survivors of crime. live coverage on c-span. coming up this tower, georgia senator saxby chambliss will be talking about derivatives legislation that the agriculture committee is debating. . .

"the miami herald" reports on the situation of governor charlie crist. the right he is facing a brutal republican primary for a full blown party mutiny if he runs as an independent. that us go to jeff reinhardt who joins us on the phone. tell us what is happening to governor chris. it is a crunch time? guest: like he has never faced before. he has until a week from friday to decide if he is going to run

as he is not as a republican in this primary and face these overwhelming odds against the come-from-behind favorite, former speaker of the florida house, marco rubio. will recreate total of people and run as an independent even though he was a lifelong republican and alienate just about everybody who supported him. or, as we said in the story, will the action the drop out. host: it sounds like this week he hedged a little bit on talking about whether he may run as an independent. prior to this he said he would stay in the republican party -- primary. guest: he has said it exactly four weeks and, yes, this week for the first time he says he was considering it. the problem is once you acknowledge that you are considering running for and -- as an independent, your republican support dries up quickly. host: where would other support

come from to fill the void -- independents, schoolteachers, who could step in and support him? guest: it is really unknown because we have not had a successful independent candidate but these are the constituencies use reaching out to. he was popular with democrats in the past. that is how he got elected in the first place. obviously independents as well. teachers who are looking at him as a hero because he vetoed a bill that would have taken away tenure for them largely, they could come out in strong numbers. but the problem is the teacher'' union is largely democratic so it is unclear how much tangible support that would really produce. host: let us talk about pulling. we have some numbers from earlier this month, april 12, looking at the gop primary. it shows marco rubio

significantly ahead. guest: yes. the polls have really slipped. about a year ago at this time it was marker rubio down 20 or 30 points of people were telling him he was wasting time running against a sitting governor. then came the stimulus and the so-called hub -- the governor embraced the president when he came to a campaign for the stimulus. the recession has lingered on and anger against incumbents is raising and lo and behold marco rubio is propelled to the front. host: what are we looking at in a matchup with the democratic candidate. how would we see things face- off? guest: there was a new poll just this week that found basically  dead heat between those three -- the republican rubio, likely democrat kendrick meek, hersman -- and crist as an independent.

host: if the runs as an independent how would it affect kendrick meek's campaign? guest: on the one hand it gets in the spotlight. right now he has been largely overshadowed by the two republicans duking it out. that is good because he needs to raise his profile. çbut as i said before, democras like the governor -- some do, at least. there are pros and cons for kendrick b.s. host: de have -- the have any idea what would go into the decision friday? guest: 11 had a deeply personal decision and on the other hand one of the biggest personal calculations ever made. the governor is known to have

one of the best political instincts in florida. it obviously they have failed him in the last couple of years. he miscalculated how he could govern and still keep his republican base. as some of his close friends, those who are left, say don't every -- don't ever underestimate charlie crist. he has come back from behind several times to win statewide office. host: you and your colleague at "the miami herald" reported friday law-enforcement agencies launched a criminal investigation into the use of american express cards issued by republican party of florida to elected officials and staff. guest: in the midst of this fierce republican primary there has been a virtual meltdown of the apparatus, the party apparatus in florida which for

yours was known as of this very disciplined fund-raising powerhouse. but in recent years, the spending apparently got out of control. credit cards issued to elected officials and staff, practically no oversight. and according to american express statements that we obtained, we have found lavish meals and golf outings and what appears to be personal items, in many cases. host: your report in a separate inquiry the irs is also looking at the tax records of three former credit card holders -- former florida house speaker mark a rubio among them. guest: it certainly is at a time when he is riding high. had it, months ago -- had it come out months ago it would

perhaps have stopped him from taking off. now i'm not sure it can take away from his success. host: thank you so much for joining us this morning. guest: my pleasure. host: let us continue to direct a question to you. do you vote for the party or the person when you weigh your decision? we are curious about what would it take for you to break party loyalty and vote for a specific candidate and our your decisions of this year different than in the past? the lines to call -- you can e-mail us act journal@c- span.org and on twitter and facebook. let us look at this crist race.

it is from "the wall street journal." this continues what beth reinhard talked about. in a case like this, perhaps you are in florida, would you stay loyal to the republican party or follow gov. chris if he decides to run as an independent? the article goes on to say that he would face questions like -- looking at another political story. senator scott brown from massachusetts. this comes from "the wall street

journal, profiling him a and seeing how he is doing in his first term as senator. neil king, jr., writes and asks -- an example of a senator in a largely democratic state. still, democrats line, norfolk, virginia -- phil. caller: i generally vote of the party. i took my cue from -- the party

that makes a difference. i am not going to give any more money anymore. i read dnc spent money on lavish trips -- the rnc and dnc. host: might you start giving up on candidates and of the independence? caller: is easier because the parties are so aligned ideologically. without knowing anything about them -- if i know something about them i might vote for an r but generally speaking they did not have anything to offer the country any more. host: let us look again at this article about senator scott brown.

danny, independent line. panama city, florida. you are in florida at the heart of this fight over governor's cursed looking at the senate seat. what do you think? caller: i vote for the person and stuff. i used to vote for a party but the parties are both out of touch, so out of touch with the people and stuff. gov. christie right now, he didn't vote on party lines -- gov. crist. the rnc is very upset. that is okay. he took a stand for the people. everybody's saying, the union.

teachers union -- talk to the parents of the kids who go to school here. it was the right thing to do. host: do you hope you present the -- registers as an independent? caller: yes. did not like what i saw. i have never been a democrat. so i am not even going to vote party lines. i'm just going to go independent. vote for the policy and stuff -- the person. not so much of the party. host: republican caller, john and live oak, florida. caller: good morning. i would like to indicate i'm upset with the governor regarding his support of sb-6 in florida regarding the teachers' union, not supporting performance evaluations in pay

versus the tenure system for teachers. he supposedly gained the support of 175,000 teachers, and a great many of them should no longer be in that position. he is not willing to support performance pay and evaluations for teachers. although the rest of us who work for a living in the industrial world, if our performance does not measure up to basic standards and improve, we are that go. for some reason, teachers and their unions are exempt from the basic standards of performance. host: let me ask you -- back to the topic. do you vote for the person or the party and how will it play out? caller: the unemployment in florida. host: john, how you think your decision to you will you support a party or person? caller: i am actually try to be

fair about it but i have toç be honest, i am looking at turning to be independent, not only for the governor situation but the other republicans and obviously all of the democrats in the state of florida and elsewhere. how they are running the government and the sacrifices they are being asked to make, the working blue-collar level, but not happening at the leadership level. host: let us go to ovita, democrats line, fairfax, virginia. caller: i usually both for the person but this round of the erection. old has really changed my mind. i'm thinking just a voting down party lines. host: why is that? caller: usually when i would vote for just the person and they stand for, they would get into office and i could depend on them to make a stand.

watching how the republicans behaved the past two years, just pretty much a voting in one caucus and following their party leaders, i don't think it is worth it. if you vote for a president to come in and the minority party does not agree with what the people voted for a pretty much block everything. host: one of our callers mentioned the spending, spending at both major party organizations. it is from "the washington post." spending is liberal and both party committees. but the national democratic and republican party committees spend about two-thirds of the money taken on the care and comfort of committee staffs and on efforts to raise more funds --

clyde in florida. caller: i used to be democrat and i used to be a republican and now i'm independent. i just want to be a good citizen. i think what we are going to have to do is the lack leaders that are more concerned about the problems and the will of the people. it is obviously neither one of the parties is concerned about fixing the problem. we have an enormous problem in the southwestern border, illegal coming into the country. the jobs problem. the social security is in trouble. this health care plan is a disaster. host: are you seeing candidates you can support as an independent? caller: i am not sure. i think they will merge providing they will probably come from the tea party. they will not be the usual politicians, of these career politicians who have sold us all out.

their interest is either global or special. host: nice town, indiana, in the, republican caller. caller: i am almost 80 years old and i always would both republicans in the past based on the fact that if you look at the party platform, the base of the republican party is very biblical oriented, very conservative as our founding fathers whereas of the base of the democrat party has become so much more liberal and if anyone does an internet search of 45 communist goals, they will save that one of them was in full trade one or both of the american political parties and the democrat party has been more infiltrated. however, i will not just a vote for anyone that has and r by their name anymore.

i want new people to come in, people like mike pence, i would absolutely support again, but voting independent would be only if it would not break up the party's so that the breakup of parties, so instead of good real republicans getting in it would split the vote and democrats. host: your opinion that the communist party has and will trigger the democratic system. we cannot -- not something that we can say has happened. randy. good morning. caller: i am glad i got to follow this lady at of me because i do vote for the party. i look at the people in that and in the democratic party because of the fall-off of the of the party. if the republicans are anti- american now, you can tell by the way their voting records and the way -- what they have done to the country when they were in power.

what we have to do, we are now still cleaning up the mess from the previous administration and there is the real -- and i think it was the real coordinated attack by almost close to being a terrorist attack by the republicans and that is what you have to look at as what -- republicans stand for big money -- host: i want to know what it is about the democratic party to support and what would it take for you to maybe crossover and vote for a candidate who is not a democrat. caller: i don't think so. the democratic party, the matter what the people to the basis is for the people of this country. if the republican, the basis for the republican party is for business. host: let us take a look at a " usa today" article. a group of retirees is the door -- endorsing a move to cut lawmakers' pay.

that is what that democratic congressman from arizona is working on. meredith, independent line. florida. caller: i was listening about the effort to have the college giving back 5% -- i think it should be more. all they do is make money, make money. they don't care about people. and as far as the teacher thing goes, yes, they need to mandate and be tested every year. when i was in school, there were teachers -- they did not know anything. they didn't care about us. they just sat there and would give us a great and help us get through the day. host: you don't support what governor crist dead.

caller: not all. host: let us look a congresswoman kirkpatrick's effort to have members of congress give back 5% of their salaries. this graphic looks at pay levels. salaries have kept ahead of inflation since 1990 and it shows the salary at the time and adjusted for inflation. let's go to our next caller. vince, republican line, calling from port st. lucie, florida. caller: good morning. i'm calling because just what you just did is the reason i'm calling. it took two democrats and two independentss. and this is the record of all the hosts on c-span. i used to be a c-span junkie. c-span is the left arm of the democratic party and professes to be unbiased and you are biased.

you try to lead the caller into the answer of what you want. it is disgraceful. i want you to take a survey -- we republicans are the mean- spirited ones. as long as i watched c-span,ç e most meanest comments come from the democrats. and you never correct them. host: can you give us a comment on how you choose to vote, the vote along party lines? caller: i am a republican but i do vote the man and charlie crist will never get to my boat. host: we welcome all the calls and we tried to rotate as much as possible so we get a diversity of viewpoints. let us go to david, our second norfolk, virginia, col. caller: i would like to just say that i vote for the party and particularly the democratic party because the republicans just lie. i'm so tired of hearing lies.

i watch fox news once in a while and they are just -- they just put out the garbage. host: give us a sense, though, what it would take for you to vote for an independent candidate or a candidate from the green party or some other group that is not a democrat. would you do that? caller: yes, i would. if obama had been an independent or some other candidate i would have voted for him. if he had run on -- if he had ran on anything other than a democrat i would have voted for him because he is honest, for pete's sake. i'm so tired of just lies. host: let us look at a peace and "the wall street journal" looking atç senators seeking cash.

that is coming to us from "the wall street journal." looking at the local news and fund raising interest -- "the new york times." democrats' top gop for fund- raising in midterms. the talks about how congressional republicans are enthusiastic about their performance in the money chase but the democratic house and senate campaign committee still manage to out raise the republican organizations. massachusetts, albert on our independent line betty caller: good morning, thank you for taking my call.

i think maybe underlying the dissatisfaction of both parties , and that independent candidates have not really taken off, it is maybe america's political system -- and america is a wonderful country and my father is a veteran -- maybe it is too much, if you have power and you -- if you are not, you are ignored. the father was a veteran. i'm considered autistic. i have gotten medical care that help me to speak. there are physical side effects. i know you do not want me to go off topic -- i want to mention my twitter site,brainplasticity -- not only if someone has a stroke, if you are getting older and what is now among

alzheimer's and use the because senility. if mental health care was officially encouraging clients to get better there would be more -- host: wilmington, north carolina. bill, republicans line. caller: we are getting off base on mental-health issues -- but i agree with john and we need to help. the individual's spouse their philosophy and we are voting for a philosophy. as soon as americans can get back to determining the difference between socialism and capitalism, which is a product of our educational system being in such bad shape, they will be able to determine what philosophy they want. limited government with personal responsibility or large government with a nanny state. i was surprised to hear your comments earlier about the lady

when she was speaking that communism had infiltrated the democratic party. if people will do their homework and read the differences between the two ideologies, there is no doubt that communism and socialism have taken all over the democratic party and the reason we are where we are today is because after the last election and the majority is being taken over by the democrats, they saw they had a card launch -- carte blanche to do what they wanted. host: "the washington post" is one of the many papers that profiled dorothy height, considered the glue that held the civil rights leaders together. is it passed away today at the age of 98. founding matriarch of the civil

rights movement. she died yesterday at howard university hospital. "the washington post" goes on to say she was one of the collision of african-american leaders will push civil-rights at the center of american political stage after world war ii and a key figure in the struggle for school bus segregation, voting rights, employment opportunities and public accommodations in the 1950's and 1960's. coming to us from "the washington post." it goes on to say she was president of the national council for negro women for 40 years. in that position was arguably the most influential woman at the top levels of civil rights leadership. jenny, democrats line. portland, oregon. caller: hi. host: when you vote, the party or the person? caller: i look at the of -- look at the party first. it will determine if i bail the party if i see too much corruption geared to come into the last caller about

socialism, -- to much corruption. to come into the last caller about socialism, what is politics but social? the definitely go with the person at the end. if he is not honest and shows his integrity to this country, i would not vote for him. host: this from "the wall street journal." president obama begins court interviews. today he meets with senate majority and minority leaders and of the top democrat and republican in the senate judiciary committee and sent after that will begin a phone calls to broader circle of senators. it looking at who should replace justice stevens. white house officials say the president is expected to announce the choice in the coming weeks. another story in the news, this one from "the new york times" looking at school budgets. it the potential for huge school layoffs. with revenues cuts, schools warned of huge teacher layoffs across the usa. we had a couple of callers

talking about education. this says school districts to run the country forced to resort to drastic saving measures -- washington, d.c., albert on our independent line. caller: your question is a good question but i think you should ask not just the you vote by party or person -- i bowed by paramount -- policy. -- i vote by policy. the actual policy of the party or person. probably a better way to do it. because it seems that a lot of the election process is such a cult of personality that you

lose sight of what the actual policies they want to push for have been pushing in the past. when you do that, you get lost. that is why a lot of the things about the socialism and communism is coming back -- if socialism was really going on i think it would be a lot more people oriented, but i say it is a lot more business oriented as far as policy goes. even the obama administration, i think, they have certain things that are people oriented but acting by and large both parties are much more -- they take their friends to business more than anything else. host: hector, a republican line. california. caller: good morning. i have a question. i am a republican. getting upset about the democrats and tea party and all that. my question is this. as a republican, i want to hear

both sides, how we as individuals are going to be voting. i start to hear one candidate calling for this and that, whenever, but when you get down to the basics, when they get elected, we voted them in to help americans, i don't care who they are paired -- who they are. then they turned around and start voting -- democrat way, whatever. we as individuals are put in there to do our bidding, as you would say. but sometimes we get upset about being a democrat, being a republican or tea party, accusing each one -- if we could just be civilized and hear both sides because the media has a lot to do with who we pick.

we can't get out to a lot of the rallies and what not -- an interview a lot of the individuals who are running and sometimes what gets me upset as i want to go one way and all of the sudden we put them in and a turnaround and do something else. we as individuals have to take time to really sit down and see the person of the they are. host: a little more financial news coming out of the white house. vice president biden urging action of stagnant wages. the u.s. must restore the broken link between productivity growth in wages.

wanda in hawaii. it is early where you are. caller: you did not know how long i try, cents for clock in the morning. i vote for, for instance, linda -- is a republican and this is her last term. i did not think we will vote another republican in because a lot of was followed her career -- for me, i vote democrat because my mom was. it is like a female thing. i like how she looked at the world in the political side. like what is going on in the world. we in hawaii like to stay out of the fray.

we don't have a choice because most of our military is here in hawaii. they are in the economy here. my concern, of the people's concern, is education. right now they have things like furlough fridays. our governor is sitting on over $30 million in funds to help schools, and people like going crazy here. i don't know what the republicans -- they are not like in the mainland -- some of us look at them as prejudice. in hawaii i have no less than six nationalities, our race, and most of us in hawaii do that and i am more hawaiian than anything . ho: let us go to a comment on

most people vote personal interest and -- what is it for me. let us go to earl from florence, ky. independent. caller: how are you today? host: thank you. the boat for the person of the party? caller: i go independent, and here is why. republican or democrats, and they all seem to have hidden agendas. take, for instance, this $4.30 trillion lawsuit from -- against

the sec. the sec delayed and may turn their eyes from obvious infractions, thereby causing this large crash on wall street and is just like everybody has hidden agendas. they are trying to steal money here left and right. i think if you are independent, you have a little bit more responsibility towards the people instead of trying to pad of the pockets of the crooked politicians. host: fairfax, virginia. republican, phil. caller: i have a question. i am wondering how it is, what policy have when you decide to come in and correct a caller. if you callers back somebody said the democratic party inc. socialist and communist principles and you had to make a comment afterwards saying, of course, that is just an assertion, only somebody's claim. how do you decide -- if i called

in on the democratic line and said dick cheney is a war criminal or a terrorist, i know from listening to c-span, the moderator would never say, no, no, that is just somebody's assertion. if host: i think p -- host: i think we want to make this a public place where people can share their viewpoint so generally that is the guideline that would follow and tried to run the show by. caller: if you are going to start correcting people based on what you think -- i think you should just a out of that. if somebody wants to assert. host: fair enough. you want to weigh in on the topic at hand today? caller: i vote for principle, as some other people have said. often that follows party because i think if you look at the -- i will try to say this without saying the democratic party and corporate communist foundations because i don't want to have to be corrected on that, but if you look at the party

positions, you can pretty much see the people who are part of the party tend to go in those directions and those are principles, not the people or the party. host: i think what we were talking about infiltration -- that some of his opinion that the party has been and will trade but then we welcome your opinion about party politics and dynamics of philosophy. thank you for calling. irene, democrats line, palm coast, florida. -- i read. caller: i'm a democrat. precinct captain. this is the first time i have ever been involved in politics. even though i'm a precinct captain, i tend to vote for the person regardless of their party. as far as i'm concerned, the only thing different in the democratic and republican, d and r.

i went to a tea party last night for spot -- first time to find out what it was about. it was very peaceful, cordial. i did not participate. i did not -- about raising taxes, one of the brown and 95% of the people there were over 75. i was sitting, why are you against health care and why are you against taxes because he had no problems with either. they could not explain that to me. it is almost like somebody told them just what they have to say. but other than that it was very peaceful and they acknowledged that they were glad to see some of the different people in the audience. that is all i have to say. host: this from "the washington times." price to hawaii for d.c. voting rights.

aha greenough, south carolina. steve, independent. -- greenville, south carolina. caller: i am just getting involved in the political process for the first time in my life and i consider myself an independent. i see what is happening in washington and i don't like it. and everyone i speak with feels -- seems to feel the same way. our politicians don't listen to us. and they think they know what is best for us. the other thing going for the people, and doing the people's will. the politicians' work for the people and they should consider our will when making long and

not that best for us -- no best for us. i don't like the way -- where our country is going. the constitution is being tread upon. we are spending money we don't have pared -- we don't have. you could not run a household and not go bankrupt, but the government is spending money we don't have and it just cannot sustain what it is doing. it is not going to work. and our politicians are not listening to us and i think the tea party is the nerve of the nation, this is what most people feel. and the thing that is why the tea party has so much attention and movement, because it is the average person feels this way, they just feel they don't have a voice. host: coming up next, senator

saxby chambliss joins us but first a news update from c-span radio. >> some relief finally for those travelers stranded by the volcanic ash in europe. air controllers in germany says all restrictions on their countries' airspace have been lifted. london's heathrow airport, europe's busiest, reopened. but several airports in sweden, including stockholm, remain closed and there is a limitation of french air travel and officials say it will be weeks until all the stranded travelers can get home. pope benedict promise today the catholic church would take action to confront the clerical sex abuse scandal. this is his first public comment on this. he recounted his tearful weekend meeting in malta with eight men who said they were abused as children by priests in a church- run orphanage. general motors saying it has repaid more than $8 billion in loans and got from the u.s. and canadian governments and the

ceo says they did it five years at of schedule. gm still owes the taxpayers $45 billion. and speaking of money, benjamin franklin gets a face lift as the treasury department unveils a new $100 bill, the first remake of that the nomination since 1996. treasury secretary timothy geithner and fed chairman ben bernanke will be among those at the ceremony at the treasury department. anti-counterfeiting measures is the main reason the u.s. has been making changes in currency. those are some of latest headlines on c-span radio. >> we are covering budget committee hearings on capitol hill today. first up, kathleen sebelius, health and human services secretary, testifies on her department's fiscal year 2011 budget. live coverage at 10:00 a.m. eastern on c-span3. this afternoon the senate budget committee will meet to mark up but fiscal year 2011 resolution,

the spending blueprint. live coverage at 2:15 p.m. eastern on c-span3. >> "washington journal" continues. host: senator saxby chambliss, republican of georgia, welcome. the senate agriculture committee takes up legislation to regulate derivatives. break it down for us. a lot of talk -- talk over the last is what derivatives are. guest: a derivative is a documents -- or it could be a phone call -- entered into between two usually entities. it could be people, but the most common derivative individuals can probably identify with is a company that is borrowing moneyç are -- for the long term and they want to hedge their bets. they want to make sure that they are going to have a flat line or stable interest rates.

so they will enter into a transaction with another party to ensure that the long term interest rate that is going to be applicable to that company to invest not move, but that it does provide the company's stability. and energy company may enter into a long-term contract for the purchase of natural gas or some other product, and they may enter into a derivative transaction with another party to ensure the stability of that price so they can ensure that the rate they are going to be able to charge their customers is not going to fluctuate to the point of where they will certainly have a black bottom- line. so that is generally the way derivatives work. obviously it is much more complex than that. but derivatives -- a dollar bill can be a derivative because it is traded on an exchange. it is sometimes thought of as a

future. that is basically what a derivative is. host: our guest is the top republican on the agricultural committee. why the agricultural committee taken this up? we talked a lot about wall street reforms, things happening in other committees. how has this come to your table? guest: a lot of people ask that question. a good chance to explain it. the ag committee has jurisdiction over the commodities futures trading commission that was created in decades ago to allow farmers all across america to have a platform from which to trade or hedge their crops. if a farmer growing corn ones to ensure he can generate a profit and the knows that $3 is break even for him, he can watch the market for corn and win it hits $3.20, he can buy a futures contract for delivery of that corn in october or august,

whenever it may be. that is how it started. the commodities futures trading zurich -- it has expanded to include metals -- now that has jurisdiction over all swaps and derivatives that are commodity- based. if there are security-based, the sec has jurisdiction. host: this from "the new york times" today, reducing the dangers of derivatives. they are largely unregulated and played a significant role in the recent financial crisis. on friday senator blanche lincoln released details on a plan to regulate the industry by creating a clearing house, a transparent exchange. they have a graphic that shows some of the examples out derivatives come into play. they talk about players being an insurance buyer -- bond investors seeking protection against the ball on an asset he owns.

and insurance seller, often hedge funds, insurance company, bank receives premiums from the buyer for of the contract and piece by piece it is what. it gets farther away from the place it started. and if people at the end of the day tried to reap -- reclaim the bon's full value. guest: credit defaults what is a term that has been bandied around since the collapse of 2007 s 2008. what happened is a product was created on wall street' whereby an entity on wall street, some sort of financial and today -- pick a name -- would package together a bunch of mortgages. the housing industry was booming back then. over a period of time they would package of these mortgages to gather and they would, in effect, sell them to an individual who would bet that they would either be paid off in due course or, on the other

side, somebody was betting that individual's were not going to able to make their payments on mortgages -- mortgages. in addition to that, you could have an insurance company step in such as aig, which happened. aig would ensure that the individual borrowers are going to pay or that they might not pay. they could take either side of it. what happened was the housing bubble burst and a number of individuals could not pay their mortgages. so all of a sudden these credits a default swaps that everybody anticipated the mortgages would be paid off, they were not going to be paid off and billions of dollars were made and lost on both sides of the transactions. there again, it gets a little bit into the weeds and it is an extremely complex marketplace. but the important thing about

what we are doing today and as we go forward is what you just alluded to in the article, that these documents have never been brought out of the shadows. there is no regulator who has been sitting out there looking at these transactions on a daily basis and that needs to be done and that is going to be done. senator lincoln and night, but the chairman of the committee, both the great -- senator lincoln at and i, both agree. we need to make sure it happens. and that will go along way towards allowing not to happen again. host: what senator blanche lincoln brought forth, what are your concerns? guest: senator lincoln and i have been negotiating over the last weeks and months to the derivatives -- there are two

other main pieces the banking committee has jurisdiction on, and that is the regulatory part, then there is the consumer finance protection person -- portion the banking committee is negotiating as we speak. but we have been working on this derivatives title and we reached an accord couple of weeks ago and all of a sudden the white house stepped in and said they did not like that particular bill and it basically pulled her back from that. so, she presented her own draft that was different from the proposal that we were on the cusp of announcing. my concern is now are that the draft she presented overreaches. we can regulate this market in the right way, or we can and out the federal government to simply step in and control areas that don't need to be controlled. we don't need a solution looking for a problem. we need to make sure the

provisions in the bill really do address the systemic risk that can be created in the marketplace and not interfere with the operation of the market. because these swaps and derivatives are traded every day by virtually every manufacturer in the country and other entities that really need to be able to operate in a free market atmosphere. and some of the provisions of that she has put in her draft, and there were changes to it -- but some of the provision simply did it over reach and were not part of the problem that caused by meltdown in our financial markets. so, we are going to have a debate on those issues. he made on both sides -- probably democrat and republican amendments today and we will see how it goes and we hope it is something that we can vote on in a bipartisan way, but we will just have to wait and see. it's got this from reuters,

going on what senator lincoln put forth. toughen oversight of the over- the-counter drug does market by requiring most swaps to trade on regulated exchanges and pass through clearing houses and banks spent of swap debt if it on protection of federal deposit insurance or access to the federal reserve discount window and eggs and some commercial and users from mandatory slow -- swap clearing. guest: the issue regarding the taping of swaps desk out of banks is a difference of opinion that we have. it is just very difficult to move it out of the bank. you may move it across the street and have a separate trading operation on going, but still, it is going to be the financial institutions doing that trading and from a practical standpoint, most big banks particularly as we have seen just in the last few days

are making their money right now not off of the banking transactions but off of these financial products they have for sale out there. we just saw earnings reports from some of the major banks in this country and it is pretty obvious that that is the case. those transactions need to be cleared and they are not clear today. and we are controllable agreement, republicans and democrats, -- in total agreement, republicans and democrats, that most of them need to be cleared. but there are some transactions done on a daily basis by non- risky individuals. for example, caterpillar company, or delta air lines may want to enter into a derivative transaction to guarantee the interest rate that i alluded to earlier. there is no sense and delta air lines having to put up 500 737's to cover an interest rate contract.

delta air lines is not systemic risk. they are not part of the problem. so there is no reason for that contract to be cleared. it should be reported to cftc? absolutely. it is not today. but it should be and the details of to be looked at by the cftc because it is entered into with j.p. morgan or bankamerica or whoever, cftc needs to have a thorough picture of how risky or how far out each of the financial institutions is getting and if they get stretched, then theu! cftc ought to have the authority to pull them in a little bit. and under the language that she and i had agreed to, that would be done and i think here that is going to be done. i do not think there have been necessarily changes to that. so, that is kind of the areas where we have the potential for some disagreements.

we will have some amendments today and we will discuss the bill and see how it winds up. host: senator chambliss, georgia's senior senator is here to take your calls. let us go to tim, democrats line from wisconsin. caller: hi. where were you between 2001 and 2006 and you were in charge and republicans had everything and everything was going bad? banks were selling these risky mortgages like they were going out of style and nobody said a thing about it. had the presidency and these sec in 2006-2008 and the sec did not do anything any new it was going on. guest: well, fact is, we actually did something. cftc filed a couple of cases against individuals that they thought were manipulating the

market and those cases were filed against individuals that they thought of by looking at the types of trades that they had available to them, that that was the case. the problem is, tim, that no regulator -- cftc nor the sec, was looking at the swaps and derivatives markets because they did not have to be cleared. they did not have to report the contracts with anybody. that is what we are seeking to change right now. there is general agreement, whether sec or cftc, that they need to look at those agreements on a daily basis, hourly basis, what ever it may be. that simply has not been the case and nobody did know that there were things going on in 2001 through 2006 that were going to disrupt the marketplace. these credit defaults swaps were around of that time, following the passage of the 2000

commodities futures modernization act -- we saw an increase in those credit default swaps and i suspect that if you had to point the finger at any one thing that caused the financial meltdown, credit to default swaps are going to be pretty close to the top of the list. but those transactions simply were not looked at, either by the sec or cftc. it was not republicans' fault, not democrats fought. we can argue about some of the things that were intended to be done in the banking committee by republicans to give more oversight authority, and those things were blocked. but that is behind us now. we need to look forward and make sure that we are doing everything that does not allow the opportunity to present itself again for the collapse of these markets. .

there is quite a bit of know, going hon about trading in these fraudulent investment vehicles which are partly designed to take down the system, i think. who is going to jail over this? guest: you have seen some recent activity from the sec. it is that criminal action that

has been filed against goldman sachs, it is a civil action. that is a determination that needs to be made by the respective agencies. there are a couple of the actions taken by the cftc against those who evade or manipulating the market. those are also several actions. those are decisions that members of congress to not make. these are independent agencies, the sec, cftc. they work with the department of justice to determine if criminal charges should be filed. if they find something from the recent charges, they will pursue that with all vigor, but i have no idea why criminal charges have not been filed against someone.

host: you have accused the white house of getting involved in this process. why do you think that happened, where do things go from here? guest: the white house clearly thought that it was in their interest not to have a bipartisan bill at that time. i hope that they are changing their mind. senator lincoln and i had an agreement that was workable, that transparency, did all the things that the white house wanted to see done. we can have this agreement over what% of transactions should be cleared -- percent of transactions should be cleared. they knew this was going on. it was not something that was not available to them. they would be better off to move

in another direction. host: i want to point out this "new york times" ppiece, talking about the descend on capitol hill. it says -- what is it like to field all that attention and double the interest? guest: i had hearings all day yesterday. those folks show up on a regular basis, and that is their job, trying to educate members of congress about the issues. this issue is extremely complex. not all lot of members, in both the house and senate, have a thorough understanding of this

issue. so there is an education process from the finance community. then there are, obviously, the individuals who are paid to represent their client's interest and they are on the hill trying to convince their members of the the senate to help their members out. it is nothing new, but certainly, there has been more activity. host: the article says that on friday senator lyndon -- yesterday senator lyndolincoln - guest: she is up for reelection this year, and that is in the back of her mind. individuals in arkansas, whether

they are companies or individuals, if there are paying a higher price for products, if we do not do this right. i would have to say the provisions in her bill do not give community banks the right they need to trade in the marketplace that they need. that is one of the discussions that we will have today. there has been an end user exemption in place that will cover some things with wal-mart, and others in arkansas, but there are some provisions in there that we will need to discuss. hopefully, we can improve her build a little bit more. once it is amended, something we get bipartisan support on. host: charles. cleveland, ohio. caller: with all due respect,

when the republican party started doing business with the communists, you lost our trust. guest: i am not sure what communists you are talking about. we do not do business with cuba, a communist country. certainly, we do business with russia and china. perhaps you are talking about the chinese government. they do own a significant number of u.s. bonds. and that is not a republican issue. it is not some kind -- something that was initiated or promoted under any republican congress. host: harry in conyers, georgia.

caller: i have been around this world for quite awhile. i can suggest to you, as far as politics is concerned, everything that is happening with the banks, i think we have a lot of foxes guarding the hen house is. what would you spend $30,000 on an election campaign just to make $200,000 a year? from what i see, most of the congress people are lawyers. so if i had a case of a police officer giving me a traffic ticket, which one of you could defend me in court? it seems that someone like you could be on the banking committee, and i presume that most of you are harvard and yale graduates and that you

probably display your diplomas, but nobody saw this coming. guest: you are right, nobody saw this coming, but as we look back, you can go all the way to the top. alan greenspan said that we should have seen this, particularly because of the oversight that should have been done by the regulators. trust me, i did not want to spend the money that i had to to get reelected in 2018. that is just the way that politics is, it is getting more expensive. there are more lawyers here, but not as many as there used to pay. and i do not know if anybody keeps a record of that, but we have more doctors appear probably then in the history of the congress.

lawyers have a history of being involved in politics. that is probably why you see a lot of them here. i am a lawyer, as you know, and i am proud of it. it is a profession that i enjoyed practicing for 20 years. once you arrive in congress, you obviously have to put a different hat on. you may the on the banking committee one day, intelligence committee the next. a legal background is helpful in understanding the laws, but there are plenty of smart people up here who are not lawyers doing a good job representing their constituents. host: you are a graduate of the university of georgia and

university of tennessee. guest: yes, i am a bulldog, and i am proud of that. host: next phone call. caller: thank you for your service. i have two areas of concern that i want you to comment on. the first is the uptick rule and subprime mortgages. in the 1990's, congress eliminated the uptick rule. why did they do it? would it be a good idea to reintroduce it? as far as subprime, i am hearing the faa is pushing banks to write new mortgages -- f h ha is pushing banks to write new mortgages and subsidizing payments. my concern is, is that wantwise?

guest: i cannot speak to the second specific part of your question. there are a lot of subprime loans that participated in the bursting of the house and bubble -- housing bubble. a lot of those were incorporated with those credit defaults swaps. i am sure there are still subprime loans being made today. loans are being scrutinized in a much more significant manner now compared to 2000, 2007. one problem that i have with the dodd bill is that it is silent when it comes to freddie mac and fannie mae. those two entities have purchased the most subprime loans over the years and have

allowed these packages to be put together. there needs to be significant oversight, not just of the swaps and derivatives market, but there needs to be more oversight of those two agencies and their needs to be some standards. we had them in previous years but under the community reinvestment act, where the promotion of subprime loans really came from, we need to have standards put in place that will require a certain amount of money to be put down. no money down on house is that people cannot afford is a big part of the problem. that means to be looked at carefully, and the dodd bill is

silent on that. with respect to the uptick rule, there has been a recent vacation of that from the sec. that originally said that if a stock went down on a certain amount on a daily basis, the sec could step anin and they could take the stock off the market, and hopefully, that would prevent people from speculating on one individual stock. if you had enough hedge funds to sell that stock short, there could be a bankruptcy on that. but there was a modified rule put back in place. we have not seen the effect of it yet, but you will hear more conversation about the uptick rule. host: the zanesville, ohio.

independent line. caller: i was wondering, it seems like everyone is singing nobody saw this coming. i wonder if you were familiar with brooksley borne and if you ever research and the sold-out report on the internet. back in 1999, she was trying to tell alan greenspan, bob rubin, mr. summers about the dangers of the derivatives. nobody gave her the time. how do you feel about bringing back a modern form of class stiegel and repealing the commodity futures act? guest: what we are going to do with this new legislation is repeal modernization act and

that was passed in 2000. as far as seeing it coming, there were some individuals who did. some people even made a lot of money in anticipation of the bursting of the real-estate bubble, and they try to tell people on wall street, but nobody listened to them. that is why we need to put in place a wmechanism that allows regulators to see these problems. regulators did not have access to all of the transactions that we are now, in a bipartisan way, moving toward bringing out of the shadows and putting before our regulators in a transparent way. if they had access to the transactions, such as what was happening with a.i.g., there would be better opportunity for

the regulators, not individuals opining around the country as to what was going on. regulators will now have a better opportunity to see what is happening and hopefully ensure it does not happen again. host: tom on the democratic line. wayland, massachusetts. caller: i have a question about credit the pulp swaps. one of the issues that i see is you do not need to own a bond to buy a credit defaults swap. you can have multiple swaps on one bond. is there anything in the legislation that will limit that, that you have to own the bond before you buy a credit the fault swap? also, these to index the dos, anything about limiting -those?

guest: i do not know if there is anything that would require an ownership of the actual mortgage or the mortgages that make up the bond. that is a good question. with respect to the cd 0 west -- cdo's, they were transferred into packages that created these credit default swaps. there is nothing really synthetic about the transactions, from the standpoint of the mortgages existing, so i am not sure what you're talking about with respect to the synthetic cdo. but the mortgages were in place, some of them were good, some of

them are dead. there was -- some of them were bad. there was not someone examining them on an individual basis, nor was that transparency in place for the regulators to see that. that is what we have to make sure that we accomplish in this legislation, giving those regulators the opportunity to look inside those bonds on the transaction by transaction basis. host: sex be chambliss, thank you for being with us today. -- sex be chambliss -- saxby chambliss, thank you for being with us today. criticism becomes optimism. senators expressed hope for a

deal on regulations soon. they write -- looking at the bigger picture of financial reform, we will take your phone calls. at 8:30, we will be speaking to the director for the national park service. mary, go ahead. caller: i have been unemployed for about two years. i know that they just passed an extension. i am 57 years old. i have worked for 40 years.

i have paid over $200,000 in taxes in my life. i was getting social security, but not have to move out of my apartment because i have no money. i have called the white house, my governor, senators in my area, asking them to extend past 99 weeks. in my county, unemployment is 12.3%. in the last two days, i went to seven different job searches. nobody is hiring. the only thing i can do is, they can give me money for food and utilities, but nobody can give

me money for rent. i am going to have to sell my vehicle and live in the whawood. i saw it in the news that the head of unemployment here makes $170,000 a year, county commissioners make over $200,000 a year. teachers in new york got a pay raise. it seemed like government workers are making all lot -- a lot. so i can either sell my vehicle and get about $3,000 and live on the streets, i could live in my vehicle on the streets, or i could just take a bottle of pills. nobody is helping me. 27 people lost their jobs at the

same time that i did. one of them moved out of state and got to go on social security because she was old enough. the rest of us are no longer even counted in the unemployment lines. the senators need to do something, the president needs to do something immediately. our unemployment rate is still extremely high. host: thank you. i encourage you to keep on reaching out for help. don, independent caller from new mexico. caller: i turned on the television, i listened to mr. chambliss, and republicans love to use fannie and freddie as a whipping boy. if he would just go to c-span

and look of the hearings that carl levin had with washington mutual, he could readily learn that many of the subprime loans, alt-a loans, all of thoseloan ls that should never have been made went directly to wall street. it was only late in the game that fannie and freddie got involved. i resent congressmen who like to use them as whipping boys when they themselves do not even know that the early loans went directly to wall street, wall street and bought them up, and the government was not involved. bush actually encouraged fannie and freddie to buy those loans in order to keep the real state ball rolling. host: back to the article in the "washington post" talking about

the change in tone -- jim on the republican line. silver spring, maryland. caller: i think what is needed in the area of financial reform, in addition to everything else that has been suggested, we need a form of birth control for

financial influence. there should be an approval process which could be difficult that would not allow cdo's to enter the market. host: "roll call" says -- let us take a look at some other stores in the news. the senses response rate. "usa today" has that story. 71% participating. the percentage of households -- mountain view, missouri.

james on the democratic line. caller: the center that was just on, during the clinton -- senator that was just on, during the clinton era, senator lindsey gramm played a part in appealing the glass stiegel laws. some people mention that. this exemption accepted credit derivatives and credit default swaps. this was signed by president clinton. this was a republican who wrote the bill, approved the bill, and a democrat president signed the bill. host: looking at global economic situations. the imf warns the country's debt

poses a major risk. that story in the "usa today." santa rosa, california , bill. caller: when we fill out our taxes, we can choose to donate to federal elections. perhaps i would like to see an optional page where there could be a number of things where we could direct our tax money to work. even if it was not a large amount of money, it would be good feedback for our elected officials to see where people would like to see their money spent. host: so something where you could allocate money for specific projects, certain interests?

caller: yes, if you think that they are doing a good job, you can say, keep doing that. if you think that they should start giving more money back to the taxpayers, you could do that. maybe you could donate to foreign aid, defense, something that would give more granular the to help people would like to see their tax dollars spent. host: coming up next is jonathan jarvis, the head of the national parks service. >> let us meet another winner from our studentcam competition. we asked students to create a video about one of the challenges facing our country. today we have an eighth grader from knoxville, tennessee. congratulations. what is your video about? >> it is about health care for

senior citizens and medicare. >> what made you pick this topic? >> we wanted to do something that affected everybody. it was a major topic of discussion on the news, radio, discussions with our family. we thought it would be interesting to cover. >> how does the health-care debate affect you? >> decisions being made right now in washington will affect americans for generations to come. so not only will it affect me and my parents, but my kids and their kids. it also has impact on the economy. we started to look for people to interview who would have insight on this topic. one of my teammates, his mother is a nurse practitioner. we interviewed her and she had access to several other

physicians that she worked with that were willing to be interviewed. we got a lot of information from them. then we were able to interview howard dean and bill frist. they had a lot of information on this topic. then we added some voice overs to it, did some research, and then added some music to the video. that is basically how we produced it. >> what was it like interviewing senator frist and mr. dean? >> that was the most memorable part. they both have great medical perspective but they came from different sides of the argument. you can hear that in their answers. >> what was something that you learned while producing the video? >> i learned about the medicare doughnut hole, that medicare is

expected to go bankrupt by 2017. that can be difficult for seniors. that can make them a bit uneasy. i learned a lot about how medicare works, how it will affect me and all americans. >> how long did it take to produce, what was the most difficult parts? >> my teacher introduced this project to us on the first day of school in august. until mid-january when the video was submitted, we had to chosose a topic and then we had all of the interviews. this was about a six-month project. during that, the most challenging part was definitely the editing. sometimes people would say things in an interview that you did not really want to cut out,

but it is an eight-minute video, and you want to have the best part, and sometimes that is hard. >> thank you. let us watch a bit of the video. >> i think they are trying to tax too much of it at one time. we need to see what works and then move on with the process. >> what ever you do can impact health care. a lot of doctors are not even accepting medicare patients because the hospital situation is so difficult. there are the sickest people, they have the most problems. >> elderly patients are scared to death. they perceive that there will be a form of ration care. >> you can see the rest of the winning videos any time at studentcam.org. host: our guest is jonathan

jarvis, director for the national park service. what is the condition of the national parks? guest: thank you for having me. this week is national park week. we have waived all the fees and have invited folks to reacquaint themselves with the national park system. host: remind us of the breatdth of the national park system. often, there are places that we would not even think about. guest: that is right. there are hundreds of locations. we often think about places like the grand canyon, but there are places like the home of martin luther king, the national mall is a national park. in every state, except delaware, there are units of the national park system. host: climate change is an issue that is coming up more and more

frequently. guest: absolutely. we are already seeing the effects of climate change in places like glacier national park, where they are receiving. according to science, we expect that within 22 years or so there could be no glaciers. we are seeing more intense fires in the sierras, invasion of exotic plant species, and the movement of wildlife to places where they had never been before. host: give us some history. president roosevelt established the idea of a national park system. how has your mission changed and what is your overriding goal? guest: i think this country needs the national park system more today than ever. we have an increasingly sedentary society that is more

and more disconnected with nature. kids spending very little time upside. there are concerns about what we call cultural literacy, and understanding of the american history. so national park provide the perfect opportunity to reconnect with nature as well as to learn about the full american story. host: where is your budget this year and heading into 2011? guest: everyone knows that the economy is tough. like everyone else, we are tightening our own belt as well. our fiscal 2011 budget, we reduced a bit from fy10. we got significant investment of recovery act funds as well to take on a lot of the make this backlog in the system. host: you testified before

congress a couple of months ago, i have your testimony when you were speaking before one of the house committees, some things that will be increased and others that will be decreased. guest: we try to strike a good balance between park operations. we are distributed at 392 units, we are open all year. we want to make sure basic operations are provided for the american public when they come to their parks. so we shifted some of our funding from construction. frankly, we had gotten a significant investment from the recovery act. host: you commented in your testimony there would be an increase of $53 million to cover some of the endangered treasured

landscape around the nation. the idea is to increase capacity and increase to richard programs, as well as enhancing security at national icons. guest: what that means is at about 100 parts, each park has requested for fiscal 2011 an increase in basic operations. they will have some money to hire seasonal rangers, perhaps provide better seasonal maintenance. to run a national park, like yellowstone, yosemite, it is really like running a small city. they take care of the roads, trails, waste water, trash, law enforcement, the visitor center, and then it has partners who run concessions and hotel services. it is like renting a small city with a transient population

every day. that requires basic operations. we looked across the country and which parts needed the best reinvestment, and that is why those 100 are poised to get funding. host: some of the budget cuts include programs to the save america treasure grant, can you translate what some of these mean? guest: these are grant programs that have been created over last 10 years, funding from the national park service billing out. these are brick and mortar-type of conservation efforts, national registry efforts. these were given to highlight historical communities and to help them with tourism and advertising, recognition that they are part of the american story.

because of the budget, we have to cut back on those grants. host: frank on the independence line. new mexico. caller: i wanted to ask mr. jarvis if he could kindly clear up some confusion between the national park service and forest service. the park service does a good job but the forest service, forests are dying all over the country. the current method of operation of allowing everything to go green and following the nature conservancy to set policy has created a fire trap in the national forests and the introduction of the the wolfwols making multiple use, which is

what it was designed for. guest: thank you for the question. if i could clarify a little bit, teddy roosevelt, sort of the founding father of land management of the country divided up forest service into the department of agriculture, the park service in the interior. so we work for different secretaries. our missions some overlap but they are distinctly different. the national park service is a mission to preserve these places for the enjoyment of present and future generations. as opposed to the forest service, as you indicated, as a multiple use mission. they provide fiber and timber for the country, protection of watersheds. they also have wilderness. they provide a wide range of recreation. they also allow oil and gas.

so their mission, in many ways, is more complicated, and they have a much broader constituency seeking to do a variety of things. in many ways, it is more challenging to strike that balance on the forest service land and within the park service, where we have a more limited agenda for how these places are managed. host: democratic caller. william in san francisco. caller: the president authorized support for our national parks. i wonder if you support the idea of being able to carry weapons in our parks? are you aware of any provisions of coming in the park service's? guest: in terms of the weapons,

in february, the president signed into law a statute that allows individuals to carry firearms into all units of the national parks system, in compliance with state law. so far, it has been fine. we have not had any incidents. it has been a smooth transition to provide for the opportunity for citizens to be in compliance with state law and to travel in our national parks. in terms of privatization within our national park system, we already have the private sector very much involved in the management through our concessionaires. there are approximately 90 concessionaires to operate and provide food and service,

lunging, guide service, a wide range of services that are not appropriate for the federal sector to provide but are certainly necessary and appropriate to the operations of national parks. that is about a billion dollar business, so that is a great partnership between the public and private sector. host: our guest is the director for the national park service. also, you were the superintendent of mount rainier , craters of the moon national monument, and you have also worked on the national mall. coming through the organization, does this give you a perspective of what the different parts have to offer? guest: absolutely. i worked for the park service for 34 years.

coming with that background gives me insight to the date to day operations of the parks. particularly, communities around parks. dealing with a particular issue that may come up here in washington, i have, at least an affinity, for those issues, and i know who to call to get to the core of those issues. host: utah. dave on the independent line. caller: good morning. two questions. first, i do not believe you made the ken burns' cut, but if i remember, there is a small national park in northern california.

i think it is a national park, if i am not mistaken. the second part of my question is the blatant attempt to lobby to keep the national park service away from cedar breaks monument. if you could, please. guest: i am not familiar with that place in california that you mentioned. it might be a state park. sometimes there is confusion about like tahoe in northern california, but that is managed by the u.s. forest service. i am not familiar of any place, having served as the regional director in california, having responsibility for those parks, and having passed tests to name them all, there is not one that i am not aware of. and there is no move to change cedar breaks. host: how would that be

significant to him, to anyone else watching the progress of this issue? guest: since the start of the national park system, we have grown, from the teddy roosevelt days, to 392 units in the system. there is sort of an appetite for parks in the country because we believe the national park system is an extraordinary institution. ken burns called it one of the best american concepts. he described it as a declaration of independence laid on the land. anyone, regardless of their and it -- ethnicity or background can stand on the edge of the grand canyon. so there is an appetite to bring land into the national park system.

we are pretty well recognized as a good steward of those lands. and there is an economic benefit to it as well. for every dollar invested in the park system, there is about a $4 return into the economy. much of that is realized in the local economies as well. but the park service is prohibited from proposing any new units. we can only do that at the request of congress. at times, there are requests to study new areas. then we submit those studies to congress for action. host: pennsylvania. robert on the independent line. good morning. caller: in the dakotas, not rushmore -- mount rushmore

-- near there, there was in the indian sculpture that they're working on. guest: that is a private sculpture that they are working on. i cannot remember who it is. caller: it is so interesting. i am hoping to make it out that way this year. i think you have the best job in the united states. guest: thank you. i think so, too, at times. host: don on the democrat's line. san antonio. caller: i want to follow up on this gun issue. whether it is a state park or

national park, the national park is supposed to be a respite. it is supposed to be a place where we can get away from people who had aggressive behavior. now we have allowed people to bring guns into the parks, especially national parks. and i am sure the national park service is not designed to be gun toters, you are naturalists, and i cannot believe that you are being subject to this. guest: the law was changed as an amendment to a rider on the telecommunications bill.

we are actively implementing the law. we still believe our national parks are in place for peaceful respite, a place to get away from the hustle and bustle of society, have the experience to have a quiet time with nature and one's family and friends. we do not believe that this changes that. host: the economy has been tight. funding is pretty much full study into the next year. how can americans contribute to what the priorities of the park service should be? guest: on friday, the president was at the department of the interior and launched what is called the great american outdoors. a new web site has been set up. is an interactive web site that allows the public to provide some input to the future of the

national park system, as well as to the broad concept of conservation. it is also our intent to go on the road with this conversation, to have a series of listening sessions around the country to engage the american public about what they think the future of conservation, historic preservation, and my proprietary interest, the national parks service, what it should be. host: pittsburg, kansas. don on the independent line. caller: i have a question about the original criticism of the -- what was called the high and dry situation. providing better protections through the ecosystems in th yellowstone.

people build their condos, vacation homes, and then there are all sorts of new requirement for fire safety. any comment on that? guest: it is a great question. when teddy roosevelt invested early in the system, the american public did not really live as distributed across the country as they are today. increasingly today, homeowners and small communities have expanded across the plains and into the west. there is any increasing concern over the wild land-urban interface. we are all working closely together with the states, particularly as it relates to wildfires, concerned with homeowners who live in that

interface between wild lands where wildfire is a concern, as well as protecting their homes and lives. over 70% of the american landscape is owned by private individuals. private individuals can be good stewards of the land as well. so this initiative that we discussed is about going out there and learning, who a month to the ranchers and farmers, who is doing a good job managing their land. just yesterday i was in georgia talking to the park staff, as well as adjacent landowners, as to how they work together to protect the wallewater quality e chattahoochee. that is a good example of this

kind of partnership so that we can maintain these systems, particularly in light of climate change and these questions on the future. host: a tweet on twitter -- guest: the great smoky national park is prohibited from having an entrance fee. as far as i know, there is no plan to change that. host: charles, a republican in mississippi. caller: mr. jarvis, first of all, thank you for the wonderful job that you do. host: talk about the national mall. how many visitors come? there has also been talk about

replacing the grass on the mall? guest: absolutely. the mall is suffering from the tragedy of the commons. it is the front lawn of america. it is the place where millions and millions of visitors come, not only from our country, but from around the world. it should be a center of pride for the country. if you have looked at the grass out there, the open walkaways are pretty hammered, frankly. so we have been combing through a process over the past several years, just completing the public comment period, and we are looking not at changing the form of the mall, but that its designed to handle the literally thousands of activities. it is also by the wa, by the wat

amendment site. that is important and we need to accommodate that, but the mall was never really designed for that. remember, this is a bill that was put on top of a swamp. it is not very resilient. it is going to take a significant investment for us to basically rebuild the mall in a way that can withstand these uses. we are not intend on taking people off of the mall. we want them to be there, but we need to make it more resilienct. host: a costly endeavor? guest: is.

just to do the grass panels from the capitol to the washington monument. that would be about $30 million. host: roger in arizona. democrat. caller: i have a question. i live about 10 minutes away from the oregon border. there has been a lot of damage there from the undocumented border crossings, but lots of drugs coming through there. i wonder if that situation has improved? guest: is a great question. i was just they're just a month ago. -- i was just that there a month agthere a month ago.

i did meet with park's death. it is a challenging situation, but it has gotten better. -- i did meet with park staff. the national park service and forest service are working closely together to strike that balance. obviously, border security and risk to the american public is the top priority, but it can be done, and it is being done in such a manner to protect the resources of organ pipe -- oregon pipe, and all of the other resources there as well. we are all working well in a coordinated fashion to provide security at the border, but at the same time, protecting park resources. host: john jarvis is the

director of the national park service. jacob is on the independent line. caller: good morning, how are you doing? i had a few questions. i have been through quite a few of the national parks, and i have done a lot of backpacking in the forest areas in colorado, california, idaho. .

guest: i have worked very closely with the forest service address to places like greater lake national park in are again -- adjacent to places like greater like national park in oregon. at the local level, we work very closely to have similar conservation efforts on both sides of the border, so that there is not an abrupt change when someone like you, take a, who backpacked along the pacific

trail from north to south in a cross between the national park plans and it -- national park lands in the u.s. forest service lands. the forest service in the department of agriculture, and maybe libby to have the chief of the forest service in here to talk about the challenges he faces. but they do have a conservation ethic as well. but they also have a responsibility to provide timber for this country as well. striking the appropriate balance between conservation and watershed protection and wilderness and dispersed recreation is a challenge for them along with the other multiple uses. host: have a couple of viewers commenting on twitter about their experience at the national park. want said that the first time he saw the grand canyon, it is but the way, called it totally

awesome. -- it took his breath away, called it totally awesome. you must get a lot of that feedback. guest: we get a lot of it. i never tire of hearing about the public's experiences at the national parks. the public are looking at the grand canyon and i am looking at the public, because i love to hear them talk about what they are experiencing. the public have always been inspired by and had this love affair with these extraordinary landscapes. this is what burns talked about with it being america's best idea that we would set these places aside. historically, was really interesting about it was that as the country was forming, we really did not have the cathedrals of europe, but we had places like the grand canyon and

the giant redwoods. we chose to stand as up. today they still attract 40 million international visitors a year to this country. we get about 289 million visitors a year from all of around the world. host: i wonder what are the more frequently expressed his and or concerns you hear from the public. -- frequently expressed criticisms or concerns you hear from the public. guest: visitors come up repeatedly. what i worked at a national park which is only an hour and a half to two hours from downtown seattle, i would run into people on the trail and it would be the 50th visit that summer. their comments can be extraordinarily specific.

there are like, "there is a sign up on this trail that is a little bit deteriorated. can you fix that?" we love that, because that kind of input helps us book is on our efforts -- helps us focus on our efforts. in general, i think the biggest concern for the future is that there is a large segment of the american population that do not know national parks exist. they are not experiencing them, they are not coming. but typically communities of color -- particularly communities of color. for a variety of reasons. maybe lack of knowledge, lack of transportation, lack of experience. to me, frankly, that is a concern, because i want every american to be able to walk to the rim of the grand canyon and have that same kind of powerful experience that you get when you see it for the first time, and the fact that there is a large

segment of the public that is not doing it, that is a problem. host: as we talked about earlier in the show, some of the challenges being faced and incorporated into the budget are dealing with the facilities. guest: the national park service has an extraordinary inventory, about 17,000 structures. we have a museum collection is second only to the smithsonian. we have thousands and thousands of structures, thousands of miles of road. just managing and maintaining all of that so that it is safe and accessible for the public is one of our number one priority. host: as the, republican, burlington. caller: hello, good morning. guest: good morning. caller: here is the thing -- the national park service's plan, but the bureau of nland

management owns too much land in this country. it is a travesty, because they take over the line and just let it sit there. rest regular americans, people like me, -- whereas regular americans, people like me, put on a piece of property and we could make it better than the -- and we could maintain it better than the blm dies. it is a national treasure, but listening to what you just said about people of color -- you cannot say that. you are trying to say that they are brain-dead and they don't know national parks? please don't hang up on me. you sound like you are going on the european and model where we provide invitations to have people see our national parks. this is crazy. guest: bureau of land management, some of the forest service, as a challenge of providing conservation and recreation and gravel and 8 wide

range of things for this country. they are consistent wrote to the national park service and the department of the interior. -- they are an assistant beirut to the national park service and the department of the interior. i have sympathy for the challenges that they have. statistically, our visitors that come to the national parks, we are not seeing an equivalent demographic that reflects the ethnic diversity of the country. we are seeing that large segments of the american population, american citizens, are not coming to the national parks. places like gettysburg, antietam, yorktown, that are quintessential components of our american experience are not seeing visitation as often at these kinds of places. it is important to remind all americans that this is their story, this is their

inheritance, and they are invited. we're not suggesting anything like any type of movement. we just want to make sure that everyone feels welcome and is invited to come and participate in the national parks. host: the questions asked as the president talks about -- guest: i will tell you an experience. we went up to baltimore to meet with kids in the baltimore area that if in and around fort mchenry, fort mchenry being a war of 1812, the inspiration for francis scott key and "the star spangled banner." quintessential component of the american experience and story. it is where we get our anthem. and yet there were kids in that community that did not know about 4 mckendree, did not know about its history and did not feel connected to that. part of it was to work with the parks to work with schools

particularly to incorporate this great resource right there in baltimore into their historic -- into their history curriculum. it is not as something they can read in textbook, but they can come out to fort mchenry and learn about that history, but also, our interpretation of the story needed to incorporate what it was like to be a teenager. what was a like to be a teenager in the war of 1812 when they were living there? it suddenly makes the story relevant to young people. that is just a simple shift in the way we talk about it. host: democratic caller, jerome in pennsylvania. caller: good morning. i would like to say thank you for c-span, and the caller earlier mentioned the monument in south dakota to crazy horse.

i thought he might be interested to know that if he wants to see it up close, he needs to be out there the first full weekend in june, when you are allowed to hike up to the sculpture. it truly is an amazing thing. it is about an hour's ride from mount rushmore. of course, both of them are well worth seeing. that is all i wanted to say. guest: thanks, jerome. i don't think i will make it out there the first of june, but i have been to mount rushmore a number of times but i've never been to the crazy horse sculpture. i would love to go some day. host: texas, independent line. caller: hi. thanks for taking my call and thank you for c-span. last summer i had the opportunity to visit arlington national cemetery and also the

moses cone state park in north carolina. i regret to tell you that i was almost ashamed of the arlington national cemetery. frankly, the condition of the parking lot there -- there was at least one pot hole where you could lose of volkswagen. as i thought of people coming to the united states to see our country and to see that kind of maintenance, i was extremely upset. when i went down to moses cone state park in north carolina, or moses cone park in north carolina, it is one i had not heard of, but it is a beautiful place. but again, there were serious maintenance issues. i was very disturbed to hear about the money that was going to be spent to increase the number of buildings and to make it larger when the the basic condition really, i did not think, represented the

conditions we would want to show to not only our own people, but particularly the people from across the country. guest: thanks for those comments, and i think that your comments and your observations about how we take care of these places is very important and important for you as a citizen to continue to make that known. in terms of arlington cemetery, that is not a national park service responsibility but that is the veterans affairs that takes care of arlington cemetery. the state park system sometimes -- each state has its own state court system, the responsibility of the state government. -- has its own state park system, the responsibility of the state government. they are not the responsibility of the national park system. our units are chosen because of their national significance. and we actually assist the states in this century, last

century, in establishing a state park system, feeling that the needs to be a broader distribution of parks in general. the american public loves the parks and frankly in many cases don't care who manages them. they just want it well taken care of. there really needs to be, and there is, and it is the great thing about this country, that we have a sort of a variety of parks, from the top lot to the city park to the community park, the regional park, the state park, the national park. national parks are places you go perhaps on the weekend or on vacation. but i always ask where you go after dinner, where to go if you just have a few hours. those parts are in many ways just as essential as the national parks, because we need those kinds of spaces. i just drove past dupont circle this weekend and was completely loaded with folks here in washington, d.c., enjoying the

beautiful sunny weekend day. parks are essential to our mental health and physical health as well. but they also need to be maintained. i hope that folks annie cho -- folks in charge of moses, will take care of it. host: we cannot let you go without finding out what is your favorite site. what is one that is overlooked? guest: they are all my favorites now. but i would say that the national park and preserve in alaska is a fantastic place. it is not well known. people go to alaska to see others, and sometimes they overlook the fantastic park, and i would suggest if folks are headed up to alaska, to take advantage of it. host: national park service director jonathan jarvis, thanks for being with us. guest: thank you, libby.

it was great. host: coming up, at zalmay khalilzad, but first, a news update from c-span radio. >> in the headlines, president obama is focusing on his upcoming nomination to the supreme court today as he meets in a couple of hours with democratic and republican senators who will control the confirmation fight ahead. he has started talking informally with potential nominees. an explosion and fire at an oil drilling platform off the coast of louisiana has left at least 11 and as many as 15 people missing. the coast guard says there are conflicting reports. several workers have been hospitalized and no word on the cause of the explosion. a final farewell today for civil-rights leader benjamin hooks with political and civil rights leaders across the country expected to attend his pindell in memphis. the 85-year-old former lawyer and judge and naacp director

died at his home after a long illness. the president at spirit airlines says that there has been no significant fallout from his airline's new charge for carry- on bags. on nbc's "today show," he defended business model by acknowledging that it did not sit well with some appearing with him on the program, new york democratic senator charles schumer, saying that spirit has set a bad precedent by charging up to $45 for carry-on bags, and that there might be legislation if the trend continues. finally, a happy birthday to one of the world's longest reigning monarchs. britain's queen elizabeth turns 84 today. she's expected to spend a quiet birthday in windsor castle with prince philip, her husband of 62 years. while today marks the queens actual birthday, the official celebration will be held june 12. those are some the latest headlines on c-span. . >> we are covering budget

committee hearings on capitol hill the day. first up, kathleen sebelius, the health and human services secretary, testifies on her department's fiscal year 2011 budget. live coverage on c-span3 did this afternoon, the senate budget committee will meet to mark up the budget resolution, the spending blueprints of the next fiscal year. live coverage at 2:15 eastern on c-span and3. >> we still have a vast workforce out there whwith peope who cannot read and. we have to do more with them. >> whether it is bill clinton for 1987 or last week, the c- span2 library features thousands of unique individuals and every day and adds new phases of politicians and reporters and experts you can follow. circuit, filed -- a search it

, every video since 1987. >> "washington journal" continues. host: zalmay khalilzad, a former ambassador to iraq and afghanistan, thank you for being with us. what is this organization? guest: i do two things since i left government. one is starting a consulting firm of my own focused largely on iraq and afghanistan to assist businesses and help economies of those countries grow. because i think that the success of both economic situations have to improve the the people. second, i am also assisted with the council or a policy -- associated with the council were id policy work. host: let's look at the latest news coming out of afghanistan. this from "the new york times" -- "assassination in kandahar

for the roads faith in government -- further erodes faith in government." the article goes on to report that "killings of local notables have become a routine occurrence in kandahar, but this slaying shocked people to the core. as american and nato troops are preparing for a summer offensive in kandahar, any sense of safety in the area is being worn away by assassinations, bombings, and other attacks on american and western contractors, political officials and religious leaders." guest: kandahar is the center of gravity, if you like, in the taliban, the struggle in afghanistan. that is where they started, the capital, and it is in play now, kandahar, because we have made clear that general mcchrystal plans to go in slowly but build

up to provide security for the people. the taliban has also been having activities. it is like the anbar of iraq, where al qaeda decontrol -- gained control and that they had to change the circumstances so that people could change sides. here, too, security for the people -- without that, at incidents such as what we saw, the killing at the deputy mayor, is likely to continue in the coming weeks and months as the fight for kandahar escalates and matures. host: the article goes on to say that over half of the todd heap on -- over half of the taliban

are "incorruptible." what are the implications of that? guest: that is a worrisome number in that paper today about increase support look taliban. -- trees to support for the taliban. this is attributed to the corruption and the government. and people are tired of the war that has gone on for eight years. there is a sense that at least under the taliban there was a greater sense of security, although there was obviously a great deal of repression and lack of personal freedom, particularly if you or a woman. i think that if people would have their way, it would like to have security and freedom, but

if you don't have security, security comes first. i think the numbers you read reflect disenchantment with the government and the corruption and being tired of the war that has been going on for a long time. host: afghan president hamid karzai has been the center of much controversy over the last couple of weeks. this editorial piece from cathy parker in "the washington post -- kathleen parker in "the washington post" action calls on you as someone with a prior relationship. it said that you and karzai dined together six nights a week during your diplomatic tenure. guest: that is true. bybee it that the issue of off dennis -- i'd be paved that the issue of afghanistan was important not only for afghans, but for is it was also important

that they acquired a partnership between the afghan government and the international community led by the united states. therefore, we worked very closely together, coordinated -- i obviously coordinated at the highest level with president karzai, and treated him with respect publicly and privately, try to solve problems, providing what he did not have a times -- at time,s the u.s. capability with information as regarding was happening, the options to deal with problems. when he pointed out to why an option was problematic that we wanted to pursue, i tried to bring to bear how one could hedge against those implications of eight negative from his point of view. if one, for example, wanted to

remove an official who was not performing, and he thought that if i remove them, he will go with the opposition, i will face a challenge, i would point out that what one could do with the opposition and figure to make sure he does not joined the opposition. so we worked together and there was a good relationship, mutual trust, partnership that was based on respect and commitment to success of the project. there was, if you like, no room or note that in terms of -- or no gap in terms of trust we were both committed to success in afghanistan. host: what is your impression in terms of karzai? he threatened to block any offensive and even threatened to join the todd heap -- he threatened to block and nato offensive and even threatened to join the taliban.

guest: the problem is a fundamental one, which is a challenge for president obama to deal with what president karzai comes next month, which is to establish a relationship of trust with him again, because he is the president and we need him in order to succeed in afghanistan. he understands that he needs as an order for the country to work. -- he needs us in order for the country to work. there has been distrust that has built over the last few years. host: can you give us more insight, having worked with him so closely come into president karzai's thinking? guest: i think he thinks we have plotted against him in the election, which is wrong, in my view, but that is what he believes, and some key figures in the administration supported opponents, and that he intentionally pushed his vote

down -- we intentionally pushed his vote down and carry out military operations in areas where he was strong to decrease turn out on the date of election. there have been meetings and interactions with him -- we were so close to him and treated in so nicely in the early period that now the administration has been at times, shall we say, < embracing of them -- less embracing of him and sometimes been publicly critical and in meetings disrespectful. i think that is heard him -- that has hurt him emotionally and given them a sense of insecurity about future of relations with the united states. that needs to be fixed, the fundamental issue. only the president can do that in perhaps a one-on-one meeting with president karzai.

the president did not have that with him when he went to kabul recently. i think they can charter a course or they can work again on what afghanistan's government needs to do, what we will do. i think that is absolutely necessary. and then trying to have a type of interaction with and that works with him, because for success, we need to make sure he plays his role. i think we have not found that. that is hard. sometimes we know what we need to happen, policy-wise, but operation lies in it, making it happen, -- operation allie -- operationalizing it, making it happen -- host: let's go to our calls. good morning, fred. caller: thank you very much for c-span. on your last note that you just

read, i don't understand how that al qaeda and pete todd heap and -- and the taliban could desecrate a mosque in that way. could you explain that to me? guest: sure. i think that the taliban are called islamists, they are strong believers in islam, but they are more of a political movement that seeks to dominate and use islam as a means to that end. they have done quite a number of things, like killing a clerics, that would be anti-islam, suicide, fatwa -- suicide is not

allowed by islam. there would be of course the killing of the innocent. when you go into a marketplace and explode a bomb and killed a lot of innocent people, not allowed by islam or by any religion. i think that the commitment to islam is a political one, a tactical one. and in fact they are in violation of many of the major tenets of islam. host: in "the new york times" ps we were talking about earlier, it sounds like some children were killed. what kind of factors that have on -- what kind of effect does that have on the afghans to witness these incidents or hear of them? guest: public security for the

people, the general mcchrystal adjustment in our strategy to in order to make progress in many of the other issues, on the economy and politics security is fundamental. the way to make progress, including bringing about change on the part of some taliban to join the government and reconcile with the government, you have to secure an area, protect the people, because in security after eight years on the part of the people, it has produced doubts about the strategy, the commitment, the efficiency and effectiveness of the coalition. that is what you see in these polls that we referred to. i support this adjustment, the

focus on production of the population as a core objective going forward but -- protection of the population as a core objective going forward. host: we are talking with the zalmay khalilzad, a former u.s. ambassador to the u.n., iraq, afghanistan. let's go to florida. caller: good morning. i would like to make reference to a news story that came out of afghanistan about two or three years ago regarding the young man from afghanistan who went to germany to study, subsequently decided to convert to christianity. upon returning to afghanistan, his luggage was checked by customs and they found a bible and interrogated him, and when they found out he had indeed become a christian, he was arrested, because came to light that the afghanistan constitution states that anyone

who change their religion from his lawn -- and is on to any other religion is subject to execution -- from islam to any other religion is subject to execution. the solution was that he was declared mentally incompetent and given asylum in italy. that is the story. as an american citizen, a veteran, and an uncle of the young man who was about to go to afghanistan, for that reason, and for the apparent corruption in the government, i really have some serious misgivings about whether or not our presence there is really in the best interest of the united states of america. guest: well, i don't know the details of the specific case, but the afghan constitution does not say what the gentleman stated, because i was a special envoy at the time when the constitution was drafted. it does recognize freedom of religion, the constitution.

but it is true that in islam, abandoned islam to convert to another religion -- abandoning is on to convert to another religion is blasphemy and severely dealt with. the afghan constitution does not deal with this specific issue of what if somebody leaves islam, to the best of my recollection, and what is the punishment di. but as far as the mission in afghanistan is concerned, the primary goal is, of course, to make sure that afghanistan is not controlled by al qaeda and the taliban, because those two in combination, but to the late al qaeda, since al qaeda has

sort of -- particularly al qaeda, since al qaeda has sponsored the taliban, we do not want that to be restored or a similar situation to come about. that is what drives u.s. policy, to not allow that to happen again. : ed, independent line. are you with us? one last time, good morning, ed. caller: can you hear me? host: we can hear you great. caller: osama bin laden is al qaeda, right? guest: right. caller: if we left afghanistan and he took over because people wanted him to take over, will be wrong with that? i don't know why we are there -- what would be wrong with that? i don't know why we are there. guest: all the opinion polls we

are seeing shows that support for the taliban is in the single digits, although the recent poll in kandahar is disturbing, this may indicate a change. but prior to this poll, that is what the polls indicated. this idea that the people of afghanistan what the taliban has not been correct, number one. no. 2, what is wrong with what he suggested is that taliban coming back, you get osama bin laden back in afghanistan -- have at terrorist taking over by state and using the infrastructure of the state to plot attacks against the rest of the world, and extremism would gain throughout the middle east and this would look like the terrorists and extremists defeated the united states in afghanistan, defeated the soviets in the 1980's, and in

the 21st century be defeated the united states. imagine what life would be like a cross the border police and -- across the broader middle east and the effect that have for the rest of the world. it is not only for the united states but we forget that. we clearly think about ourselves, but this the most important challenge facing the world right now. geopolitically it was for a while the balance of power in europe and then it was the soviet union. we did not go looking for it. on 9/11, it came and visited us. we have to deal with it. and we have to bring others together with us to deal with it. this is the defining issue. host: matt is calling us from the republicans line on st.

thomas. caller: good morning. my question today is if we are there to the break, what is the population of afghanistan? to liberate -- -what is the population of afghanistan? guest: about 30 million. caller: we just liberated people, and we did it in iraq, too. where is the rest of the world coming to our side saying thank god you save these people? guest: well, if you talk to iraqis, you see that an overwhelming number are grateful for what has happened. there are significant opponents of what happened there, but if you go to the kurdish region of iraq, much of the south, where the bulk of the population is,

they are happy with the overthrow of saddam hussein. now, iraq has had some terrible things in afghanistan, a substantial part of the population is happy with the overthrow of the todd heap and -- at the taliban. now, there would like our progress, it would like to have the government work better for them in terms of services and rule of law. they want u.s. military operations to not do some of the things that happen in war -- for example, a civilian casualties. they are unhappy that we have not been able to stop infiltrations across the pakistani border, and that leads to a suspicion about motives. how come we over to the taliban for so many days and for so many years -- over through the

taliban in some days and for so many years we have not been able to prevent infiltration across the border? but it would be a mistake for people of afghanistan and people of iraq to a post -- to oppose what we did or not express their appreciation. i have heard repeatedly their appreciation for what we have done in those countries. i think that is true. but as far as the region is concerned, the idea of building a democracy in iraq is not popular with some of the governments in the area, because they are not democracies. they fear that. there is a push by extremists to defeat the efforts to stabilize iraq and afghanistan that is part of the broader struggle that i mentioned earlier that is so important, and something that will shape the future middle east that now to politically --

now geopolitically is like what you wrote was -- like what your up widespread -- like what europe was to rid the world needs to find a way to protect itself from its problems and help overcome the difficulties as we did with world war ii in europe. host: you had a meeting in the state department yesterday. who did you meet with and what was the progress from that? guest: i met with ambassador holbrooke and we talked about the situation in afghanistan. i just came back from afghanistan, about five days ago. we just exchanged views with regard to what the situation was in afghanistan. my discussions with afghan

officials, including president karzai. we had a good chat. host: democratic caller, new york, new york. caller: hello, everybody agreed hello, mr. ambassador. guest: hello. caller: i have been listening to you for about half the time you have been on people want a greater sense of security -- it struck me when you talk about people wanting a greater sense of security. how do you have greater sense of security if you do not know what will get you killed? you literally do not know if you'll get killed for wearing the wrong clothes, flying a kite in the ave. you just don't know. but you have is a sense of insecurity. guest: right. caller: it struck me also that this goes back to the times that people like stalin and mao zedong. you still have that frame of mind that they are going to give us security and they promised us

security and they don't do it. they don't get it. they give what they want, they do what they want, and you are left with the results. guest: right, i think the caller is quite right that there is a tremendous sense of insecurity. you get suicide bombers, people are not sure if they are safe in their homes. one thing we should remember is that this not true across the vast country of afghanistan, and you have areas that are quite safe, life is quite normal, but areas, particularly in the south and parts of the east, with the insurgent presence is strong. it also happens in the capital

city of kabul. that, i think, as a way to move forward and achieve success, reconciliation, i think the idea of population protection and strategy of counterinsurgency is very smart and the right adaptation in our approach. but i think besides that, what is needed is to deal with some of the underlying issues of government corruption issues, providing services, and that is where the effective partnership between the coalition and the afghan government is required. i agree with the caller with regard to the dictatorial, totalitarian regimes that provide security but at huge cost in terms of personal freedom, and that that is not obviously we've seen in the other places the answer to the aspirations of human beings.

host: our recent "washington times" article talks about his concerns for his brother may be fueling his antagonisms toward washington. the news reports as open court a former senior u.s. official -- report says "a former senior u.s. official says the his chief motive was to lash back at washington for a recent newspaper reports that his half brother might be targeted in the upcoming military pushed through southern afghanistan." guest: i think with president karzai there are a couple of issues going here. at times he believes, and i have been told myself that he has been better informed about the

west than he sometimes in kids, because he believes the media with stories like this -- that he sometimes indicates, because he believes the media with stories like this, officials in washington are telling them to do this. and that this indicates a hostility to him from washington, from the obama administration. otherwise, an article like that, in his view, would not appear fingering his brother. host: and there are concerns about his brother and heroin trafficking. guest: and the media about him in fought in these various nefarious activities. -- him involved in these various nefarious activities. i sat with him for hours and he was saying that one part of washington conspires articles like this, and another part of

washington to working with them -- another part of washington is working with him. why don't you get your act together is his point. i asked officials to come and visit me, give me the evidence you have, and you don't trade on the other hand, you also work with him and he works with you, and there are allegations of contracts from the u.s. government, working with different parts of the u.s. government. which one is it? are you partnering with him, or are you after him? if you are after him, did you have the evidence for the charges that he make? can you share that with me? i believe he bases this issues with the senior current and in this -- raises those issues with senior current administration officials to visit him, putting some of these articles next to himself and saying, did i ask you to give my brother or contract? have i ever asked any of you to give him a contract? the complexity of washington

sometimes puzzles him. he thinks there must be a grand design somewhere in one of the buildings in d.c. where everything is related to everything else and decisions are made by the chaos of our policy making process -- and decisions are made. but the chaos of our policy making process is something he does not appreciate sometimes. host: independent caller, pennsylvania. caller: thank you for taking my call. my question is, the big fat cats that are running these heroin outlets over there -- you going after those directly, assuming they have support from other countries and all of this -- are you investigating and of the to that development? -- investigating enough into

that development? who are the big fat cats -- i am going to call them that -- who are running all these things, and have you got after them? that would eliminate a lot of the people in the bad politics. guest: first of all, we have to recognize with heroin and opium and so on, now a big area for supplying these things is in afghanistan. unfortunately, a group of people in afghanistan, in association with the international drug- traffickers, are involved. the afghan farmers that produce the opium get the least amount of benefits, if you like, a financially. the biggest money that is made is made by the traffickers, when

opium is converted into heroin and that is supplied to the world market, if you like. it has been issued for the united states, how to treat -- it has been an issue for the united states, how to treat the drug traffickers but for a long time that was not part of the u.s. military mission. i think increasingly now there is a perception, especially if you see in the operations in marja, a big area for drug trafficking, it seems we are moving more to deal with this issue. that is what it appears to me like -- of course i am along with the government -- i am no longer with the government, so i cannot say exactly in detail what we're doing, but from the outset i recognize the essential

part of the resources the insurgents have to attack us comes from drug-trafficking and therefore we are being more attentive to it. host: atlanta, georgia, republican, timothy. caller: we went into afghanistan because we are attacked for a war for israel. host: concerns about our relationship with israel. guest: well, i think the relationship with israel -- it did not have anything directly to do with the decision to go to afghanistan. summit said that some -- would say that the extremism and the terrorists at that extremism produces -- much of that in part has to do with the israel-

palestinian conflict. because we support israel, because the palestinians are not doing well, the muslims, or the muslim extremists at least, are hostile to us because we support israel, in their view. i think all administrations, including the present one, recognize that in order to normalize this region, you need to deal with the israel- palestinian issue. there are tactical differences about how best you can achieve that goal, how you can be helpful. but there are other distinct issues in need to address as well. you still have a lot to do with it with the issue of islamic extremism. you have to deal with iran and all the other issues.

host: less go to west virginia -- let's go to west virginia, tom, at democratic caller. caller: pleasure to talk to you this morning. i went to university in the 1970's and we had an international dinner club each week. i had the pleasure of being able to meet many people from the middle east, iraq, iran, and also from afghanistan when i went to university there. the impression that i got was that there was not all that is going on now. it was very simple and people got along and people came to get a good education so that they could go back and have professional careers did i understand the previous years in our country, dictatorship from bush and cheney, but now we have

are no president in the white house who understands the reality -- have a real president in the white house to understand the reality. but i don't understand why you allow in the middle east religion to intercept and your government, because that is a disaster waiting to happen 24/7. guest: well if i understand the gentleman's question, that at one time religion was not as preeminent in the politics of the middle east as it is today, i think there is truth to that. but the big question for the muslims of broader middle east is a kind of crisis of civilization. there is a debate that is going on over 100 years, or at one time the muslim world, the arab world was doing so well,

civilization on the march, universities. an open, multi-cultural society. and then there is in a period of continuous decline. what went wrong? what to do? two questions that they have argued and fought over. some have bought the way to achieve greatness again is to imitate -- thought that the way to achieve greatness again is to be secular and western- oriented again. the even changed the alphabet to latin alphabet and made sunday, the weekend, a holiday, and similar -- and a dress code similar to western dress code. and others who say that the way

to achieve greatness is to go back to the period of profit mohammed. -- prophet mohammed. especially after the iranian revolution of 1979, this view that you go back to his long, a particular interpretation of islam -- go back to islam, particular interpretation of islam, it is the way to achieve greatness again. that is why we have seen more of an islamic dimension. the afghans fighting against the soviets, there were also a lot of islamic insurgents fighting the soviets with our support during that period. there was another period or the islamic forces gained and -- that was another period where the islamic forces gain and became part of the scene. there are groups like that and we don't pay enough attention to

them because we pay attention to the problem more. but there is a struggle going on inside islamic civilization and forces are doing for universal values and keeping their -- forces arguing for universal values and keeping their values as well. officially and unofficially, we don't pay enough attention to those, and we don't do enough to support -- a lot of our attention is on weakening the more extremist elements. host: independent from california, john, welcome. caller: i have a question for mr. khalilzad most of the west perceives afghanistan as an arco state. going forward, i guess my question is how is it was supposed to proceed afghanistan specifically -- how is the west supposed to perceive afghanistan that specifically? we have committed to resources and manpower and our troops --

committed huge resources and manpower and our troops. how does afghanistan go forward, from that point of view? i would like to hear your comments. guest: there is no question that our products is a big part of the afghan economy. -- that narcotics is a big part of the afghan economy. there's a lot of money in the hands of powerful forces that they can use for elections, bribing people in government. by influence -- buying influence. that is why going forward, how did you build an effective state apparatus that will require strong leadership to address it and support the alternative livelihoods' for people? you have law enforcement, but

you have got to do justly and fairly and make examples of people in or outside government. and at the same time, have alternatives, especially for -- my approach would be that he to law enforcement use of the drug traffickers and people involved in a -- you do law enforcement vis-a-vis drug- traffickers and people involved in it. i don't think we have the kind of strategy and cooperation between us and karzai on this issue that is needed, and that is why reaching a new understanding, updating our strategic partnership with afghanistan and karzai, specified tasks that each of us will do going forward, will be an important delivery of the upcoming visit