♪ host: good morning and welcome to "washington journal" on this sunday, april 11. president obama will be meeting in separate sessions today with the presidents of india, pakistan, as extent, and south africa. the white house prepares for this nuclear security summit and

congress will return for the first time since major health- care legislation was signed. what should the president's focus be? the supreme court replacement of john paul stevens? immigration reform? of financial regulatory reform? what do you think should be the focus? we will take your call. for republicans, 202-737-0001. stephen dinafor democrats, 202-. for independents, 202-628-0205. you can find this on e-mail, journal@c-span.org, as well as twitter, twitter.com/c-spanwj. let's take a look at a piece from "the washington post" today. "for gop activists and hopefuls, no time like the president's.

there is a far different message coming out of new orleans this weekend. a host of potential candidates moved through during the three day gathering, sarah palin being the most prominent, although not necessarily the best received. buffeted by growing satisfaction with president george w. bush, moving from the midterm elections in which they ultimately lost control of the house and senate. this year, however, roughly 3000 activists have their eyes on 2010, as do the politicians. the energy and enthusiasm on display amongst republicans if they do not get distracted or divided."

referencing the weekend meeting in new orleans, urging gop not to indulge in distractions. "michael steele and acknowledge mistakes but cautioned against errors in a midterm year." we will be talking more about politics in what is the, as congress returns to capitol hill, but we are curious as to what you think there issues should be. hispanic voters, obama, immigration reform, and colorado at the post, a convenience store owner who is among one of the hispanic voters in colorado that turned out to vote for president obama, hinting at the democrat difficulty in november.

amongst hispanics, one concern often voiced is that obama has not moved quickly on immigration laws. he and his party have been hesitant to take on this contentious issue. is this something that the president and congress should be focusing on? let's go to detroit in indiana. good morning. caller: i have recently become an independent. i am a recovering former black republican. in this political climate these days with t baggers it is not a good place for a person to be. once the congress comes back and tries to work together, i think that they should work hard to try to fill the supreme court. they could do two other things at the same time, but if he tries to appoint someone of

hispanic or minority background, it will be extremely divisive. the republican party, which is not only been hijacked by the former tactics of the kkk, it is understandable for him to arrive at that conclusion. i believe that the republican party and tea party will meet a bigoted and. the democratic congress losing seats in november, that is wishful thinking, i do not think it will happen like that without the thinking of a former party member in this new election.

this is uncharted territory for most of us, but i think that the heat coming from the right is going to cost them at the polls. host: the tea party movement was an influencing factor this weekend, they had their straw poll vote. mitt romney got 24% of the initial choice amongst the folks at the southern republican leadership conference. ron paul so about 24%. newt gingrich, sarah palin, each getting 18%. lower numbers for mike huckabee, rick santorum, and larry johnson. from the initial choice, mitt

romney and ron paul are at the top. at the southern republican leadership congress, newt gingrich got 20%, as well as sarah palin. mitt romney of 14%, mike huckabee got 11%. let's go to fort worth, texas. joe, democratic line. caller: i think that the democrats in congress should vote is on jobs and the economy and this second wave of foreclosures that will come through. people that bought those houses with that those bad loans. a second wave of that is going happen pretty soon and they need to focus on that.

what they put in place the last time worked. that is my chief complaint that happens all the time in washington, d.c., things moving at a snail's pace. host: what should congress do to change that? of caller: they should work together a bit more. this bipartisan thing where the president is trying to reach out, republicans seem to be in a no mode. they think it will work for them in november, but that is not so. too many people are in dire straits when it comes to the economy, homes, jobs. we need to get this country moving. there are so many things that we do well.

we need to focus on that. host: roy, republican line. caller: shame on that caller from two callers ago, pretending that he used to be an independent, demonizing -- used to be a republican, demonizing the tea party movement. nothing will work in this country through the government. you must learn to take care of itself, stop with the hatred from the left -- take care of yourself, stop with the hatred from the left. host: what should be done? caller: the government has taken over the private sector, which is not american. host: our next caller is mitch, independent life -- independent line.

caller: the president and congress should do the one thing that they can to fix the problem of polarization. they talk about it a lot and discuss it a lot, but the root cause of this polarization is the fact that most elected republican leaders, including mitch mcconnell, they'll fear rush limbaugh and talk radio. they fear that because they all know that if they do something to cross rush limbaugh they will be primary and in the next election. michael steele apologize to rush limbaugh because rush limbaugh threatened to tell his followers to not fund the national committee. whenever they do anything to upset him, as long as that condition -- so many elected republicans fear rush limbaugh,

there will be a continual no to anything that the democrats want to do. for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. the democrats are going to overreact and you will see divisive behavior on behalf of the democrats. host: a couple of the primaries coming up, "the open senate seat in kentucky will be that of trade race and -- trey grayson. rand paul is challenging mr. grayson, taking credit for being a member of the tea party

." while there are other -- "with frame -- with the name recognition and fund-raising prowess, no one else has been quite such a product of the tea party movement. if dr. paul wins the primary on may 18, the tea party will have to prove its appeal beyond the republican right." looking at the race of blanche lincoln, a senator facing a battle in arkansas, this piece says "the very definition of the democratic label is being tested in arkansas, which has become one of the most divisive primaries as the midterm elections get under way." ed, democratic line. san diego. good morning. caller: i have a solution for

the economic situation. the furlough from the labor department to contact each state and county, looking at the old factories that were in existence. if they could get those back, people would have the ability to work again in the community. paying taxes, people would get back to work. a couple of years ago, georgia, florida, they were told that the stimulus money would be paying for our companies -- those companies.

[unintelligible] transportation limiting the stuff sold in the united states. host: anthony, republican line, west palm beach, florida. caller: good morning. i just saw the data regarding the straw poll with mitt romney coming in first. let me tell you, mitt romney has nurtured it -- no chance to become the head of the republican party. his estate endorses a marriage. republicans, christian republicans, the largest bloc of the republican party, would never support mitt romney. also because he is a mormon.

faugh although he is a loose mormon. the largest bloc of the republican party would not support full. host: "politicians were allowed to strike their names from the ballots in the straw poll, but rick barry, he of the barber, and bobby jindal all remove their names. ben smith and jonathan martin writes that others did not remove their names. mitt romney and tim pawlenty aggressively moved to build national campaigns, as did sarah palin and mike huckabee. so did rick santorum and ron paul. supporters of mitt romney and ron paul were the only ones visibly organizing for the

gathering. evangelicals for mitt romney, who say they operate independently of his campaign, offered 200 tickets to republicans who would commit i am writing to voting for romney in the straw poll. a minor reality check for sarah palin and the intensity of the ron paul base support." switching gears, we are turning to another story in "the washington post." looking at the school days of president obama and his early education in indonesia. you are in beijing, thank you for joining us. tell us about the piece that you did. what was your motivation to look at this catholic school in jakarta?

caller: i was addressing the accusations that the president attended an islamic with ross of -- host: i think we just lost andrew higgins with that connection to beijing. we will try to get back to him. "long shadowed that he had attended old school pals to come clean about the past. the truth is clear, according to the president's childhood neighbor. we know that he is busy, but we want to refresh his memory. the president was actually spending time at a catholic school in jakarta.

they want to remind him will not bring any joy to the u.s. who contend that he is a closet muslim. the truth is while he went to school at a mostly muslim school for less than one year, he spent most of four years studying at a roman catholic school run at the time by a stern dutch priest. classes began and ended each day with christian prayers." the piece goes on to look at his time at the school. little different here in "the washington post." children attending class in the same room where the president was a student. "alumni are getting together to raise awareness that he did go to their school. critics repeatedly intended to

prove that he did not -- that he attended an islamic mud dross of -- madrasa as a boy. the well-connected and wealthy alumni of the school was mostly written out of the script. catholics for the president are trying to get more attention." one interesting feature in the story is the class differences between the schools, looking at how the roman catholic school -- the muslim school is run by the state and more in line with the general orientation of the nation at large, as well as the islamic school being located in

an upscale neighborhood just a short walk from the residents of the u.s. ambassador. it continued in its role after independence. the catholic school is in a much more downscale neighborhood. the people must pay modest fees. in the days of president obama they typically came from less privileged families. chicago, democratic line, terry. caller: that have a lot of legislation that has been passed, in the senate there is a lot of assumed friendly legislation and they need to be

stronger with their message. many media outlets are doing a service to the people. leadership means to be a check and balance. focusing on the people in the issue of the facts. the bottom line is that what is going on now is that the media, along with republicans, they are focused on the people's vulnerability in the situation. focusing on hate is what i see? -- what i see.

they are truly focusing in that way. host: we have had calls this morning focusing on each side of bringing down the tenor. what would you say to do? caller: trying to make this equal, if i do not like what i democrat those, i would call and complain about them also. so many of the people out here coming down on the tea party, there are some regular people months of them. i do not even think that they deserve to be occupied on those balcony's if they perpetually hate and fear.

this is what is going on. it is as though the people are so afraid that they go against their own interest. host: one thing that has not been talked much about his welfare reform. "old limits on welfare and government. ryland has the nation's third highest unemployment rate but the time limits and stringent work will acquirements continued to push things down, congress overhauling allot in 1996. in the booming economy these changes were considered a wide success, questioning now whether welfare is fulfilling its mission. congress and the obama administration are considering more changes this year.

-- this year." mark, an abandoned mine. good morning. -- independent line. good morning. caller: i live in northern california and it's terrible up here. disabled veterans. i do not need to work, but the economy appear is terrible. gas prices are terrible. i would like to say something about the republican party. they are so filled with hate. host: let's keep our focus on what congress should do. we have had calls on this already, we want to hear about what is next. are you concerned about the economy? a specific jobs bill that you would like to see? the housing market? where should it go?

caller: it may sound like a crazy idea, but if we had more experts figuring out ways for people to put solar energy of houses and business energy to pay more taxes like they should, that would cut down a lot of energy. i think we need to be conservative about what we use and what we throw away. host: this is from "the new york times." "interest rates headed nowhere but up in tight credit markets. consumers are about to face a new financial burden, the inevitable outcome of the nation's ballooning debt as the

economy recovers from the debt of the recent recession. americans have assumed that the roller coaster goes one way when pimlico take -- took part in a government that plan, now facing an extended climb." let's go to ohio, republican line. sheila. caller: how're you doing? i think that mitt romney will be the next president. by the time that obama is finished with this country, we are going to need someone who knows about business. second, well the first they, the word t bagger.

you would not let someone, on and said that they are in sob of f, would you? host: point taken. let's watch language. you are saying that that is an offensive term. let's have a more productive conversation. what would you like to see congress do? caller: i would like to see congress handle nothing. nothing. 2010 is going to be a blowout for the members in congress. anyways. host: hank, democratic line.

caller: thank you for taking my call. congress is looking at the people of the united states and the nonsense that takes place over there. once you finish up at the end of the day they are saying written that, no, no, no. throwing money at the gas pump. all kinds of tax money, everything going haywire. everything, time to put a stop to it. the only way to do that is if people stop voting for the government to bring in more stimulus money. people starting to get their money, you tell me how this could keep surviving with idiots like that. host: from twitter, "congress

should pass appropriation bills and go home, they have damaged our freedom and of -- freedom enough." john paul stevens announced his retirement from the supreme court a couple of days ago. what could happen during that battle? jumping down in "the new york times" it says "some democratic leaders want a harness for the populist anger in the obama policies, worried about alienating the base. republicans are going to be moving deliberately at first, saying that they did not necessarily want to fight, but if there was a fight there would be a possibility that obama could pick someone that they

could support. -- support." jacksonville, florida. caller: everyone seems to be going left, right, left, right, left, right. government is spending your money. people do not seem to understand that. the government is spending your money, your grandchildren's money, everyone else. kind of funny that congress work for us, they get paid better than that normal people, better benefits than normal people with shorter retirement terms. everyone is getting out. maybe the best thing that we could do for congress, like they

say about massachusetts, we are safer when they are not in session. basically we need jobs and we need to stop bailing people of that make bad decisions. the retired health care bill is cutting my medical benefits, giving money to people on medicaid who were paid into the system. why are you punishing me for other people that want to get out of work? what happened to personal responsibility? the last thing i have to say about the racist remarks regarding the president, his mother was white, folks. stop beating up on black, white, everything else. he is the president.

thank you. host: coming up this morning on "newsmakers" brad sherman, the chair of the non-proliferation subcommittee of foreign affairs, saying that there is momentum in decreasing the world's nuclear weapons arsenal having signed an agreement with russia in the coming week. >> we are dealing with the rather technical issue of making sure that medical nuclear materials are well handled and are no longer useful when disposed of properly. as for the bigger issue of stopping the uranium programs, i think we are due to it -- doomed to failure as long as we follow the policies of the bush and obama administration's.

we beg but we never bargain. we never tell countries that if they help us for fat-fre, we nem that we will see their way on any other issue. making concessions seems to do was to a world where iran and north korea has a nuclear weapon. host: you can see that today at 10:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. here on c-span, as well as online on c- span.org. what to talk about as congress returns from the spring easter recess this week. the senate majority leader is looking at immigration or alter -- overhaul. from "the new york times" they

have this story. "lawmakers return this week from a recess, harry reid said that open what we are going to come back and have comprehensive immigration reform now." a speech he gave in front of nearly 6000 people, mostly immigrants. "we cannot wait." the senator surprised immigrants and that the kids with his direct commitment to moving forward with legislation nonvolatile issue, with the senate already divided by the passage of health care reform. also, after john paul stevens announced last week that he would retire." republican line, good morning. caller: by was calling regarding immigration reform. -- i was calling regarding immigration reform.

let's get this stuff out in the open, find out who the real racist are. my father is from china, my mother is from puerto rico. being a minority, i can say this. the people accusing republicans of being racist or the ones who are really the racists. that is the mentality they have right now. host: talking about immigration reform, which direction would you like to see it move in? do you have members of congress to approve of? caller: there are a few issues that will be taken up by a few leaders. one out of every five american people are unemployed and they need a job.

the people that are getting jobs say that no one wants to do these jobs. i guarantee you that one out of every five americans wishes they had a job. and anything to feed their families. host: spartanburg, west virginia. caller: the most important thing is the jobs and stimulus package. host: do you think that the prior stimulus package was effective? caller: i think it has worked pretty well. you can see that the stock market is going up but jobs are always the lagging indicator.

the fact that jobs are the lagging indicator, like as said, the other caller is right on the monday, talking about immigration. the whole thing is about jobs. what people need our living wage jobs in this country and that is what congress needs to focus on when they come back. host: reporting going on right now but the plane crash that killed the president of poland and essentially decimated the polish government. a look at some of the other folks there were killed along with the president. his wife, the national security chief, former presidents living in exile, the deputy speaker of parliament, the president of the national bank of poland. looking at a couple of other

headlines in the news, sudan as having elections. "low expectations, however, after holding their first multi- party election in two decades, liz liz expected to change in the political -- until is expected to change in the political landscape. -- little is expected to change in the political landscape. many analysts fear that this could further cement the country's division." another story in the international news, iran is urging iraq to include sumy's in the government after calling for shiite -- sunni's in the government after calling for shiite dominance." that is coming at us from "the

new york times." jonathan, a connecticut. what should congress focus on this week? caller: thank you for taking my call. they should focus on giving back to the basics. 40, 50, 60 years ago. we have to get away from this era of violence in this world. obviously, you know, you always hear the cliche, there will never be world peace. the thing is, we talk about our children, and you see it with all the technology coming out. texting, a sex thing, they have

got to put a cap on this. it is ruining our families and breaking up society. you are not going to like this, being a female. when you have a kid, stay home and raise that can. but find a good husband first. host: what is the role of congress? how should they legislate? caller: that is what i am saying, we have got to get to 40, 50 years ago. even further back. their role has been handcuffed. people do not want to except of rules the day. they want everything and they do not want to play by the rules. host: republican line, washington.

caller: when congress authorizes activity in the stock market, the financial service sector is the one making money off our backs. we need to see capitalism with a stock market like oxygen. i think that he might have been by racial, as he described himself. we have a more clear perspective of race. thank you for commenting on the fact that it has nothing to do with the race and everything to do with what is right for the country. the question is misleading. what does the congress do?

what they are chartered to do. go to washington, d.c. and protect our liberties and freedoms. stop the government from stealing them. host: congress, according to twitter, "going hand in hand. well linden, democratic line -- linda, democratic line. caller: first of all, no one's freedom is being stolen. it is a false premise that congress should focus on one thing. they have committees and huge staff -- congress is broken in the committees said they can concentrate on more than one thing at once. we have such low expectations. they do their committee work, passage through committee, taking a vote.

we cannot allow this rhetoric to just go crazy. the government? that is us. we have got to stop hitting each other on the head and telling congress that if you cannot do more than one thing at once, why are you there? host: is there something that is most important in your mind? caller: jobs stimulation and i wanted in sectors. i would also very much like to see them tackle financial reform. with financial reform and jobs we will be a lot happier and we will like each other more. not just congress. they are set up by chartered to do more than one thing. host: independent line, robert, dallas. caller: the biggest problem that

congress should be focusing on in the long term is job creation. what i really means is our trade relationship. we have exported so many manufacturing jobs, when we are looking for recovery like we are right now, the manufacturing base that is not there to create the jobs, that is a long-term problem rather than a short-term problem. i would also like to comment on something else, if i can. i know you have discouraged callers from mentioning this, but the first caller this morning is typical of so many liberal callers who have been calling in recently, using the term tea bagger. it is not only a sexual slur, it is also a racial slur --

host: so it is language that is offensive to you? caller: said that will more time? host: that is language that is offensive to you? caller: yes, i think it is a racial slur -- host: let's not go into the details. is there a way that the tea party can talk that is constructive? is there a way to continue that dialogue that is constructive? caller: i am not sure. you are breaking up. host: all right. thank you for your call. coming up next, we will continue the conversation with congress coming back to work this week with stephen dinan and jennifer bendery. first, a look at the sunday talk show topics. >> a nuclear preview security

summit and the new treaty with russia, as well as party politics and what is ahead for the supreme court with the pending retirement of justice john paul stevens. "meet the press" will include patrick leahy and jeff sessions. also interviews with hillary clinton and robert gates. on "abc's this week" the guest host will be speaking with secretaries clinton and gates as well as charles schumer, democrat from new york, and arizona's jon kyle. "fox news sunday" will have joseph lieberman, lamar alexander, and michele bock win.

on "face the nation" they are speaking with secretaries gates and clinton, they will be talking to guests, including haley barbour. youkilis and all five of them starting at noon here on c-span radio. on the web at c-span -- c- span.org. you can follow us on facebook and twitter. >> ♪ jobs >> what is more ridiculous than american politics this year? >> over the past year the gregory brothers have become hit makers with auto-tun the news.

we will be talking to them tonight on "q&a." new york post columnist ralph peters look said u.s. foreign policy on his book, "and liz warren." afterwards, deborah -- endless war." afterwards, follow a son twitter. >> "washington journal" continues. host: our guests are stephen dinan, washington times congressional bureau chief, and jennifer bendery, roll call house reporter. talk about the congressional timeline this week and how things will get rolling. host: -- guest: things are

shaping up to be a slow week for the house in terms of their business and what not. the senate left without taking care of their exceptional unemployment benefits, the first thing that is up for them, dealing with a cloture vote to head off a central filibuster on the unemployment bill that is out there right now. host: did members go back and hear a lot about health care? were they engaging with constituents? caller: we did not see the vehemence that we saw last time -- gguest: we did not see the te hemans that we saw last time. -- the hemans -- beamon's -- vehemence that we saw last time.

jobs are a big issue. you have a whole host of issues that they did hear about and. less of the anger from august and more -- the interesting thing, as much as the town halls and poles do not show much movement in either direction on health care. host: what is the mood of the white house as they watch the congress had a home? i imagine that they were trying to get a sense of the mood and if the democrats were facing tough homecomings. guest: obama has definitely hit the road running. he is out there something health care, trying to tell people what the bill really does. states like maine, iowa, hitting up district numbers where they could use an appearance from obama. talking about the bonking the

myths of what the bill does, what everyone wants to hear about. he is out there trying to say that it is a tough vote on this bill and they will be back up. host: you reported this week that you found out on friday that the supreme court justice, john paul stevens, plans to retire. you told the story on a full line about the timeline. talk about that. guest: it was friday when he announced he was leaving. that same day obama announced that he would announce his nominee in the coming weeks. the idea is that you will have someone appointed and in the seat by the fall, stevens will leave at the end of the summer term. someone will be sitting there in his spot. host: what will we be seeing

this week? guest: the unemployment rate in particular, the battle with tom coburn announcing he wanted the bill to be paid for and that he wanted other spending cuts to pay for the billions of dollars in this bill. some of the republicans thought that they were arguing with democratic counterparts and the house was not sure that they were on board did, so congress left without extending the benefits. they ran out and congress is going to see if they have the votes to except it as is without a paid for bill. host: how quickly will the senate start talking about justice stevens? guest: you will see a debate on that early on, particularly when the folks on committee lay out how quickly they want to see the

president move on announcing someone else and how long they want the committee to take in debating it. there are a lot of different steps to it, the question of potential that would be filled out by the nominee is and how much time there would be for hearings and how much time republicans would go over responses for floor debates. one of the standard things in the supreme court is you look at how long it has taken other supreme court nominees to go through. given past nominees, democrats would point to their own list. there would be discussion on how to do the process with a name and discussion becoming much more focused. host: talking about a week coming up in washington, counseling us forward, our guests. call in, for republicans, 202- 737-0001. for democrats, 202-737-0002. for independents, 202-628-0205.

let's start with gary, republican line. fort lauderdale, florida. caller: so many things need attention. if congress could work together as a unit, it would help. it seems that one thing that would help would be gaining jobs through the energy program that obama ran on. we are so dependent on foreign oil and it is so bad for our economy and security. if we could come up with a storage of our own energy, wind, solar, natural gas, that could help our security as well as our jobs situation. i would like to hear what you think. host: where is that in congress? what are the chances for energy legislation? guest: there's a difference between them as it comes now.

there was a push for a broad climate change bill that drops a little bit in terms of the president's initial approach of cap and trade and carbon credits. at this point there is definitely some momentum on trying to get some kind of bill out of the senate, looking like it would focus on what the caller said, pushing for renewable energy sources, which can rightly be sold as a jobs bill for americans. because of bad you want to pay attention. every bill in congress right now is being sold as a jobs bill. everything from a travel promotion bill that came through earlier this year to the extension of unemployment benefits. as long as you can credibly say it is a jobs bill. host: where is the white house on addressing these climate

change issues? guest: obama hit the road running the ball kinds of issues wants health care passed. he has had many leading senators at the white house to talk about climate change legislation. obama is definitely trying to keep this on the map. it is not clear if he will be able to move something this year. he is definitely giving signs that he wants people to know he has not forgotten about this and is keeping it alive in the public. host: california, ronald, independent line. caller: i have a suggestion about what congress can do to create new jobs. i think that the government has a good potential to use the treasury department to stimulate job growth by insuring investments in manufacturing

renewable energy jobs instead of sending tax dollars out to subsidize at fort solar panels. instead of doing that they could use treasury money to back up private investors for programs and budgets like solar energy and thermal energy, so for. the blue ribbon panel should look into the issue to see which is the most viable investment and see if it works or not. host: -- guest: first of all, it is interesting how many callers are focused on jobs. there is no question that of all of the other legislative stuff you have heard people talk about, it all takes a backseat

to the push for jobs. congress will have to be able to convince american voters that they are focused on jobs. one of the problems that the caller addressed in his good point was the blue ribbon commission. i think that lawmakers will be looking to do something else and blue ribbon commissions can take years. trying to say that it will get better in the near term. guest: obama, who has been focused on health care for so long, now that he is out there all over the country he will be linking this to jobs. republicans like to talk about how the democrats have taken their eye off of the ball, focusing on health care what they should have focused on the economy. in the case of health-care laws,

they will be looking the help families and small businesses. you will see these issues coming together over the next several months. host: "the new york times" profiled the likely contenders to take the place of justice stevens. are you getting a sense from the white house that they know what direction they're going? some of these would be more conservative choices, liberal choices, some of them in the mainstream. others are people like jennifer granholm or delay in occasion -- elena kagan. guest: stevens was known as the liberal leader of the court. obama said on friday that he would like to see someone that mirrors the qualities of stevens. kagan, solicitor general, i know

she tops the list. diane wood, i also know that she is at the top of the list. leading contenders in the race. the race for the nomination process. we will see some of those come back up. host: how likely is it that the president could replace justice stevens with someone of that ilk? justice stevens says that he has seen the court's shift to a more conservative direction in his time there. . .

the only change we've seen in the last i guess decade or so was the trade of sandra day oh conner for justice owe leeto and you've seen with the campaign finance ruling is that he has been part of, you have seen people say, well, that's why we shouldn't have exchanged

one voice for another voice. it will be interesting to see how that plays out. host: hi, john. caller: good morning. so many things to say. i realize there are other people waiting. you know, i agree with the republican caller who called in in the beginning of this session who talked about energy. unfortunately, the republicans in congress are stopping the energy bill. it's a very sensible energy bill for us to produce our own energy. the president has taken the opportunity as george bush would say to put two nuclear power plants, start two nuclear power plants here in georgia. and also, about drill, drill, drill offshore. so energy is one thing. another thing is china. we need to work with china in the respect of their monetary

policies. they need to let their currency flow freely. and the american people want too many things cheaply. wal-mart. we need not to go to wal-mart. i personally do not shop at wal-mart. that's one of the shizz. when i grew up, locally you were able to go to your hardware store. you had one or two people, three people working there. where those -- where are those local hardware stores? guest: i don't necessarily know about the wal-mart issue so to speak, but there's something maybe behind the caller's question about americans expecting things on the cheap. and i've certainly heard the argument that's part of what's led to overspending and led to the amount of debt that the country has piled up.

americans expect things cheaply now. they expect to be able to have their social security, health care coverage paid for, for those 65 and older for medicare and now we have a new health care bill. the question is debt continues to pile up. there may be something very deep in the american psychie that we need to come to terms with. the president has announced this debt commission that is going to meet the end of this month. and those are the sort of things that they're going to have to confront. and one of the big issues is how ready are american voters to actually have cuts in these programs, to potentially raise the retirement age for social security benefits, to actually sort of trying

so if you accept that the budget situation is as bleak as some say we may be coming to a reckoning. host: can you talk a little bit about the president's trip to prauge and what being there meant and what signing the treaty meant? guest: obama and the russian president signed the start act, and they're going to try to reduce nuclear weapons and they're moving forward on this. they have a lot of support to move these forward. these treaties typically have strong bipartisanship in the senate. so obama is gunning, so to speak, to get this through the senate in the next several months. there are some senators, some republicans in the senate who have thrown up some walls saying we want some more details on this treat gri before we're willing to sign on and get this going.

but these things have passed traditionally with a pretty strong bipartisan vote. so obama is getting his team together to get this through the senate at some point this year. and as we look at the white house hosting -- washingtonning playing host to nations, heads of state coming up this week. what is congress' take on this? will they be involved in what's happening? guest: what jennifer is saying, that debate when it happens, will be the chance for congress and i guess the senate in particular, to actually go ahead and have a say on obama's nuclear posture and view that he released on the -- essentially on this vision he has of a long-term towards a nuclear free world. and i imagine that most up there would say they agree with that broad vision. the question is do they agree with the president's particular steps to get there. so that is where congress will have their say, the debate on the treaty will turn out to be

an evaluation of the president of that broad vision and of the specific steps. host: john, republican's line. caller: hi. i want to thank you all for taking my call. i think it's a good thing you do here. my basic statement was for jennifer from roll call there. she made a statement earlier talking about how the president was out explaining his health care bill since it had passed. i believe that's pretty close to a direct quote from her. i wanted to ask her, doesn't she think that this should have been done before the bill passed so that the people had a full understanding and the outcome may have been different on the jobs front. it's pretty clear we have an anti-capitalist moving direction going within the halls of power right now. and businesses aren't going to hire when they feel this anti-capitalist movement.

and what makes that clear is a very easy point when you go to a second grader's class and you see them airing a film called the story of stuff, which is an ant-capitalist screen. i don't see why a business would hire in this climate. host: jennifer, talk to us about the white house's take now, hindsight being 20/20 on the president's approach to health care, on how much he got involved or didn't and how it's played out. guest: i think there was some frustration on the hill that he was not more involved in the last year, it was kind of a slog through the bill. and he came in later in the game and really played a big hand in moving this bill. i think that it's not so much to address what the caller said, i think it's not so much that obama is feeling like he didn't explain the bill before and so now he has to do it now that it's law. i think it's more trying to clarify a lot -- there's a lot

of information out there on this bill now law that wasn't true and so he's got like a few bullet points that he is running through when he goes to these different states and gives speeches. he's trying i think to calm people down and say this is actually what it will do. it's not going to take this away from you. the issue of abortion has always been controversial with this bill. he's trying to clarify that no federal funds are going through with this toward abortion. right now it's debunking a myth toward what is now law. guest: there's a huge difference between having a bunch of different bills. i believe at one point there were five different versions, or maybe i have that reversed there were so many different versions of these bills and now you actually have a law. and he can go and defend a law that he actually has his own stamp on at this point as opposed to having to explain or defend what one committee did versus another committee.

and there's confusion that results from that if nothing else. so now even there's definitely misinformation. but at sox point some of that -- some information was true about various versions. now he has a law, very unified, very specific and he can point to point and section and this is the section that's going to help you. host: bob, independent caller. good morning. caller: good morning. i just wanted to give you some points. i've been listening to you guys. i'm going to get right to it. as far as jobs go, i think slick willly is the one that initiated the nasa agreement. you have to get rid of that. you want jobs back they went out the door -- naft that. that was the final proverbial stake in the heart when they did the north american free trade agreement. as far as energy goes, i remember president carter

initiated a solar program and i believe that the white house installed solar in stuff. i think when he went out of office, when reagan came in they dismantled everything and they got rid of that notion. the oil boys are the ones that are really controlling everything. so that takes care of that. i also remember the alaskan pipeline, which never gets discussed. and i also heard there's enough oil in alaska to last us another 150 years. and, above all, i'm a constitutional guy. i think that pretty much everything that's being done right now is in contrast to the constitution and i don't really feel that it's -- and they all took an oath to uphold the constitution. host: there's a lot there. but the trade is a very interesting thing. you have the president in the state of the union speech mention that he would like to pursue, keep free trade moving

ahead. that was something that got a lot of republican applause from the state of the union. and congressman david drier from california, the top republican on the rules committee said he went up to the president's top economic advisers after the state of the union and said when are we going to see these, when are we going to get a chance to move sfuff through congress? and all he was told was soon. that was not good enough for republicans. this is a very tough issue for the white house to try and work through congress because you have a number of democratic leaders in congress and particular mr. drier's counter part ms. slaughter who is the chairman of the rules committee who doesn't want to go that far on free trade. and so it will be interesting to see how the president sort of weeves his way in trying to promote free trade which he sort of in a broad sense believes, encourages job growth, encourages economic

expansion while dealing with the politics. host: and you mentioned congresswoman slaughter and it's true what they want is the a whole new approach to trade. what they've had their biggest beef with president obama is his signals at times, at least from the trade representatives, that they're going to move ahead with the three pending trade bills left over from the bush administration. so when there starts to be signals coming up that they're just going to finish up what was started under bush, that raise as lot of red flags for congresswoman slaughter, for a lot of people from ohio and states where they keep want to manufacture jobs and people that have been hit by the economy the hardest in terms of jobs and manufacturing. so, yes, definitely like trade is a dicey issue for some people. but i have noticed that in the last year there were definitely signals that they were definitely going to move forward with trade deals and

there were lot of cheers from republicans and pushback from some democrats and then it seems to stalled and fizzled out for a while. so now it's unclear to me where they are going with this. and i think there's a lot of people waiting for more clear direction. guest: and it gts into one of the other callers mentioned chinese currency. members of congress and i guess voters judging by the caller voters at large are sort of looking for the administration to take steps to deal with essentially trade and international financial markets under the laws that already exist and under the enforcement mechanisms that already exist. and that's certainly one argument you'll hear from democrats who are reluctant to see those free trade agreements go forward. prove that you're actually doing what you can to use enforcement tactics under the existing trade agreements, the other ones, and then maybe we'll believe that you're read dwroy go forward with these others and enforce those as well. host: zack on our drook's line.

good morning. caller: good morning. what's the possibility that our politics -- politicians could start working together and not just politicing and jostning? there's got to be things that both sides agree upon, deficit reduction. do you feel that there's going to be an impending inflation? and why can't they support some type of energy stimulus where -- we're lagging far behind on nuclear energy. guest: we talked about what's going to come up and one of the big questions will be how the senate behaves now that -- after we had health care we had a number of republican senators saying that's poisend the well for doing anything for the rest of the year. things like immigration reform, climate change, were off the table. we've had a little bit of a walking back from some of the same republicans. but in those final weeks

republicans actually shut down committee hearings and used some of the procedural tools they had to make it clear they were not happy with how health care was pushed through urntted the budget reconciliation process. one of the things to see was after being home and hearing from constituents for two weeks, if they decide that voters do want to see them cooperate with democrats on at least a specific set of issues or whether the voters really do want to see more gridlock, at least the republican lawmakers want to see more gridlock. host: the republican conference wrapped up in republicans that showed mitt romney and ron paul being the chosen potential presidential candidates. jennifer, what reaction is there to what's going on in new orleans and washington? how closely here are people paying attention to that? guest: there's talk. people are talking about some of this stuff a little bit. i think right now there's a lot more focus on at least at the white house, there's a lot more focus on not who is going to be

his opponent in 2012 but on getting as much done as they possibly can right now while he's still in there and while democrats still run the show in congress. so people are watching what's going on over here politically with the conference we're talking about. but that's lernl not what is at the focus of this point. there's a lot more to get done. guest: one of the main things -- there's very much a conversation among republicans within the republican party as chiefly what that was about but also michael steele down there saying essentially acknowledging that he had been made some mistakes and been the cause of a lot of bad ink, bad press for a couple weeks. that was -- a lot of folks are looking at the republican party. it's one of these crazy situations where voters seem to be, judging by the polls, are dissatisfy fid with everybody in congress.

republicans believe they have an opportunity to take back one or both chambers of congress but still have this bar to pass which is, are they different now than the republicans that were turned out of office in 2006. and stompled again in 2008 in the elections. republicans are trying to make the argument we've learned our lesson and we're ready to lead. that's essentially the discussion that's going on among republicans and among conservatives at gatherings like that. they're trying to decide among themselves have we really cleansed ourselves of the problems that voters turned us out of office for. host: sara palin made a big splash on friday. but 2014 did not rate that highly in the straw poll. and tina fay is back in the knew because she has already resumed her character impression of governor palin. let's take a look at that. >> and at 2:30 catch me andrew smarter than a half-term governor. i think you'll be surprised by the answer.

i know i was. and at 4:00 don't miss elite, the show that takes c-span footage of a bunch of and redubs it with a teacher's voice from charlie brown. do you hate journalist? get ready for hey journalists, i got cha where i reedit my interviews to make them look like the ones who were woefully unprepared. so katie, what newspaper doss you read? it's an easy question, katie. well, better luck next time. got cha. host: that's tina fay paretting the former governor of alaska. governor palin is still in the

spotlight even though she stepped back from politics and is focusing on her fox tv show. what does this say to us about these personalities in politics and how they gain momentum and a grass rooths u.s. base? -- roots support base? guest: i spend so much time trying to figure out the sara palin effect. and what's going on with her and voters. and i talk with voters, talk to a lot of folks. and i don't understand it but i -- there's no question that 10, 15% of voters, a decent chunk of the republican base, likes her. and my sense is there's certainly policy that a lot of them identify with. but by and large a lot of them like her because of things like the tina f.a.a. parity and the number of hits she takes from people in the press, from everyone else. and so it's a very weird

phenomenon. i'm not sure whether that's -- i don't think that 10 to 15% is enough to actually launch her on a successful presidential run. she may try and she will have to broaden out past that but it's interesting watching that stratification of politicians and of the electorate based on essentially the sara palin effect. guest: i think you're right, there is definitely a following behind her. but as far as i can tell, like the polls that have shown her when people rate her in terms of wanting her to run, they don't seem to be very high. so she definitely have a following. it will be interesting to see where she goes. host: republican's line in illinois. hi, julie. caller: i just have a suggestion on -- for how to stimulate the growth for the small business. i think that overall they need to look at the small business

association and where the federal funding is going to to stimulate the new businesses coming into the economy. and i'm just wondering what you are seeing from this question is for steven. you know, where is congress going with that? you know, with the small business. and how can they in my opinion reform these groups that i don't think are doing enough for the use -- youth going out, people wanting to open new businesses. i've been to the small business association. i'm not impressed. so if our federal funding is going there, i think that they need to really take a look at these type of groups. you know, the small business association. you mentioned the chambers of commerce. guest: it's interesting. there are certainly a number of member of congresses who would agree with your assessment of

small business administration. there are folks, and my e-mail gets filled with folks proposing different changes and more scrutiny of how sba is handling its business. there's no question that both parties in congress sort of accept the premise that small businesses the are the engine of small growth. we've had a bill come through congress that deals with technical stuff way above my head, but writeoffs and what not for investments for equipment purchases, things like that. one of the key reasons that was considered so easy to pass was because it was both sides agreed that will help small businesses. those are the one whose can really use this help and those are the job creators in the country right now. so the sentiment is definitely being heard on capitol hill.

host: in the washington times, congressman bart stupak, michigan democrat who has announced he does not plan to run for reelection. how significant is this, and what do you expect the fallout to be when congress comes back? guest: it's interesting. he says that for the last six years or so he has been trying to decide whether to come back and it has always been health care, the fact that it hasn't passed. that was essentially the accomplishment that he wanted to leave congress having finished. he's in his ninth term right now. and having health care done he said his time here, he essentially accomplished. now, republicans in particular msh republicans declare him the first casualty of what they expect to be many more out of the health care debate. it's actually a good election to watch to see whether that seat, he attracted a number of republicans seeking to run against him and it will be interesting to see what

democrats get into that race and how that race goes. it will be a good belle weather to see whether health care will be a single issue bullet to shoot down lawmakers who voted for it in the end. host: has the white house lost an ally, someone who could be seen as a conserve 2if6 democrat but someone willing at the end of the day too go with this health care plan? guest: i guess democrats are never happy when somebody leaves from their party. but you know, i think that they're going to keep moving forward. i think obama will probably lend his support to whoever runs in stupak's district on the democratic ticket. i would not be surprised if he shows up there as soon as he can and someone is out there running because they definitely want to keep that seat in the house. host: victor from tampa, florida. caller: good morning. thank for your call. and also, what i want to bring up mostly is jobs, and jobs can be solved and you've got a

couple of reporters there. you're all young enough, you're too young to recall the caps. this is only a suggestion and it's up to our media and the reporters like yourselves to initiate a program where you can go out there and clean up the environment, clean up all the old dead trees that are laying along our freeways and in our forests and our state and in our counties, throughout the whole country. president franklin roosevelt started this program years back called conservation. and i worked on it when i was about 13 or 14 years old. for 25 cents an hour. and with the unemployment situation as it is today, i would appreciate not so much as congress and them because i see a lot of bickering back and forth between the both of them

and concern about the money and everything. i would like to have your reporters get to work and look into this conservation camp. i'll hang up now and wait for your reply. thank you very much for c-span and thank you jennifer and yourself there steven for your reporting. guest: it's an interesting issue he raises. i was in shen doa, which is one of the places that got a lot of work. i never end up writing the story. but when you think of the new deal program, ccc is one of the things that you definitely think about and you think about the folks who were put to work and sort of the infrastructure that was built during that time. and then you look at the stimulus bill that came through last year, and it's nothing like that sort of focus on infrastructure at least as we thought of from the new deal programs. and it's a curious sort of

disconnect. what the caller said, i certainly heard from a number of folks. there are a lot of just driving around washington, d.c., which is famous for its bad roads, there seem to be a lot of, quote, shovel ready projects that could probably be done just on basic road construction. there certainly is the national park service says, there's an $8 billion backlog of park service projects. there's not just the park service. there are a number of interior agencies and agricultural agencies that deal with federal land that could have these projects, and yet not a ton of money from the stimulus went there. so it's an interesting question. host: is there a real movement to try to match this language of jobs that you mentioned with some of these other goals the obama administration has, like perhaps cleaning up the environment, conservation work? can that get through the congress? guest: i think you're going to see the white house and congress to try to link jobs to

everything they're doing, especially with the stimulus funding, with again with health care, which is going to be what they're talking about a lot over the next several months there's going to be a lot of talk how ths going to help the middle class and small businesses. because everybody knows jobs is the number one issue, they're going to try to link all of the things that they've been able to past to ways that they could help jobs. so stay tuned. jobs will be all over everything. guest: one issue that i remember writing briefly about was in terms of trying to link jobs to everything. the house passed a bill to designate some beach front property on the u.s. virgin islands as a national historic site. and even that on the floor of the house was cited as a potential job creator. so there's probably nothing that's safe from being designated as a jobs bill. host: thanks to bodes of you for coming in -- both of you

for coming in this morning. thanks so much. we'll come right back and talk about the international atomic energy agency with anita neelssn. >> welcome to c-span. what is c what is human trafficking? >> selling of people on the streets of urban america. >> why did you focus on this topic? >> i think it's a very important question that people need to understand that it's a big problem within america. >> let's talk about what you knew about human trafficking before you start it had

documentary. >> i really didn't know much about it at all, actually. i just knew that it was a problem that a lot of people don't want to talk about. and that it's something that's very prominent in america alone. and we need to understand that we really need to see what is going on just behind the wall that nobody ever wants to climb. >> you interviewed angel vickers. what did you learn in this interview? >> well, she really did open up a lot of points about the world that we really don't see. she told us about how she was able to help a lot of the victims that were going around on the streets, how they rescued them, how they really were able to rehabilitate these people. and i think that was very important and that it showed in the aspect of the documentary i made. >> what are some of the problems associated with try to

stop human trafficking? >> there are many federal places that do not really understand the problem. they don't know what the entire situation is. they need to understand it completely what they're looking for, the profile of the people they're trying to get into prosecuted. they need to find what these people are doing. they need to understand that these are shady characters and that they need to discover exactly who the humans that are doing this are to these young people. and it just seems that they ignore the problem more than they actually want to learn about it. and that's a very large problem. because if they're not helping, who will? >> and how did your knowledge about human trafficking evolve throughout creating this documentary? >> i really didn't know a lot about it right before i made it. i knew so many of the world's problems, you know, the

recession and the wars going on within the world, and that we need to be finding smggets that's within our own -- something that's within our own minds that we meed to really discuss and need to find exactly how these people are working and we need to know that these people need help. and i just knew there are people out there that really need this. so i wanted to make a documentary for them. >> and as the community is trying to target human trafficking, what advice would you give that community? >> well, they need to definitely find out who is within this, who not the people that are exactly selling these people but exactly the people that they are selling, they need to understand, they need to find these people and they need to help them in any way they can. they need to provide some kind of housing, some kind of education, and then they need to be able to have them open up

and tell how they did this. or exactly who did this to them, how they were stuffed in. and then we need to prosecute the people that are actually doing it. >> we thank you for taking the time to talk to us today. and congratulations on your win. >> thank you very much. >> and here's a portion of his documentary. >> kids who are put into trafficking situations either inside the united states or brought from overseas here, half of them end up in the commercial sex industry. >> and of these victims, what is the average age? >> a lot of research has shown that the average age of a child prostitute or child exploitation victim is 14. >> 14. that's the average age of an eighth grader. >> to watch all of the documentary as well as all of our winning videos, you can go to student cam.org. >> washington journal continues.

>> our guest, anita kneel sen is with the international atomic agency. >> thank you for having me here. >> this week we have the security summit in washington, d.c. 46 foreign leaders are coming here for this meeting. what is the iaea's role? >> the director general has been invited to participate in this meeting as an observer. and we have come to the meeting because we have a program, a rather large program about nuclear security to help countries establish effective nuclear security systems. and i think that is going to be part of the discussion at the summit. how it can be utilized 2349 best possible manner. >> how does it mean to be an observe sner >> the director general will be part of the actual meeting. he will have his contributions

during the lunch, which is the appropriate thing to do when you're an observer. and at that time there will be a dedicated discussion about the roles and functions of the iaea. >> a piece in the "washington post" looking at the nuclear summit coming up, the security summit called the obama leads the security efforts. and this piece in the "washington post" by scott wilson and mary both looks at the president's role in all of this. it says that back in 2005 as a senator he traveled with senator richard lugor of indiana for a tour of the cold war's most fearsome sites. jumping down, five years later, obama is no longer the understudy.

the president has identified nuclear terrorism as the most immediate and extreme threat to global security. his aids note that al qaeda has sought unsuccessfully to acquire an atomic bomb. can you reflect on how the president is involved in this process? >> this is a very, very important step that has been taken by the president. and the fact that he has convened a heads of state meeting with so many actual heads of states coming to washington discussing these matters is a good indication of the seriousness of the matter and how serious he takes it. and how much he wants to contribute for the global response to the risk. that nuclear material could possibly come into the hands of terrorists and that they could use it to create or produce, put together a crude nuclear explosive device. >> the "washington post"

reporters go on to write that the president's central challenge will be to persuade the leaders arriving in washington to care as much as he does about securing the material that could be used to secure a bomb. elaborate for us on the chat eng of getting other world leaders invested in this. >> he is very successful in that so many are coming to washington. that is a very positive thing. and those that could not come for one reason or another have sent they're high representatives. so this means that all these countries are represented at the high level. and in addition to that he has invited the atomic agency, the general and others to contribute to these global efforts which are required in

order to master this problem. >> our guest has been the director of the office of nuclear security since it was established in 2003. and that manages the iaea's program to protect against nuclear terrorism as outlined in your organization's nuclear security plan. and we can take your calls. the numbers are on the bottom of your screen. what is your organization's biggest concern? the president has mentioned that we've shifted from a time when there's not so much worry about state upon state attacks of nuclear proportions but there is still the concern about loose materials getting into the hands of people who could use them. >> our biggest concern is that to make all of this happen and to be effective, it is something that has to be subscribed to by all count urizz. all are at -- countries.

all are at risk basically. even those who have small programs, because the material can move around. and it is essential to have a full fledged program with a regulatory system, with security at the facilities, adequate security at transports. the proper human resources so that people know what they are doing. the right instruments to detect if any material is moving around. and et cetera. and all of this has to function at the same time. otherwise, it presents gaps and it is a vulnerability. >> and you're focused on prevention, detection and response, and coordination and analysis. >> that's right. >> talk to us why those three things are the important keys. >> it is very important. and i think it has been mentiond in quotes by president obama that when there is a vulnerable or sensitive high

quality nuclear material, it has to be locked up very properly. and it has been also compared with how gold is kept at fort knocks. i there cannot be fort nox's around the world but it points to the need for security of the material wherever it is. but the second line, the detection, is something that is supplementry and, for example, it means to control trade at borders. it means controlling what comes in if you have a major public event, if people are gathering in big numbers. so that you could discover if anyone is carrying materials or substances in that. and then, finally, being prepared if something should happen. what to do if there is a see senior, what to do if there is

a threat. and what are the arrangements that need to be done in such a case. >> the "washington post," in reporting on this nuclear security summit says at the end, the summit is skedyuled to produce a commune kay on a crackdown on smuggling, standards for securing highly enriched plutonium and stock. but the obama administration has asked countries participated to ensure that the countries are not used as smuggling routes. outside experts say those will be as important as the sum commune committee. this idea, can you explain that for us? >> it's like a buy-in.

you identify a problem or you identify a goal and then everybody who is around the table will say that i will contribute this to reaching the goal. i will contribute to making an effort of securing all the material in my country. i will make an effort of helping my neighbor or i will make an effort by giving some resources that could be used by the iaea to help countries far away. because this is something that will have to be seen as an investment. it doesn't come for free. it doesn't happen overnight. there is no one size fits all. but it is something that has to be profiled towards what is the material that is existing at individual places. and then shape the assistance or shape the gifts in this regard so that this material is well prepared, that all the

rest, that the people involved are well educated, that the administrative system is in place, that the technical system rls in place. all of this. >> our first call for anita nillsen who is the director of the international atomic energy agency is from dave. caller: good morning. c-span doesn't want us having open topics for only 45 minutes every day. also, what has been done to stop countries like russia from supplying nuclear parts to iran? thank you. guest: this is an entirely different question. we are talking here about what can be done in order to secure nuclear material which countries have responsibilities for in their own custody.

the trade functioning and the question between countries related to that trade is an entirely different question and it is not handled at this summit. >> let's look at sunday opinion piece in the "new york times" how to build on the start treaty. this is a commentary coming from william j perry, a fellow senior at the institute for international studies. he was a secretary of defense and george schultz, who is a former secretary of state. and they comment that after a year of intense negotiations with the russians, president obama signed the new start treaty with the president of prauge. on monday the president will host the leaders of these nuclear security summits. new start, is the first of the promise to press the reset button on u.s.-russian relationship. they say it is a modest step entailing a reduction of only

30%. some of that is war heads that are counted, not by their destruction. the two also go on to ask, what is next. they look forward to a follow-on treaty that builds on the success and leads to a significantly greater arms reduction including reductions in tactical nuclear weapons and being dismantled and not simply put in reserve. nato must be reopened and talked about, the relationship with russiana and also missile defense and the russians are eager to revisit two cold war treaties that they would like to talk about. i hope that answers some of your questions. let's go to connecticut. anthony on the independent line. caller: hi. my question is, i asked the screener about iran. what is the ieea doing about

iran? and the other subject i want to mention, why is -- i'm not a hater of israel. why is israel not at this summit? thank you? >> the question around iran, which is coming up whenever nuclear materials is being spoken about is also another one. because this is something which relates to treaty obligations according to the nonproliferation treaty. and that is related to what kind of commitments they are doing for their use of the nuclear materials. as you know, this is something that needs to be supplemented with measures to protect that this material is stolen by anyone in the country. and this risk, the nonstate actor is what we are going to speak about in the summit and in the context of the summit the coming two days.

>> this, iran will file a formal complaint against the united states after president obama accepted iran from a pledge not to use them. the foreign ministry said sunday. it was a threat to global piece and security, according to the smi official fars news agency coming out of iran. we're talking with anita neelsen about the upcoming summit and specifically how countries can come to the table and pledge support for trying to gather loose materials and deal with that on their own turf. guest: all countries know what kind of material they have in their countries because there it is surroundd with a licensing structure and the regulatory system that dictates what kind of activities it can be used in. what is an added dimension here

is to have a security system which is so strong that it protects against any theft or protects against any ill lisssit illegal use of material that is not supported by the individual government. and those measures are of this complex nature and they have to be complimented with everything else. and it takes a long time to introduce a new culture of how nuclear materials are being managed in each country. and that is i think the core of the subject matter we are speaking about. host: republicans line in california. good morning. caller: good morning. you didn't answer that guy's question about what isn't the russian president going to be at that summit. and this is whether or not i want to know. he'll get nailed on their nukes in israel. i want you to break this down. i'll make this short and sweet.

if israel didn't exist on top of america hyphen high jack.com. guest: this is a question which goes beyond any comment that i can make as a representative from the iaea here in regard to this summit. host: and you are, again, the director of the office of nuclear security. and we're talking less nation to nation or action in treaties. we're looking more at what countries can do and what the iaea does to try to increase nuclear security, deal with upgrading facilities, how to help nations develop things like radiation detectors. talk to us about the trafficking data base. guest: a question which quite often comes up when we are speaking about this is how well controlled is material now. and although i would say that it is realtively well controlled, we also know that

there is material which is circulating around in uncontrolled circumstances. we have an ill lissity trafficking data base. and 110 countries are providing us with reports on a voluntary basis on all their cases of i will lissity trafficking. so in the last ten-year period we have about 1,400 of those cases. and er year, we have another more than 100 reports of trafficking cases. some are innocent, some are in dirgent but thin others are more significant. and by this data base we know that it is necessary to get together to buy into the goals and the wishes that president obama has phrased for the

upcoming summit to strentsen the control and the all the materials as well in any one country. and this is actually what's going to happen in the summit next. >> what incentive is there for a country to take that step of trying to cut down on the trafficking and also not only secure potentially loose nukes and things like that but also fess up about it and talk about it? >> i think the first and foremost, it is to contribute to global security. what we are speaking of here is the risk of explosive device that any terrorist would get the possibility of having such a thing in their storage. that is unthinkable. that is the first thing. to contribute to global security. that's the best goal. but having done that, having had that, countries will also be more prepared to take on new

nuclear energy because the world needs nuclear energy or i would say the world needs energy. and nuclear is one of the options for producing energy. and some countries have opted to choose that option in their energy mix. and of course, a good culture for nuclear security, good security for the existing materials, et cetera, will make them much more prepared to take that step. host: let's go to doug, democrat's line in boston. caller: i'd like to ask you about israel too. israel has the reputation for illegal nuclear transfer material. i can remember about ten years ago when they obtained nuclear driggers and nothing was said about that. especially by the united states. personally, i think that iran should get resolved of nuclear weapons and maybe the middle east will be a safer place. thanks a lot.

guest: thank you for that question. as you said, this is not part of the trafficking data base. we have the cases which are reported to us by countries and the matters that you brought up goes beyond what is being considered as i will lissity trafficking. host: can you give some some of the countries perhaps in the middle east that are involved? guest: we have 110 countries and several of those are in the middle east. but in emphasis is in europe, in asia, but also all the african, almost all the african countries, asian countries, latin america. so you see 110 countries is a big number. and this means that the records that come out of this is not only reliberal but also rather complete.

host: let's go to mark, independent line. caller: hello. i'm concerned about why it is that the iaea does not seem to be looking at israel's nuclear weapons. it seems to me that those are the weapons that are most likely to get used. israel is -- as a country has committed terrorist acts. it has no friends in that region. eventually, the american public are going to realize that they don't even agree with israel on most issues. you have people in america right now who are against home sexuality or against abortion who support israel when in fact israel support's those things. where as the people that we're fighting are against those things and agree with most americans about those issues. so eventually this is going to end and end badly and israel's nuclear weapons are going to get used or may get used and we need to get in there and

destroy those weapons before israel gets a chance to destroy this world with them. host: sor are to cut you off. we got the gist of your conversation and need to get a response. guest: in this case, the question circulates around nuclear weapons. and i think i would like to point to the new start treaty which was convened just few days ago. and our director general here has also welcomed this treaty as a significant step towards a world without nuclear weapons because everybody is looking forward to any step in the direction of disarmament and this treaty is a good step forward in that regard. host: when countries like russia and the united states step forward and sign a treaty like this, what does it mean for other countries, including israel? do they take notice? does it have an effect? is there potential for that to

be a real ice breaker? guest: a treaty of this nature is a disarmament objective. and within that treaty it stipulates what are the conditions. and both countries are now reducing their number of devices. which in itself is a very important step forward. and that is the main contribution to this, a step towards a world without nuclear weapons. host: we have a comment from twitter. guest: i think that is not necessarily correct. it is necessary to have a common understanding, a common goal for what kind of security arrangements should there be. there must also be a system in

order to check that the adequate security has been done and that it is maintained and sustained over a longer period of time. host: one of the things that the organization is involved with is preparing for big events, such as if olympics, and the socker world cup which will be held soon. guest: whn there is a big gathering, there is always security arrangements. and you go into the venue, you are looked at, you are screened, your luggage is screened for weapons. what is happening now is the recognition that it is necessary to put in an extra imention to this normal screening and to look at whether is anyone carrying in radioactive substances. and for that purpose there needs to be special detectors put in strategy jick places and also the people that are doing

the security work must have the right background, the right training, know what they're doing, how to operate the instruments. this is what it is all about, to prepare the security arrangements for something like this in a broader way, adding new technology, adding new procedures for it to eliminate this threat. that you could get the nuclear material in or radio active material in to have a dirty bomb, for instance. host: danny, republican's line in tennessee. hi. caller: hello. listen, about 25 years ago, the united states decided not to do breeder reactors because of many reasons but one of them was it was a lot more difficult to control waste and there was a proliferation concern. now then, in hindsight, were they correct?

and also, i would like to know do you think that it actually has a hidden cost or an increased cost to have a breeder reactor system like in france or japan? guest: the actual technology which is used for the energy generation, because this is one of the ways that you can produce nuclear energy, has always to meet high standards for safety and high standards for security. and it is necessary then for an advanced technology like the breeder to go through all the different procedures and certifications and all of that. and it is a difficult and complex one. and it has some of the added complexities that the normal nuclear energy technology does not have. and that has made it more

difficult to master in a regular manner. but if it is done, it has to subscribe to the high standard and they are general for whatever technology it is. it's a matter of what it takes to get to reaching the high standards. host: we have a list here provide bid the white house of the world leaders attending the nuclear summit. it starts out with algeria, the leader of arm meania, australia, brazil, canada. the czech republic, the european union. also countries that might not come to mind, like the republic of finland. so there is a well-rounded group. also, the republic of india. so there are countries present involved in this debate. we have from israel the deputy minister and the atomic minister of israel plands to attend. italy, japan, jordan, korea.

quite the list goes on and on. let's flip to the end. it goes all the way to the united nations, united emirates, the ukraine and vietnam. you mentioned it is significant in your view that so many countries are coming together for this event. how unprecedented is this? . .

caller: where the united states may fall in that rating? guest: the question about what stands nuclear waste is managed is a very important one. and the iaea is issuing standards, we are producing and developing good standards with our member states. and once they are developed and published they are the norm for countries to subscribe to meet when they are exercising nuclear activities. either production or the waste that is generated after the energy production. and if they so wish, but this is strictly a national responsibility.

but if the country's wish, we convene expert teams to look at how they fulfill the norms and standards. and give recommendations of what improvements could be done or recommendations to be put in place. host: mike from los angeles. good morning. caller: i have two questions for your guest, there was an incident in the united states where live nuclear missiles are transported on bcc-2's for that to happen multiple safety redundancies have would to be broken. and second question, why did japan need a few thousand tons of highly enriched plutonium?

guest: there are rules of how these should be implemented. first it relates to how they are packaged and what kind of protection layers are around the package. so no radio activity can leak out and then steps to get it on a plane and to a new storage space, etc. host: in "the washington post" speaking of looking at chile and the energy department went down to deal with it. they had packed 39 pounds of highly enriched uranium to make a road to import and then to the

sea and the united states. they were worried about the safe containment, it was not damaged by the earth wake but it was an example of how risky this transportation is. this is from david haughman in the post, that this nuclear material from that of the soviet union and united states has cleaned out highly enriched urani uranium. >> guest: that's i these materials are not used for production or the harveeves it was intended for. it was sitting in storage. and it's much better this material is very safely handled, very securely done. and one option for that is to

bring it back to the country of origin. to the supplier. and that's exactly what is being done in all of these cases. reducing the inventry of h.u. in the country and by reducing the risk. host: in the washington post, the security installation of removing the highly material from chile. was that something you were aware of? it seemed secret to some degree. guest: the operations like this has to be done without much noise, without speech because of the transport itself. and the fact that it happens in several different countries, that is no secret. and it's part of an effort to reduce the actual storage of

these materials in places where they -- or move them to places where they are better handled. host: i am sure we will hear about chile this week that they are a nuclear free zone, is that correct? guest: well, nuclear free zone is not relevant to this. this removal has put the uranium in a better storage condition. and also east, chile to take care of this. it's significant. host: let's go to our caller in illinois. caller: i support israel

wholeheartedly. and i see why they need new weapons since iran threatened to wipe them off the face of the earth. and i think that one the reasons  prime minister is not coming is because obama mistreated him as obama often mistreats our allies. he coddles up to dictators but not to a host of our allies. guest: i have no comment. host: can you give us a perspective on what it is that has gotten so many player here in washington this week. is it the president's presence? is it things he's said or the timing at this point in history? guest: i think that the recognition that nuclear

security matters now must be high up on the agenda has been recognized by so many countries. and that they have welcomed his initiative and welcomed the timing of it for an opportunity to sit together, talk about the problems, talk about what can be done. and agree on something to move this whole subject further. so that it is seen as it can be moved from something that needs to be dealt with urgently into a more sustainable question. host: let's go to larry, democratic line, rocky mountain, north carolina.  no fan of iran, but if you would have seen what we did to iraq. we said that they had killer weapons and a nuclear weapon program and all this stuff. and we went in there, and saddam

let us, we expected the whole country and he went along with us. and what do we do? we go over and hang the guy. so when iran sees this, can you blame them for getting a nuclear weapon. if we had done it right, but there was so many things done wrong in that last administration, during those eight years. i am afraid a lot we can't get right. and this thing of security. it's costing us. when is it going to end. we spend billions of dollars more. and people on airplanes and now the security of all this nuclear stuff. it's ridiculous. and it's more and more and that's what will bankrupt us. we played right into bin laden's hands, this is what he wanted us

to do. guest: the summit will deal with what kind of measures must be done now. and what can we do together. what kind of normative system should we join up for. what kind of joint forces can we do in order to provide the adequate training to the responsible people. how can we equip them in the best possible manner. how can we make sure that material which is legitimately used is also secured in the best possible manner. all of this is something which takes time, effort and resources. and it's a good agenda for all of these countries to come together and talk about as their common matter of interest. host: was there an international lesson learned from the

inspections that happened in iraq? guest: again the iraq question is one which relates to the implementation of the nonfiltration treaty and there are different views on that as you know. while it is something that contributes the nonproliferation in the whole picture, it's not the subject of the summit and not the subject that we put in the center when we speak about nuclear security. host: finally larry brought up the question of cost. who pays for it at the end of the day and is there a discussion of how it can be financed? guest: the responsibility rests with the initial state and they have it take the responsibility to cover the cost for that. be it the purchasing of the fuel

or safety arrangements or security arrangements. at the same time we have a legacy of the past that security was not seen in the same manner as it is now. and we have a catch-up to do to secure that material. and the cost for that is an investment. and it's something that can be shared between countries for the same goal. so assistance can be provided. through bilateral programs, through multilateral programs or through the iaea. because investments made by the countries benefits all countries. it's a global concern and of a global nature. >> our guest, anita nilsson and has had security importance.

thank you for being with us. guest: thank you very much. host: c-span will continue as the nuclear summit gets underway in washington. next we will talk about brian stann about veterans looking for employment. >> the topics on the sunday talk shows will include a preview of the nuclear summit in washington. also party politics and what is ahead for the supreme court with the retirement of justice stevens. meet the press, with interviews with robert gates and hillary clinton. talking with clinton and gates

and shumar from new york. the guests on fox news sunday, include joseph lieberman and the conference chair, lamar alexander, and michele bachman. guests to include mississippi republican, barber. you can listen to all five sunday morning talk shows starting at noon here on c-span radio, 91 fm washington, d.c. and follow us on facebook and twitter. >> all this month see the winners of c-span's studentcam

documentary, from all states submit top winning videos, every morning on c-span at 6:50 eastern. and at 8:30 meet the students that made them, and for a list of all winners, visit studentcam.org. >> after 34 years on the supreme court, justice john paul steven finishes its work for the summer. and the best place to span his legacy is c-span video library, the latest gift to america. >> "washington journal" continues. host: our guest brian stann,

executive director of hire heros. talk about your organization, veterans are coming back from afghanistan are looking for jobs. the market is tough. guest: we are a career placement and assistance organization for our veterans. we look to help make the transition out of the military into the civilian workforce and find them a job. it's our strong belief that our nation's employers owe it to these veterans to be first in line for the american dream. to be first in line for the jobs of our countries, due to their defense of our nation. especially because the military has a global impact, and the nation's military provides the security.

superpower in this world. host: you are a veteran, and what was your experience coming back to the states and reentering the civilian workforce. guest: it's not easy and i was fortunate that i met a person that shared these beliefs of honor and commitment and duty. but i was one of the few. it's a difficult transition when you come out of the military, there are skill sets you don't have. having never interviewed for a job or having written a resume. you can be a skilled person but if you don't know how to market yourself, the job market is difficult. host: we have a story of veterans including matthew

eronset that was in active duty and planned transition to civilian life. and since returning to a six month job and having a master's degree in marketing and has gone from florida to milwaukee with no luck. guest: this is similar, we work with veterans and try to get in their life as early as possible. we would like to get involved six months to a year prior to departure. but we work with many that are unemployed for over a year that are homeless or living on someone's couch because they can't find a job. it's two sides and the veterans need to educate for a job. but our government, the department of defense has not done a good enough job of putting together a transition program to educate the veterans.

we have the programs in place, but in many or most cases they are in suspension. host: we have a number for the veterans to call. and all other lines are open for republicans, democrats and independents. let me give the phone number for veterans, 202-628-0104. you can call about your experience or if you have served and having made the transition. when people come out of the service who were full-time fully signed up versus national guard duty, is there a difference in expectations of finding

employment and what they see? guest: absolutely, when i leave the military, i obviously will get a better salary, because of the housing allowances and difference revenues as active service man or woman, that's not the case. a big reason for unemployment rate for our veterans, is that employers and companies are not educated on the skill sets of our veterans. they are not educated on the amount of training they go through. they are not educated on all the different skills based on their job and not educated on the amount of leadership skills6r? these young men and women have. when you look at the6&gñ confli in afghanistan, they are not being fought by generals or captains, primarily they are

fought by corporals, 18 to 22 year old men and women, we are putting a great responsibility on these young people and greater than a c.e.o. and you can be leading 15-20 men and women. employers owe it to their warriors and get educated on what they bring in their skills. host: we have veterans look at age groups and how they stack up. it shows that nearly across the board veterans have a higher rate of unemployment. when we look at 18-24 year olds there is a dramatic difference and goes down. can you reflect on that?

guest: absolutely, if you are in an interview and look at someone's resume, you understand what you are looking at. but when looking at military employment, they don't understand what a crew leader is or someone working in aviation. even if you spell it out and translate your skills well on that resume. it's still difficult for very educated people to understand. if they don't understand it, then your chances of getting hired have gone down. and there are several stigmas or stereotypes about veterans. i don't want headaches of a war veteran and i don't want any problems and employers are quick to stamp problems on veterans from afghanistan. and that helps to compile that

statistic, unfortunately. host: let's go to indiana. caller: hi, i have a question about codifying putting veterans first in line for job considerations. i certainly understand that veterans have lots of skill sets that may not be reflected on their resume without further understanding on the employer's part. but that applies to lots of job applications. for instance work-at-home moms, that's a consideration for a long time. and i would like to get brian's input. guest: thank you, that's a great question. i was raised by a work-at-home mom and married to one. and i understand the skill sets it takes to raise a family. and however i believe that

veterans should get priority. if we talk about who gets priority out of employment from stay-at-home working mothers and the people that defend our great nation. host: comment on twitter from donna, to get called back from duty, a reason why some employers would not hire them? guest: that's specifically designed for those in reserveses or national guard. men and women off of duty, that's the irr, and they are not getting called back. that's not the case with the folks getting off of active duty, or those wounded in combat and being medically discharged. host: employers have a duty to

keep their job open, and how often does that happen? guest:wu in many cases, compan that have hired veterans or reservists, they have bought into it. in most we find that companies do a good job. not all the time, but they believe in that skill set of the veteran and their duty to defend the nation. host: we have nick calling from scotland. caller: hi, good morning, i wanted to say to brian, i applaud his sincere efforts for the veterans returning from iraq. my own experience was that when i joined i enlisted in 1971 in the air force. and it was because i didn't have a clear goal in my mind.

or a skill set that lent itself to getting employment in an area i probably would have found successful. i think that the key is education, subsidizing the veterans that would allow them to get the education, to fill in the gaps that they perhaps entered the force with. and once they are in the education system it gives them a chance to understand where they might want to go with their lives. and also meanwhile make them more attractive to the employers. i found that a lot of people that enlisted with me didn't have any clear goals. the military was the way to take a step that had a lot of credibility. but when i came out, i still

didn't have the education. i did take advantage of education opportunities in the air force. and that was another great benefit to me as a stepping stone to get into further education when i left. that's my comment. thanks very much. guest: well, sir, first and foremost, thank you for your service. you served in a time where it was difficult to transition out of the military and blend back into society with just the climate of our nation and the attitude towards that war, vietnam. and i agree that education is vital for the veterans to make themselves more marketable and compete in the job market. many times these veterans are getting out and have children and going to school full time is not a question. and the post g.i.bill that pays education because of their

service to their country. that doesn't work unless they go to school full time. they have to take a certain course load to get that education paid for. if they go to school at night and that school is not paid for. so some are not afforded?u opportunity. but i agree, and we at hire heros we look at vocational rehab and all the programs out there for veterans. and if their financial situation or personal situation allows for it, go back to school. because nothing will look better on the resume for these young men and women of all the skills and the leadership coupled with a degree. they will be hard to compete against. i agree with the comments, education is key.

it's key for anyone in our country to get to the next job market level. host: we have all our lines open. tampa, florida is our next caller, jerry on the independent line. caller: good morning, one of the things i hate to hear the most, thank you for your service, we just don't have a position for you at this time. you get tired of hearing that, i put in seven years back in the 60's and 70's. i heard interesting statistics, about 33% of americans have served in the military and 31% of the homeless are veterans. maybe you can respond to that. guest: sir, thank you for your comments. and i agree, that's a comment we

can't stand to hear as well. and it goes back to the education of our employers and the commitment of our nation's employers and the current administration to the veterans. it's ridiculous that these people return from fighting a war and get turned away from jobs and end up homeless. one of my director of our organization has walked those footsteps. i have an army sergeant that broke her back saving her soldiers and came back and couldn't find a job. she is getting a degree, but she was living in her car. and she's fantastic, and it happens to veterans all over. with we talk about interviewers looking at resumes and not understanding, stereotypes come

to mind and they hire someone from their background. companies that we work with that are preferential to veterans, guess who is in charge of those companies. veterans. host: you mentioned educating vets themselves and how to sell themselves. selling one's self is not something that you learn but maybe in business school than the military. it doesn't come across your resume of what you accomplished. guest: absolutely, writing a resume is a skill set. i had never written a resume before. i was infantry officer and how do i talk about defeating the

enemy and put it on the resume so the company can see my worth and how i can bring value to their team. it's something that we found in the last three years of being in this business that is mandatory. and we try to insert ourselves in the lives of the veterans earlier, like i said six months to a year. even two years if we have to. we would rather have them seek our help then, than to say i am out of work and help me. teaching them and putting them through mock interviews and prepare them for that skill set so that it applies to the job they are interviewing for. there are experts that people go to, and our veterans can come to hire heros usa andևget it for

free. but it's a skill set that we have to teach, we have people on place to teach that. however most courses last 72 hours. it's not long enough, the instructor to student ratio is 1:300. and hire heros fights for in the pentagon and on the hill to improve on that. host: talk about the policy, where the policy angle comes in. guest: well, the policy looks great, which is the case in many things. so i have looked at the policy and i have met with the deputy in charge of me. and it's the execution of the

policies, when you go through a transition course and look around and see the instructor teaching the class. and you see 50 to 300 servicemen and women going through the same course and see how engaged they are. they are not engaged. they are not learning anything. it needs to be very hands' on. and hire heros%qwill go to the places and teach them. we go and help and help them write resumes and point them in the right direction to verbally and written skill set themselves to countries. host: patrick is a veteran. good morning.

caller: good morning, and thank you sir for your service. i took advantage of the g.i. bill less than 10 years after i came back from vietnam. and i found that i can't use an remaining time i had on my g.i. bill. and that is one thing to consider. you are doing exactly what is needed. i found when i had my own business and worked for other people, they found it a plus that i had been in the military partially because they knew i was familiar with the chain of command. i would shut up and follow orders. which is something that a lot of people don't know how to do. and your resume help and your high teacher to student ratio is

part of what needed. and a lot needed is odéqydecomp. in world war ii, they talked about coming back from hours and let loose in society without resocialization. guest: agreed. and thank you sir for your service and for your comments. and i agree, there does need to be a decompression time. and we work with the veterans and work with a lot of organizations and v.a. organizations, if we get veterans that we believe are not ready for employment, and need decompression time. we have partners we can refer them to. and i agree, it's ridiculous that you can't use the remaining

time on the bill. and there are people fighting that on the hill and hope to get movement on that in the coming years. host: our phone lines to call are on your screen. brian stann is the executive director of hire heros u.s.a. where does your funding come from? guest: from priority donors and companies and corporations we work with. we get no money for placing a veteran. we get zero money when we go to a base and conduct a transition seminar. so we get all of our money, and we work on a shoe string budget from american people who care. and say i want this organization to grow, i want to help as many veterans as they possibly can. and we are grateful for it.

host: kim from columbus, ohio. caller: hi, i was getting ready for church and i seen brian on. and i wanted brian to know he really touches my heart. i have a website called bashelmaskem.com. i am so offended that any veteran that comes back from doing a job, i can't even think about doing. just makes me nervous from the tv. that they come back to this country and i did not know they were living on the streets like that and that our veterans were hungry like that. i did not know. and brian if you would like to contact me by that website, it's free now but i cannot live with one of y'all sleeping on the

streets. and that makes no sense to me. and i hope that you are in contact with barack obama, i voted for him and seems like they have something for them. guest: thank you, and i appreciate your comments. and i understand you getting emotional, columbus, ohio was hard hit from the war, and there was quite a few men hit in that area, i believe they lost over 20 marines in iraqi freedom. and i was fortunate to serve side-by-side with those men. host: our guest, brian stann served and was awarded award

during an ambush. for those struggling to find jobs, and the piece says that small businesses can ill afford to lose someone if they don't have other people to fill in. said john challenger a global outplacement firm. do you hear that story? the companies want to hire veterans and want to keep them on staff, but need to keep the work going. and can't necessarily afford to wait. guest: we hear that from time to time, we hear several different excuses. and i disagree with it. you are talking with men and women who enviewed with commitment. they are taught loyalty. if they are talking about reservists that get called back

to duty or national guardists. there are plenty of people that would work for a period to cover down for a veteran. there are people looking for work that would take what they can get. and really our unemployment pool now is the most talented it's been since the 1920's, the great depression. there are many talent the people in the unemployment pool. host: there was a piece that ran months ago looking at the rate of joblessness of the male veterans. and i will flip the page, it says that the president looks to hire veterans.  made? guest: i haven't seen a difference from that. and it's been a short amount of time. and that's a great effort. some federal jobs will directly

correlate the gs ranking that these men and women receive. and sometimes it's so low that their starting salary is less than the military. and it goes by time in service. it could take until these veterans are 45 years old to make an income to support their family and children. and live a middle-class lifestyle. those are issues to look at, that's great but that's only one piece of the pie. those are just federal jobs and great jobs and pension but we need to look at more than just the federal jobs. we need fortune 500, regular companies as well. host: ann on the republican line from cincinatti. caller: i have a comment, something that occurred to me

when talk about this job skills. college seems to be what most companies are looking for people with degrees and trained, etc. unfortunately with servicemen there is no documentation as to their skills. even when they go into college it's not like they get the skills that they learn. others that are taught in universities etc. this is not recognized and it has to be documented as such. if we relate that to their college degrees and not to mention since the vietnam war there is such a different there is such a different attitude towards goingw[ and fighting. a lot of people are against it. and i wonder if they put a stave

on the military instead of people looking at them as it should be. guest: agreed. as far as the opinions on the war in iraq and afghanistan, and employers not employing veterans because they don't agree in those wars. i agree that sometimes happen and veterans that are proud of their service may be misconce e misconceived that they are for these wars and believe in these wars strongly. just because you are proud of your service doesn't mean that you are proud of what you have done or what the mission is. that shouldn't be held against anyone whatsoever. and i agree they need to document the schools they have gone to. but they have the schools you get on your paperwork when you exit the military. and much the paperwork you have in the military, you can get a list of classes, schools and the

courses you have taken during your military. and again it goes back to the education of our employers. just like you said, if the employer doesn't realize these are difficultsç)lu courses and will disregard squad leader course than something from college. host: bill, good morning. caller: i have a question for brian. one topic you have touched on is taxwm reductions for employers that hire veterans. i have found that especially in states like kansas, inmates getting released from prison to keep recidism, they have

provided more of a tax break than to a veteran. what does that say about our country to do that just to keep someone out of prison and not going to help veterans. guest: sir, that's an outstanding comment, and you are correct. there are tax incentives to hire prisoners than to hire veterans. and it's atrocious, it goes back to the administration piece and our country's employers. like i said, the global economy is depend on our military. the burden falls on the united states of america. the dollar directly correlates to the global economy, and

that's held stable and secure because of the men and women that serve this country. host: let's go to arkansas, with wilma. caller: hi, brian, i want you to know i really admire to what you are doing. and to respond what the young lady said, our military men and women shouldn't be faulted for the wars they are to fight. when they put on that uniform and raise their hand and say, i do. to me if i have to put a spiritual connotation to it, they have done the jesus act. they said i have laid down my life so you can live. they are our backbone and not only do they give up their lives, they give up their lives to their family. so that they outlive their

uniform, but they come close to doing the jesus act'k as anyon know. guest: thank you, i agree with you, that means a lot to every veteran. and it's part of my mission to convince our nation's employers of that. host: the article in the "baltimore sun." says that the veterans from afghanistan and iraq has increased in the last three years. the labor department reports shows it's compared to after overall rate of 9.7%. one is networking with your colleagues and having that as a skill. do you talk to your vets about that? guest: absolutely, we are twitter and facebook and before

i came on the show, i used twitter. we say go to facebook or myspace and twitter, if there is anything inappropriate, take it off. and we teach in the seminars and i hawelñ the guys pull out the cell phones and make a list of five people on there that may be able to point them in the right direction or influence them in the right way to help them find a job. either connect them to someone that can hire them or their wife that has a company to hire veterans. you never know what is out there, and you have to activate your network. that's part of the game. host: brad is on the republican line. caller: hi, brian i wanted to thank you for having an organization like this. my dad and grandpa are both veterans. so i definitely can appreciate the organization like this.

i am actually a corporate recruiter in the clinical research industry. and one of the questions i had, since i work in a high-tech industry, i would love to hire veterans. how do you help prepare them from the technical aspect? guest: great question, we work with health care companies that have difficulty without a background to find jobs. we help them by pointing them in the right direction to get education whether it's unfront courses.bqd in the health care field they can go to school for a couple of years to be a registered nurse or lvn. those are things we do, research the market and find experts in that field if that's the job they want. and the other thing we can do is talk to the company.

and explain that this veteran may not have the technical skills now. but if you train them, you will get someone with honor, courage, commitment and loyalty, and you won't find that from a regular employment pool or college grad. those are skills you get from someone in the military. and if the employer says this person is worth investing because i know what i get for the next 20 years. host: david is calling from michigan. caller: hi, brian, i am in the executive level, i am in the army reserve, and mobilized twice. i am very marketable from a civilian perspective. and i wanted to ask a quick question about resumes.

because i think this doesn't just impact entry level workers and entry level veterans. but i had discussions with companies looking to hire me. they don't know about my military service. but the minute that resume is shown to them. all of a sudden i don't hear from them or call me back. but maybe before that we had dinner and lunch and visit their company. they had a high level of interest and then dropped it like a hot potato when they see that. is that something i should not mention and just show sabbatical during those years? guest: great question, absolutely not. that's speaks volumes about your skill set. as an officer in the military you have more leadership experience than anyone you are looking to get hired from. what i would like to do is see

your resume personally. send it to some of our experts and see how well it translates your leadership skills and your past leadership positions. i don't think employers understand how muchñ÷n goes int being a commander of a shop or division in the united states military. you have far more managerial skills and training than anyone they have. we are quick to deal with personnel issues than many people looking for jobs. i think it's important to have that on there, i think that the companies that are interviewing you and dropping you when they see that resume are ridiculous and absurd. i would love to get your resume and get to people that can positively translate your skills so they understand what you are bringing to the table to that company.

host: independent caller from oklahoma city, ryan. caller: hi, good morning brian. the question i have for you, i am quite technically qualified. i got out of the service in 2005. i went to school and college and got my degrees in mathematics and engineering with honors. and since i graduated last year, about this time last year. i have been to a couple of job interviews. but i feel like for some reason even with a really, really impressive resume, i am unable to get the kind of visibility with the companies i am looking to get. is something that hire heros u.s.a. is doing to get the veterans the visibility in these interviews?

guest: absolutely. and again it comes back to training and education.nut this i don't want to call a game, but it's a serious skill to finding a job. there are some people that are very good at selling themselves and some are skilled but can't sell themselves. no one feels good bragging about themselves. and there is a certain technique. we would look at your resume and look at the company you are applying to. and look at the exact job requirements for the job, and make sure you have a couple of things in your resume that you are ready to speak about when you go into that company. and tell the company exactlyray why. if this is the requirement for the job, and looking at my resume here and my past experiences, this is why i feel i would be an asset to your company. and go to the second point and

take charge of that interview to gain visibility. host: let's go to john, a veteran calling in from unionville. caller: good morning, as a teacher in the military, the virginia department of education does not recognize military courses to go to recertification points. i wondered if there is advice to help effect change in that. guest: i would go to your congressman. and go multiple times a year. there are many organizations arguing those points along with us. we find that everyday along with medics and core men that get a lot of training in field tactics and life-saving skills. none of that translates to the

civilian world. they can't even draw blood in a regular hospital when they have done it everyday in their job in the military. we need to go to our congressmen and fight in washington that these courses translate over. i have been in the naval academy and the marine corp, and some of the courses i took are harder than the ones i took in college. they are very detailed and difficult and certainly should carry weight in the civilian world. host: our guest, brian stann, executive director of hire heros u.s.a. that's all for "washington journal," tune in tomorrow as we talk about the nuclear security program, with josh