it is a group of officials that worry about domestic terrorism and so on. most people like the caller, have never actually read these reports. the report was very similar to the department of common security report that was leaked last spring. it had a couple of statements in at that were unfortunately written. they said things like "you might want to watch out for people with certain kinds of bumper stickers." ron paul was mentioned. similar uproar, a much bigger one of was generated by the release of the report or the leak of the dhs report. that was a tempest in a teacup. it did not do anything it was accused of. it was attacked as supposedly

characterized him all returning the vets as potential timothy mcveigh's. it was withdrawn ultimately by janet napolitano. . . host: and they were arrested as they were about to invade for good in central texas to kill as many people as they could because they believed that

foreign troops were being trained their to assist in martial law on the united states and so on. these are ultimately where these kinds of conspiracy theories lead. of course, there are pilots, eu pilots and other military officials that are trained over here as various cooperation programs. that is not a secret. that does not mean that fema is running concentration camps or anything else like that. host: a stake a call from don in michigan -- let's take a call from john in michigan. caller: may i call you market? guest: -- may i call you mark? guest: absolutely. caller: thank you. obama set out on just it was when he was running for

president and when he becomes president he keeps the dollar in tax, the policy. -- keeps it all intact, the policy. when they passed it, bush and cheney, they had a terrorist alert. that's what bothers me the most about this. we've got to be honest with the patriot act. they're going to be using it against us. host: any truth to what he had to say, that there has been an increase in extremist activity as a result of the creation of the patriot act? guest: i do not know that it has

led to an increase in extremist activity, but there is some truth to the idea that police in this country over the past 20 years have been increasingly militarized. there are more and more swat since, more heavy equipment. to speak in defense of law enforcement to some extent, the threat they are facing is more and more well-armed. and on talking about domestically. some of the group's that have run into various criminal matters and so on have been unbelievably well on. it is not that uncommon for the atf to turn up catches that include large amounts of explosive materials along with 50 caliber machine guns and that kind of thing. i'm no fan of the patriot act. i do not mean to suggest that i am and it has been disappointed that a bit of it has not been rolled back a bit more quickly, but there is something to be said about the increased

militarization that is counter, at least in part, by a serious threat out there. host: karen has this twitter message -- guest: there is a similarity, of course, to the first iteration of the militia merv -- militia movement, the first wave in the 1990's, which have been in the clinton administration. i didn't there is some relationship to that. however, is very -- i think there is some relationship to that. however, the 1990's were a very good economic times. that is obviously very untrue right now and i think about economy is taking a situation and making it worse than it was in the 1990's. i think one could argue that the anger out there seems to be

broader and deeper this time around. host: regarding domestic terror plots, the splc documented -- more information from the southern part of law center. and we are talking with mark potok from there. our next crop -- call comes from charlotte, john on the independent line, go ahead. host: i think your organization is one of the most corrupt and propaganda based organizations in this country. militias, by the way, are not unconstitutional. host: mr. potok?

guest: and not quite sure -- i do not think we are spreading racism at all. i can't recall it as we see it. -- i think we call it as we see it. i would note that because anger of the caller is also directed at the department of homeland security. whatever one thinks of our analysis, it is clearly shared -- certainly, in its broad outlines, by virtually all of the law enforcement agencies in this country. i think we have seen an enormous amount of violence or planned violence associated with the rise to power of obama. let's not forget that since obama became an nominee, if we have seen two racist skinheads plots to assassinate him.

we have seen a man in maine found building a dirty borum with radioactive elements that he planned to set off at the inauguration. -- a dirty bomb with ray director elements that he planned to set off at the inauguration. we have seen a man storm and museum to kill black people because as he told officers later he had read that whites the premises had been subjected to genocide. -- white supremacist had been subjected to genocide. a story i will never forget, being the second and third graders in idaho chanting "assassinates obama" on their way to school. i think as a whole we are moving forward as a country without any question at all, but we are in the middle of a backlash.

a lot is going on in the world. the world is changing economically. this country is changing racially and in other ways. the economy is in the pits and as a result we see a lot of anger, a lot of demonizing of certain individuals, in particular the obama administration. i think what we're seeing out there is very real. host: james on the line for republicans out of warren, michigan. caller: i would like to thank you first for letting me talk on your program. there is a lot of anger out there. i am a militiaman. of of what i want to say is regard as -- regardless of who had been president right now, there would be a lot of backlash for any president right now due to the economy. there are a lot of people out of work. there is a lot of confusion and anger.

we're all in the same boat and we do not know where our next meal is coming from. host: is there a particular reason you joined the militia your index caller: -- the militia you are in? caller: i joined the militia i am in to keep an eye on government along with them keeping an eye on us. it is supposed to be hand in hand. host: do you feel threatened by the government? the government's caller: itself has caller: got worse with the the government -- caller: the government itself has gotten worse with the page redact. we're not trying to knock down the government. -- the patriot act. we're not trying to knock down the government. everybody is in the same boat. i am a republican, a staunch republican.

even if john mccain had been in there, we would still be doing the same thing we are doing right now. host: two questions before we wrap this up. are you white? caller: yes, i am. host: are there any black people in your militia group? caller: yes, about 1500. host: how many in the group altogether? caller: i cannot give you the exact numbers. i hope you understand. but we have a very diverse group. we do have color and we do have jews. host: thanks for your call, james. start to cut your off. -- sorry to cut you off. guest: i simply do not believe him.

1500 block people in 1 militia group -- 1500 black people in 1 militia group, out of the question. i do not know any group that has 1500 people of any color. in the 1990's there was an occasional black person. it was not 100% white. was it 99 % or more white? absolutely. but to say that there are 1500 black members of the militia out there is simply false. host: francine on the line for democrats, go ahead. caller: i would like to make a statement in reference to the last caller. why do they call themselves militia? to me, they are terrorists. what is the difference between them and the ones from other countries? there are to overthrow the

government. -- they are allowed tout to overthrow the government. host: let's go to round rock, texas on our line for independents. caller: thank you for the opportunity to speak. a recently moved back to texas after being away for 40 years. i grew up here. i am a black person and i have in my family about five different cultures and i'm very pleased about that. but i do think that much is racially based. i have been pulled over by police more times than ever. i find the best thing to do is to get involved with the community and get involved with the police department and go in as a volunteer so that there is not a visible threat that is being perceived. it is a problem, it really is. one of the other things i have observed since obama is

president is that we have so many people misinformed about health care and what the government is going to do and they get most of their thoughts from fox news or some of these other radical discussion groups that help perpetuate it. host: mark potok, your thoughts? guest: i could not agree more. i think the knitting together of communities one stitch at a time is the kind of democracy we need to do. i do not think the country is collapsing or that we will see a race war or anything like that. i think is worth remembering that with all the trouble we are going through right now, we are a nation that went through 250 years of slavery followed by a century of jim crow. in your 40 or so years later, tends millions of black people in this country did -- tens of millions of white people in this country did vote for a black

president. every generation in this country is more open to international -- interracial marriages and relationships and so on. i think we are moving to a better place. but you know, history does not move forward in a solid, unbroken line. we go through these difficult times and i think as the caller suggested, we are seeing one right now. host: you have the last call for mark potok. go ahead. caller: people like chris matthews and yourself, when democrats were voting against obama, they were considered racist. it is not against the law to be anti-government. we are allowed to. daly, 24 hour domestic terrorism is happening in black neighborhoods with the

christmas -- the crypts. you have only had 75 incidences of [unintelligible] these people are killing them daily. when i go after these domestic terrorists? guest: because they are not domestic terrorists and we are not a law-enforcement agency. i absolutely agree, violence in the cities and elsewhere is responsible for far more criminality and numbers of deaths than people who blow up federal buildings. there is no doubt about that. but the gangs and the mexican mafia and the aryan brotherhood, these are fundamentally criminal enterprises. the are not seeking to -- they are not seeking to impose some sort of ideology.

we also do cover hate groups of all kinds. the new dock panther party, which is utterly unlike end -- the new black panther party, which is utterly unlike the to original, is a racist hate group. but whatever it is worth, we try very hard to look at the whole scene and assess it in an even- handed way. host: thank you very much for being on the "washington journal" this morning. caller: thank you for having me -- guest: thank you for having me. host: the lead story in last week's "wall street journal" ceos see pay fall again as the recession took a toll. the author of the article, joann lublin is our guest in just a few minutes. we will be right back.

>> wednesday, live from the white house, first lady michelle obama who has made fighting child of obesity one of her focuses will sit down with a student from hawaii. his topic was charles guto pc. joining will be other studentcam filters -- his topic was childhood obesity. joining will be other studentcam filmmakers. that is wednesday on c-span. >> tonight, a discussion on the federal oversight of car safety standards with former administrators of the national highway safety administration. pvalso, the president and ceo f the alliance of automobile

manufacturers. that is live at 8:00 p.m. eastern here on c-span, c- span.org and c-span radio. >> "washington journal" continues. host: joining us from new york is joann lublin, managing editor at the "wall street journal." she is here to talk to was about ceo pay and perks. welcome to the program. guest: thank you for having me. host: the article you wrote last week was based on the recession that says it took its toll on wall street as well as everybody else. tell us about this. guest: what the survey showed was that for the second year in a row, total compensation for the ceos drop. that was not just a consequence of the recession, but outrage on the part of your elders and government regulators over soaring pay. host: it said that bonuses and

grants of stock options for the chief executives of 200 major u.s. companies declined 0.9%, less than 1% to 6.9 $5 million, according to the group management consultancy -- less than 1% to $6.9 5 million, according to the group management consultancy firm. how was the man on the street supposed to feel that they only lost 1% of their salary and are only making $7 million than what they were before? guest: it is better than going the other way, isn't it? host: what does that say to the man on the street, that things are going to get better, that's always are going to come together what? guest: i think what it says to the man on the street is that the man on the street pay has very little to do with what

happens to ceo pay. host: how is ceo pay generally affected? is it by performance? if your company does well, are you going to make more money, or will you make more money regardless? guest: it will vary by company, but public companies, their pay is set by the board. the board looks at different measures for assessing that pay. a lot of it is linked to corporate performance, financial performance. a lot of it is linked to stock performance. the biggest chunk of co competition -- compensation is based on what is happening to the shareholder price. host: 1 ceo of the dish network corp. have the distinction of the harshest drop in pay. he drew a $623,000 salary that was 92.5% lower than his 2008 total compensation even though

the company's stock doubled. what happened there? guest: as in many companies, you had situations in which the prior year was even worse, and in some cases, the ceo had skipped or not gotten a bonus. or in this case, had gotten a bonus the prior year and then did not in 2009. bonuses generally are tied to financial performance as opposed to stock performance. host: you write about the chief executive of general electric, declined a bonus for the second straight year, pushing his total pay lower by 7% to $5.1 million. g,'s stock fell last year. he is doing that -- g.'s stock fell last year. he is doing that as a show of faith. guest: we have seen a couple of

ceos doing out where they have refused to take a bonus, or they took salary cuts as their workers and companies got worse in 2009. but in some cases, the game is back the way it was before. their pay cuts are being restored for 2010. we saw that, for instance, adviser. -- at pfizer. host: we are talking about ceo pay with joann lublin of the "wall street journal." if you want to get involved, the numbers are on the screen. our first call comes from william on our line for republicans out of spokane, washington. caller: i am a disabled vet and i serve this country for capitalism and all of that stuff, but what gets me is if

the ceos want to make $100 million per year, fine. but if -- but once you make over $100 million for a year or two years, what do you do with it then? you cannot spend that in a lifetime. also what irks me is millionaires in congress who are filthy rich, a lot of them, are going after other millionaires, calling them greedy. you've got a millionaire going after another millionaire calling them greedy. and then you've got the little guy like me. let's close all the loopholes for everybody and you pay 10% of your income. it should be good enough for the government. they should start obeying the constitution. host: joann lublin? guest: what is interesting about what he raised is this issue of paying taxes. one of the things that ceos have

enjoyed for a long time have been the perks that give them help with preparing their taxes. a lot of perks are going by the wayside pentico one of them is arnot -- by the wayside and one of them is a financial planning and tax assistance. host: next up is minneapolis, carl on the line for democrats. caller: i am from minnesota and there was a contract there recently for $20 million per year and everyone cheered. my question is about the tax code. i think he said ceo pay is based on performance. who -- i think you said ceo pay is based on performance. i wonder if there are ceos that are paid based on real standards and not just stock.

thank you. host: karl i am wondering -- hello? carl is gone. guest: as far as i know, stock options are not a tax free form of compensation, having been the recipient of them and having had to pay taxes on the benefits. ceos to have well-paid accounts and to find ways to minimize their tax bite, that is true. host: next up is linda on the line for republicans. she is calling from crisfield, md., on the eastern shore. go ahead. linda? i think we have lost linda. let's go to jim on our line for democrats out of massachusetts. all right, we seem to be having some problems with our phones. we're going to clear the calls and let jim back again.

in the "wall street journal" last week also, many wall street chief executives took a big pay cut for 2009 but their real value may have been in deflecting attention from their troops, who enjoyed the largest collective pay on record. sounds like these guys are doing ok. guest: yes, and that article is in today's "wall street journal." very often, the people just below the highest paid executives, their pay goes

unnoticed. i take my hat off to the reporters who reported this because some of the numbers are pretty eye-popping. host: the idea is that if you want to make big bucks, do not be the guy at the top of the pyramid? guest: it probably helps. your name does not appear in the proxy if you are not in one of the five highest-paid officers. host: linda from crisfield, md., are you there? caller: yes, sir. i am a republican. when it is party time, though my heart. -- i voted my heart. but what i'm disturbed about is what they've done to our veterans. our freedom is not free. there have been great prices paid, bloodshed for our freedom. all of these people way up high,

these executives making more than the president with these big salaries and bonuses and all, and taking from our veterans, it is a shame to our democracy. something needs to be spoken about that. our veterans should be held in respect. host: thanks for your call. did you want to comment on guest: that one thing that the caller needs to -- did you want to comment on that? guest: 1 think the caller should be aware of is that congress is trying to pass a bill that would give government a say on pay vote at every public company in america. and you would be able to cast a vote, although it would not be binding, about how you feel about the big pay packages that the executives at the top would be getting. host: next up is jim in massachusetts on the line for democrats.