increased age of our community, as well as an increase in the awareness of the disease, and in particular, we also look african-americans and hispanic americans, died last up to six years earlier than their white counterparts -- diagnosed up to six years earlier than their white counterparts. african-americans are twice as likely to have high blood pressure and diabetes. hispanic americans are twice as likely to have diabetes. those are very strong risk factors that drive those numbers. host: and because if you have high blood pressure or diabetes, you have to go to the doctor and deal with those issues first. is that a contributing factor? guest: absolutely. many times, in those populations, african-americans,

hispanic americans, they don't treat those conditions. they leave it and treated for many years, whether it is from access to community health care, knowledge of the condition and how it will affect them in the future -- we feel it is a contributing factor. host: westchester county, new york, and nathan on the democratic line. caller: good morning. maria, thank you for giving me a chance to comment on alzheimer's. you see, my wife has alzheimer's, and she is at a facility and i this occur each and every day -- a visit her each and every day, i want to tell you something, area, that despite all these theories they have about alzheimer's, almost everybody in that facility, including my wife -- it runs in the family. it is the genes that causes alzheimer's. it is the basic, general cause

of alzheimer's. i have investigated, spoken to 39 different people. i have spoken to their families and such. let me tell you something, maybe diabetes and so forth causes a more advanced case of alzheimer's, but basically, it's got to start with the jeans, it is hereditary. host: may think, before you go, are you still there? caller: yes. host: before your wife was put in this facility or had access to it, what was your situation like at home taking care of her? caller: well, of course it was very difficult. i thought i could easily do it, but the alzheimer's association warned me that it was the most difficult thing and it will, and you know what, they underestimated. it is even more difficult.

this facility, assisted living, i call it, with an alzheimer's unit. i visit my wife every day. believe me, i think i am quite right. i don't know what scientists are coming up with, but there is a basic, absolutely basic cause of alzheimer's. you cannot get alzheimer's, in my humble judgment, it is not hereditary -- if it is not hereditary. guest: thank you. genetic causes are being investigated to the fullest. genetic causes are strong indicators of alzheimer's disease. the first, biggest factor is age. as we get older, we have an increased risk to the general population. newmont -- no matter what else you have, what is going on, whether it is diabetes, heart disease, or aging.

the second great contributor is having a relative with alzheimer's disease. it seems to be a little bit stronger. if it is the maternal relative, that seems to be a factor as well. however, we do have people with a genetic link to alzheimer's disease by a first-degree relative that never come down with the disease. it is not quite certain that if you have a relative or are connected genetically to alzheimer's disease, a hereditary or otherwise, he would contract the disease. but it increases your risk. once you add to that additional risk factors like heart disease, high blood pressure, diabetes, cholesterol, then you increase your risk even more. it is a combination of factors that could end up giving us the perfect storm, so to speak. host: los angeles, republican line. caller: good morning, how are you this morning?

host: doing well. bill ahead -- go ahead. caller: i heard our guest made reference to diabetes being part of the problem. in the african-american community and hispanic community, they have a tendency to eat poorly. things like high blood pressure, diabetes, all of these medical issues, they are highly related to poor diets. i'm thinking is that each a plant-based diet, remove foods like white rice, remove alcohol , that all these kinds of bad foods from our diet, then we would see improvement. guest: that is a great question,

i think inherent in discussions about high blood pressure and diabetes is the fact that the risk factors are modifiable mainly through diets, and certainly through medicational intervention. inherent in the discussion is that a healthy diet is always one of the best things to do to combat not only those factors, but alzheimer's disease. there's a lot of research that tells us that a healthy lifestyle by it, and to exercise, believe it or not, and the late your risk of -- can delay your risk of alzheimer's disease. thank you very much, because it is a very important point, that these are things that we can change, we can modify them with our lifestyle. host: new orleans, independent line. caller: i want to mention two things that our government has put in our food chain that has

been documented, and i can bring up the scientific studies if you wish to show the direct correlation between the introduction of these ingredients into our food chain, and the alarming rise in neurological diseases, specifically alzheimer's and other diseases. the first one is aspertame, a genetically modified bacteria. it is an artificial bacteria. it is the excrement from that bacteria -- in other words, aspertame, when you take it, because it is in 80% of our sweeten food -- when you eat it, you are eating bacteria crap. it has neurological damage. ghost: your background is an

8 neuroscience. guest: we examined many risk factors, and certainly, aspertame and nutra-sweet and artificial sweeteners have been extensively studied. we have not found a direct link between artificial sweeteners and the risks as of yet it is certainly under investigation, but as of yet, we cannot definitively say there is a risk. in order to have a definitive conclusion about any particular food or in our mental risk factor, it needs to be studied on a national level with thousands of people. current studies are sufficient and that perhaps we should continue to research the areas, but not generally conclusive for us to make a determination and that recommendation as to

people should or should not eat certain things. host: what are the symptoms of alzheimer's? guest: the main symptoms start with short-term memory loss the association has published 10 warning signs and you can find that at our website. we included difficulty to remember words, very common things, easily being disoriented and lost in space and time. many times people will feel that their loved ones will first have symptoms when the forget words for common things. those are some of the very first signs and symptoms. but the association encourages is that any type of memory loss should be talked through with your physician. it is very important to monitor that. it is hard to know on the first time you have memory loss, because when you are under stress, you forget your wallet,

lose your license but it is important to monitor these things with your physician, so that they can no to any major changes that need further investigation -- note major changes that need further investigation. host: next caller. caller: my mother suffered from dementia, and yet, i visited the alzheimer's association in manhattan. there are things i would like to point out. my mother stayed home, and she died in her home, and i got assistance from the association, which is god's gift. but i would like to point out some things. trying to put this as a black and latin disease, like the most victims of it, and if you take their research, it seems that alzheimer's has no color. what i have learned with my mother's dementia is that she consumed a whole lot of world aids. -- a whole lot of rolaids.

my mother is african american, and has some native american. she ate a very well, never had a high blood pressure or any dietary situation. i find that most of problems when it comes to alzheimer's or dementia has to do with not understanding what a person can or cannot do -- host: all right, we will leave it there. guest: certainly, care givers are an important part of the equation. our recent figures in the report highlights that there are a 11 million caregiver is out there in the united states -- 11 million caregivers in the united states giving 12.5 billion hours to the loved ones. that is estimated to be millions of dollars, really significant part of the equation.

absolutely, with your mother and the risk of alzheimer's disease not having a genetic link, it is hard sometimes for us to have that type of information, because alzheimer's disease is a disease of longevity. we have made great progress in research and investments in many other diseases -- for example, the death rates of diseases like strokes, cancers, such as breast cancer, prostate cancer, and certainly even hiv and aids. those rates are going down, which is great news for all of us. but the death rates for alzheimer's have in turn skyrocketed. it is a disease of longevity. it is hard to know -- our ancestors did not live long enough to be able to see alzheimer's disease. that can be aluminum is another informant was a factor that has been extensively studied,

similar to the call about artificial sweeteners. and enamel -- we have seen that aluminum could be a contributor. however, one that has been studied in humans, we understand using aluminum products -- our body has an inability to allow aluminum to penetrate. we are relatively protected from aluminum spirit -- we are relatively protected from aluminum. certainly, alzheimer's can still affect the person, despite doing everything right, unfortunately, and despite even at not having a genetic link. that is one of the major reasons why even in the general population, this is on the rise, and we must act now to do something about it. increase and research dollars would be key. host: you said that $2 billion is what you want congress to

approve. how would it be used? what areas? guest: much of it would be focused on basic science of the disease, basic biology. what the research dollars to do or really contributed to our knowledge of how the disease actually forms in the brain. and it gives us opportunities to interrupt that process, gives us more opportunities to have molecular targets, perhaps even compounds, the pharmaceutical companies could develop. secondly, there is a large portion of the bill that calls for an increase in the diverse population of clinical trials. that is very important. currently, about 95% of participants and the clinical trials are white americans. we know that with genetics, and race and ethnicity, a good -- it could have different info for what could to bits -- what contributes to the disease.

host: republican line, pensacola, florida. caller: good morning, how are you? host: doing well. go ahead. caller: i wonder if some of the medications that people are using to treat different diseases, could that be some of the side effects? i have both my grandparents, taking high blood pressure medicine, and they or older. one of the side effects they had was starting to have memory loss. it continued on from there. i'm wondering if with different medications people are being treated with, could that be some of the said act? -- some of the side effects? host: one of our twitter people is also saying, or asking the same question, but asking specifically about anti- psychotic drugs. guest: i will address the first one, the first caller. there is a possibility that some

medications could increase memory loss. not quite sure if that is a direct link to alzheimer's disease, because just general memory loss can be because of several things -- certainly a lack of sleep or depression. there is not a direct link to those did specifically, high blood pressure medication, there are several studies going on of high blood pressure medication, because it actually seems to be beneficial for people with alzheimer's disease. specifically to that one, there are some studies currently, even in phases one and two of the development process, early on, looking at high blood pressure medication in alzheimer's disease. that could be the case for other medication, but i blood pressure is not what we know of today. as to the twitter question on anti-psychotics, they are sometimes used in conjunction

with other medications in alzheimer's, because sometimes people as they progress in the disease can develop agitation and other types of psychotic behavior. in general, anti-psychotics are used only if there is no other way to really help the caregivers keep their loved ones safe. in general, they come with many warnings. as probably every one knows, the increased morbidity in people who use them. one has to be really careful in using anti-psychotics with any loved ones, but very specifically people with memory loss and dementia. host: arkansas, independent line. good morning. caller: good morning. how are you, greta? and hello, paisano.

i am 86 years old. i have a question and comment. has anybody ever made a study on sexual activity of people with dementia or alzheimer's? guest: specifically, on the sexual activity as a cause of alzheimer's -- i am not sure if that is the question -- but no, there is never anything studied -- has never and -- there has never been anything study. but there was a study of couples with alzheimer's disease, a couple counseling studies with alzheimer's association funding several of those, and federal government continues to find that type of research. it is important to note that even if your loved one has been diagnosed with the disease, they are still your loved one and a

person with many biological needs. sexuality is part of a couple's life. whether couples want or need to engage in sexual activity once they are diagnosed is a factor that can lead to continued healthy relationship, even with a person with alzheimer's disease. good question. host: another nodte -- guest: it has been known to keep your mind sharp. caffeine is a stimulant. it can keep your mind sharp during the day. exercise can also do that. there have been a lot of studies that indicated that caffeine in coffee perhaps can ward off alzheimer's disease. there have been studies of coffee drinkers, that they have less risk of alzheimer's. it is hard to know what in

coffee is contributing to when you do studies like that, you can bias your study, because they could also just be people who exercise more, read more, they want to stay awake in the morning and are more active. it is hard to know what about coffee may be good, but anything that increases your alertness is very positive. host: wichita, kansas, you are on the air. caller: good morning, c-span, and maria. my mother passed away from alzheimer's in 2004, and she was in a nursing home for 10 years before she passed away. it is a very difficult thing to deal with, especially for caregivers. a couple of questions or comments i had -- she came from a family of 10 kids, and out of those 10, five had alzheimer's over their lifetimes. there might be a genetic link

there. also, the amount of people with alzheimer's over the next, say, at 10 to 20 years, is going to triple. we are going to see a huge amount of increase in nursing home care, and this is going to be even more of a drain on the health care. host: let me leave it there and have you addressed what he said -- talk about characters a little bit. what is the cost to care givers, and the hours that they put in? guest: we estimate about 12.5 billion hours of unpaid, informal care goes into helping your loved one. when you put that together with the 5 million people with the disease, that means almost 17 million people in the united states are living with this disease in some form or another, whether they have it or are caring for someone to that really, of course, but

contributes to some factors with caregivers, because the health deteriorates as they are trying to provide 24 hours, until, as the earlier caller said, they just could not sustain it anymore. it is also important to note that the costs associated with the care is, in our estimation, $144 billion, which is more than the federal government spends on alzheimer's and dementia in terms of medicare and medicaid costs. the costs are absolutely astronomical. host: indiana -- idaho, excuse me, republican iline. caller: i would just like americans to know that nutrition has a tremendous effect on at the body, and therefore on the brain. it has been noted that several countries have far less

alzheimer's disease that americans do, and the nutrition of the people in those countries is far superior. host: we will leave that there and go to the last call if we have enough time to answer. dawn on the democratic line, go ahead. caller: real quickly, i want to know this disease that might daughter-in-law's father has -- i wonder if it is a form of alzheimer's. also, can she recommend a good book that we can get? thank you very much. guest: certainly. certainly, there have been some studies that are looking at links between these and other diseases and alzheimer's disease, but there is no indication curley that it is a type of alzheimer's.

about 24 hours a day" is a great book weakened recommend -- "24 hours a day" is a buckwheat and recommend for care givers. an act -- a book we can recommend for care givers. alz.org has a lot of information. any information can be mailed to you free of charge. host: maria carrillo, medical and scientific record with the alzheimer's association, thank you very much. guest: thank you for having me. host: up next, live coverage of the fda budget hearing, with the commissioner of the fda. it will start shortly. we will bring you there now. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] cp%púgp;p;pgp;p;pap7p7p=p;p;p;p