from wyoming will discuss the republican efforts to repeal the new health care law. we'll also talk with aarp about the economic outlook for seniors. "washington journal" is next. . .

or would you not support someone because they are a woman when you go to the ballot box? or you reach a point where you are thinking it is all skills base and your gender does not matter? we would like to hear you tell us about that this morning. we will get to your calls in just a minute or so. "the washington post" gives a history of women in federal office. below that, "women elected to

congress." the first woman was elected to congress in 1916, they tell us, before women even won the vote nationally which was 1920. this little box right here is the 1992, officially named the year of the woman in national politics as the number of women and congress jumped from a total of 33 to 55. the current total and house and senate -- this is over all, 76 in the senate, 17 in the house and 93 total is how they depicting this, 2007 through 2009. we are asking all of you whether or not a candidate gender affects your boat.

let us begin with a telephone call from california. you are on the air from the independent line. caller: good morning, susan. absolutely not. you know, i would like to see a little more representation since women are more than half of the population. i would like to make a comment about the candidates from california. host: please. caller: i have not heard anyone comment on, watching their ads, neither fiorina nor whitman said one single thing about what they want to do if they are elective. all they have done is go after their opponents. we are sitting here saying, so, what are you going to do? big deal you ran a business. that is not the same as running a government. but absolutely not, it depends on what they have to offer. host: in california's kansas you have had two female senators for

quite a while -- in california's case. caller: personally i think they are both doing a good sign. i think perhaps it is time for feinstein to move on but i have been very happy with barbara boxer. host: raleigh, north carolina, is next. republican line. does the candidates gender affects your vote? caller: good morning to you, to the rest of your listeners. thank you for taking my call. gender, nor race or ethnicity has any effect on my vote. i look totally -- which all americans should -- we are supposed to be americans now, totally inclusive. they should look at the qualifications and also their train of thought that what they think government and this country should be. perfect example. you've got sarah palin, who is a free-market economist, limited

government, personal responsibility, personal rights, who is a woman. and you have barack obama, a large government, government knows best, collective rights, redistribution of wealth. if you look at those two sets of ideology and also value sets, you would see that one is looking over the individual and the other is looking for government does best for the individual. so i always look at what their party positions and ideology are versus what their gender or race or ethnicity. that is what america is supposed to be about now. but unfortunately a lot of people are bringing this race and gender aspect into it, trying to divide americans. host: a caller from raleigh. thank you for sharing your views. on the campaign trail, many women not making a point out of their gender. but a quote from tuesday night

that some pickup is referenced here in "the washington post" this morning. meg whitman said career politicians in washington and sacramento be worn because you now face your worst nightmare, two businesswomen from the real world who are able to create jobs, balanced budgets, and get things done. next is a call from scranton, pennsylvania. thomas, democrat's line. caller: good morning. i think it should be on the issues and not agenda. gail collins had a common -- -- column today. host: what did you think? caller: i heard somebody talking about. this country is run by money. i want working people to run for office. the mailman, the truck driver, the milkman. i want the firefighter. even police officer. i don't want these rich people. it is not big government, big corporations running the

country. my father told me years ago a starving dog will eat so much and then he will stop because he knows if he eats any more he will throw it all up but the rich never get enough. never get enough. this is what happens in the gulf coast. the oil companies never get enough. a starving dog knows more, to stop eating. but they are taking the money. this country is going downhill like a toboggan and nobody is going to stop it. the end of the roman empire but these riches and the year of the net. a lot of these women are not. host: let me show your viewers -- our viewers this column. she sees it not about gender but the rise of the rich. as the caller just said. this is a little bit about what gail collins just said.

that is what gail collins says it is all about. we are asking you whether it is the year of the woman and whether it affects your voteefor a candidate. jacksonville, florida. john, democrats like betty caller: good morning -- john, democrat's line. caller: you got off on a tangent with the gentleman caller from pennsylvania about the rich. host: talking about whether having women on the ballot makes you react positively or negatively. make me reactsn't positively or negatively. i look to see who is backing her, who is backing him, -- if it is big money, i don't want it. i want a regular person in

office, -- host: someone close to the people. not the ones whose life experience isn't like everyday americans. caller: i don't want the country club set in power. i want the everyday -- it could be a woman, it could be a man. it does not -- doesn't it say in the bible that a child shall lead them? host: that is reflected by em up on twitter -- emma on twitter. salem, oregon -- oregon. darren on the independent line. you got your volume on the tv. hit your mute button.

caller: ok, sorry. first of all, all i have to say is that the people with this oil spill that is going on, and the way our government is reacting, i wish bush was still our president because he would be saving the oil that is spilling into the gulf. secondly, obama should be criticized because he has done nothing but breakdown of our civilization. i mean, our older people are being charged more for health care. they are getting the night for health care. i'm only 25 years old. when i am my uncle's age, i'm not going to have health care, not going to have social security, not going to have any of that. all i have to say is that people -- the people need to step are -- step up and start

contributing to the cause of humanity. host: not so much on topic but suggesting people need to get involved in politics. six states right now have women governors. jan bridge were in arizona, connecticut, hawaii, michigan -- jan brewer in arizona. asking whether or not gender affects your vote at the ballot box. pittsburg, shirley is on the republican line. caller: i was just wondering if maybe women are being elected because all of the scandals that the men have caused, starting with bill clinton. it seems like we had just so many scandals lately with the man getting into trouble with other women and looking for their soulmates, that maybe we are taking more women to leave us. i think maybe that will be the answer to our problems. host: south carolina, and the

governor's race, there was a similar campaign suggesting that there was impropriety and the female candidate there that was denied. so it is not just men being accused of these things. caller: yes, my daughter lives in south carolina and she said she did a little research into that and found that maybe some of that was being put upon with the democrats trying to get are not elected in south carolina. host: i guess the question is, as women become more ubiquitous and politics, do you think that the fact you are talking about, people voting for them because of men having scandals, would be mitigated? caller: i don't know. but like in california, even though i'm a republican, like dianne feinstein. she does not think like i do but i think she is a very, very good senator. barbara boxer, i don't. host: it is not about women, but

their performance. thanks, shirley. shirley is a republican and a couple of people watching this suggest it is about the republican woman, such as this story in "the wall street journal." sharron angle in nevada and nikki haley and south carolina. san burgundy know, california. christian on our democrats line -- san bernadine know from california. caller: i am calling about barbara boxer. i think barbara boxer is a really good senator. the lady that is running against her, i think she broke hewlett- packard. she put too many jobs overseas

and she really can't run this state. she wants to run that she can bring jobs but she took jobs overseas. how could she really bring jobs to this state? what does she stand for? host: christian in san berna dino. find same success in politics?" we had an earlier caller who have the same point of view. he writes --

of course, this is all -- this is all an issue because of the two female executives -- meg whitman, and winner of the republican nomination for california governor, and carly fiorina, the gop nominee for u.s. senate in that state. next is a call from martinsville, louisiana. anthony on our independent line. caller: good morning, how are you? host: very well, thank you. caller: the question is -- host: and whether or not the

gender of a candidate even matters. caller: to me, absolutely not. i want someone in office who knows what they are doing. if when they are campaigning they make complete sense, i will vote for that person. whether it is a woman or not, it does not affect me. kind of referring to another caller was talking about, as far as who to vote for. firefighters and things of that nature -- i really don't care what they did before. if they make sense and what they say is going to make changes, then everyone knows what needs to be done, i'm all for that person. more than anything, i would say i would vote for the ceo's and the business owners because they ran a company. i want them to run a successful government at the same time. host: can i ask all your? caller: i am 22. host: so this has never been an

issue for you, thinking about and watching politics? caller: i am actually pretty bulova coakley active. i watch c-span i would say every morning -- i imagine pretty politically active. i watched c-span every morning. go ahead. host: thank you very much for your call. it would be interesting if some of our older callers have had a migration in their attitude over the years. warren, ohio. gene, republican line. caller: thank you for taking my call. the reason why i'm calling this morning, saying that the richies are trying to get power. i hate to go into the old double standard, but if they are going to print about that, they need to talk about all of the democratic very, very wealthy people who have been in power for many years and continue to do that. and the democratic money of

george soros that floats into all of these candidates. i am 65 years old. i would be more than willing to cut back on my entitlements. i'm still working and i intend to work until i'm 70 if the good lord is willing -- as long as the government cuts back on everything. i have nothing against working hard red i live a very frugal life. i love this country. and whether a person is a man or a woman means nothing. let us sit back and listen to what people have to say and get our country on the right track and do it together. host: she hopes to work until she is 70. she is right on top it with our final guest, from aarp. talking about older worker unemployment in the current economy. we will be right back to our question as to whether or not gender affects our vote. but today, as i mentioned at the outset, the opening of the house and senate conference committee session. coming up with final wording for the financial reform the

decision. philip has been watching this process for "the hill. " we learned the names of the people who will be sitting on the committee. what does the list say to you? guest: the list, in total, 43 members of the house and senate will be having a role in the conference process. there are 12 senators -- seven democrats and five republicans. in the house, 20 democrats and 11 republicans. in the house, some of the conferees will sort of have a say on the entire bill. and others will be sort of more directed to specific titles. but they will also be hashing out many differences in the 1500-page bill, to complete the july 4 recess.

host: specifically go through the list of names on the house side. because the people who sit at the table certainly will have a great influence on what the final legislation looks like. when you see names like barney frank, paul kantor ski, maxine waters, gregory meeks, a ceremony, luis gutierrez, mary jo kilroy, dennis more in the democrat side, what world you do these folks bring to the table in crafting legislation? guest: these are mostly the senior members of the house financial-services committee. chairman frank will serve as chairman of the conference committee. on some of the provisions in the bill when it was marked up more than six months ago in the house financial-services committee, some of these members opposed some of a more controversial elements. it wound up actually been part of the bill that passed the house, mainly an exemption for

auto dealers, but consumer protection agency, for example. so they represent the senior members of the financial services committee, for the most part. their view did not always carry the day, even in chairman frank's own committee. but that is an issue they will all have to resolve. host: the same question for you, the republicans that have been appointed -- spencer baucus, scott garet, jeb hensarling -- what was their role in crafting the legislation so far and what are the kinds of issues to you see them pressing for? guest: in the house republicans unanimously opposed the bill on the house floor when it passed in december. the republicans you just mentioned are members of the house financial-services committee. there were plenty of provisions

on the marked up in december in which democrats and republicans worked together. perhaps not the majority of provisions, but some of them, at least. so, there is perhaps some scope for working out a few agreements on specific provisions. it is unlikely they will come out and all of the sudden support the bill. host: as you know, barney frank has been requesting for suggesting that he wants c- span, and therefore, televised coverage of the sessions of the conference committee. i should say our network has committed it will have a camera inside every open session as it meets, and we will make sure the people who are interested have an opportunity to see it either on internet or television. let me ask you what people will see on screen versus white -- versus what might be happening off screen? guest: i think chairman frank and senate banking committee chairman chris dodd of both said

their staffs have been working over the past several weeks, or a month or so, to go through differences in the bill. and certainly lawmakers outside of sort of the publicly televised portion of the conference agreement. certainly lawmakers outside of the room and the private sessions will be negotiating and sort of coming to agreement, hopefully. all the different provisions. -- on the different provisions. what may in public might represent a culmination of what was agreed to in private, in other cases there might be public -- but both will be part of the process. host: what about the the people who seek to influence the -- the amounts of money and access? how does that process work in this town wanted moves through the conference committee? guest: will be swarming the town of on numerous provisions on

this bill. they have been looking at this since january of last year. this is the final stage and there are several very important provisions that lobbyists from the financial industry and working to change or oppose outright. and supporters for those same provisions from the consumer advocacy side, and other associations, a working to retain them. both sides will really disorder be making it their last stand on these issues. host: thanks for setting the stage for us. the conference committee gets underway at 2:15 p.m. eastern time. and c-span cameras will be day. -- will be there. typically the first day as opening statements. you expect that to be the bulk? guest: i think that will be the bulk of what happens today, and perhaps more nuanced work will be next week. host: thank you for getting us started today. as our cameras pick up the first of the senate and house

conference committee on this great financial legislation that has a great -- a lot of time and effort, time and effort on both sides. certainly a point of discussion between both parties as we go into the election year. all late -- all of that coming to a crescendo as the conference committee is underway and i hope to bring it to the floor in several months. thank you so much for being with us this morning. guest: thank you. host: thank you for the information there let us go back to the telephone calls from you, and your e-mails and your tweets on whether women candidates affects your vote. is it a post gender election, or are you think of other things such as whether they are inside or outside status in washington, whether or not they have been a ceo or close to the people? is there gender effective. hollywood, florida.

ried is on the democrat's line. caller: thank you for taking my call this morning. ma'am, gender means nothing, race means nothing. it is the ideology, the philosophy of a person. i feel that carly fiorina -- i know about her background, i know what she said. she made comments that a job in america is not a guarantee to anyone. and i think that this is very neocon. i do not like supply-side economics and the free-market ideology. i think it is mythology. and i don't subscribe to it and i think this is the reason why we are having these economic environmental problems because unregulated capitalism is a disaster. i knew this when reagan was elected, that this was the beginning of it and it is

unfortunate. it is big government that causes us -- excuse me, it is big business causing the problem, not big government. i am a lefty and i like big government as long as it serves all the people and regulates capitalism. i don't believe in unregulated capitalism. that is about all i have to say. thank you. host: the next participant is jamie, independent. anderson, indiana. caller: how are you doing, ma'am? my observation of what is going on is basically the discord in politics since the election of our first black president has been so uncivil that i think america, and in general, basically purging itself and giving women an opportunity to work with this man because the angry white man in the senate and house don't agree with anything that comes from the president and we are in a country that realistically we

don't want to accept the problem that race may have with that but we do know that women way -- women may be more successful in working with the man and may govern. they just want to do what is good for america because that is what is holding back from these people in congress now, and in the senate, from simply just governing, because everything this man comes of what they take an adverse adversarial position on it when the benefit of best interests of the country is what is at hand. we have this tribal mentality that so many people will vote against their own best interest to keep this man who is in the white house from simply getting credit for lifting this country from the spiral we were in from the angry white man persona of neo con politics. i think america is just purging itself. i do not think it is necessarily post racial or agenda, but america wants to get back what is good for america and the

angry white male has ran its course. host: thank you from anderson, indiana. jeff tweets -- "washington post" anne corbett writes about this. here is what she writes today. new hope, ky. mary on the republican line. caller: thank you for c-span. i certainly always examine what that is what governs my vote.

my primary thought is pro-life. if the woman is for the baby and knows that it is a baby she is killing, then i'm not for them. but if they realize it is a baby and by killing it you killed another possibly woman or a man, and you killed them. that is my governing old opinion. so, thank you for c-span. host: thank you, mary, for calling in. >> in this las vegas, rich on the democrat's line. caller: before i get to my comments i would like to, if i can, address the caller before this caller that you just had. host: south carolina? caller: not sure where he was from. host: talking about the president? caller: the angry white men.

i am really getting frustrated here. recently of an autistic child. my son is 29 years old. 90% of the people who helped me with my child were white. these people were just relentless in their support of me. ss, i understand i think where the caller is coming from, there is a strain of racism out there. but to paint all white people with the same brush, it is frustrating and it is just inaccurate. but more to my point. this is a little bit off topic, susan. but i don't see you very often anymore. i do not think you are in as much. host: just changed to tuesdays for the first few weeks. caller: but i will tell you this -- you are absolutely, apart from brian, my absolute favorite. like i said, just recently married. not kidding when you but you

look absolutely radiant. and the job you did with grant that is not think short of amazing -- the job you did with greta is absolutely amazing. she came into her own and i assure you are largely responsible for that. thank you for your excellent service and delightful to tune in. its coat thank you for your find words. -- host: thank you for your fine words. it is not something that you can just sit and do -- it seems easy but there is a lot going on. i wanted to go back to the newspapers because which lowry writes about women in the republican party -- rich lowery. here is what he is saying this morning.

he talks about whether nikki haley can fill her star potential in south carolina. whether angle will discredit the tea partyers? talking about women candidates this morning. the next call is from arizona. chuck, independent line. go ahead. caller: good morning, susan. a good call from las vegas, i concur. yes, i'm all for women in government. i think we would be a lot better off if we had more women in government. however, i seem to be seeing a trend here. where i am located geographically is right where california and nevada and arizona come together. i have been watching things recently. the trend that i see is that a lot of the women that are running for major office now are just so far to the right that it is scary.

and i don't know how this has happened. i'm an independent. i am a bernie sanders independent. it will let you know where i'm. but it is frightening. the women in california are anti-choice. that is not going to sell in california. the one in nevada, this angle, knowing where she stands on issues, that will not sell in nevada. i just don't know -- of course, the one in alaska, we don't even need to talk about her. i don't know why the women that seemed to be running for major offices now are so far to the right. i don't know how that has happened, but it has. it is a little bit scary to me. incidently, the one that is governing arizona right now was not in -- was not even elected. she was appointed. so that speaks for itself.

i'm all for women in government and i hope we get more of them but i hope the trend changes and we get some women that are a little bit maybe left of center again like it used to be. host: thank you for participating. it had line you have been seen during that call from "the new york times" this morning. let me read to you a little bit of this piece.

back to your calls. next is aurora, minnesota. caller: good morning. --m sorry, but i'm one that does not like women in government. i watched c-span. on all the channels. we don't get three -- but i know they repeat them at night. the women, there are very, very few women that come across to me. i just don't like the women in government. i am sorry. host: can you explain why? caller: they don't reach me. host: they just don't read you.

you never voted for a woman in all your years? caller: one woman locally, and i'm so disappointed with her that i think it will end right there. host: a different point of view -- we were showing a picture from the california candidates. a piece about blanche lincoln -- calling this a risk for obama to mend. -- rift for obama to men. next is williamsburg, ohio. this is our roof on our democrat's line. caller: good morning. thank you for c-span. the reason why i'm calling is, i believe women have a place in government. i disagree totally with the

previous caller. but i think it is not as much gender-based for me. i think it is their political views. and i think we have had enough -- i am not real positive about the two women -- if you have enough money, you can buy your way into a campaign. i think we need to get back to the basics. i think that is what america is calling for. host: the "usa today" editorial page looks at the election and they have two items. this one is abouu proposition 14. and it picked up the well candidate field with the second editorial. this year's politics can be called by many things -- year of the anti-establishment, year of the woman, but one thing for certain, the year of this self funded very rich candidate.

athens, georgia. christine. caller: hi. i definitely think gender has a bearing on who i choose to vote for. it is not the primary thing that i look at. first i looked at their priorities and their positions on issues. but if all else is equal, then i would definitely vote for the female just because i think females have you need perspectives and skills that they can bring to the system. host: thank you. appreciate your to the patient. later on in the program we'll be . lking about the oil leake we will also be talking about health care, the law, and the two parties' views. and also about the economy. so let me show you a few sidebar headlines before the first part

ends this morning. ff leaving federal prison for a halfway house. and we will show you the federal page of "the post" -- we will go back to calls at this point. this might be our last.

lakeland, florida. esther and the democrat's line. caller: i wanted to say, i wondering when we will do a show about the fate of black men in politics, especially national politics. i think we have one black senator and he is a rather curious situation, the man from illinois who placed the -- replaced obama. i think the state of national politics with the scarcity of black male politicians is an absolute disgrace to this country. i am glad women have come a long ways. but even aside race, i am a mother of a son and a daughter in their early 20's, and the culture has really turned on young men. it is so hard for young men to succeed in today's society that i wish people would take note of that fact. it is terrible for young, black men, but hard for young white men, too. i'm white and my son is white and he has had struggles, his friends. my daughter is very successful.

she got a scholarship and went through college and she is now a teacher. i have seen it. her female friends have had an easier time than my son -- and my son and his male friends have had a harder time in my heart breaks for the young males of this country. host: a lively discussion about women candidates, whether gender affects your vote. thank you for your produce a patient. this morning we are showing you are brand new digital bus and smaller traveling unit, called ltv, local content. we will show you when we will be visiting your communities. >> today c-span is unveiling the latest community initiative, the 45-foot motor coach and the local content vehicle which will begin traveling today across the

country this summer, working with cable partners to put together local events and other programming. c-band -- c-span marketing supervisor is at the bus to tell us a little bit about the vehicles. but before this, we ought to tell the vehicle -- viewers about the history of the program. >> c-span has had a bus program going back to 1993. the genesis of the program came from a "book notes" interview with a story and the douglas brinkley, "the magic bus: an american odyssey." the story was about taking 17 students across the country on a bus on a six-week tour to understand history hands on. he thought it was a novel idea so seven months later the first c-span school bus was launched in november of 1993. we went to schools across america, a partner in with our cable affiliates. in 1996, a second c-span school

bus was launched and from there we continue with the education outreach. in addition to the community education outreach the buses were fully functioning production studios, so they were used to do live programming on c-span, including american president series, american writers, and students and leaders. today marks a new day for us. this is our brand new digital bus. totally different than our other buses. this is a more interactive hands on multimedia demonstration center. >> house -- why did c-span decide to launch the new vehicle? >> the older buses were outfitted as production studios so that had a lot of space, that took a lot of space -- switcher an audio board. we thought we wanted to bring the bus program into the 21st century. on board, this vehicle has interactive kiosks, laptops to demonstrate social media, and it

also has an area where you can sign up for c-span resources. it is really interactive, hands- on, self guided and that allows the end user, or visitors, of different experiences with our resources -- whether it is tv, on line, on the radio. >> a lot of new technology. what -- what went into creating a buzz? how long did it take and who did c-span work with? >> it was a four-month endeavor. we purchase of this bus december of last year. our driver drove it to creative mobile interiors, a conversion company in grove city, ohio. we designed the layout and it was a company-wide effort. our engineering and i.t. department was part of this. a four-month process and it actually came out of the shop on april 30. >> where does the bus go now? >> after today, the bus will head to chicago for the chicago tribune literary festival and

from there it will go to denver for an education conference. >> what locations would be visiting? >> the last four or five years, as a mentioned earlier, we had education outreach initiative, that was our focus. the last four or five years we branched out and we go to universities, six organizations, large book festivals, large education conferences. really needing a lot of people, whether it is students, teachers, people who might not be familiar with c-span, and branching out and letting them know about resources on board. >> how long will the bus be on the road? >> roughly 10 months out of the year. in between -- and between the large anchor events like book festivals, political events, we work with our cable affiliate's to go to high schools, universities, libraries, and six clubs. p> that was our c-span marketing

supervisor. at around 8:30 this morning, we will take a look at the local content vehicle, and later on in the program we will go inside the digital bus for a glimpse of what visitors will see when they go on board. host: and welcome back. let me introduce our first guest at the table this morning. gene taylor, congressman from mississippi's fourth district, member of transportation and infrastructure committee and also served in the coast guard reserve and knows the gulf wealth from growing up there and we will talk about the oil spill and its effect on his home state and regional and national economy. where do things stand at this six-week mark? guest::at the six-week market mississippi, we have been very lucky. almost attitude from hurricane season -- you hate to see somebody get hit, but it has not been us. but it has certainly affected

the tourism. it has affected the seafood industry. it affected boat repair, both maintenance. so even though it hit most louisiana, alabama, and florida, it's definitely affected our economy because the national scene of the oil best soap birds. -- oil-soaked areas. host: as a person representing a region, are you satisfied the way bp it is playing damages? guest: yes and no. they did a pre-emptive call up to commercial fishermen and immediately cut them $5,000 check, a first start. but this would be fun -- prime schrempp harvesting season, processing season. it is not happening. it obviously heard beach rentals, jet skis, tourism industry. it is about the billion dollar

industry in south mississippi. my to them -- pay every legitimate claim, just like -- pay every lead in a claim or i will be all over you the way i was over the insurance industry out -- after katrina. the phone numbers are -- host: for your state's relatively good fortune in this process, less talk about causality. was it preparations made by the state, where you are geographically? guest: more the latter. my theory is, the same thing that keeps our war fairly brackish is we have a number of waters that feed into the mississippi sound. the mixing of fresh and salt water makes it extremely fertile

for growing shrimp and oysters but we did not get a pretty water like other areas. i am convinced and the northern gulf institute feels the same way, the flow of the pearl, jordan, wolf, pascagoula and other rivers, the flow of them -- and we had fairly heavy rains this spring. it has been pushing the water out. there is an natural flow inside the island chain, that when it gets to a point near the louisiana line, turns and goes south between a place called staten island and louisiana marshes, on either side of the chandelier islands and the oil has stayed about 40 miles away from us for weeks now again, there have been a couple of flare ups, but compared to other places we have been very fortunate. host: the congressmen brought a fairly large nautical chart to help demonstrate this. it will not make for pretty tv but it does help demonstrate what he wants you to know. our colleague is bringing it up.

what you want us to know? >> what is working in our favor, this is the pearl river, jordan river, wolf river -- other rivers, flowing. the natural flow is mostly from east to west. then somewhere around here it makes a turn and passes between cat island and louisiana marshes, grants pass. and either side of the chandelier islands. that followed -- in my opinion -- what you don't have west of the mississippi river is something like that, which is why grand isle is getting hammered. what you don't have it east of us, pensacola, is a bill like that while they are getting hammered. host: where is the epicenter? guest: 30 miles south of your thumb. 101 miles -- down to the rig. one of the things working in our favor is just the distance from spill.

i am going to -- island today. bp staged a lot of equipment right here, and hired vessels of opportunity. what we are going to call on the coast guard to do, since we have not seen a clear effort on their part, is to stage vessels here, there, and there. with the idea a significant number are skimmers. have them forward deployed. since we have gone this long without oil, i am convinced we can set a realistic goal of keeping it -- keeping it from ever touching our shores. and then place a series of picket boats. use the satellite -- the happens to be a space center here -- to monitor it constantly. and as the small patches break off and work their way north,

send skimmer boats to catch it before it hits the beach. that was not a realistic goal in april. you had wins, at 8 feet a 10 foot seas. now bearing the summer the winds lighten up for the exception of thunderstorms. this is a realistic goal. i really do think, again, if a cap -- that is the key, they have to cap it soon. if they capture the well we have a realistic goal of keeping all live from the shores. host: a lot of issues around the rest of the gulf. guest: in lieu of the coast guard coming up with a plan, and sent bp has not come up with a plan, i will submit it to them. i think it is a realistic and achievable plan. host: thank you for your help. congressman, how receptive was the unified command in accepting a local solution? guest: we are going to see. quite honestly, in the beginning the goals were set pretty low. a lot of the local mayors wanted to put a boom across the harbor.

that still leaves beach is exposed. in beginning the goal was to keep the fragile wetlands from getting covered, and that has been achieved. now that we have the short-term goals, we think it is a realistic thing to ask that we keep it off the barrier islands, off the sound. time and distance works in our favor. we would have warning that it is coming. so we have time. one thing i have noticed -- and i have flown this four times now -- no coordination between overhead observers and skimmer boats. you see a patch of oil the size of football field here and you see is mon-khmer -- skimmer boat going over there. so there has to be coordination between what is going on in the back, what is going on overhead. they put about 800,000 gallons of dispersant. they have had over 100 intentional fires to burn it. i regret to say that the boom technology has not improved in

40 years. scanning technology has not improved in 20 years. if you think about it, we are a market-based economy. since the oil pollution act since 1990, there has been no market because there has been no spill, for bones and skimmers. now there is. and one of the things i want to hear from bp and others in the oil business, that they will pay for the next-generation a blowout preventer, that next generation of skimmer and boom equipment so that does not help and again. host: our lines are lighting up. you have been following it and have as much emotion about it. guest: for good reason. host: before we go to calls, we have been -- you have been in office 20 years. you have lived through -- guest: hurricanes, oil spills. host: on relatively scale, where is this? guest: the absolute worst was katrina, several hundred south

mississippi and skills -- families with no staff -- several hundred south killed. pians it would almost take a war to compared to katrina. this is certainly bad. but as far as the number of people affected by this, this is not katrina. host: let us begin with thompson, tennessee. terry on the republican line. guest: a quick comment and a question. my comment is, i fully support what mr. obama is doing. i think he is going out of his way and doing what he can. now to my question. due to the fact that bp has lost $93 billion in stock value , wouldn't it be smart for the government to insist that bp may be put up $15 billion to $20

billion in a fund to be held by the u.s. government to cut all of these expenses, and if they refuse to do so, wouldn't it be sparked -- smart for the u.s. government to make pcs and hold the assets of bp in this country until all of the claims are filled, paid for. because if their stock keeps plummet -- plummeting, what is to stop them from bankrupting itself and we being stocked with everything? guest: yes, sir. excellent question an excellent observation. number one, there is and oil spill trust fund of about $1.5 billion collected from about 8 cents per barrel tax of imported oil since the act in 1990. we are probably going to exhaust that. your observation that bp is liable, i am in total agreement. i do think at some point a judge would rule they were grossly negligent. i think that is on its face of

evidence. but traditionally americans have not passed laws after the fact. as far as going back and saying, well, we will charge you extra money for your income taxes five years ago. but it would certainly be in our nation's best interest to reach a negotiated settlement, trying to accomplish what you want right now from bp, getting something in writing that they will cover the losses and have them show some sort of bonding and insurance. but i am in total agreement with you. we just need to make sure we honor the rule of law. .

that is who is responsible. under the oil pollution and of 1990, something i voted for, we left the private sector and made him responsible for fixing the problem. at some point, use and it is not going to get done and becomes in into the end of national significance. seven days after the passage of the bill is when the nation made the call. i called the chief of naval operations, whom i consider a personal friend, and said that we have to have some game plan.

he calls me back that afternoon and said we do not have a game plan, we are going to depend on the private sector to do it. so one thing that have to come out of it is a solution, a plan to cap rigs in the future. we are a market-based economy and because we have not had a major spill in 20 years, we have not had any major technological advances in booming, skimming or anything. we need to make sure that the right sort of equipment is bought and staged so that this does not happen again. host: we have been showing pictures of the oil spill. many more gallons were

contained yes today than previously. more is being skimmed and burned right now, but do you know more than the general public about this right now? guest: given the enormous pressures, one of the most frustrating things is that the oil is still coming out. they are afraid if they closed all the vents, it would push the cap out of the way. the other thing i know there are working on is, almost everyone followed the process of that top kill. there are efforts underway, as we speak, to see if they cannot use those two hoses to start socking oil from there, instead of pouring something in.

i have also learned they would also like to burn the flaring oil, on the soil, as much as they can. there are a number of other rigs in the area, so byrnes become a problem for others that are nearby. when you think about the technology of these two relief wells, 18,000 feet down, hitting a pipe this big, 23,000 feet beneath the surface, that will be one engineering feat, and if they can pull that off. host: we have been getting some input from the lawyers about

solutions. that allen has mentioned that they are taking some mission. we are learning that bp has received more than 80,000 suggestions on how to stop the spill. the pace has been picking up in recent days. here is what they say -- about 60% of those ideas are about putting a week, while the rest are about cleaning up the oil. you talk about not having advanced technology. right now we are testing solutions that are being proposed by the public. guest: we are in market-based

economy and many of the same folks screaming why is there no solution, if the government has mandated better technologies in an absence of a spill, we may not be talking about this. just like we got caught flatfooted with 9/11, we vastly increased security after, i think that now that something bad has happened, i think everyone can understand there is a reason to raise the ante here. the key thing is to make sure that we do it right. one thing i want to address is the subject of negligence and misconduct. that is what is going to lead to liability on bp.

the problem is, there is no clear definition of negligence or willful misconduct. one of the things that i would like to see come on of the bill -- out of the bill is at least a threshold, if you do not plan though oil in so many days, if you allow this amount of oil into the gulf, it would be considered gross misconduct. i have a shrimper. if i have a vote and that makes the mistake, it bank of him. i do not think this will financially ruined it ceo of pp. -- bp. there has to be some fairness

host: daring in baltimore. independent line. caller: i have a comment and question. i fish and spend a lot of time outdoors. this oil spill hurts me so bad. it is terrible. i feel like crying every time i look at that monitor. but this does not show the big picture. we need a different form of energy. we need engineers and scientists working on improvements in the ethanol, solar, winn. we cannot keep using oil. my question for you is will you support a comprehensive climate change bill? guest: i did not support that

climate change a bill but i have been the leading proponent in the house of representatives for as close as possible to having an all-nuclear navy. ddg51 is the finest warship in the world, but it need to be refilled every few days. that is a will or ability. should an enemy take out our oilers, the vessel cannot sail. we put some money into some programs this year to come up with a smaller nuclear reactor that will fit inside a ddg51. i am not disagreeing with you. we have the world's greatest military but we also have the most fuel-defended military in the world.

we need to take the steps to lessen our dependence on foreign oil. host: let's talk about politics in the bp spill. in the "the baltimore sun" -- one of our twitter suggestions -- what do you think about the administration's approach? guest: i can only speak to where we work with bp. i want to see your equipment. i want to know who to call. i would hope the president would take the same approach, let them know that we know they are at

fault, we want them to admit it. but now they have to pay these bills. when the coast guard comes up with a plan, they will have to pay for the implementation of it, and that will take a businesslike approach. you are responsible, you are going to pay for this, and this is what we expect. guest: and the administration -- host: the administration also announced a moratorium on drilling. what is your opinion? guest: i think it needs to be technology-driven and not so much time driven. when the industry comes to us and says we have better skimmers, blow up printers, that is when we can change. -- blowout preventers, that is when we can change.

we cannot be caught flatfooted again. host: next phone call. george. caller: i have worked as an engineer. i have worked with shrimpers. they are all upset with how this has proceeded. most of this should have been done within one week. i am concerned that we are going to shut the well in when we had so much material coming out of the gulf. we have spent the money and time to run two pipelines from that position to nearby platforms. if we could put in gas-liquids separator down there near the well, which you find on every platform out there, we could be separating the oil and gas and using those profits to pay for the cleanup.

i have one additional point. in the north sea, and they use for concrete casings that i believe our 200 feet in diameter, 600 feet high. you could not do that in every place, but you could definitely put them on the sea floor to do some thinning out. that would give you much less of a chance of a blowout. but if we can just put in that separation unit, some electrical controls, pumps, we can do this. send that oil and gas to shore. that would help to pay for this and stop all of the pollution going into the gulf right now. guest: you need to be telling this to bp, not me.

what i can tell you is we are recovering 13,000 barrels a day of recoverable oil. that is being collected and taken to the refineries. i know they are going to go to the blowout preventer and use those two tubes that were to be used for the top kill to suck oil until the two relief wells are drilled. because this is 5,000 feet under the sea, we could probably get you ready to fly on the space shuttle. we do not have the kind of technology to go to the bottom of the sea, and that is the reality. host: next phone call.

caller: good morning. it is great to see a democratic congressman from mississippi. my comment is, i meant something in the local paper, quoting haley barbour, that he was downplay the oil spill. he said there was an oil sheen in the water and said it was nothing more than when you take your motorboats out. we are not going to wash ourselves in it, but it is safe. republicans are always harping on the free-market and minimize government, but how does a free- market deal with a situation like this? we do not have the technology to take care of this. how does the free market take care of this without government

involvement? guest: thank you for your call. it is not my job to defend the governor but i have also flown over the oil slick four times. there are varying degrees of ugly out there. what happens naturally is the farther you get away from that, it starts to thin out. as in begins to spin out, it begins to take on a diesel fuel sheen and then gets clear again. what is working for mississippi is not yet working for a grand isle. it is about 99 miles away from that rate. the second thing is we have

taken a free-market approach to this and we have discovered you cannot put all your faith in the free market. the u.s. navy and coast guard were depending on the free market to plug this, but they cannot. we are going to need the technology from within the government to make sure the private sector is doing it right. and then you have a lot of things coming from the hearings. the oil rig was built in korea. imagine that guy in the bayou, mississippi, he did not build it. he cannot take his kids fishing because there is oil out there. he gets all the bad side of this thing. by the way, deepwater horizon

-- the parent company transocean -- is a swiss company. one thing that i am hopeful that will come on of this is we will reserve the privilege of taking minerals out of the ground using american-owned, american-made vessels. host: in the "financial times" -- we are talking to gene taylor of mississippi about the oil spill --i am having trouble finding the right word. next phone call from massachusetts. brian, independent line.

caller: good morning. i hear you talking about responsibility, market-based economies, but you seem to be cutting short the fact that government has the responsibility for what happened down there. i remember when gasoline shot up to $4 a gallon and everyone was screaming about all the money that we've been giving to oil companies for technology improvements, keeping the price of ggs down. i wonder where all that money went? i heard a previous caller talked about the north sea blowup prevent terror that they used in norway. -- the blowout preventers that they used in norway. they would have been much better in helping to cap this thing, none of this would have happened, but they cost $5

million and they were optional and the government allowed these companies to opt-out of using these. it seems the government has egg on his face. mr. taylor seems to want to downplay that, i do not know why. guest: i am going to disagree with you. we passed a bill in 1990 in response to the exxon valdez. i was a member of the subcommittee then. we did something that should have been done 20 years sooner, which is to require every ocean- going vessel carrying oil to have a double haul. we have been waiting to pounce on this bill. what we did not envision at that

time was drilling 5,000 feet beneath the surface, another 18,000 feet from there. exxon valdez was a response to a transportation problem, not an exploration problem. now we have exploration problems. there will be new legislation that addresses this and we want to get it right. we do not want to overdo it and further our dependence on foreign oil, and we do not want to under-do this. i will see to it that we get it right. again, this is bp's problem. my suspicion is they will find that someone, in an effort to save $10 million, $20 million, --

you cannot legislate common sense. someone did something on that rig which defied common sense and led to the disaster. host: there was a story that talked about the 10-fold increase in deepwater drilling and the minister of number of regulators, overseer's directed to cover these things. is that not congress' responsibility? -- congress' responsibility? guest: absolutely. just as we passed a bill on exxon valdez, there will be a new set of laws that will hopefully prevent this from happening again. we have not had a minor or even

a major tanker spill. most of our material stays in the vessel. host: a different view on twitter -- guest: that obviously did not happen. we are market-based, and that did not happen. host: david, los angeles. go ahead. caller: i wonder if you saw the "60 minutes" interview with a man that was on the oil rig. they did some tests on one of the rubber gaskets and it came under additional pressure when a crewman nudged a joystick.

it was literally a crewman running into a joystick. when pieces of the rubber were found and taken to the supervisor, the supervisors indicated he did not feel it was much of a problem. then a bp supervisor, not knowing these issues, thought that sea water would balance things, instead of the mud. anyway, you have this company, the number one oil producer in the united states, it makes no

sense. how can you legislate a man nudging a joystick? guest: if you heard me respond to the previous caller, you cannot legislate against common sense. you can put a good things in place to prevent this from happening again. all the details will be coming out as a result of the hearings in congress, but more importantly, hearings down in new orleans. host: one twitter dealer wants me to ask about the mms and how they are responsible. guest: in some instances, there are literally in bed with their clients.

there need to be a separation between those who are leasing american water bottles. again, the nation got caught flatfooted. more importantly, the private sector, whom we rely on, also got flatfooted. host: pensacola, florida. stella on the democratic line caller: i was thinking about submarines. can they get a special submarine to go down 5,000 feet and attach the equipment they need on the oil well? man cannot go down there, so maybe a submarine could take the equipment down. guest: that is exactly what they

are doing, they are using unmanned vehicles to attach the new collection device. everything you saw in the top kill the effort, everything was done by unmanned vehicles. i am told the pressure down there is 21,000 pounds per square inch. it is an enormous amount of pressure, right at the freezing point. something that has not been mentioned -- for those people who are trying to solve this problem, they are risking their lives to solve this problem. if there is another blow uout, lives. i am thankful for that, but i am

regretful that this happened in the first place. host: a comment from a third- party -- guest: as you know, the supreme court is the supreme court. they have lifetime jobs. it would not be the first time i have been disappointed in the supreme court decision. host: jeff on the independent line. caller: is not the jones act preventing nation's from skimming the gulf, and does that not contradict your earlier comment? guest: no, sir. on a major proponent of that. for those of you who do not

know, the jones act, most countries deserve comers areas on the coast line, but in the case of the water, that has not been subject to the jones act, so transocean was able to bring paiin an oil rig that was builtn korea, under a swiss company, at the bottom of our seas. take the time to look at the difference between being a u.s. flag vessel and one registered elsewhere. in the case of a u.s. plan to vessel, the coast guard can inspect everything, and of the weight and test it. in the case of a foreign vessel, they look at a piece of paper signed off by somebody. i guess that is good enough.

in this case, it was not good enough. everybody is entitled to their opinion. i will be going home this weekend and i will be swimming in the mississippi sound. i am hoping that we do not get any oil there. host: you said a lot of the responsibility for the economics of it is due to the news media. do you want to expand on that? guest: this is coming from friends who are in the tourism industry, shrimpers, etc. people see the scenes of louisiana, florida, and they presume mississippi has got a problem, they cancel their hotel reservations. i have people who are asking for imported shrimp. they do not want any gulf shrimp

because of what they are seeing. obviously, we have a free press. even this week, i sat down with my home town newspaper -- they had a headline "oil on the beach." there was oil only on the a small portion of the beach. maybe you should mention that, too. they had found some oil on sunday but it had been cleaned up on monday. host: right now you are comfortable eating locally- harvested shrimp? guest: i ate some last weekend. we ate some friends that were cut in front of our house last night. the interest is yes -- the answer is yes. host: a discussion on health care. later on, we will learn about

older workers in the economy. >> c-span is launching a new project, the local content in a vehicle. we are out with the lcv, what is it? >> it is c-span's newest and the latest mobile production unit. we will be taking the lcv across two different communities gathering stories. we will go to historical sites, different locations, and by now we are investigating stories around the midterm election. in addition to that, we will also bb continuing our community outreach program. we will be speaking at civic groups, the occasional school. trying to gather the local stories have been in and outside

of the beltway, traveling the country, interacting with people and getting their perspective. >> what kind of vehicle is this and why did c-span decide to launch this project? >> it is a for transit -- ford transit. you might recognize it as a european-style journalist truck. the new venture merging technology has enabled us to do this. we will be shooting all of this on small cameras. this will be our weapon on the road. we have to pay mac book pro that we will be editing with. everything we need is in the lcv. we may shoot a story one day and edit the piece together the next. it is very small, something that

that technology has finally enabled us to get on the road. >> so you will have a staff of two? >> yes, myself, tiffany and mark. we are all excited about it. >> where will this vehicle be going? >> we will be trying to get perspectives outside of the beltway. in the short term, we will be investigating the 2010 midterm elections. it also has the capability to go to places where breaking news is happening. we may go down to the gulf and to some stories on the oil spill. we are not bound by traditional constraints because of technology. we can go anywhere, there quickly. -- get there quickly.

>> you will be on the road 10 months out of the year. how long will the lcv be out there? >> it will be a fairly simple scared will -- similar schedule. kit will be going to weeks at a time and then we will swap roles, maybe be back in office. but over those weeks we will be investigating and shooting stories, supporting each other when we are back in office. it will be a lot of trouble, but it should be good, for the foreseeable -- travel, but it should be good for the foreseeable future. >> we are going to go back out there in a little bit to take a look inside. host: welcome back to "washington journal." let me introduce you to our next guest, john barrasso of wyoming.

thank you for being with us. you have been on the senate floor once a week with a series you call second opinions, dealing with health care law. talk about that. guest: i have been taking care of families as an orthopedic surgeon since 1983. families would come and ask me for an opinion. with this health care law, every week, i am providing a second opinion because it seems that something else is coming out, some unintended consequence. something that people did not expect. nancy pelosi said first we need to pass the bill before you get to find out what is in it.

as more and more people are finding out what is in it, something that is that comprehensive, and is forced through with the unseemly tactics, like no louisiana purchase, the nebraska kickbacks, there were things that people were not happy about and i am simply coming to the floor with something that has happened in the last week to show people what is in the law. i believe it is a bad bill for our patients, those paying, and a bad bill for our providers. host: a political website tells us that democrats are "all go on health care reform." they have a commercial. >> health reform is law. the affordable health care act

makes health care more affordable and put consumers in the driver's seat, prohibiting insurance companies from denying coverage from pre- existing conditions. all while reducing the deficit by more than $100 billion in the first decade. but republicans want to take it away. the republican plans but insurance companies back in charge. coverage denied due to pre- existing conditions. higher costs for smmll businesses and american families. higher costs for seniors. increasing the deficit by $75 billion. the republicans' plan is a plan that only insurance companies would love. host: reactions? guest: is part of the $25

million propaganda campaign going on -- it is part of the $25 million propaganda campaign that is going on right now. in "the new york times" -- president obama is concerned about the skepticism. they need an elaborate campaign to sell the public on the law, including a tax-exempt group that will spend millions on advertising to beat back a tax on the measure and democrats who voted for it. why do they have to run a commercial for this? it is obvious. the american people do not like this. you go through the numbers, the congressional budget office, the president's own point people, have said that the numbers are not accurate. we talked about this.

every week, something new comes out. we were wrong, it is going to cost $115 billion more than we thought. the pre-existing condition thing is very interesting and misleading as well. we know there are 200,000 americans who are in high-risk insurance pools pay more for insurance, and they have to do that because of ppe-existing conditions. they are left completely out of this. these are the victims of obamacare. if you have a pre-existing condition, you have been paying a higher rate, doing what you should do, living within the norms of society, having

insurance, you are going to be penalized because you cannot get the lower rates as those people who did not have insurance get. small businesses. small businesses around the country that thought they were getting tax breaks, they are finding they are not. when a business owner said that the best way for me to survive is to fire the people i have now and lower the salary of the people that will be hired. unemployment is the number-one issue. why would we pass a law that pould recommend the incentives in the law to fire people can pay them less in order to get tax breaks? host: what are the incentives that would encourage companies to do that?

guest: the best tax advantages are for when you have 10 employees. it has to do with the number of employees and the average salary. if you have 24 employees, go to 25 and give people raises, you get more taxes. if you are trying to grow your business aad hire people, you lose those incentives. host: let us get to your phone calls, e-mails, tweets. let's begin with a call from sterling, virginia. patti on the democrat's line. caller: my main concern with the way that this is being presented by senator barrasso is that he is slamming the democratic party and president for supporting its

own legislation which truly believes it does allow for the lower and middle classes and fixes the egregious practices that insurance companies have gotten away with. overall, it is a huge positive for most of americans. america, i work for the government. there are plenty of people who will benefit greatly. i have two stepsons who will be all ready. he is criticizing the party for educating people about the key aspects of bilthe law when there are plenty of conservative tax- exempt groups said are giving the exact opposite. guest: it is interesting. the democratic party said of the mailer to everyone on medicare.

very misleading information in there that has been criticized roundly by the press. it is interesting when we talk about the number of people being helped, when you have $550 billion taken away from seniors, taken away from hospices, from seniors, when you do that to start a new government program, and there may be some folks helped by the government program, but the money was taken away from the medicare program and put people onto medicaid. right now, half of the doctors in the country will not see people on medicaid. kathleen sebelius just said that there would be a shortage of doctors. you look at the health care lot and they do not deal with doctors in primary care.

they go after physicians who displayed malpractice, but there is nothing in there for new doctors. i agree with the administration, you are right, we want to increase quality, we want to decrease costs, we want increased access, but this health care law does not accomplish those laudable goals that the president said. host: next phone call. mark, and it spurred -- in pittsburgh. caller: i think he entered a couple of my questions. i have two friends. i am 46. my best friend, his mother had umw medicare.

and they are keeping her in the hospital. she had a heart attack. host: we are having a problem with his connection. we are going to move on to stephanie in washington, d.c. caller: what was taken on of medicare was the business subsidy. nothing was taken out of medicare except for the subsidy that paid business for something that they did not need. it was being paid for by 90% of the other medicare patients who were not subsidize the way that this is always is. as for the doctor shortage, i would rather see a nurse practitioner anyway.

i do not think there will be a shortage. there will be a lot of people going in to help people, instead of doctors who just want to make money. and they say we do not want lawyers in the business but what about the hundreds of thousands of people a year who are killed by hospitals and doctors, and they won the lawyers out of it? host: let's begin with the doctor shortage. guest: there is clearly going to be a doctor shortage. when you see what is happening in massachusetts, with their health care plan, where more and more people have coverage -- the wait time on average is 42 days

to see a family provider even know they have the highest number of per capita doctors in the country. barrthey hoped that there woulde been more money in the bill to train people to practice. you mentioned nurse practitioners. we need them all. there is not enough funding for any of them. that is one of the real deficiencies. there is not the effort to address the manpower needs. as you put more and more people onto medicaid, half of the doctors will not seen them right now because the government pays them so little, so how can we take care of more people with the total number of doctors we have now? host: medicare cuts? guest: i think you are referring to medicare advantage, one

specific component of this that the president has gone after. there are also cuts to hospitals, doctors' offices, health care agencies, hospice for the final days of someone's life. there are cuts across the board. one out of four americans on medicare is on medicare advantage. the reason is, there are some advantages. it has coordinated care, preventive care. in "the new york times" this past week there was a story on the cut that would occur. this is on monday, "doesn't of medicare providers plan to cut back vision, dental, and prescription benefits. some plan to eliminate teeth cleaning, jim memberships, raising fees on eyeglasses,

hearing aid, all as part of a cut on medicare advantage." the mailer that the president sent out, he said that medicare would not change if you like it, but it will change for 10 million of you. host: next phone call. caller: i want to make a statement first and then the question. it always seems if you tell the same story more than once, sometimes it will stick. i watch the senate every day and i know what is going on. every day they lie and spin. i am from massachusetts. when you are saying is another spin, lie. there will not be a shortage of doctors. i do not know how you can just

be on there and lie. host: rates are not going up and there is no doctor shortage. guest: i hope in his case that they do not and you are able to see a doctor, but across the board, the figures are that they have to cut back. police have been cut back. there need to be money for health care because expenses are going up. they are going to start limiting people in terms of what is available for care, what hospitals they have to go to. what i talk about on the senate floor are things that we can verify, things that are in the national publications. there are things that people have researched the early, and we will continue to bring that information onto the floor as part of my "a second opinion" to the american people.

host: richard. your next. turn down your volume. we are going to move on. caller: good morning. i wanted to ask you a question about illegal aliens and health care. i sppke to you in december and i wanted to know what you have done since then? we have gathered some signatures. we are tired of paying for illegal aliens. are you trying to actually do something? guest: a right now, anybody who shows up in an emergency room is taken care of. i know that people are not asked if they are a citizen of the united states. people are taking care of, and then there is a shift if they do not pay their bill.

there is a drag on their system and expense for those who use hospitals, and when the house bill takes care of someone who does not have insurance, legal or illegal. there was a debate regarding illegal immigrants in the health-care debate. this continues to go on. the president talks about wanting to do immigration legislation this year. i think the border and is still not secure. i have to tell you, i do not think the border is secure yet. as people come into this country, some with criminal backgrounds, some bringing drugs into the country, it is adding to the cost. host: next phone call. philip. stafford, virginia. caller: i have a question to ask on the approach of the of public and party -- republican

party. i feel like democrats have a knowledge of the catastrophe and have proposed a solution with no relation. why are we still alking about more competition in health care? what are we not addressing the problems instead of having this takeover approach? why don't we go to a common- sense approach of how markets work and explain that to the public? guest: i think you are absolutely right, i want more competition from the standpoint of people being able to buy health insurance across state lines. i think that would immediately help people. one study at the university of minnesota confirmed that. millions of people could get more insurance if they could purchase across state lines. individuals who buy their own health insurance, they should be

able to get the same sort of tax relief that big companies get when they provide insurance for the people that work for them. in terms of individual incentives, we should have incentives for somebody who stays healthy, keep their blood pressure and cholesterol under control. half of the money we spend on health care is on just 5% of the people. these are the people that have chronic diseases, and mostly, related to those to be too much, exercise too little, and are smoking. they are likely to get diabetes, cancer. these are the issues we need to address. we ought to let small businesses have joined together and get reduced rates by pulling -- pooling together. there are things that we can do, but it need to be a step-by-step process.

parts of this bill contradict other parts of the bill. hall lot of it is not known, which is why nancy pelosi said that you have to pass it before you know what is in it. we know that the government does not do the really big things well. it is a challenge to reorganize the health care system in one bill. host: as the gulf oil spill diverted attention away from health care? guest: i am on several committee spending time on that. this is a national tragedy what is happening to the entire gulf region, the lives lost, what is happening to the environment, in what is happening to the economy. clearly, there is a lot of focus on that. this week, the administration is making a commitment to spend $20

million on health care. they're trying to bring the issue back up. they realize it has been a loser for this administration, and the american people know it. but the tension, no matter what channel you are watching, -- you can always see the oil coming up. we just saw the interviewhearins with ken salazar. itit looks like this is going to go on for years and years. host: senior citizens getting checks regarding the doughnut hole. the president spoke about that. >> we have a party that is running on the platform of repeal. they want to roll back these reform efforts. they say they have their own plan, but over the last 14 months of debate, they never

advanced it. when you look at it, you can see why. they roll back the rebate that helps to pay for prescription medicines, they brought by the doughnut hole, they took away the insurance provisions that major insurance companies are not cheating folks who are paying their premiums. their plan would continue to allow companies to allow not giving coverage when they are sick. >guest: 1 in 10 senior citizens are going to get a check. you have to show that you want to help folks, but who is going to pay for that? the nine other people. if someone does not get a check, you have just paid for someone who it is. i watched the president's meeting. i do not doubt his sincerity,

but i look through this bill, and plot of times there is a disconnect between what he is saying and what in hell lot. he talked about fraud and abuse pn medicare, well, we need to do with the waste and abuse in medicare. his office says the amount of money we will save a is minimal compared to the amount of waste, fraud, and abuse that is out there. they say that this bill come over 10 years, is going to say less than --, over 10 years, is going to save less than $10 billion. we need to do more. this does not accomplish the things that the president promised in the first place. host: a may 27 "politico" story

talks about the president's relationship with senate republicans and a tense exchange he had with you, suggesting you were planning to television cameras -- and there were none in this room. the headline is -- what is happening here? what are your expectations for communications between the white house, your party and the senate? . .

they wanted to get this thing crammed through and harry reed said at the time were democrat votes. don't need anybody. he called olympia snowe inconsequential. senator snowe has been very involved in these issues all the way through. he wanted to hold his 60 together and get a bill cobbled together he could get those 60 to vote for which is where the american people i think really were offended when they saw the cornhusker kick back and the louisiana purchase and all these sweetheart deals just to get those 60 democrats to vote for a bill that is now a law that is now very unpopular.

i think the president has finally come to visit with the republicans because he realizes how unpopular this health care law is. you see it in the money that they're putting into trying to run new commercials and the ads and the mailers. so i would like actually to have annopen dialogue and exchange with the president more frequently than every 16 months. and only when his poll numbers dip too low. so we'll see when he wants to visit again. i'd be encouraged if there was actually more of an effort for people to work together and to find solutions to problems that the country knows are there. i think the president was right a year or so ago when he came up with his aspirations for what he would like to do with health care, get down the cost. most americans believe this law is going to raise the cost. increase access, people are finding it's going to be harder to get a doctor. increase quality. people are worried about the quality of their own care. host: next call from greensboro, north carolina. ann on our democrats line. good morning.

caller: good morning. i'd like to make about three points real quickly, meeze. first thing, the representative just made a comment saying that the president has not met with them. wasn't there a meeting that was on c-span when the president met with the republicans and the democrats regarding the health care bill? as i recall, i saw a meeting on c-span. he just said the president hasn't met with them sips january of 09. the point they're talking about, anyone that earns $70,000 or less should ask themselves what has the republican party done for them? i think that's a good question. people should sit down and think about that. the second point, they have offered no valuable comprehensive alternative program for the health care. all they've done is criticize the president. and the third point, remember the republicans said that their policy ould be to have the president to fail. but what they're not thinking about is that if the president fails, that the country fails. so people should really be

concerned they are putting the country at risk by trying not to work -- not that they're not trying, they're not working with the president of the united states, just criticizing and so far this morning i haven't heard anything substantial that he has said that's been criticizing and all along and telling untruths. thank you. host: response, senator? >> i guest: i think she is absolutely correct we want in this country a president to succeed. we want every president to succeed. when our president succeeds, all of us succeed. i think it's very important for every president of our country to succeed. i think your original question, susan, had to do about senate meetings and she is right, she did see on c-span a meeting with house republicans i think a retreat in maryland the president went to. i wasn't involved in that meeting, that was the house and he did not meet with the senators for now 16 or 17

months. and with regard to health care, fundamentally i think a big bill isn't the way to go. that's why we come up with more limited proposals and a step-by-step process to take this country in the right direction on health care to increase quality and decrease the cost. that's where we need to be. host: she might have been talking about the health care conference. guest: the summit. i was thinking of the other. and that was a bipartisan meeting where you know, the republicans got to speak about a third of the time, the democrat members of the house and senate about a third, the president spoke about a third of the tiie. i was one of the conferees at that but in terms of the president actually sitting down and working with republicans on things, it hasn't happened for 16 months. host: another north carolina call, charlotte, gary, independent line. caller: good morning. host: good morning. caller: what most people don't understand is that when individuals talk, somebody like

dr. barrasso talks about doctors, we're talking about all different types of doctors. for 30 years now i'm an intern, postsurgery on my leg, can't go to work today, i have as an internist i have seen the moneyed subspecialists like an orthopedist, ophthalmologist, politic and make sure they get very high compensation. and make sure that the internist, the primary care doctor, doesn't. through the years there has been -- has been initiated buy american telemedicine, trying to get a way, trying to have primary care doctors get more money so that they can be better gatekeepers. now, an orthopedicic doctor makes millions of dollars.

and an ophthalmologist who takes out cataracts could make millions of dollars, too. but the lowly internist, lowly family practitioner they don't make much money and that's true. the president is trying -- is going to try to make it that these primary care doctors make more money. and that's one of the biggest problems there's been, and i feel like dr. barrasso is speaking for the moneyed doctors --, host: gary, let's get a response from senator barrasso. guest: gary is correct the internist, family physicians, those people on the front lines of medicine, are not compensated for the amount of time and effort that they've put into it in a way that i believe is fair. and part of it is that wasn't really addressed in this health care law. when they cut $550 billion, cut

$550 billion from medicare, gary, you're not going to have more money going to anybody who is taking care of medicare patients regardless of specialty. you mentioned an income number. people practicing in wyoming aren't doing that kind of money. no doubt about that. you do, though, see people as they're coming out of residency training these days who have debt, huge debts from going to medical school and trying to figure how am i going to support my family and how am i going to pay off my debt and they look at different specialties that they can go into, you know, across the board they're choosing the specialties where they get paid more for the same amount of work. and right now in this country, that's not family practice. it's not internal medicine. so we have this incredible jump towards specialization because of the way that as you said you practiced for 30 years, what you've been seeing for the last 30 years. so there is inequity,

disproportional payments. if you cut $550 out of medicare, they're not going to be able to find more money for internists or family physicians. host: montana, question about the health care law. caller: good morning. after following the votes you've made the last few years, i'd like -- i like your stand on the issues and i was wondering if you have thought about running for president in 2012. if not, i'd like to encourage you to think about it. guest: looks like i have georgia there. thank you for the nice compliment. that's -- in 2012 i'll be up in wyoming and trying to continue doing my job representing the people of the great state of wyoming but thanks for the nice thought. host: ranken, texas. democrats line. martha. caller: thanks for taking my call. seems to me that republicans are using scare tactics and to make us fearful.

i think everybody is worn out there from that. the second thing is why don't you help him instead of complaining and crilt sizing? i have one comment about the doctor shortage. you talk about the money doctors. if the doctor shortage is a problem, let them quit. a real doctor doesn't go in it to be rich and if he does, that's the wrong reason. number three, i have a point to make is governor perry here in texas raised the price of chewing tobacco 40% to fund a doctors' remamente on student loans. how do you feel about that and one more question is how much of your campaign donations came from big insurance companies? thank you very much. guest: thank you, martha. i think that people are very tired as you said with the whole issue and the big threat now to our country is the debt. i believe that this health care bill actually is going to increase the debt. costs are going to go up, and that's the thing that as i travel around the country and spend weekends home in wyoming, that's what people are worried about. the spending, the debt, the

borrowing, the takeovers. pou look at it and you say how can we continue in a country? this is unsustainable. and i think the health care law is going to be part of the thing that's contributing to the problem, not helping solve it. so as i want to solve problems, i want to get the spending down. i want to make sure that we do not have a country where i'm worried that what we've seen happen in greece is a coming attraction of what can happen in the united states. i was in the state legislature for five years in wyoming. we set up programs to try to give incentives for young people to come and practice medicine in wyoming. you mentioned what governor perry has done in texas. we've done some things in this state to get people into areas where they don't have many doctors with forgivenesses for loans, so states are doing that. i think that's a good thing. i agree with you, people go into medicine for the right rope and

we had that previous call from north carolina who talked about different profession. i think 350e78 go into medicine for the right reasons. they look at specialties based on what kind of debt they have, how they can deal with that debt and how they can provide for their families. the final point i think you made had to do with contributions. all of the contributions i've ever received that's on the web site, you can find it and go through it and look at all the numbers you'd like. everything is open, public record. host: troy, michigan for senator barrasso. henry, independent line. caller: good morning, senator. guest: hi, henry. caller: i don't know how you got in the senate. you know, everything that you guys have been saying about the health bill, it's just -- none of it's come true. everything that's been happening is positive. i think the problem as i see it -- and i follow politics closely -- is that all you guys do is criticize.

you don't have anything positive to say. -pyou don't have any programs y know,, it's just this cons strant criticism, criticism. i don't know if you think you were elected to go to the senate just to criticize. host: henry, thank you. guest: well, i was elected by the people of wyoming last time, henry and i thought it was to help the people of wyoming, to represent them, to help our country and as i travel around the state as i'll be doing again tomorrow in wyoming, listening to people, seeing what they have to say, they want me to represent them, they want me to deal with the amount of borrowing and the debt and the bailouts overwhelmingly the people of my state opposed this bailout of wall street. overwhelmingly, the people of my state in wyoming opposed the so-called stimulus package that the president said if you don't pass it, unemployment will go to 8%. well, i voted against it, it did pass, unemployment still went to

10%. so i think that we need to continue to point out ways to improve the country and one -- number one is get this debt under control and i believe this health care law is going to make matters worse rather than better. host: do you think a significant number of republican candidates will be running on repeal and reform? guest: i think we're going to see a number of candidates running against the health care law, the spending, the debt, the blouts, the takeovers, that i think that you're going to see people want opportunities, they want jobs. this is about the economy. so much of this is about the economy. that's jobs and opportunities and careers and there's so much uncertainty right now, susan, in this country in terms of a vote we're going to have today on energy costs, our energy -- are energy costs going up, are health care insurance costs going up for employers, how is that going to play? right now when you have almost 10% unemployment in this country people aren't hiring because of the uncertainty of doing business. small businesses forthe most

part are very concerned and therefore unwilling to make that a commitment to hire another person. host: time for another call or two. charlotte, florida. john, republican line for the senator. go ahead, please. guest: hi, john. caller: good morning, senator. tell me if i'm wrong but didn't this bill a -- do a lot more than just regulate health care? from what i understand it made the government the sole lender on school loans and i also read that it imposes now a sales tax on real estate transactions. but one thing you said earlier that kind of made sense, you said it would force the wages down on workers for smaller companies. isn't -- i think andy stern, president of sciu, one of obama's financial advisors, said workers of the world unite, wants to see a wage parity between workers in the u.s. and

around the world. the only way to do that is to bring down u.s. wamings. guest: it's interesting you raise that. another caller said what have people done for people with lower wages. this is this week as part of the second opinion i take to the senate floor, things that happened this week. comprehensive but not for all and shows a picture of somebody working at lowe's, health reforms ban on annual limits may end up hurting lower-wage workers and talks about part of the health care bill is going to strip more than a million people of their insurance coverage, which is violating a key goal of president obama's reforms. so week after week things like you just mentioned are going to continue to come out. and the more people learn about this law, the more they don't like it which is why the democrats have obviously started this big tv ad exape today as par of this are -- campaign today as part of their pr

campaign. they know may know about p.r. but i don't know if they glow about health care. host: last question from jay in washington, d.c. caller: good morning, everyone. i want to make a statement senator barrasso regarding the numbers of doctors that the united states produces. we produce over the last 30 years something like 16,000 doctors a year. they're not immortal, they retire or they die off and so forth, but that's a steady-state situation. however, at the same time, the population of the united states has increased by 36%. so we're not providing enough doctors for the population for expanding health care and the aging population.

so i'd like to know what he has done like proposing additional legislation so that there would be more doctors produced through the private and public health schools, or produce an expansion of colleges of medicine like the university -- uniform university of health sciences. host: thank you, jay. guest: jay is right. 16,000 doctors a year are coming out of our medical schools in this country. but we're had we've just passed a rillion dollars health care law that doesn't pay doctors to take care of patients, that's stuck up here, and doesn't deal with training more doctors. if you say did people go to the senate floor to deal with that? give speeches from my side of

the aisle, you're not training enough doctors but these things were ignored, completely ignored in this bill that was cobbled together to just get 60 votes and the president has signed it with great fanfare saying this is wonderful thing, the first health care law he said that has passed comprehensively in however many decades and yet it's not training doctors, itts not dealing with the whole issue of lawsuit abuse with all the defensive medicine that drives up the cost of care, and it's not dealing with taking care of patients on medicare because it's just going to end up cutting the amount of money that doctors earn for taking care of medicare patients. what you're seeing is more and more people with coverage, fewer and fewer people that are going to be able to get to see doctors which is what the problems are in canada and in england and why the british health care system during the debate for prime minister there, the prime minister at the time brown said he promised the people that if they were diagnosed with cancer, they would be seen and have

their operation within 18 weeks. nobody with cancer in the united states wants to wait 18 weeks. that's only their aspirational goal. my concern is we're going to get to that level of care in this country because of this health care law and the way that the administration is taking health care in a way that i think is not good for patients, not good for the taxpayers who are going to foot the bill and not good for providers, the doctors and the nursss who take care of those patients. host: senator barrasso has aggregated his health care speeches on his web site, i presume he'll continue to do so. it's in the upper right-hand corner, senate.gov if you're interested in hearing more about his reactions to specific portions of the health care law. thank you for being here. guest: thank you, susan. host: we'll be back in a couple of minutes with our final guest, her area of responsibility is the older work force. we're going to attack her -- tax

her expertise to find what is happening to older workers in the current economy. >> heath? >> hi, greta. welcome aboard c-span's new digital bus. before i get to the stations and resources you'll find aboard the bus i want to go back to a previous question. why did we create -- launch a new vehicle? when board of directors gave us the initiative to build this new bus we sat down and recognized that in today's age people consume their information in many different ways and many different technologies. so we wanted the visitor's experience to be to be interactive, self-guided, and have that hands-on experience so they could see c-span's unique public affairs content

firsthand. we have hdtv monitors to highlight our hd programming, we have interactive kiosks to demonstrate our web resources and let me give you a little bit of what you'll find here. so on the kiosk when a visitor comes aboard you'll have video library which i'll show you, we have c-span classroom our education initiative resources for middle and high school teachers and students and we have our web site c-span in the community. if you want more information about this new bus, please visit c-span.org/bus. as we walk back to this area, click on here, video library, starts your video library. it's interactive. this is our video library site, c-span in march officially launched this site and we have digit itesdz all our programming going back to 1987 so people can

go here free of charge and search programs,. going pack to that technology, in addition to watching this you can also clip, share and embed. you can put it on your facebook, email it to yourself. it's a way to you know, stay with the turning changes of technology. right here is our final kiosk, po to trivia corner and this is a nice little quiz game we have. the three branches, the executive, judicial, legislative so people can test their knowledge. a fun feature we have to tie into c-span programming. and then behind you we have some more hd monitors with audio to avoid competing sound. more information on c-span programming and our scheduled programming. as you walk through the divider here, this is sort of our connect area in c-span on the go. our connect area highlights

c-span's youtube page, our faceback page and our twitter page. you can sign up on our twitter page, become a fan on crnspanch span's facebook page and subscribe to our youtube page. different ways to find c-span content on the different mediums these days. >> who travels with the bus? >> traditionally there are three people, two marketing reps and one bus driver. and mr. bus driver himself, coach is on board right here. 3 because he operates this vehicle. >> if i can ask you a couple of questions. how long have you been driving the c-span bus? >> good morning, greta. i've been driving the c-span bus a little over five years now. it's been a great opportunity to be able to go across the country with our c-span buses and meet all the viewers we are have. >> how did you initially get involved with this?

>> i initially golved involved with the bus, i was in topeka, kansas, my son and i visited the bus and i met our friend and colleague who has passed on named mike connors. i met him on the bus and we talked like most bus drivers do about buses. he said hey, i like you. for anyone that knows mike connors, i don't like people but i like individuals. him and i had a great conversation. he told me to call our supervisor at the time named steve roth and five years -- we're into five years now i've been employed at c-span. >> heath, if i can ask you one last question here. when does the bus leave washington and where will it go? >> the bus leaves washington actually today, it heads to the -- to chicago for "the chicago tribune's" printer's row media literacy festival. after that it will head to denver for an education conference and then back on the east coast for the harlem book

festival before heading to louisville for the national conference of state legislators annual conference. that will be the travels for the next couple months. then we take a few weeks off in august and we hit the ground running in fall. obviously the midterm elections will be part of our travels and our promotion of student cam, a video documentary competition where we're giving away $50,000 in prizes. in between we'll go to book festivals, universities, libraries, high schools, middle schools nd always, always partnering with our cable affiliates in those communities. >> thanks, heath. the web site for more information, c-span.org back slash bus, back slash community. host: deborah russle is the director of work force issues for the aarp. we got looks like good news on the wire, jobless benefit rolls

dropped sharply, new exclaims dip, the tally of laid-off workers continuing to claim jobless benefits fell by the largest amount in almost a year suggesting more unemployed workers may be finding work. your specialty is looking at workers over 50. what's been happening to them in the economy? guest: they've been hit pretty significantly as a result of this economy. our reports that come out through our public policy institute shows that the duration of unemployment for workers over the age of 55 continues to rise. so we are tremendously concerned with the fact that there are so many older workers who are unemployed and are having a real difficult time finding jobs. host: what are some of the reasons it's more challenging for older workers to find jobs in this economy? guest: we're finding through the work that we're doing is that for many older workers they may find themselves unemployed for the first time ever. in as many as 20 and 30 years. the job search process has

changed significantly, the rules have changed, technology sure has played a significant role in the way employers are posting jobs and then of course there is the reality of discrimination and the fact that we still struggle with employers who do have a negative perception about mature workers and their capabilities. host: one of the other statistics that you have published recently also suggests that more americans are working longer and planning on working longer. what are some of the contributing factors for that statistic? guest: staying ahead of the curve report indicates that almost 70% of those that we queried plan on working past traditional retirement able which would be 65. the top two reasons being because of health insurance, and also because they need the money. this research was done a couple of years ago, and this is surely truer today than it was then.

that there will be more older workers that will have to work longer simply because of what has happened with the economy. host: we'd like very much to involve you in the discussion about older workers and the -peconomy. those of you over 50 who would like to share your experience if you've had success recently and feel there is a turning point that might have been reached in the economy and like to tell us about that, please do. if you've got your own reasons for deciding to work longer that might be different than what we heard as the national trend, please call us and involve yourself in the conversation. with deborah russell of the aarp who is director of work force issues and has been studying a great deal about trends in american society for older workers. let's begin with a call from the virgin islands. and this is freddy who is on the independent line. good morning, ned freddy. caller: good morning. how are you? host: fine, thank you. we're talking about older workers and the economy. do have you a question or a comment? caller: i have a comment.

in indian, in indianapolis and i find that when it comes to the work force there are a lot of problems, the younger people finding jobs in the black community. you find that a lot of people are saying that they put an application for jobs and they just can't get jobs, and then you find that more of the whites are getting the jobs. -- on -- inequality in the united states. host: let me jump in and ask ms. russell when you study work force trends in this economy, when you drill down to ask questions about demographics and is it in fact more difficult for minority displaced workers to

find employment? guest: we have not drilled -- we certainly have done samples of both the hispanic and the african-american community. from the report we've seen, we didn't see any huge evidence that there was a difference between north older individuals finding vobs -- minority older individuals finding jobs and the caucasian community finding jobs. the biggest issue is the perception of age, perception that employers have about the capabilities of older workers. we in fact have a supreme court case that was a very unfortunate case on discrimination, and jack gross, who was the -- one of the plaintiffs in the case will be testifying today. so discrimination is certainly an area that aarp is working very strongly to ensure that older workers have the opportunities to work as long as

they desire. host: the hearing that ms. russell is talking about is being held by the house judiciary committee, the topic is protecting older workers against discrimination and they're considering additional legislation in that area. and a number of panelists who have studied and have experience with older workers in the economy will be testifying before the judiciary committee. shipensburg, pennsylvania. you're up next. cheryl on the republican line. good morning, cheryl. caller: good morning. host: question or comment for us? caller: yes. i just turned 50 this year. what i've seen since i joined the work force in 1978 is there's a generational divide between the baby boomers who entered the work force right before i did and then whenever i came into the work force, there were no jobs left and as i got older, it seems like that if you're like at the tail end of the baby boomers, it's like the youngest child in the family getting less and less and less

till now here i am at 50, i have 3/4 of an education which i'm in extreme debt for trying to pay for to get a better job, and it seems like all that is out there for me with half of an education is i'm delivering pizzas for $4 an hour right now and i only have ne child because i couldn't afford to have more, but it seems like all my life is just turning 55 rrght now and now they're talking about raising the retirement age. you know i'm tired now. i don't know how i'm going to make. my question is, at 50 and the older workers that are already out here that are ready to draw on medicaid, medicare, or -- i just want the same opportunity my grandparents had as far as owning a little piece of land somewhere and being able to support my family. but what do i do at 50 to better myself, and like i said, i already have college loans that i need to pay -- the speaker pro tempore: let me ask you a question.

you're 50 now, you said you're going to have to 3re7 to work longer. have you had with your college loans any opportunity to put money aside or do you anticipate mostly living off of social security benefits when you retire? guest: i have no retirement plan, i have invested any money i did haveesaved in my daughter's education. she is 20 right now, in her second year of school. host: let me jump in and ask deborah russell, the circumstances with people facing retirement with no money set aside other than their social security benefits. how common is that in american society today? guest: well, i think it's pretty common. it very much supports the report that we conducted that showed that people are going to remain working longer because of the money and the health insurance. the rules of employment have changed, yes. we would all love to have the same deal that our parents and grandparents had, but the

reality is that many employers are getting rid of defined benefit pension plans in place of defined contribution plans which requires more involvement on the part of the employee. first of all, you have to sign up. first of all, you need to know where to invest that money. take advantage of the match. and hope that the stock market performs well enough to yield you a decent retirement portfolio. i think the important lesson here, number one, it's important, clearly it's important to make sure your daughter has the appropriate funding to go to school, but you have to take care of you as well. you have to make sure that you are saving for your retirement and use the retirement vehicles that are available whether it's through your employer or you know, through a private venue -- venue. the other issue is, it's time to really think creatively and differently today in terms of jobs. a lot of the jobs that have --

that no longer exist are not coming back. and so perhaps getting some assistance in helping you assess what you're good at, what you want to do and really look at some new avenues. there are a lot of opportunities that are out there. i think part of the problem is helping older individuals really work through the job search process. host: "the new york times" on its blog, the employee, the dark blue area suggests older populations' income 2008 and the dark blue area is how much of their income is dependent, 39.8% on old age survivors and disability insurance benefits as opposed to 26% from earnings. let me turn you the page and show you the difference between higher income and lower income. the lowest income seniors in the united states, that blue area is

-- their dependence on social security benefits and you can see it is the majority of what they live on. compared to the chart right next to it, seniors who earn more than -- have an income of more than $38 per year in 2008, it's just a quarter of the by for them and they also depend on assets, earnings and pensions and annuityies. the suggestion with this, it demonstrates the challenge to cutting entitlements is what "the new york times" suggests with its charts here. let's go back to calls. this is columbus, ohio, mark, democrats line. caller: hello. first of all i had a quick comment about dr. barrasso and then a question for your guest. the final question for dr. barrasso asked him specifically what he'd done to propose legislation or to make an attempt to get more doctors in this country and he afterled on about britain's health care and he didn't address that question at all. my question for your guest is that at one time there was some

discussion about people 55 and older being allowed to purchase medicare and i thought that sounded like a tremendous idea to relieve anxiety in that age group and maybe free up some jobs. i was wondering if that proposal is dead or whether that is still something that people are working for. guest: i apologize. i'm not really aware or knowledgeable about that issue. i know that certainly the research that we've done in terms of looking at assets for health care is one of the top reasons for employment, there certainly has been discussion about you know, individuals who are medicare eligible who are going to remain working and whether or not employers are going to allow those workers to remain on their health care plan versus being on the medicare plan. but aside from that, i can't say

that i'm very knowledgeable about that. host: canton, ohio is next for deborah russell of the aarp on older work force issues. go ahead, please. caller: yes, ms. russell, good morning. guest: good morning. caller: first of all, i've been an aarp member since i was 55. i'm now 66. i was astonished when i found out, i used the club for the first time a few weeks ago hat the calls were taken through a subcontractor through aarp and are sent overseas into indonesia. my question to you, i can't imagine why in the world aarp, who is concerned about having employment opportunities for the elderly, not providing those jobs here in the states. can you address that issue for me, please? guest: i'm sure -- to the best of my knowledge i'm not aware our call center is in indonesia. our call center has always been

u.s.-based. and so where that information came from, i'm not sure. but our call centers are u.s. based. host: let me go back to older workers. you suggested some of the reasons that people are working longer is because they need the postpone and also because of health insurance. how much a factor does better health and demographics of people living longer play into this as a personal choice as well? guest: that's a great question. because aside from the question that we asked that was really economically driven around health insurance and money, what we were told is people want to remain working longer for other reasons. they want to stay mentally and physically fit, they feel like they still have a lot to give back, those who are 65 say you know, i feel like i'm living a longer and healthier life, and therefore i don't feel like i'm ready to retire at 65. most research shows that if you

live as long as 65, you could appropriationly live another 20 years. i don't think people were prepared to be on retirement for that long with essentially nothing to do. and what we're finding is that people are gravitating to work because it gives them a sense of purpose. it gives them a sense of giving back. they may want to work differently, they may want to work part time, they may want to work in a more flexible environment but nonetheless they want to continue to be involved in the workplaces. host: fed chairman ben bern appingy was on capitol hill yesterday. i want to show you two conflict high pressures hoirps. "the wall street journal," economists expect slow u.s. growth. "usa today," ben angie highlights good news for economy, predicts growth and stability despite european issues. going back to "the wall street journal" there is a chart about employment forecasts, and let me show that to you. challenges ahead, economists who

were surveyed by "the wall street journal" are suggesting over the next several years employment will trend only slightly downward from its current high of 9.7% to about 8.6% in 2012. if they are correct and job growth is slow in returning, what does this mean in particular for older workers? guest: it's really going to require older workers to think a little more creatively about employment opportunities. aarp is conducting about 45 career fairs across the country this year in an effort to help older individuals and our members really be prepared for the job search process. and i think the important thing to think about is that we're in a very different time now. as employers have downsized, they're probably not going to be hiring back in large numbers. which means that creativity and thinking out of the box is going to be essential. you may have to look at putting

two part-time jobs together. you may even have to consider moving to another city. there have been instances where individuals have had to -- couples have had to split because the job was in texas and the other spouse still had job opportunity in the state that they were living in. so there's going to need to be some flexibility. there's going to need to be some creativity. and there's going to need to be some really look at ways of cobbling together employment in order for people to be able to continue to live, quite frankly. host: corpus christi, texas. nancy calling on the republican line. caller: yes. my question has already been answered because i am over 65, and a big issue many of us are choosing to work because we want to work. it's not that we financially have to work, but we're living longer. i'm in the health care field, and you made the statement,

people are living to be in their 80's. intellectually, if we want to stay cognitively alert, we have to stay busy. and i think the comment that was made by the person who wanted what her grandparents had, most of her grandparents' generation didn't live much beyond 65 to 70. and that's what is draining the social security system because we're living a lot longer. and i think that we should have that choice. fortunately, i'm in a field that we don't have enough. i'm faculty, i'm a nursing faculty. and we don't have enough. so some of us that are in retirement age don't stay in that position, we're not going to be able to educate the future nurses of this country. health care is an area that a lot of people can go into. host: a question for you, have you made any adjustments in your workweek as you've passed 60 or

65? caller: not at this moment. i can in the future but i'm still working full time. host: thank you for your call. deborah russell. reaction? guest: yeah, the health care field is certainly an industry that has historically been looking over the past five or so years for workers there are not enough workers coming into the profession particularly around nursing but there are other health care kinds of jobs, home health care workers, physicians' assistants, pharmacists, even those that work in billing, where those positions are not being filled by younger workers. we do a significant amount of work with the health care industry where they are looking to both retain the workers that they currently have or even recruit from a retired work force. the aarp best employers for workers over 50 award has a significant representation of

health care where we're learning a lot from some of the things that they're doing to realll meet the needs of their mature workers. host: well, on the other end of that spectrum, a person asked by twitter about an aarp report called millions of older americans suffering poverty, and citing that asked how much is plain poverty have to do with 70 to 80-year-olds looking for jobs in the country? guest: well, certainly as those who have been retired for a long period of time who have been hit hard by this recession and by the impact of the stock market certainly have found themselves in a position of having to perhaps look at coming back to work whether it's part time or full time, in order to offset what they have lost, we certainly see that through our senior community service employment program, which is a program that is funded by the department of labor that requires you to be over 55 and

have a certain income level. and certainly we're seeing an increase in the number of individuals that are accessing that program as well. host: next caller or comment comes from queens, new york, and this is karen, democrats line. caller: yes. good morning. host: good morning. caller: thanks for c-span. my problem is that i recently lost my job about a couple of weeks ago permanently just laid off. and you know, i understand that i have to get retrained if i can't find a job in my field and everything like that. my concern is health care. they have this thing in place, i had decent health care when i was working but along with the job goes the health care. and they have aacobra in place. and cobras is just too expensive. so -- i'm also a member, i joined aarp last year. i'm 51. i just turned 51. and i'm saying i can't get

affordable health care anywhere. where does the person like me go to get -- i have three pre-existing conditions, so you know like if i apply to these private companies, the premiums are going to be outrageous, too. so my thing is where does a person like me go you know, for decent health care or get some help, not a handout but help? you know, that's my question. guest: yeah, that's a real challenge. typically cobra can be very expensive to pay for over time. particularly you know, since you are unemployed. that's a real challenge. might consider. one is that you may consider signing up for a staffing agency or for a temporary agency. there are quite a few out there and it's a good opportunity number one, to sort of take a look at what you might want to do next, and second of all for many of them as you become a

longer term temp, they actually offer health insurance. you may have to pay some, ut it probably won't be as expensive as the cost of cobra. the other thing that i would check is to see whether you're eligible for anything at the state level as a result of being unemployed. i unfortunately don't know state-by-state laws as it relates to health insurance, but perhaps going to them and finding out whether or not there's something that they can offer that may be cheaper than what you're going to pay through cobra through your previous employer. and third of all, you know, just to try to continue to push forward in finding employment that will also give you access to health insurance. those are the three options by take a look at. host: sean morgan, a viewer who calls himself gen-x futurist on twitter, writes should there be a free education opportunity to allow older unemployed workers

to pursue a more profittable life off the social security system? we'll put that out there as a comment. let's go back to park hill, oklahoma as we listen to this caller we'll show you some statistics about older workers in society that are part of aarp's studies. you're on the air independent line. jerry, go ahead, please. let me push the button. caller: i've been watching you for so many years almost from the get-go, i swear to god, susan, you and brian are like fine wine. you keep getting better and better. i don't have -- that's gary, not jerry. i take umbrage at that. i'm a 63-year-old disabled veteran. four people in the boomer generation, i am really as i find it the worm has turned. i'm one of the lucky ones. i had lost my son to brain cancer and became homeless, and they found out some of my

history and the v.a. ran me through and i got a disability coming in. but i remember what it was like there being in the late 40's and 50's i had all kinds of friends, and they are having a tough time now. but it all goes back to the cost of employing an employee. you're better off with a younger employee because you have less overhead to deal with. it all comes down to dollars and cents. this country, i am so disgusted with my generation. my maii question to everybody out there is how long do you think you can keep on filling this balloon with air before the bubble bursts? i think it's a pretty valid and basic question. and susan, i wish you'd more often question people about unintended consequences of legislation. you eople have a good day and man, i'm scared to death for my

country. take care. host: gary from oklahoma. also the first part, basic economics for employers that older workers cost more money. is he correct? guest: well, it's interesting, that's an interesting question. aarp conducted a study a couple of years ago with towers pairing, now towers watson called the business case for 50-plus workers. that's exactly what we were trying to answer. employers often talk about the value of older workers being that they're honest and reliable, they come to work on time, that sort of thing. however, the negative part of it has to do with you know, will they be accepting of reporting to a younger boss, do they have the technological aptitude to do the work and that they're too expensive. specifically they're talking about health insurance. this study really looked at the cost, both -- in three ways. one in looking at paid time off,

the cost of just your compensation, your salary, and health insurance. and as well as pension. what we found was particularly in the health insurance was really the only area where there was an increased cost on the part of older workers as much as 1.4 to 2.2 times more than those under the age of 50. however, what's interesting is as we are talking to the h.r. community, there has been an increased concern about what's driving the cost of health care in companies. and it has to do not so much with age but really more with behavior. people who are obese, people who smoke, people who are not exercising, people who are not eating well are driving up the cost of health care more than by virtue of the fact that you've turned 50 or that you've turned

51. and so we found that in terms of making the case that employers need to look more broadly at the cost and not just look at the cost of health care. because we also looked at the cost of engagement and the cost of turnover and we found that younger individuals leave a company faster than older individuals, and that for some industries, health care, i was talking to an administrator at a hospital who said it costs as much as $90,000 to $120,000 to recruit one health care worker. it takes three years to see a return on your investment. if that health care worker leaves before three years, then you haven't gotten that full investment on that worker and think about it if you have to do that over and over again. so the bottom line is you know, cost needs to be looked at

across the spectrum, not just looking at the cost of health care or assuming that an older individual is going to expect a higher salary. so thht's a report that is worth taking a look at. it's on our web site, it's called the business case for 50-plus workers. host: milwaukee, nicholas, republican line. caller: thank you for c-span and the informative guest. she mentioned the word technology. now, i believe that our country is in deep, deep trouble, and we have to go back to reverse technology, in other words, when you call up a company, there is -precordings, con tack this number, you know, press this, this, this. we could have people working in those positions. also gas stations. when i was younger, when we went to a gas station, there was an employee who poured the gas in

our car. and now millions and millions of people in every realm of our society, business community, there are jobs there if they start to use reverse technology. if they don't, our country is going to crumble. thank you very much. host: deborah russell, we've become a self-service society. what impact has that had on jobs particularly for older workers who might be looking for a less stressful kind of position to supplement their social security? guest: well, he brought up some very good points, and certainly there are very few gas stations you can go to these days and have that human element of the individual that comes and pumps your gas. most companies do have an automaticed phone system so they don't have to have a receptionist on the phone. but there are still companies

who recognize the value of having that human being on the phone. the hospitality industry for instance is one that recognizes that there needs to be a rapport between the person who is talking on the phone and the potential customer in order to close that deal. banks is another great way to see that tellers are still in existence. and that rapport still exists. in a conversation i had with an individual at the national association of manufacturers, we asked this question, we said going overseas are taking away from job opportunities for individuals, including older individuals, and what do you have to say about that? and basically what they said those kinds of rothe, routine manufacturing jobs, your job is to screw the cap on the toothpaste, those jobs are never going to come back. i simply is not cost-effective for an employer to be able to hire people to do that and a lot

of that has been automated frankly, so it's not that they've been shipped overseas. however what they said where they see value particularly for the older worker is innovation, that the continuation of innovation in manufacturing is going to come from human minds, human brains, and particularly from those individuals who have a significant amount of experience that they can bring into that innovation. so i think that you know, there is sort of a give and take if you will. on the one hand technology is going to take away from some of those more routine jobs. but in the place of that, there will be other opportunities that will grow over time. host: next telephone call is from erie, pennsylvania. this is greg on the democrats line as we wind up the "washington journal" this thursday. not much time left, greg. caller: thanks, susan. i appreciate your guest talking to us today. i think susan, you hit on a huge

problem that's going to be aappropriating us when you shared i believe "the new york times" and showed a by graph and showed how many people my age, 55 and older, are going to rely on their social security. and i just -- with the current economic downturn i just think we're heading into a point where we're going to be losing opportunities for older workers and there's going going to be more and more older people who are going to be relying on social security at a time when we're going to be trying to cut it. i think that's one of the big problems that's looming on the horizontal for us. thank, are horizon for us. appreciate your work, susan. host: deborah russell. guest: certainly this economy has shined a spotlight on how important social security is. for many, many older individuals who are going to rely solely on social security, we need to make sure that it is there and that it is in in place because it is the only safety net that is the only safety net that is available for those