>> " washington journal" is next. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] host cut debate continues on the floor of the u.s. senate on the health care reform reconciliation bill. we will then say a long list of amendments getting votes through the rest of the week, with a final vote expected perhaps thursday, friday, and saturday. you can watch live coverage of

this morning at 9:00 a.m. eastern time on c-span2. and the president today signed the executive order on abortion, he will sign it closed the to the press. then he gets by what tomorrow to talk more on health care. -- then he hits iowa. and the gop is talking health care as they had to the midterm election. do you think the health care bill and what historians have called the age of reagan? " the new york times" writes about this morning -- " the new york times" writes about this morning. here is the front page of "the new york times." the picture from the signing ceremony at the east room.

as the camera goes down, you can see one of the lead items. in the process, pushing back at inequality.

we look forward to your thoughts on that question this morning. we will get to your calls and just as soon as they start coming in. we will read a little bit more. its moves out some of the

roughest edges of society and it will do so in large measure by taxing the rich. some of the details -- you can read a lot more about this in "the new york times." hillside, new jersey. it democratic line. good morning. caller: i am calling to express my gratitude and appreciation for the democrats for passing this health care bill.

i am a lawyer and i work in the stock market, also appeared i'm not a poor person really by any standard. but i also see the fact that i have people around me who cannot afford health care. i am astonished that the republicans as bright and intellectual as a new to gingrich's -- newt gingrich, that the democrats will pay for passing the bill just like they paid for passing the civil- rights act in 1964. host: take a step back, the so- called age of reagan. it does the health care bill and all of that? caller: excuse me? host: the age of reagan. caller: it probably ends the age

of reagan. as far as i'm concerned. i believe the health care bill was a good bill and that the republicans -- maybe they have to go back and have their consciences checked. host: here is the headline on the jump to this piece. york, pennsylvania, republican, jan, go ahead. caller: i love listening to you guys in the morning, every morning. my question is, but i have been wondering about this through the whole thing. i currently have tricare and i am currently active duty. my concern is -- and i am just curious. and i have not read all 2400 pages, of course. but i'm planning on keeping tricare for myself and my family once i get out and i know there are some people in the same boat. i'm wondering how much more of the cost will increase or will

it decrease and what kind of coverage? well i have the same type? i sort of like what i have now. if anybody could answer the question i would greatly appreciate it. host: i am sure we will show you the details as the days and weeks go on. what about the end of the age of reagan? caller: well, i am not too much on -- i am hoping to get an answer on this so maybe i would just call back later on that. host: the benefits meanwhile flow mostly to households making less than four times the poverty level.

host: pleasantville, california, independent collar. the age of reagan. talking about inequality here, at least in the view of the "the new york times" piece. caller: thank you very much for taking my call. there is one aspect that everyone has missed. why don't they put dental care? when your teeth ago, your health goes. and i have not heard anyone mention a policy or a program in this health care bill which would take care of dental. you still have the insurance companies. the dentists seem to have a free ride.

host: washington, ,caller. what about the notion of the age of reagan coming to an end? caller: i watch you guys every morning -- morning. i hope it is, but i am afraid it is not. it i have been around since hoover. been there, done that. these guys have complete power of the country and they are not going to turn it loose. you still have the supreme court yet to go through for this. host: appreciate your call. lancaster, pennsylvania. caller: i think that age of reagan ended when reagan left office. i think as the caller before me just said, the supreme court will rule on this and make it unconstitutional. i just cannot see us going back to socialism and entitlement programs. i think that is the end of the

era for socialism and entitlement programs, unless there is a major court change with the immigration reform or something where democrats would be the party in power for years to come. i just think the age of socialism is over. host: springfield, ohio. democratic collarq -- caller, your thoughts? caller: i am thrilled to death that this health care bill has passed, and i do think -- i hope that this is the end of reaganomics. host: i'm going to let you go. getting a lot of feedback. here is that line and "the new york times." -- here is the headline in the "the new york times? the centerpiece of the president still aboard effort he writes to end what historians call the end

of reagan. what some have viewed as inequality over the years. in little more about the bill. by 2019, 95% are projected to be covered. up from 85% today.

next call, defiance, ohio. caller: good morning. i just have to sit here and laugh about this whole premise. the congress was notified by the department of justice that this health care bill, if -- that they passed, was unconstitutional and illegal under a 1935 supreme court decision -- versus the united states, a 1992 decision, daily versus drexler, and under a 2004 decision, and yet they went through and did this. when the state to get this before the supreme court, it is going to get shot down based on those decisions. as for this being the end of reagan -- don't count on it because you can't and something

by an illegal action. it makes no sense. and congress is going to find this out very, very quickly. host: here is a message via twitter at this morning. jacksonville, florida, the next call. good morning. caller: how are you this morning? the gentleman who called in earlier about the tricare -- this is not -- not gospel, but if you are under 65 -- over 65 it will remain the same but if you are under 65, it will change. i did not know exactly what it will do. the whole premise of the article is, you know, equality, some of the equal things they have done. if you have a health care savings account, it will be reduced $2,500 and you will not be able to use the money to buy

over-the-counter drugs. your maximum deduction for health care is going to be raised on your income-tax. it used to be seven, now it will be over 10%. and, according to my representative, crenshaw, they will hire 16,500 irs employees to oversee your health care, and that is going to cost $77 billion. so the whole thing goes back to what i call -- i called the white house in march, and if we don't put people back to work, we will not have any revenue to come in to tax the people. the health care for everyone will not take effect until 2014. in the they are going to start collecting the taxes now. so, i don't really see the

promise of the "the new york times" article. it just seems to be a very biased toward -- which we know "the new york times" is. where is the money going to come from? host: here is an update on the senate floor debate. and we will show a piece of last week's action. the hill talked about how the senate adjourned after a chaotic debate -- the chamber adjourned. they are back in at 9:00 today.

here is a small taste of last night's action. >> this is why we fight for people. it is why the health care bill is before us. many people across this country who deserve much better. and we are in the very end. we are ready to pass this legislation. the president signs the bill this morning. this is just to make it even a little bit better. this is an open process. and i urge all of my colleagues to quickly pass of this and help a lot of people and get on to other matters. >> mr. president, -- >> i wish i could stand here and agree with the senator of montana. i wish that as i look at the many bills that just passed the house and now we are getting the bill used to purchase the votes in the house to pass the big bill, that i could say that

america's children are going to be better off, that the people who have health care issues in this country are going to be better off. but that is impossible to say. why is it impossible to say? because this bill, as it passed the house, was an atrocity. host: this update from "the washington post." gop has a last chance to change this bill. that is what is happening on the floor right now. one more part of this piece --

host: kate caught, massachusetts. this so-called age of reagan, is it ending now with health care? caller: thank god it is over. it has been a pretty rough period. ronald reagan was for the corporations and for big business and they gave us the cockeyed. that the money what trickle-down to the people if the businesses get well. unfortunately the businesses are global, not really american. the people have suffered since those policies have put in.

everything that ronald reagan stood for has been thoroughly discredited. unfortunately george bush turned out to be ronald reagan on steroids and he certainly has been discredited. hopefully we have turned the ship of state. we are making a change. slowly we will get back to the people of america which is what this country is supposed to be all about, for the american people, and not to the score -- colgan corp. to have pretty much been eating our lunch all of these years since reagan came in and hoodwinked. i voted for him, i was stupid, i did not realize what was going on and we look at what happened it was devastating to the middle-class, the backbone of this country. thank god there is a new era, i knew obama era. host: the republican line. florida. hello, florida? caller: paul, this is joe.

i just want to say i totally disagree with the last caller. i think the age of reagan is coming back. i predicted the republicans will take over the house and senate and elect mitt romney president and 2012. i think you've got a coalition of the 27 million small businesses, the tea party people, that will give republicans a landslide win in november and house and senate and two years later, he let mitt romney president and i'm working for a strong reagan conservative to be reelected to convert. i thing reagan will come back stronger. less government, less taxes but that will be the big thing in the years ahead, no question in my mind about that. host: appreciate your call. we will hear from you in another month. arlington, virginia, the age of reagan, is it ended?

caller: i think there is no difference between that last caller and the caller before him, they are both nuts. as far as the health-care system, it is not in proportion to my labor. i am not free and independent under the laws. when you consider the reaganesque history, no different. the federal reserve came along. we are trillions of dollars in debt. all these unfunded mandates in a global economy with no defense of our constitution for individuals and independence, freedom, and liberty. as a result the only way to restore the republic is to reconstitute the system and deal with the two parties that are totally corrupt. it if not in that -- inept, the on delusional.

as a christian, the prophetic strong delusion is not -- you cannot a christian, jew, or muslim or anybody and pay for socialized abortions. that is insane? and did think people will do that -- just delusional. it as far as reagan and the correct new messiah obama -- current new messiah obama, they are all not, of their minds. host: this shows the signing ceremony. one of the headlines -- tax increases, not only on the wealthy. have a trillion dollars over 10 years to pay for the bill. if you go into "usa today" and other papers, attorneys general from 14 states are filing legal challenges. they argue that the mandate requires for people to have

health insurance and it exceeds the federal government power. these are attorneys from 14 states, a joint lawsuits in u.s. district court in pensacola. alabama, colorado, florida, idaho, louisiana, michigan, nebraska, south carolina, south dakota, texas, utah, and washington. all of those states, except louisiana, have republican attorneys general. "usa today" and houston, texas. the line for democrats. i had my letters back on my screen. go ahead, trish. caller: two important words. health and wealth. would you rather be healthy or wealthy if you had a choice? i am asking you. would you rather be healthy or wealthy? you would rather be healthy. host: what does it all mean? caller: republicans put so much

on welfare and what people don't need to pay. they want to be the only ones who have money in their pockets and good health. most of the country is not able to pay for health care -- it is more important -- the wealth will follow if everyone is capable -- capable of doing a job in. if you are healthy -- americans need to stop being so racist. host: from the front page of "usa today." they did in a bowl and a show more favor than oppose the health care overhaul -- they did a new poll. the say it is a notable turnaround from surveys before the vote that showed a plurality against the

legislation. that is the lead item and "usa today." if you go to "the wall street journal" there is more about republicans. that is from "the wall street journal." virginia beach, ruby, a republican. thank you for waiting. the age of reagan, is the ending?

caller: absolutely not. i saw yesterday, and i almost fell out of my chair, and advertisements from g.e. -- controls most of our media, going back to advertising using reagan. they certainly do not think it is over. the just try to fool us. host: meridian, mississippi, rose on the independent line. caller: reaganomics is definitely over, the trickle- down effect is over and like the of the gentleman said, we are moving forward to a much more friendly middle-class society and thank god for that and thank obama for passing this health care bill. for me it meant a great deal because my husband had cancer in just two or three weeks before this equation my insurance company attempted to drop him --

before this situation, my insurance company intended to drop him. this will come in handy and let americans know, you people out there, you will love it and this is the greatest president we had since i don't know when and thank you, obama, and thank you, democrats. host: twitter.com -- another twitter message. louisville, ky. danny, a democrat. caller: is a age of reagan over? no parent i think we are going in the other direction. -- no, i think we are going in the other direction. this might sound like speaking down to the other side. the genius of reagan is he cobbled together a bunch of groups that were very strong in their beliefs and they could really get out the vote.

god, guns, the whole bit. for the benefit of the people that the very, very top, a very small percentage. so, as the nation which unquestionably is getting less educated. you see it in a falling test scores of our kids and the general falling behind intellectually of the united states, that kind of plays into it. it just for an example, if you look at just say the 14 states who are suing, and, of course, the state governments are selling at the bequest of the majority of their populations. if you go and take any state ranking, anything to go with -- do with education, act scores, as a team scores, and look at the rankings, out of the 14 states, 12 of them are in the

bottom 25. none are in that the top 10. and only two between 10 and 25. same thing if you look at the presidential elections all the way back to reagan, in the last election there were none of the top 10 states devoted -- that voted republican. and if you go back. so, as the population gets a little less educated and more gullible. yes, you've got the republicans, the two main torchbearers for morals is a drug addict and a sexual harassment -- harasser. and they come to us and said the democrats have the week morals. it is like, you guys are taking your moral cues from guys who are not repentant. host: got to let you go. when to get one more voice in before we wrap up.

malika back to the republican line from atlanta. caller: this is a battle for the hearts and minds of capitalism and socialism. and we as americans have to stand up what reagan called a shining city on the hill and really begin to really live. the devil is in the details. it is not over. the democrats fought for health insurance reform, not health care reform. repealing it sounds very extreme. what we need to say is we will continue to work on health-care reform. now that we know how the democrats will go about repairing our health-care system, we know it is about the big government. so what republicans have to work on is the fact that we are still working on health care reform. thank you. host: plenty of time for your calls. we will take a short time out and talk about the future of

fannie mae and freddie mac with corbett daly, a reporter with which hers -- reuters. see you in a minute. >> this weekend on c-span2's "book tv." on "after w. -- " after w.." william bennett is interviewed by a former editor from time magazine. and the book critics circle awards ceremony.

the route we can look for highlights from the virginia festival -- throughout the weekend look for highlights from the virginia festival of the book. >> our commitment to israel's security and is ross a future is rock solid, and wavering, and during, and forever. >> secretary state, senator, first lady, or attorney have agreed clinton in 1991 -- you can search it, clip it, sharon and more at the new c-span video library with over 160,000 hours of video and 115,000 people. every c-span program since 1987. cable's latest gift from -- to america. >> "washington journal" continues. host: at the table now, corbett daly, economic policy reporter for reuters. several headlines about the future of fannie and freddie.

one headline said geithner backs fannie and freddie reshaping and another headline says geithner rejects full privatization of fannie and freddie. what did the treasury secretary say yesterday? guest: clear as mud. basically he said we will start thinking about reshaping fannie and freddie and we will start thinking -- maybe some time down the road we might come up with a plan and then it will be up to congress to decide what to do but it will be a while to decide. host: remind us of the recent history of fannie and freddie. guest: fannie and freddie are responsible for about half of the mortgage-backed securities in our country. they are the ones who buy up mortgages when you get a loan. they are very important to the housing sector. they started buying up mortgages that were no good and it basically they got into a lot of trouble. so now, they were nationalized

in september 2008 and then treasury secretary henry paulson came and said we need to take over and they said we would do it temporarily and it has been a year and a half, and here we are. host: $125 billion in taxpayer money has been used so far. guest: secretary paul said in july 2008 said we need a bazooka, lots of money. he asked congress for authority to inject money into fannie and freddie. he said he would not need to use it. but a few months later they used it. he injected i think $50 billion and that increased to what is now $125 billion. host: phone number is on the bottom of the screen for our guest, corbett daly corbettreuters -- corbett daly from reuters. here is the treasury secretary

on the hill yesterday. >> i think there is a quite strong economic case, quite strong policy case for preserving designing some form of guaranteed by the government to help facilitate a stable housing finance market. but it cannot be the one we have today. it cannot be the one over the last decade. it will be significantly different. but we will likely conclude that there will be some rules for a guarantee. host: corbett daly, what is the rule on the hill -- mood on the hill? guest: quite a bit of anger from the republicans. it is in 15 months since they took over fannie and freddie and the administration said it will come up with a plan and then the delay the plan and they will take public comments, which is in some ways a stalling tactic to try to get feedback of what should we do so the republicans say we have to act now.

host: you talk about how important fannie and freddie have been to people. put it into a broader context to the u.s. economy? what does it mean? guest: housing market is a huge component of the u.s. economy. during the boom years it was responsible for creating thousands or millions of dollars -- jobs in the construction industry. real-estate agents, mortgage brokers, all of the above. when the housing economy tank, we saw the economy go with it. host: indiana, marked on the independent line. caller: 40 and fannie failed, and put geithner in jail. that is what happened. guest: i could not hear exactly what he said. host: was betty -- very critical of that treasury secretary.

speak more to secretary geithner's approach to the hill. aside from fannie and freddie, he is the messenger. how are they receiving him? guest: as a messenger to the hill? not very popular on capitol hill. some republicans have called for his ouster. a few liberal democrats, the progressive caucus, said he has not handled the economy well. mostly for his role with the bank bailout, especially in the early months. he came to the hill in february of 2009, right after the administration took office and said this is what we need to do with the banking sector. not a lot of detail, was widely criticized. i think in the last year he made up for a lot of that. and repaired some of those relations. not quite the going for his head as a there was. host: a quoted from his

testimony -- it would take months to shake -- shape legislation that the man's consensus but i did not see how this could take years. but he pointed out the self- imposed deadline was missed. what goes into that? why was the deadline missed? guest: i think the administration has a lot of priorities obviously. seven to that was financial regulatory reform -- second to that was financial regulatory reform. and so they kind of delayed that. i think part of that is housing is critical to the economy and critical to the voters and it is a very contentious political issue. basically how much government support should there be for you to get a mortgage. that will set up a big fight and i do not think they want a big fight in november.

caller: yes, sir. i just wanted to say that i have been watching c-span for a while now and each time i hear the republicans talk about fannie mae and freddie mac, to meet it is the sort of a code word for minorities who have been shut out of the housing industry. i mean, when you go in to try to buy a house, you are shuffled into -- what do you call it? the subprime mortgage is what you end up getting. to me personally, i feel that to the housing problem is a result of the racism actually in this country where it permeates every system in this society. so, when they tried to blame fnma and freddie mac as a result

of -- blame fannie mae and freddie mac, they should blame racism. guest: it is certainly a very charged issue. i don't know about the shorthand for subprime loans -- fannie mae and freddie mac guaranteed what are called conforming loans, which traditionally had not been the subprime loans. in recent years they did get into the subprime market to try to compete with the private lenders. but fannie mae and freddie mac were not big subprime lenders throughout most of their history. host: define what a conforming loan is. guest: conforming loan appears to fannie mae and freddie mac guidelines. you have to meet certain requirements, loan to value ratio, how much your house is worth versus how much you are boring, what your credit score is, and it is only up to a certain dollar value which has been raised in certain areas to

$729,000. host: little rock, arkansas, patricia, republican, good morning. caller: 3 or four years ago i lived in houston, texas, and at that time i was astounded because a couple had come over to the united states from some islands and as of late he had taken a fertility drug the -- this lady had taken a fertility drug and the taxpayers paid for months of bed rests because she had the babies and afterwards they had to all be on incubators and it was a huge hospital bill and they paid for that, and after that happened th, the top official from freddie mac came out and gave this couple a

$250,000 home afraid. at the time i thought -- my word, freddie mac and fannie me sell stock and what kind of way to run a business is this? i am sure everybody in the united states would like to have a $250,000 home given to them. i just thought it was terrible. and as far as us giving minorities help, i think that is just an example of what a wonderful country the united states is to be able to do that, but i think it is totally unfair situation. guest: i have no idea how to respond to that. i am not sure -- i had not heard of that case and i'm not sure how health care issues relate to

housing, so maybe you can help me out. host: you could help us probably with this headline. existing home sales -- could see a boost in -- from tax credit. guest: the housing market is not doing too well, as many or probably all of the viewers know. this is the third monthly drop in existing home sales. this is the lowest level in about eight months, i believe. and many economists are worried we will have what is called a double dip, a second drop in housing, and that could be a problem for the u.s. economy. host: explain what the current causes are. a lot of people talking about spring and time. guest: the spring selling season is traditionally the strongest selling season for the market. as you know, congress passed a home buyer tax credit that was

giving $8,000 to first-time homebuyers. it was wildly successful last fall -- or the real-estate industry says it was wildly successful. it appears to have boosted sales. it was very popular and was extended through, i believe, the end of april. antics -- expanded to allow not only first-time home buyers or anyone trading up, buying a new home for a $6,500 tax credit. but the second time around, it has not spurred sales nearly as much basically as -- because analysts say that basically it inflated prices by $8,000 or $6,500. it just takes into account. host: a related head nine. existing home sales declined 0.6%. the supply glut, foreclosures pushed prices lower.

red wing, minnesota, brad on independent line. caller: one thing, i would like to go back a few years when george bush was in office and the republicans were in office. freddie mac and the other one, their percentage of house foreclosures were a lot less than the other banks that had to take money from the american people. what have they done since? when george bush left office, congress had a lower approval rating than he did. so american people know exactly who is doing what to whom. the republicans paid a price for it than that and they will pay another prize over health care. host: long island, new york, anthony, democrat line. caller: as the gentleman just spoke, i do believe there was a

complicity within our government to undermine most of our financial institutions and to siphon the money out of our economy into the pockets or the hands of big business leaders. if you look -- i am on long island's and there was a gentleman, a developer, who was pardoned and then on parton -- remember christmas two years ago right before bush left office? that developer took hundreds of millions of dollars from hud and i am sure he had his hands in freddie mac. the justice the problem brought a case against him to try to recover some of the money and none of it was ever recovered. i think he finally settled for a $10,000 fine after having undermine the economy. he was taking real-estate that the taxpayer already owned through an abstract corp. and then reselling it back as open space to the taxpayers.

çhundreds of millions of dollas were stolen. and then the justice department just through the whole case out. it was ok because he was one of bush's contributors, he contributed to bush, john mccain, senator -- the list goes on. host: question for our guests? caller: i think there has been complicity in the media not looking at these cases closer. they act like fannie mae and freddie mac are these -- like these institutions off somewhere on some desert island that just happen to do this by themselves. no, they were in on it just like everybody else in the bush administration and the clinton administration. it is akin to silverado savings and loan, akin to whitewater, it is all about real-estate and how they are stealing our land and selling it back to us. guest: this is exactly why this

is such a complicated issue. basically what secretary geithner is saying is we will have to have some sort of public support of the real debate is how much public support should there be for housing. that is a philosophical difference between the democrats and republicans. what makes it interesting is secretary dick paulson when he was in the bush administration, obviously very free-market, ended up effectively nationalizing -- nationalizing fannie and freddie when he took over and said we need to come in and run things. so you have this philosophical difference but at the same time so important -- it is difficult to extract the government's role. host: at the big bill gets passed, signed into law yesterday. how does that relate to public support for something so large as fannie and freddie moving forward?

guest: it is hard for me to know. what i have trouble understanding what people bash fannie and freddie, if they did not exist there would not be a 30-year fixed-rate mortgage. that is very popular in this country. so i don't know how you can get rid of them and keep the 30-year fixed-rate mortgage and allow people to boost home ownership when they were -- of one ship. when they were created in the 1930's, homeownership was much lower and it has boasted to about 70%. now some are saying it is a bit too high and maybe some of the people should be renters. but i think everyone would agree that what it was, when it was created, was too low. host: from "the new york times" -- the lack of specifics frustrated

many lawmakers. republican of florida last out at mr. geithner saying, we can't wait forever to find out. it says -- guest: i put both of those quotes in my story as well. he can't get rid of them now both sides do agree you cannot go back to the structure where the government is completely under control, or back to the hybrid status where they were private companies with implicit guarantee from the government, which investors back to it on

what happened, and in fact it did happen, that the government would step in if they got into too much trouble. host: west virginia. janet's on the line for republicans. caller: if you will give me time. i think this covers the whole thing. you can get this on the internet, www.thefreedonfactory --democracy will continue to exist up until the time the voters discover they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. from that moment on the majority will always vote for the candidate who promises the most benefits from public treasury what the results is democracy will finally collapsed due to fiscal policy always followed by a dictatorship. number one, which came from bondage -- from spiritual faith to great coverage, from coverage to liberty, liberty to

abundance, to abundance to complacency, from complacency to apathy, from apathy to independence, from dependents back to bondage. right now we are in apathy to dependents. i wish i had a lot more time. i just think the obama generation -- or more folks are trying to bring this country down and pretty soon we will be like a third world country. and i thank you. guest: :the caller some of purviews pretty clearly. host: richard from arcadia, florida. caller: good morning. similarity between the health care program and freddie and fannie. both big government programs, both doomed to fail. you have to remember, four months before the housing market collapsed, you had the chairman

of the financial committees in congress telling the people that freddie and fanny and housing market were solid and stable. four months before it collapsed. if they take over the health care program, like they said, it will be a tremendous failure, just like the housing market. host: our guest suggested if it were not for fannie and freddie, perhaps the 30-year fixed-rate mortgage product would not exist. caller: 40 and fannie i think were good programs originally, but when congress got involved that is when the have the problem, when they started manipulating the rules. if you listen to the congressional hearings, you had two economists on there, and they both said that what happened in the housing market, did not happen by chance, it did not happen by failure, it happened by criminality. this was a planned criminal plan

by congress and by the people in the industry that allowed this to happen, knowing that there would be tremendous failure and knowing that the taxpayers could pay for it. host: and little more anger about congress and its involvement. guest: i am not sure what to make of that. clearly there was quite a lot of mortgage fraud going on. and part of the problem is, but with the mortgages, when you get a loan and you go to the bank in the ask for money you get the loan and a salad and it is sold again, so no one really cares about what you tell them. that is, i think, what the caller is referencing and i think there is validity to that point. host: our guests backgrounds, time and "thomson financial news" and market reporter for "cbs market watch." corbett daly is not economic policy reporter at reuters.

caller: i wanted to ask the gentleman is the subprime and arm, are they won in the same type of loan? let me host: stop it and get back to you. guest: no, they are not. the digestible rate is as the name applies, the rate will adjust overtime -- adjustable- rate. subprime, it may start off at 2% 05% and rise to something higher than that, or fall depending on what the interest rates do. a subprime loan is a category of loan which, as the name suggests, is subprime, which means of the borrower does not have as good credit as they find our word, and then there was alt-a loan. subprime was thought to be in a small portion of the overall mortgage portfolio but it turned out to be much larger than

anyone thought. host: widely asked about the differences? caller: we just came off of an arm loan last july and we have to pay almost $8,000 to refinance. but had we not come off of that, our payment at the time was $1,200 a month, it would have gone up to $1,400 a month. not only that, our loan was flip-flop, flip-flop, flip-flop. but i don't understand, too, how can they do a drive by thing in order to get the value of your home? like the guy over in tampa gave us a loan on our house and egos and says, what would you sell your house for? i told him. he goes, well, i think we have a gentleman over there who can appraise your house. he did not come in to do your

appraisal so i called them and he said, all he did a drive by. how can they do a drive by appraisal and not come in your house? that is all i have to say. guest: that is a very good question. during the housing boom there was a lot of stuff going on that is what we would say, -- there was not a lot of fact checking, dirt digging, checking to see what people said was true. that may have been actually what was going on. i think from my experience recently, talking to mortgage brokers, the lenders have gotten a lot stricter and it is much more difficult. it changed the way the appraisers are chosen. it used to be such as the mortgage broker could basically say, i've got my friend jimmy and he will do an appraisal, and how much do you need -- the wanted worth $500,000? no problem.

surprise, surprise. now it is a much more strict system where it is done by lottery and there is a lot more of its control. but lenders have gotten stricter. host: to what extent district lending or the availability of loans contributed to this headlines of existing homes sliding compared to the broader economic conditions out there? guest: i think it is all related. i think getting a loan is much harder today than before. it is a lot -- what policy- makers like to calls in in the game. instead of no money down or 2% down, you have the but 10% or the full 20% down. that is certainly part of the problem with the existing home sales. host: james, jamescaller -- james, independence caller.

caller: fannie and freddie, according to the numbers i heard, grew to 40% of 50% of the whole mortgage market. i am not sure what happens to antitrust legislation but it seems like government got a little bit larger in the market. i'm wondering just what kind of anti-trust legislation should be used to pare these bats of the do not threaten the home mortgage market with a have in the past? guest: that actually is a good reminder for me to answer your prior question, action. part of the issue is fannie and freddie do have about half of the loans out there. the federal housing administration is the other part. so the government basically is the mortgage market. very small, less than 10%, private lenders are doing mortgagors. host: before we let you go

back, how easy this playing out in the months ahead? guest: treasury will probably ask for public comments on april 15. they said they want to seek input from the public about what it should be done. it would take that into consideration. excuse me. excuse me. they will take that into consideration. and then they will come out with a white paper some time in the coming months and they will send it to congress and congress will begin debating and we will have the whole process where it goes to committee, the senate, committee, back and forth -- not reconciliation, conference, and we will see where it goes from there. but it could be years before we have a new system. .

it is the secretary of state hillary clinton with her mexican counterpart. wegmans this meeting in mexico about? guest: the meeting itself was a symbolic commitment, serious about their pledge to cooperate with the mexican government in countering these brutal drug cartels.

mostly, amongst themselves. what came from is hard to say. there was a signed agreement with and napolitano about border security. details of that were not immediately released. the u.s. has been flashing for a few weeks that the office of national drug control policy's next strategy will be a significantly different than those in the past. but that also it is not out yet. mostly what came once the u.s. sending a top-level and going to say that this matters to us. host: some of the other names that are part of this trip, robert gates, admiral mullen, homeland security secretary napolitano, dennis blair. what does such a large and high ranking contingent say to the

people down there? mexico and mexico's leaders are frustrated, frankly, with the united states, and appreciated of the corporation. the frustration is the north for traffickers and a handful of these things which are becoming increasingly powerful are funded by u.s. money. the president of mexico on down keep on saying that the u.s. needs to do something from keeping that from happening. as much as $25 billion in cash comes across the border every year and that money goes straight into these crime rings. host: so what can the u.s. say about that kind of money? guest: they say they will increase controls on money laundering and finance.

indeed, they have changed the way that cartels get money -- a wire transfers and the banking are much more difficult, so now they move more bulk cash. one thing that all the secretaries have been very firm on is that they are not going to decriminalize drugs in the u.s., which is something that the mexicans have done. mexican police searching the dozen on the outskirts -- host: mexican police searching the outskirts. we see plenty of pictures, but how bad is it really right now? guest: it is mixed. most everyone goes another normal life with regular street crime, but nothing beyond that.

however, in the border cities and in some of these regions that are currently under siege or the drug cartels basically fight with each other to get access to trafficking corridors , and in those places, people are living under siege. in tijuana, people do not go up, although that city has become increasingly safe. while mexico has looked like a murder capital, indeed, it is happening in small regions and almost all of the 18,000 people killed in the last three years or not innocent civilians. they were not people caught in the crossfire. host: one more than line from " new york times" talking about

$331 million -- that was one of the numbers that came from the meeting -- and focusing on civilian law institutions and focusing on rebuilding communities. could you speak more deeply to the response to that, whether or not that work? guest: that is something that mexico has been pushing for, opening support for that. mexico's courts are such that very infrequently people are put in jail, or they are released shortly thereafter. they definitely need help, they definitely want to do away with corruption. they have public television ads asking parents not to make bribes in front of their children. apple all levels there is some corruption that they are trying to get rid of.

host: martha mendoza, thank you. joining us in the studio is representative henry cuellar, a representative from texas. how bad is it right now? guest: i live in laredo, right near the border, so many of us were ringing the alarm of what was happening across the river. the legitimate trade is here, but at the same time, illegitimate trade, whether human trafficking or drugs, has changed into violence. host: what has the mexican government tried to do about this?

guest: they knew that the situation was going on, but i think they may have turned a blind eye. president calderon takes a different position. he has taken this drug cartel had on -- head on with the assistance that the u.s. has given him. the only problem is, only a small amount of assistance has gone over. keep in mind, we are not handing over a bag of money. it is basically equipment and training. part of it will go to the military. part of it is strategy from the secretary's that went down there, more of a shift to civilian institutions, making them stronger, and looking at

social and economic factors, hopefully preventing jintao from entering gangs. host: will this work? guest: i think so. you can bring in the military, law enforcement, but the gangs are still successful in getting young kids, with no future, no drums, they will be looking at this as a way to make a lot of money. host: the phone numbers are on the bottom of the screen. henry cuellar is our guest. we are talking about the drug violence on the u.s.-mexico border. our guest chairs the committee on homeland security underprepared nest. -- on preparedness.

tell us what your committee does. guest: i am actually now the chair of the border maritime group. we deal with what is homeland security doing to protect the border. one of the problems, of course, i think we need to look at this -- what can we do to stop mexico's struggle? we need to make sure they get the resources so that we coordinate and communicate so that we can provide prevent -- protections, said that while that doesn't spill over to u.s. host: 1 message from a u.s.

official. what is being done about it? guest: any time you talk to the mexican, they will tell you two things. what is coming in from the americans is just consumption spending billions and billions every year. the second thing they complain about it is not arms that are used over there against law enforcement. we are trying to enforce some of the issues, but we need to look at how we stop $30 billion in profits going down to mexico. host: what is the answer? guest: this is an issue that we have been fighting for many years of liberal off the table legalizing drugs. we just have to make sure that we work with -- including rehab with our young people who are using drugs.

host: our guest is in his third term in the house. prior to that he was a u.s. customs broker. the secretary of state in texas. henry cuellar, your first phone call is from georgia. republican line. caller: thank you. this is the first time i have been able to get through. first of all, i admit that our use of drugs in the united states is the largest problem that mexico has. i also think that the drugs coming into america could be stopped within a week. we need so many jobs in america. we could put them on the border

and we would have stopped anybody from coming in. if they were serious about it and not sending people to present for stopping from someone -- for stopping someone from coming across the border, and do what is needed to stop them. if it means shooting them, shoot them. if they do get in here, but them in jail and do not send them back to mexico. they are just going to go back, load up, and come back again. guest: i have three brothers who are peace officers. one of them is a share if right on the border -- sheriff right on the border. this is an issue that we certainly need to stop. first of all, we need to stop

consumption. $30 billion go to mexico every year. i think we need a smarter way to burma border security. i am a big believer in the virtual wall, which means you use technology and cameras to do that. the way we have been doing it is, we have been spending almost $700 million for only 28 miles. four and a half years, 28 miles. at the rate we are going, it will take us 300 years to build this virtual funds because there are literally 200 miles on the border this is why we need to change the strategy. certainly, working with the mexicans, one of the things we have been pushing for this setting up a mexican control on the border so that they can link

up with our side and give better protection. at the same time, we need to work with mexico. central america, that is where 80% of all the cocaine is coming from -- from colombia. we have to look not only at the northern border of mexico, but the southern part, so that they can stop the drugs before they come into mexico, and then the u.s. host: akron, ohio. anthony. democratic collaaller. caller: i have heard something like 60% of profits come from marijuana sales. that is ridiculous to me. prohibition has made a plant that grows in dirt, were ounce

for ounce more than gold. think about that for the second. it is worth killing for some people. you cannot really say it any other way. guest: again, on the legalization of drugs, i do not believe in that. actually, most of the profits that go into the mexican drug cartels is cocaine. most of the cocaine coming in from the u.s. is coming through mexico from colombia. also, what the mexican drug cartels are doing is they are diversifying, going into human trafficking, a human smuggling, and they are going to a

legitimate businesses on the mexican side saying we are going to give you some protection. protection from whom? protection from us. therefore, what you see is a legitimate businesses that are now coming over to the united states opening of stores, restaurants. that is a positive for us, that they on this in the middle class over there. if that happens, certainly, in the long term, it is not good for them. they share about $1 billion of legitimate trade every day between the u.s. that is why when a country shares a 2000-mile border, we have to be smart in our strategy because it affects us and them. host: besides the secretary of

state, robert gates, and john brennan, among others. what does such a high list of individuals mean to you? guest: that means this is a serious situation that we have to address. when you have all of these leaders, it means that it is serious. president obama also spoke with president calderon. calderon is doing his best. one of the bravest we have seen. this means we have to look at the strategy and start adjusting the strategy. right now, we have a $1.3 billion program that was started under president bush, so now we need to look at what comes after this.

i think we are starting to see a shift. less of the military. how can we improve the prosecutorial process? how can we improve prisons so that they can keep people in prison? of course, what can we do to make sure civilian institutions also work in mexico? mexican drug cartels have permeated so many parts of mexican society, so we need to make sure that we help prop up those civilian institutions. a prosperous mexico means a prosperous relationship with us. host: you mentioned $1.3 billion is out there. "the wall street journal" says only one. green million dollars on that money has been distributed. -- $1.3 million of that money

has been distributed. why is that? guest: we are going to be having a meeting on this soon. we need accountability, but how do we provide speed? mexican drug cartels are not waiting on that side to say, okay, u.s., give us the equipment and training, and we are going to wait while they get stronger. we need a stronger sense of urgency to get the equipment and training over them -- over to them as quickly as possible. only $128 million has been given. that means after three years, the speed, the urgency, needs to be there. host: independent phone call. dennis in kansas city. caller: immigration reform is a

hot topic right now. border security, the drug problem in mexico all relate. with unemployment the way it is, could not we just increase our border patrol? i know there have been campaigns to do that. host: what would you suggest? how big? caller: dick. -- big. similar to the work program in the depression. make it big. get serious about stopping people from coming across. host: congressman henry cuellar?

guest: border patrol in the last 10 years has more than doubled its presence. right now we have just over 20,000. it is the largest we have ever had. the other thing i have also been working on it is to have the uav's, predators, fly over the border more. out of the 2,000 miles that we have on the border with mexico, texas has about 300 miles, and they do not have a uav, but we are hoping to get them 12. we have to be smart about this.

immigration needs to have three things. you need strong border security. i am with you on that, but it needs to be smart. number two, some sort of plan that we need to have. if you recall back in world war ii, when our young men were fighting, they left. like agriculture and nursing, and that opened up the door for women to get into those industries. at the same time, we started a federal program in mexico asking them to come over to help us with the agriculture industry. i know that because i am part of the agriculture committee. after the war, they said many of them that, so now we need to look at some sort of guest

worker plan. quite honestly, this is the most difficult -- and i am not talking about amnesty -- but what do we do about the people who are here already? certainly, undocumented people, there are criminals, and we need to kick them out. we have been working on this for four and a half years. the virtual fence, using cameras, drone, to control the border. homeland security has been using part of it right now. they spent almost $700 million in the last four and a half years. 28 miles, multiplied by four and a half years, controlling almost 2,000 miles. it would take us almost 320 years at the pace we are going.

if you multiplied the amount of money, it is a ridiculous amount. we need to be spared -- smart about how we do this. host: republican line. david in ohio. caller: good morning. i have some information if the congressman will listen. years ago i had a friend on border patrol. his foreman told him where not to be so that the mexicans could come across. you can build a fence but you have all this corruption on your border patrol.

when bush was down there, border patrol told no. not to be so that they could come across. you can build a fence and everything, but if there is corruption on our side that is going to let them in, you can build a fence clear across. hal are you going to stop this? -- how are you going to stop this? i have worked all my life for this country. i am a veteran. guest: thank you. that is an interesting question, but first, i have jurisdiction over customs and border patrol. i have lived on the border and i know a lot of the border patrol

folks. they go to our school, our church. the men and women serving on the border patrol are honorable, good, hard-working individuals. does that mean that once in awhile there might be a bad apple? one of the concerns we have right now is drug money may be corrupting some of those folks. the senate just had a hearing on that, as well as on the house side, to make sure there is more internal watch on our people to make sure that they are not corrected. overall, those folks are hard- working, honest people and i want to give them all the support i can. host: fort worth, texas. good morning, renee. caller: thank you for c-span.

i have been enjoying the c-span2 library. -- the c-span library. i spent time when i was younger in mexico. back then, you could walk across the border, enjoy yourself for the day. it was a good life. the war on drugs, need i say more, caused quite a bit of problems for us. i think it made us an enemy. we went to war with drugs, but drugs have to do with people, they are associated with people. it took away the neighborly feeling. going across the border felt

like going through the airport and it was not fun anymore. now it is dangerous. my parents live in san its heathrow -- isidro, and it is spilling over, but the u.s. is asking for it. guest: i am familiar with the situation. i used to go across, have dinner, my wife and i would grow. some things have changed in some areas. keep in mind, almost 90% of the murders that have been occurring are bad guys taking on bad guys. of course, some of them have also been a military and law- enforcement officials trying to do the right thing. a couple of months ago, i was with my family in mexico, i

think it goes all around the christmas holiday. i have a wife and two kids. it was safe. there are certain areas, certain pockets that are considered dangerous, without a doubt. again, it is one of those things where we have to make sure we help mexico. host: before we let you go, i want to get your thoughts on health care. how did you vote the other night? guest: i am voted yes. i read the amendments and i was one of those concerned about the abortion language, but i feel very confident when the catholic nuns say that it is ok to go after it. overall, i think once the american people see that this is not the demon that some people

painted it to be, they will understand what kind of bill is. is it perfect? i will be the first to say no, i know that we can do some fine- tuning later on. host: politico says that the president will have an executive order. you have an invitation to the white house today. why is this meeting closed? guest: i did not know it was closed. other presidents have issued executive orders like this. you have a language, and on top, this is just assurance, affirming the language is not meant to pay for abortion. i am one of those blue dog democrats.

host: henry cuellar, thank you for your time. we will talk more health care in the next half hour. our guest will be senator richard burr of north carolina. in the meantime, some news from c-span radio. >> said democratic whip dick durbin speaking earlier says republicans are engaging in a "political exercise by slowing the reconciliation process." adding, the gop should except when came through yesterday. republicans at the same time say that there are not backing down. the senate resumed debate at 9:00 a.m. live coverage on c-span2. the national urban league is weighing on health care. they say blacks have made gains in overall quality but still lag behind in employment and health

care. in annual state of black america report asked that a $150 billion be pumped into local job creation in hurting communities. in california, restrictions have been relaxed for nonviolent criminals, like burglars, drug offenders, and front stairs. no more random drug test, trouble requirement to check in with an officer. the law aims to shrink the prison population. more on that later in the program. >> google closed its search engine in china this week over concerns of government censorship. today, a commission in congress

will examine internet regulation in china. live on c-span 3 at 2:00 eastern. >> this weekend, former education secretary bill bennett examines america at the end of the 20th-century and the beginning of the 21st. he is interviewed by the former editor of "time magazine." throughout the weekend, look for highlights from the virginia festival of books. find the entire schedule online. host: our guest is senator richard burr, senator from north carolina. what is the gop floor strategy at this point on the reconciliation bill? guest: the gop is not in

control. i think america has realized the strategy is to work with the majority to offer amendments to try to fix things that were broken. this is not the way washington is supposed to work. we're not to both to pass legislation knowing that it is flawed. and we need to have clarification for veterans and their families. this process has been a lengthy process. eight months i have been involved in health care reform, through hours of markups, long debate on the floor. unfortunately, we did not end up with a bill that i could support, but we will try, over time, to make this bill positively affect the american people. host: as part of the republican

mantra now, i want to throw a couple of words your way -- repealed and replaced. what does that mean to you? guest: if you believe the current bill and try to cost for every american, and that the expansion of coverage could have been done much less expensively and more effectively, then you have an obligation to the american people to try to repeal the bill. i do not think it could enough to just repeal. you need to promise to replace it. we introduced comprehensive health care legislation last may. we were the first members of congress to introduce comprehensive legislation. it expanded coverage, did not require taxpayer investment. it really addressed health care costs. that is what is killing our

system. if we do not drive down that cost, it will be no more affordable for the next generation that it was the last. host: taking your phone calls now. richard burr is a republican from north carolina. he has served in the house since 1995. a headline on the "wall street journal" frontpage -- they are basically saying when it comes to financial regulation and no child left behind, the strategy may be no, as a day -- may no longer be no, as they put it. guest: if you look at health

care bill, is inappropriate to have student loans in a reconciliation bill? it is inappropriate to take $9 billion from student loan to pay for health care? in essence, they are going to be overcharging every student on their student loan to balance what they need for the health care bill. i do not think that is what the next generation of higher education signed up for. if we work through the reauthorization of the elementary, some of the other bills coming through congress, it is not that we will be opposed to them, it is just that we want to structure them in a way that the american people will approve of. host: first phone call. caller: i have a couple of questions. has there ever been any kind of thought into how this will affect the u.s. dollar in the global market? number two, why are they

calling in health care reform when it is really health insurance reform? number three, i had a plan that i submitted that called for, number one, actually, it would require repealing the mccarron act dealing with antitrust. it would allow people to buy insurance across state lines. number three, it would require insurance to say across the line, h, price that you will be paying -- age, price that you will be paying. guest: all good points. as we spend money, more than we take in, we risk inflation.

all of these things that we thought were once unthinkable are now possible $13 trillion in debt that requires a $5 trillion interest payment in the next 20 years. this all takes away from the discretionary spending side of the needs of the government. the cbo projects in 10 years the interest on the debt will be $800 billion a year that is the size of our discretionary spending in the military. this is a huge deal. i would agree. this is not health care reform but health care expansion. we have done nothing to address the cost of health care. many of the creative things that americans send us in e-mails, private company that or self- insured -- safeway's health care

costs have gone up 0.5% because of innovations. we have done nothing like that across the country. purchasing across state lines can help out. addressing tort reform. all of that can affect the cost. making sure individual americans can construct their own health care to meet their age, health care, home conditions. i think to create more competition would be a great thing for the system. host: one of your constituents in north carolina. rhett, good morning. caller: good morning. sorry that i missed you the other week in washington, d.c.. or staff was very hopeful and gracious. i want to talk about education.

you are a strong advocate of education in our state. i want to thank you on behalf of our school district for your assistance. a lot of people do not know that north carolina, we are a cutting edge model for education, particularly in our school district. we have a 121 digital conversion going on right now where all students have a mac book 24/7. we are changing the model of our classrooms have to prepare children to succeed in the global economy of the next century. that has been a credit to you and a lot of power forward- thinking educators, here in the state. i have also been able to speak with secretary duncan to tell him about our model and invited him down. i wanted to get your ideas on

how we are heading into the future of education, and again, thank you for your assistance. we hope you will come down to see us next time. guest: thank you for what you're doing. secretary duncan is someone who understands the transition we need to make in k-12 education. we may have differences in some things, but we are headed to the same goal. for any state, functional, successful k-12 education means we have a larger pool of talent going on to higher education. i am blessed with the fact that i represent a district that has such a high percentage of higher education. it is that asset that north carolina has that attracts 21st century investment. education plays an integral role

in economic development. as elementary schools begin to take on the responsibilities of conditioning themselves, and they recognize the next generation does not learn the same way that i did it is not the way that they learn, the way that they communicate. for most adults today, just in to look at your children. they pick up their cell phone not to make a phone call but to send a text message. i think we have to begin to incorporate some of the change in the class from that experience every minute they are outside the classroom. i would just applaud the local community.

across the country, we have models of success. we need to figure out how to export that to everywhere else. we cannot say cost limits our ability because it is not always just putting a computer in front of a student. in many cases, it is simple changes that change the way that we communicate with the next generation. host: what has the administration set about education standards? guest: i applaud secretary duncan's efforts. there are many things in the blueprint that i can support. creating competition by allowing charter schools to grow -- charter schools are the result of apparent dissatisfaction with the monopoly system. when parents choose to do that, i think we need to support them. the true competition, we will make failing schools better with the attraction of leadership, teachers, change in curriculum,

a change in the way they teach. more than that, we have to look at if we are teaching our teachers, the right way to teach. host: toledo, ohio. molly. good morning. caller: good morning. i wish you will give me a moment. my husband passed away june 4. he had cancer. i was his caregiver. we were fortunate. we had good health insurance, courtesy, sir, of his union. the unions that you republicans hate, despise anything that they consider socialist. i took care of him. if we did not have insurance,

his treatment to every week or at least $15,000. in the end, it did not work, but it eased his pain somewhat. i have been for health care. he needed platform to build on. this is what president obama is doing. it is like what we did with medicare, social security. i do not see any of my republican friends giving up their medicare or social security. they will holler and fight until the end. give this man a chance. tell the rush limbaugh's that you followed so closely, not call the president hitler -- give him a chance. what you did on the floor calling stupak baby killer -- this is not good for our country. guest: we are sorry about the

loss on your husband and we are glad you have the coverage you need to take care of the chemotherapy that your husband needed. let me remind you, medicare and social security was passed, not just by democrats, but with republican support. health care affects 1/6 of our economy and the majority of the american people's opinions were ignored. it was not that they did not want reform were covered expansion. they did not want this plan. they read it. all 2800 pages. at the end of the day, they said, this is not for us. i wonder if spending this much money begins to affect innovation in the future. i want to make sure the next generation has the same choices of the treatment that your husband had. the truth is, if we drive

innovation out of the united states, we are not going to have the next chemotherapy drug, the next non-invasive devices. we will have designed health care based on how much money behalf, compared to the quality treatments that are merged, day in and day out. the other alarming thing, where this bill sends us -- it was in the american journal of medicine. a study suggested that potentially as many as 46% of primary care doctors will think about getting of practice. we need to look at the pool of health care professionals and ask ourselves, what our medical schools going with open spaces this year? there is nobody who believes that our goal should be that

everyone has coverage, but in order to do that, we need to invest in prevention, chronic disease management. i do not care what state you are in. you cannot expect that everyone will get the education from an emergency room. 50% of the expansion in this plan was to push them into medicaid, which is the worst delivery of health care that we have been the country. i applaud the fact that union's negotiating good health care for your husband and others. i am supportive whenever a company wants to join a union. there is a process to do it. north carolina happens to be a right-to-work state. that has been advantageous to us from the standpoint of economic development. but that does not hurt north carolina citizens in terms of health care.

private companies have been able to supply, in many cases, as good, if not better, and insurancinsurance than what is d by the unions. postcode next phone call. caller: i hope you do not cut me off. -- host: the phone call. i do not feel like republicans or democrats speak for me, and i will be an opportunity to speak for myself. one of the most debilitating patterns of behavior in our political system today is the fact that president -- precedent has been established in all three branches of government, extreme ideologies have taken

over and infected every branch of, government -- every branch of our government which are used to violate the prime directive of our constitution, both in spirit and letter, which is to balance and separate power. if you will give me a moment, i can give examples of each. there is nothing in the constitution about signing statements and executive orders. it has been a pattern of behavior from our conagra's to surrender their responsibility, both legislatively -- from our congress to surrender their responsibility both legislatively and resistant -- representation of people today executive branch. judicial branch ideology has affected us in the sense that they are making decisions that corporations are schuman's, but

someone might dread scott is a piece of property. host: your response? guest: we are a young country. just a little over 200 years old. you continue to be bald -- evolve. we have always use the constitution as our road map. anyone should be concerned any time we hear too far outside of that. we have seen administrations, not just this one, exert power that is not enumerated to them. we have seen blurred lines between the executive and legislative branch to especially -- branch especially. i think our founding fathers would be appalled at the fact

that we pass something that most members believe have unconstitutional pieces to it. the truth is, it is not for them to sort out. it is for the congress. my advice is we slowdown and vet some of these issues better, based on the constitutionality of them. if the ruling is that they are unconstitutional, they need to be taken up. at the end of the day, many state will challenge the healthcare bill. individuals will challenge the individual mandate. i think it is unconstitutional. i do not think we can force the american people to purchase the product. i think there are ways to do it where we could attract 918-to- 35-year-old, and then maybe

eventually roll them into a retirement account or they want to be in the system. this does not do that because it has mandates. host: here is the headline in the newspaper -- this is a theme that we have seen quite a bit. what is your take on how we approach the economy, and also how to pay for it? guest: i would like to focus on how we create jobs. the wrong thing to do would be to automatically extend unemployment for 12 months. that is discouraging for individuals out there. that decision has been made. the reason we are on another short-term continuing resolution for this is because most of the

money that paid 41-year extension was used to pay for health care bill. so now and the extended unemployment, cobra insurance, cannot be paid for. the payment in it was used to balance the healthcare bill. i would imagine at the end of the day, just let the 30-day extension, they will ignore the pay-go rules. enough is enough. we 0 $5 trillion in interest payments. every 30 days, we are offering our benefits and putting that on the shoulders of our children and grandchildren. host: next phone call. clinton township, maryland. caller: good morning. i want to make a comment about

unintended consequences. when they passed stimulus, in that package there was billions for body scanners ahead of time before the christmas day bomber. in this legislation that was just passed and signed by president obama -- you cannot call this health care reform, it is insurance company reform. i want to know why you members of congress cannot be truthful and tell people what is in there, such as mandates that will make people have vaccines against their will because they will be pushed into medicaid, and in order to give them health care, they will have to do what they are told. that is unconstitutional. guest: nobody believes in transparency more than i do. we are trying to get the word

out on what is in the legislation. we are not always successful. there is not always a political showdown. i do not think our job is to win at all costs. our job is to best -- pass the best policy that we can get. that is why it disturbs me when 16 million of the american people are added to the roles of medicaid. 40% of doctors in america will not see medicaid patients today. most medicare beneficiaries seek their care at the emergency room. the most likely group for chronic disease are individuals who have a lower income. typically, they are on medicaid. if we are to address chronic disease, which is over 70% of our health care costs, we need to educate those individuals on

how to manage that from a disease. we cannot ask an emergency room doctor to do that indication. they are there to treat trauma. we have been on over to do as we continue to implement this bill before some of these mandates go through. we have the opportunity to work in a bipartisan way to modify or change them, or to scrap it and replace it with something that works. host: arkansas. good morning, becky. caller: thank you for taking my call. i have a major issue with an individual mandate coming down from the federal government that i must buy a product. i also have concerns about the overall bill within the next 10 to 20 years.

i do not think the cbo has agreed on the cost. it also concerns me in terms of the debt for the nation. host: anything you want to respond to there? guest: the cbo is an agency that can only score a bill based on how the authors say they will implement it. i think what we will find out is many of the cut that were proposed to pay for this one will not be made it is a fact. it is $540 -- $540 million from medicare. these fees and increases are over $500 billion. when we taxed in medical device, then that tax will be passed through by whoever uses that device. . .

half host: other news from the papers. this from "politico," and the meeting between the israeli prime minister and president obama last night.

"after the meeting, deafening silence. the administration shifted from red hot anchor with benjamin netanyahu to icier suspicion with the prime minister, who completed a round of meetings that he would give ground only grudgingly on the disputed territory. netanyahu met with president obama tuesday evening in two sessions. the first and unexpectedly long 90 minutes, according to one source briefed on the meeting. the meetings were shrouded in unusual secrecy, in part because u.s. officials, who just 10 days earlier called the surprise announcement of new housing and east jerusalem and insult and a front, made sure to reward netanyahu with a series of small snubs. there were no photographs released from the meeting and in a briefing for the press. as of late tuesday evening, and neither side had released the usual readouts of the meetings content, it likely indicator of the distance between the two

sides." chad, republican, good morning. caller: i just have a couple of questions for mr. burr and a statement -- host: go ahead with the statement, because the senator has to get to the hill. he is gone already. caller: my statement from the previous callers who mentioned that the republican party would not give up social security or medicare. i am 32 at i have a long time to pay either one of those things. i would gladly give them up right now in exchange for the money back so that i could better afford my own or 1 k or my own future health care needs. -- a own 401k or future health care needs. host: albuquerque, welcome. caller: i was addressing the person talking about the drug cartels in mexico.

i disagree with his approach. he was really dismissive about making this more of a police- military connection. i believe it is a treatment issue. i think they need to channel some of that money into education and treatment as opposed to a virtual fences and sensors and what not. it is supply and demand, it always has been. they can build as many fences as they wanted until people are understanding the dangers of drugs and education and what not, the problem is never going to go away. the cartel's just feed off of that. host: fred is on the line, hartford, connecticut. caller: democratic congress health bill, lawyer lobby -- there is no tort reform -- union lobby -- they go to see the president, they get their insurance policies exempted from

the cadillac tax. insurance companies and drug companies' stocks go up after the health care bill gets through the senate, when the filibuster was broken. the stocks go up. you get the insurance and the phrma lobbyists. republicans, if they were in power, knowing they are pro- corp., would there be true costs contained? i have something to i have to sit, and i'm very disappointed in c-span. i hope he will give me -- i hope you will give me a moment. there is a bill about so-called immigration reform, and i believe it contains mandates so that we all take government id cards and probably will involve legalization of illegal immigrants. you had a representative gu

tierrez on for quite a long time, a sponsor of this legislation. two other people you had on were pro-immigration reform journalists who were offering softball questions, and you had no one who is opposing the bill or informing us about details in the bill, and no one followed the program with a representative but here as -- rep gutierrez. one other thing, and i thank you so much for the time -- this health-care bill specifically said it did not cover it illegal immigrants. it was a political decision, because they knew that legalizing immigrants was coming. if this bill will cover the -- this bill will cover them if they get to legalization, which is on the agenda next. host: statement on the

immigration issue. with health-care reaching an end here, we know there will be talking more about immigration. in terms of health care, the u.s. senate is in session this hour. c-span2 breed more debate on the reconciliation bill c-span2 --. more debate on the reconciliation bill attached to health. a long stretch of the voting on amendments, and a final vote on that bill, the health care package that the democrats but fourth, could be happening by weekend. roberts, republican, good morning. caller: at like to speak about the louisiana purchase deal -- i would like to speak about the louisiana purchase deal that they are, you know, pushing through with this health care bill. the louisiana purchase and deal -- went katrina hit louisiana --

when katrina in louisiana, congress and president bush allocated $110 billion, and then they give them another $18 billion for fema, and the state of louisiana got another $11.9 billion, $140 billion that they received so far in total funding for disaster relief. and now they are talking about giving them another $300 million. i just looked up on the fbi page, and they are saying that 1300 people were indicted already and they wasted $1.4 billion with people taking money out of this illegally, sheriffs,

councilmen. now we want to give them another $300 billion, up one at a wasted $1.4 billion. -- when they wasted $1.4 billion. host: janet, democratic color, asheville, north carolina. caller: i want to read from this week's "newsweek" in response to senator burr wracking about what carroll and education. -- bragging about a north carolina education. "classrooms are now dividing along racial lines. the naacp has filed a complaint alleging apartheid education. 'i think it is intentional discrimination,' says an attorney at the center for civil rights.

i also want to say in regard to -- what else did you talk about this morning? oh, yes. i want to say that if we jailed and fined outrageously the criminals who are hiring illegal aliens, people would back across the border and we would have to do no more. -- people would drift back across the border aand we would have to do no more. host: internet regulations in china -- if you are interested in the whole googled-china story, 2:00 p.m. eastern time, the congressional executive commission on china will look at internet regulation. this is a panel made up of senators and house members and administration officials. c-span3, at 2:00 today.

the lead story in "the washington post" says that " western firms begin to change approached in china. the bond between western capitalists and agent authoritarian system -- beijing authoritarian system. after google's audacious decision to confront china over the issue of censorship, officials insisted tuesday that the internet giant's case was an isolated one and would not affect china's opening to the west or its market-oriented reforms." there are other stories and the papers about china. philadelphia, republican, good morning. caller: good morning. i am enjoying your show. at the women's history month to all the -- happy with the system to all the women of their. -- happy women's history month

to all the women out there. three weeks after nixon resigned, president ford signed the women's educational equity act. then in 1976, the women's task force. the leader of era america, betty ford did all it took w -- betty ford. all it took was phyllis schlafly to lead to the defeat of the equal rights amendment. host: independent, what are you thinking about today? caller: i was just listening to senator burr from north carolina, and he was stating

about north carolina. most of eastern north carolina, the people are having a very hard time. it does not matter what walk of life you are in. you are talking about teaching them about health care. if they cannot afford health care, if they cannot afford to do the things they are being taught -- host: "the washington post" talks about general robert harding for tsa head. "if workers did have collective bargaining, says the retired army major general robert

harding, the senate briefing, the tsa 'would never bargained away security.'" he remains on the hill this week. "financial times" follows up on a governor jon corzine. he is returning to wall street, according to "the times." "the former chief of goldman sachs is returning to wall street to head and a global -- head mf global. he wanted to come back to the industry since losing his reelection bid in new jersey in november." caller: how are you doing, man? i am enjoying the program. i was very happy about the health care bill that passed. i think the president and nancy pelosi -- i think they are heroes. i will be honest with you.

i think they've done a great job. we have this attorney-general from michigan that is suing along with other states, but he does not represent michigan. he is representing himself. we are happy about the health care bill. everybody's predicting, like the last senator, whoever that was the was on the program -- host: senator burr. caller: they are predicting this is going to happen. how do they know? the republicans don't know what will happen in 10 years. the democrats don't know. none of us know. host: good morning. caller: i am in the health care system, a disabled veteran. the government right now cannot manage the of veterans' care system. the cap on hospital right here -- tampa hospital right here will not accept any more patients. the medications i need to handle

might service connection -- they won't pay for it, so i have to pay for it on the outside. recently they sent me out. i had an injury to my foot, and they sent me home, and two days later it turned to ken green and i am getting my token of -- it turned to gangrene and i am getting my toe cut off. i do not know how the government can take care of the health care system when they cannot take care of their veterans. i should be taken care of and i am not being taken care of. it is a big issue. i am a republican, and republicans have voted against funding the va. at least obama went ahead and funded the va and has added more people for their claims. host: thanks, appreciate you

taking time to weigh in. another call from asheville. jim, independent. caller: thank you for having me on your show. this is my first call. i think is -- i think there is a certain amount of irony that the bush administration legacy of putting some democrats into the congress and senate has allowed health care to actually pass. it's kind of an ironic twist in history that health care actually comes on the heels of his administration. apparently, the american people are not very satisfied -- host: thanks for calling. pittsburgh, pennsylvania. democrats lined now. caller: i am concerned about the folks that you folks of been complaining about for medicare. when you have no problem with

that sending millions and billions up in the air that will never work. i do not know why you come to the conclusion that it is not going to work. you said about money for more room on that space thing. -- sent out money for more room on that space thing. where is the money coming from for the plants and food and everything else? host: mississippi now. republican, good morning. caller: is actually missouri. host: thank you for the correction. go ahead. caller: we're talking about these mandates. but what happens when people absolutely refuse to go along with that these mandates? will be the repercussions of that? has anybody even brought up that? earlier they talked about -- there was never actually an answer to the question. host: thank you for your time

but we will take a short time out and wrap up the program with adam gelb, with the pew center for the states. the topic is a decline in the prison population. first, c-span radio. >> members from the commerce department showed orders for big-ticket manufactured goods rising for a third consecutive month in february, due to strong demand for commercial aircraft and machinery. economists hope that continued strength in manufacturing will help sustain the economic recovery. meanwhile, british treasury secretary alistair darling, delivering the british government's annual budget earlier today it at an anticipated tough national election, warns that recovery is still in its infancy, and there are still tough choices ahead. the credit rating agencies has issued new warnings over britain's fiscal position. russia and the united states had been negotiating for months of replacement to the 1991 strategic arms reduction treaty,

or start, which expired in december. the two countries are close to finalizing the deal. officials said the u.s. wants it to take place in prague, the city where president obama delivered his speech on arms control and nuclear non- proliferation last spring. pakistan is asking to be recognized at that nuclear -- as a nuclear weapons power. they want a civil nuclear cooperation agreement with the u.s. similar to the one that in the ads. the administration has said it is willing to listen to -- a nuclear cooperation agreement with the u.s. similar to the one that india has did the administration has said it is willing to listen to the proposal. host: with us is adam gelb, with the pew center on the states.

what did your study what you find? guest: we wanted to find what has been going on with the prison population. it has been going up and up and up for decades. we noticed that before the recession started, it was coming down. we wanted to check what has happened, and we found some things quite startling. the population has dropped, for two reasons. states are looking across partisan lines right now for solutions. sick and tired of spending so much on prisons, chewing up more and more of their budgets from other pressing priorities. second, they are looking at finding solutions, ways that for less cost and still protect public safety and hold offenders accountable. host: 2.3 million people from state and federal prisons. 8% of the population -- 0.8% of

the population. but actually going down. talk about the solutions. guest: one in every 100 adults in this country is behind bars. there is but a 705% increase in the number of people in prisons. 2.3 million right now. a tremendous increase. it is driven by a number of factors. what is happening now is that states are realizing that new technologies that did not even exist when we started on this prison-building that years ago -- we have read a result protests, gps, it interlocks, -- we have rapid result tests, gps, interlocks three weekend know where -- interlocks. we can know where offenders are and what they are doing. and very specific strategies to keep them away from the places and things that trigger them to use drugs or get involved in

crime. public attention has turned elsewhere. we have the health care debate going on in this town. we have two wars. the economy, of course. public attention is diverted. there is greater and greater public awareness that there are to meet -- too many lower level offenders and we need to save at the prison space for violent criminals. host: we want to get your comments on this study from pew. adam gelb on the decline in prison population, some of the ideas that are out there. more on the numbers and economics of it all. the u.s. prison population as a whole -- $52 billion spent on prisons in 2008. a year translates to about $25,000. a day approbation, $3.42. -- a day on a probation, $3.42

bid put this numbers into perspective. guest: it is more than $50 billion now. more than 7% of state general fund spending is on correction. one in $15 that states have a choice of how to spend. six states are spending more on corrections than they are spending on higher education. something that governor schwarzenegger has raised a flag about in california. these kinds of expenditures are saying to lawmakers at this point, we are not getting our bang for the buck. the question at this point is not so much to prisons reduce crime. of course they do. increase and a presence have something to do with the cry -- increased in prisons have something to do with the crime dropped. but we have so many people in prison that most researchers believe that more and more prisoners will bring less and less crime reduction. the question is how, dollar for

dollar, we can get taxpayers the best bang for their buck. host: first call, florida, good morning. caller: am i on now? host: yes, you are, sir. caller: okay. i am a little bit nervous, because this the first time calling. it seems like a good solution to the prison problem would be to legalize drugs and put them on the care of the doctor. they can do whatever they want in private. i think that is a basic right. so many of the public population is just people who smoke marijuana. when i was a child, we walked down the street and we would see mexicans smoking their pot, and it was legal then, and we used to laugh at them. host: legalization of drugs.

guest: it is an interesting question that is getting a lot of discussion and a lot of quarters, but not in the state capitals. legalization of marijuana does merit discussion, but other drugs, cocaine, methamphetamine, heroin, not the case. the reason is that they're not a driver of costs of the prison system. it is a myth that prisons are full low-level first-time drug possession cases, particularly marijuana cases. it's just not the case. judges and prosecutors are not putting those kinds of people behind bars, largely. it is not a cost-driver in the system. it is that the thing that most states are looking at right now in order -- is not something that most states are looking at right now in order to solve the problem. host: yvonne, new york. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. my question is about how it

costs so much to house them and feed them every year. if you would put them on the welfare program that we have a four other people that -- that we have for other people who cannot get a job, it would reunite families and may provide more support to prevent war criminals going into the system , -- prevent more criminals going into the system, children who have fathers who are incarcerated. this will cost 1/3 of what it would cost to keep them in the prison system, and let them reunite with their families, and get them some community assistance, and have some provisions for them. guest: right. you are touching on are really important point that paul is the second ago, the costs of locking somebody up versus providing for them on the street.

$79 and versus $350 a date for somebody on probation. you can really be up substantially the percentage -- $3.50 for somebody on probation. you can really beef up substantially the percentage of people on parole. the evidence-based treatment programs, hold these people accountable for making sure that they tow the line with their position and do it at a fraction of the cost of a prison cell. preventing violators on probation from going back to prison when they do these things, slapping a gps monitor on them, home confinement and other things -- this prevents the massive cost of we incarcerating -- reincarcerating so many of these people, and it keeps them in a job where they can pay child support and restitution.

host: state prisons -- 1,403,000 people, 6% less than the previous year. prison populations have fallen in 27 states, but have risen in 23 other states. anything about those states in particular? where are they? what should we know? guest: what that kind of a variation shows, with half the states dropping at half increasing, is how important state policy is in this. there is an assumption that states are involved in this reckless rush to release in order to save money but the fact is, texas and kansas, two solid, red, law and order states, in 2007, long before the recession started, started taking steps to control the population. they realize that they're not getting a return on investment and public safety. it costs too much and crime is still high. they took a number of pro-active steps.

you see states like that and that is that come before the recession started, started doing things to slow the level of these low level by raiders -- lower the level of these low- level violators back into prison. host: rich, republican, for adam gelb. caller: we are broke out here. i think everybody in the country knows that. i was looking at the budget for california, and the numbers icy -- california spends $49,000 per inmate, which is twice what you had on your board there. i think the prison guards union, which is very correct in this state -- corrupt in this state -- what is your opinion? guest: there are a lot of reasons why california is in the mess is in. california has been in political

paralysis, has not been dealing with this problem, has been kicking down the road, a lot of chest thumping and fear mongering. the state is talking about doing some and very far-fetched and bizarre things, like building cells in mexico. at the same time, they are doing some sensible things. they passed last year to give counties incentives to stop dumping people back into the state prison system. when someone is on the county probation will come out the county has to pay for the system. -- county probation role, the county has to pay for the system. that is one reason that the prison population in california spike as well, and the state has tried to do something about that. they are trying to concentrate parole officers on high-risk

offenders. if you put all whole laundry list of conditions on a low- level offenders, make them go to treatment and do this, that, and other, they will trip up. even worse, you put them in programs with high risk offenders and they start making relationships and getting into things that they would not have otherwise. they do worse. california is saying, the low risk offenders, let's not spend the resources on them. there is interesting cross-winds blowing in california right now. host: california on the front page of "the new york times" today. interesting figure -- roughly 11% of the state budget, at $8 billion, out goes into the penal system. a lot of money. guest: it is a huge amount of money, and that is what is pumping the discussion with the federal court order. this is why the states are tackling this issue now. it is a consensus at this point,

across partisan lines, that there has to be a better way. that is why we here in congress and washington, senators whitehouse from rhode island, senator cornyn from texas, reaching across the aisle to support the criminal justice reinvestment act. what it does would be to provide a small amount of money to states to gather the data so that the states can roll up their sleeves and figure out who we have here who is a violent criminal that needs to stay behind bars, and who are the low-level offenders, probation and parole violators, who don't really need to have in here for that long. when you see that kind of bipartisan cooperation, it really signals how much the politics and policy in our rent on this issue have changed. hos -- policy environment on this issue have changed. host: our guest was educated at the university of virginia and

harford, worked at "the atlanta journal-constitution," a bit of a journalism background, work for kathleen kennedy townsend in maryland, and he is now director of the prison report at the pew center on the the states. how long have you been doing this report? guest: just a few months. counting the present violation is quite difficult. but we have a great team and a -- we have a great team ant pew. it has been going on for three years. host: next caller. caller: with our governor, pat quinn, there has been a minor scandal, because he released many violent criminals, and a lot of them were rearrested.

we would have preferred him to release may be minor drug offenders or someone who did something a little less extreme. i think they should take these cases on an individual basis more. it is hard for felons to get jobs once they are released. maybe if they keep more monitoring, like other lady said earlier, tax breaks to companies who are willing to give it breaks to people with minor crimes -- maybe three strikes. i just feel like our governor -- our state is broke, and this is a huge mistake, but nobody knew about it until it was too late. i don't know. host: ca any thought -- any thoughts on illinois? guest: there were mistakes made in illinois. there were top officials and the department involved in decision making on this who were let go. no question that is the case in

illinois. other states are taking a lot of different approaches to this. there is an impression that all the states are doing this kind of thing either recklessly or not, but thinking about it. most of them are trying to do a number of things. they are trying to divert low- level offenders from going to prison and the first place, trying to slow their return of the probation violators back. they are trying to increase the success rate and make sure they are law abiding, taxpaying citizens. it really points out the issue at how much the issue has changed at this point. the debate is to become what we started down this 25, 30 years ago, there was a notion that we could build our way out of it. prisons were the answer to the crime problem. now there is really a perception that that is not the case. we have so many people in prison at this point, 2.3 million

behind bars, a cost of over $52 billion to the state, at $70 billion when you combine the federal and local expenditures. what people realize is that there is not going -- is that we're just not going to be able to build our way out of the public, and a question of whether somebody gets out in june or july, the question is, when they do get out, will we be ready for it? will we have strong systems in place to incentivize them to behave and make sure they are paying their restitution? host: with the parole law, what is this doing to improve the situation? -- what are states doing to improve the situation? guest: many of them are turning to new technologies. they are moving to swift sanctioned systems. focusing exclusively on penalties -- we wait until

somebody has violated a crime, and then we lock them up. what the research is doing is -- in hawaii, for example, there is a program started by a former federal prosecutor, a probation program that tells a violators caught here are the rules, you come every two weeks to test for drugs, and if you violate you go to jail for two days. and enforce it. even with meth cases, when you put out word that this is going to be the consequence, even though the consequence is relatively mild, it has an impact. over half of the people stop using coke and meth within a few weeks of getting into the program. they are reducing recidivism and rearrest. it is a real demonstration of how when you try these

strategies and look at the research, you can produce less crime and have less incarceration. host: state's move in different directions, something we touched on as far as prison population. this is a map of the u.s., the percentage change in various states. you are looking at the colors here. the larger increases are in blue and gray on this map. the decreases are in the browner shades. we can just take a look at this map as we take our next call from ohio, a democrat for adam gelb. good morning. caller: i have kind of an adopted nephew. i known him since he was 4 years old. his mother and i have been friends since the third grade. her husband left her and her kids when he was 4 years old. she did her best to raise them. rick was a good boy, was never

in any kind of trouble. he was kind of naive. i spent a lot of time with police. when he got out of high school, -- time with bullies. when he got out of high school, he wanted to meet his father who abandoned him. he went up there for the summer. his father is an alcoholic, does drugs, is a wannabe biker. he had rick doing things his mother never would have allowed him to do. when he came home, he wanted to go to florida to his father's brothers. his mother told him that she did not have the money, and she did not want him to go there. so he was upset, he was angry. he talked to a cousin that he had never hung around with who was in trouble with the law all the time, older than rick.

he told them he knew how to get money. he got ricky drinking and he gave them drugs, which he had never done before, and he told me they would rob two houses and there would be nobody home -- told him they would rob two houses and there would be nobody home. unfortunately, there were two older women. his cousin threatened to women and tried to force one of them to have oral sex. they did not get any money. the end of stealing one these car. they wrecked it -- they ended up stealing what ladies car. they've wrecked it. and he just up and ran. he was wandering the streets, so messed up that he did not know where he was. the police picked him up. i do not even know if he was read his rights. this was 25 years ago. he had a court appointed lawyer.

at that time, the prosecutor was up for reelection, and the judge and him wanted to make an example out of them. they called it "attempted rape," and rick wanted to plead not guilty and be tried by juries -- host: question for our guest? caller: he is still in prison. he is still in there. he has been in there since he was 18 years old. he has taken every program. he has not been in trouble. small engine repair, and classes, anything he could do. i don't understand why, when he comes up for parole, they never let him out. host: adam gelb. guest: obviously, a very distressing case and situation.

we have prisons to lot of violent and career criminals, and we need to make sure that we have space for those kinds of offenders. what we see going around -- going on around the country is that there are lots of people on the other end of the spectrum who do not need to be taking up those prison beds, and we need to be taking a hard look, whether it is illinois are colorado or mississippi, texas as well, states taking a look and seeing who is in here, who has done their time, and can be safely released. if we save some money from that, how do we reinvest the savings from prison into the stronger parole and probation supervision programs? host: twitter message for you -- can you explain the differences? guest: some states have

privatized either the building of the operations. we looked at the research for this, and we have not found a significant difference between the costs. sometimes it is faster, if the state is looking to build a prison, to get a private company to do that. but in the end, the costs for the inmates does not seem to be all that different. right now, a lot of states are not building, they are contacting in some states -- pennsylvania, for example, which has had a spike in its prison population -- they are moving inmates into other states that are shrinking the populations. host: george is standing by, republican. caller: to me, what is is that these kids don't grow up without a moral base. that is why there is a lot of bribery ever since the 1960's, they took the bible out -- that

is why there is a lot of crime. ever since the 1960's, when the to the bible out of the dam classroom, that is what a lot of this started in this country. it would not hurt. host: moral decline, in his view. guest: crime and has been -- crime has been dropping for about 17 years. one of the interesting thing and a drop in prison population is that it lags so behind the drop in crime. whether it is moral or other factors that people have mentioned, what a lot of this comes back to his state policy -- is a policy choices. there are seven states in the past years that have reduced their prime rates and incarceration rates at the same time. -- that have reduced their prime rates and incarceration rates at the same time. -- crime rates and incarceration

rates at the same time. there are ways that states can reduce their prime -- crime rates, hold offenders accountable, and that sink more and more of the budget -- not to more and more of their budgets into prisons. host: we are talking about declining state prison populations. adam gelb is our guest, director of the prison report at the pew center on the the state's three talk about how federal growth continues to occur. can you speak to that? guest: when you factor in federal growth, there is a bit more of an increase and the federal oblation that there was a decrease in the state population. -- bit more of an increase in the federal population and that there was a decrease in the state population. the federal population has been increasing for two key reasons. one is increased retention of illegal immigrants. the second is that over the

years, congress still political pressure to extend federal jurisdiction into areas that were traditionally the province of the state authorities. there is overlapping jurisdiction, particularly on drug offenses, and thought it -- a lot that are not being prosecuted in federal courts that would be prosecuted in states. host: what situations and conditions are you looking for in the months and years at ahead? guest: this is an election year, so it is not as if, despite all the factors that point towards more research-based and cost- effective solutions flooding through -- still pretty tough politics, despite these new reports and technologies. we do think that there is a good chance that this is more than a blip. that it will be the beginning of a sustained trend. one of the reasons we do is that the trend really started in

texas in 2007, long before the recession started. they just said no, we will not spend up to $2 billion on new prisons. we will have a stronger parole and probation program, treatment centers, other measures. that has really reverberated around the country. we do expect it to continue. host: springfield, illinois. caller: you are right. the federal prison system will always grow. they may be saying no to prisons in texas, but if the fed's decide -- if the fed decides to build one, they will build one. and it will get money from connecticut to build a federal prison in texas. that is why federal prisons continue to grow, as much as

they politically feel are necessary. four years in state and eight years in federal prison, and i'm still, after being out for six years -- what most people don't know about is mandatory supervised release. sounds like you are pro-after care, so to speak. mandatory supervised release is just another prison sentencing. if you think you are going to scare people by putting them in jail for two days, you are sadly mistaken. one of the things they could do to reduce prison costs is make prison something that you don't want to go back to. civil rights and all this over the years, every inmate has got to have his right to this or

that, or make prisons bad enough to where you were about going back -- where you worry about going back to them. nobody worries about prisons when you eat well and live comfortably and you have all your buddies right there to talk to. you cannot really discouraged from going back -- are not really discouraged from going back. host: view from the inside there, a former inmate. guest: most prisons in this country are very, very unpleasant places wardens to a good job making sure they meet constitutional standards, but they are full of low-level, first-time marijuana offenders -- but as it is a myth that they are full low-level, first-time marijuana offenders, it is also a myth that it is a place where people want to go, that they get to hang out with their bodies.

it is just not the case. the fact is that what happens, with people, after they leave the system, is that they do go into a parole system that has traditionally been focused, as we say, on trail 'em, nail 'em, and jail 'em. that is why you have any california, and others to come up to 2/3 of prison conditions being people who have not actually committed a crime, but have broken the rules. when such a large segment of your prison population is taken up by those kinds of offenders, and is considered doing, you have to find different strategy -- and this is what states are doing, you ought to find different strategies to hold them accountable. host: we have a few minutes left in this segment.

joe on the line for democrats. caller: how are you doing? this is my first time called -- first-time call. i am from rhode island. our present system is messed up. -- prison system is messed up. you may be hanging out with a person on parole, and they violate before you are found guilty on the new charge. i think that is unconstitutional. i have another question for you. we have about five polices appear now on a case with marijuana -- with cocaine, selling cocaine. the police who was buying the cocaine from the sk -- from this guy -- the police is out on the

street if that had been me or anybody else on the street selling cocaine, we would be in jail. i will take my ass off the air. -- take my answer off the air. guest: my answer would be that stick to this point realize -- states at this point realize that prison should not be the only air wrote in the quiver -- only arrow in the quiver. there are a whole series of better ways that we can reduce crime. they start with stronger supervision of the 5 billion offenders in the community. we started at the top of the show talking about how there are 101 adults in america behind bars. there are 131 adults in the country under some form of correctional control. -- one in 31 in the country

under some form of correctional control. we have to do a good job of supervising these people. the investments we're starting to see, or low-level offenders are being looked at, low-level offenders of the court level being looked out, they are starting to say who needs to go to prison and how long, to make sure that we are protecting public safety but giving taxpayers a better return on their investment in public safety. host: year is 8 twitter question for you. -- here is a twitter question for you. guest: it is on the minds of a lot of corrections directors in the country. the female population has been growing at a faster clip than the male population for a few years now. it is less than 10% of the population, but it is one that

needs special attention and programming. a lot of particular effects on children. there are a large number of children in this country. one out of the 100 adults in the country behind bars -- the various programs and strategies are being used to minimize the impact of incarceration, particularly on children. host: herndon, virginia, next call, republican line. caller: am i on the line, sir? host: yes, sir. caller: i was involved in a project to fill a prison in west virginia. i think it is interesting, if i just give you an account on how i got on this idea -- it came about that i have some property next to the prison, and i saw

prisoners come out and watched the warden's cars -- and wash the warden's cars. nobody ever taught them a trade so that they could go out and get a proper job. i wanted to see what i could do about this. i put together a project at that time and jesse jackson got involved also and was very supportive. unfortunately, the cricket system in the mayor's office -- crooked system in the mayor's office did not like the idea of a system in west virginia teaching prisoners of trade in the construction business. 200 years ago, the reason they came over -- one of the

principal reasons was to study the american system. he studied the tax bill, and they set up a system where the quakers would teach prisoners the art of carpentry, bricklaying. they found that the rates of recidivism in america was less than 30%. host: anything you want to sit there? gue -- say there? guest: i do. a couple of things . there are several different approaches to punishment. there is deterrence, making people know that if they do so bad, something bad will happen to them. and then there is rehabilitation, making sure the

people who commit crimes do not do so again. the american public, according to polls, feels quite balanced about the purposes now. they want a violent and career criminals locked off the street for a long time. they emphasize punishment there. but attitudes towards punishment of low level, not a violent offenders is different. they want to seek rehabilitation and deterrence to victims. -- rehabilitation and deterrence and particularly restoration to victims. host: next call. caller: the grand jury cause of the fifth amendment does not apply to states since the -- grand jury clause of the that the man does not apply to states -- of the fifth amendment

does not apply to state since the 18 eighties. i am a combat-disabled veteran, and i took that oath to uphold and defend the constitution, and to come out and find out that these things are true, that the constitution does not apply to the states, is kind of disconcerting to me. host: florida, a democrat, you are the last caller. caller: 25% to 35% of our people in prisons are illegal aliens, and considering the massive crime on the mexican border, what is going to happen? this is out of hand. host: is that the right person? gues -- percent? guest: