about the budget deficit. then, a look at how military contractors are operating in afghanistan with congressman john tieney. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] host: good morning, it is thursday, july 1, 2010. states face their new fiscal year and many are facing financial challenges. we will begin a series on states and the red today, beginning with the largest, california. the house of representatives passed a financial reform legislation last night but the senate is out of session until after the fourth of july holiday. the also failed last night to

reach closure on a filibuster on a jobless aid extension measure. that is where we are going to start our program, and discussion about the debate over extending jobless aid and the deficit. that is the crux of argument in the senate right now, how to pay for the extension. we will show you some of the articles, but we would like to get your thoughts on this. what is more important? should both have equal balance in this age of those with the long term unemployment as well as all look -- rising federal debt. good thursday morning to you. throughout the program, fiscal measures and to debate over government spending will permeate our discussions. we will have a couple of members of congress, kevin brady from

the house ways and means and joint economic committee, republican from texas, with his concern over the announcement by the budget office that u.s. that will be 62% of gdp by year end. john tierney from massachusetts will be on later on, he will talk about the cost of the policy of the war in afghanistan and he commissioned a new report that looks at fraud in the contract in dollars. our last gasp in the morning is the executive director of the california budget project. we said in the beginning we will begin a five-day series looking at fiscal challenges in the state across the country. let me tell you a little bit more about the jobless bill in the senate last night. this is the third time the tried to advance a plan to restore jobless benefits for those out of work more than six months. two republicans -- olympia snowe and susan collins joins with them. some are suggesting once a replacement is made for senator byrd, this measure ball forward.

let me read some of the stories. laurie montgomery in this morning's "washington post."

we would like to get your thoughts on this. a related article in the aba says for the third time in as many weeks republicans in the senate successfully filibustered the bill to continue to provide an end when the checks. but since olympia snowe and susan collins the vote with democrats, passage seems assured next month once, as i said, the democratic replacement is named for senator byrd. about 1.3 million people who have been out of work for more than six months, jobless checks averaging about $300 a week when benefits began running out earlier this month. phone calls, beginning with the seattle, david on our democrats line. the amoco good morning -- caller: to me, this is a simple issue. these people through no fault of their own are out of work and there are no jobs for them to have that are comparable to what they were accustomed to.

one can take a pay cut, but that -- not that much, especially when you have kids. for republicans in congress to filibuster of the working guy, the low guy in the total poll really got hurt in this recession, losing their job, losing their homes, a lot of those different kinds of things, it is really untenable in washington. i really hope the voters are watching this and listening to this and really paying attention to this because you see where it falls, you see where the democrats are working hard for us small guys and the republicans are falling for big yes, we can save money at the behest of those of you are out of work. host: suggesting this will be the crux of the debate defining the two parties. roswell, georgia, allen on the republican line.

caller: i could not disagree more. this is not about saving money, it is about ensuring that the government does not continue to finance the bulk who are not making any more money. if the government continues to pay for all of this stuff, it will never end. it has to give the government pause to look at a different solution and find another way to go about doing this stuff. we can't just continue to spend billions of dollars. and i feel bad for those who don't have employment, but for myself, taking money away from me and my family -- cannot remain and remain stable yes, i oppose it. thanks. host: next is a call from new york. steve -- you are going to have to help me with the name of your town. thanks very much. you are on the air. caller: i think the real emergency is the deficit that we

are running up. although those without jobs might seem to think that that is the real emergency -- and it truly is a problem -- we need to pay for this spending if in fact this bill is going to be passed. as simple as that. forget paying half of this with the unspent funds, pay the entire thing. if we can't do that, then no extension of jobless benefits. people in the past have gone along and made do with certain less than the 94, 96 weeks that they are planning on extending this to. i feel bad for those people, as the previous caller expressed, but we've got to get our fiscal house in order and that's got to be the number one priority. host: diana is calling us from park falls, wisconsin, on the

democrats' line. caller: i was just going to comment. i was on the six month extension, i was a displaced worker. it just came as no warning. host: are you still getting your checks? caller: no, ma'am. host: how are you supporting yourself? caller: i can't. host: what are the prospects for finding work? caller: not good. i will have surgery and be laid up. host: what were you doing? caller: a factory. host: closed or just laying off? caller: closed permanently. host: what did it manufacture? caller: veneered? host: question -- what were you doing?

caller: it was just a warning. a small area were granted year extension. fortunately we get benefits of affordable insurance. host: you have not had time to make a longer term plan. let us hear what two united states senators have to say about this -- senator dick durbin and then followed by massachusetts, brown. >> 1.2 million americans in the

month of june will lose their unemployment benefits because not one single republican will vote to to help americans who lost jobs through no fault of their own. where they would find permission to spend money on so many things, when it comes to investing in american families who have fallen on hard times, they turn a deaf ear. that, to me, is sad and unfortunate. >> of course, we want to help people hurting through unemployment insurance, of course we want to have medicaid reimbursements to help struggling states, but, to use our checking account or do we use the credit card? i am in favor of using the checking account by using an allocated stimulus dollars, finding other moneys that are in the so-called slush funds that have not been used for years and years and still are available, or cutting across the board from various entities to come up with the money we need to fund these programs.

host: two views from the senate floor and the debate whether or not to extend jobless aid to workers with long term unemployment issues. and the debate over the deficit. as we have been telling you, the senate failed to find cloture. filibuster continues. the senate is out of session. today with a special honor for senator byrd. we are talking with you about it this morning and whether or not the deficit and the debt should matter when so many people are out of work in the united states. that is the crux. the next is alabama, angie on the republican line. you are on the, go ahead. caller: i just had a comment. i know that there are people who really are trying to get a job, but there are so many people who are not try to get a job, that are taking advantage of this. and the nation is paying for them to not work. i know one lady in particular,

she just of those not want to work and she is taking advantage of this. i think it is sad. host: next is hopkins, michigan. this caller is brent on the independent line. caller: good morning. i can't agree with the last caller more. i know more than one person who is milking the system. me myself, i have three children and i lost my job before but the first thing you do is get right back out there and find one. you don't sit around and plan on somebody paying your bills for you. of the government does not have the money to take care of everybody right now, and that is the one thing these people need to realize. host: next comes from new york city, pete on the democrats' line. caller: thank you for c-span. i believe that millions of people will need the extension of benefits absolutely should get the extension. if you are going to talk about a small number of people that

might dupe of the system, but you've got to remember millions of honestly unemployed people need the money to keep going. so, these complaints -- i understand because i feel the same frustration about fraud, but they are few and farm between. you have to give people who are down and out the extension. you want to balance the budget, that is not the way to do it. you tax the hedge funds and the millionaires and the rich, they do not pay their fair share of taxes. all of these of said people about people getting unemployment benefits fell feel the same outrage about rich people who don't pay their fair share of taxes, that is where the of rage should be. also, you talk about the extent, the extent of the war of afghanistan and iraq, completely misguided and mistaken -- it

started with bush-cheney. host: let me jump in at this point. the senate confirmed the general petraeus yesterday as well. we will talk about the war in afghanistan later on with congressman tierney and take your calls. next is a phone call from a long island. jamie on our republican line. caller: how are you? i am calling to say that i am republican and i feel it is very unfair for the unemployed because there are no jobs out there. but what bothers me more, the republicans are stopping this bill, but knowing they have an election coming up with 50 million people out of work, are they afraid nobody is going to go to the polls and vote for them? they have to show they care for the people of this country. host: thanks. "the orange county register" profiles and long term

unemployed data on the front page. the jobless man -- now focuses on family. he has been out of work since october of 2008. next is for work, texas. colton calling on the independent line. caller: i would like to point out after the great depression, when programs like welfare rolled out, it was very hard for americans to take help from the government. we were once a nation of pride. it is time we return to that. what the government should be worried about is fixing the cells generating debt. host: harry reid as majority leader has been at the center of the debate. he actually switched his vote on the and so he can bring the measure back up again. for his hometown newspaper "the las vegas son" looking at the

election -- "the las vegas sun." we are talking to you about the jobless aid extension and the deficits. next is a call from atlanta. allen on the democrats' line. caller: i have not called about this topic before. i didn't think they should extend the benefits because we don't have any money. people who know their benefits are going to run out need to find work. the great motivator is no more income. so, i would suggest other forms of assistance be made available.

not cash in the form of an unemployment check. the problem we have is that we borrowed money to so gratuitously over the decades that we basically sold ourselves to china and japan, who was loading us the money. one day they will cut us off and we will be hopelessly screwed at that point because we are basically it debt junkies, and the politicians continuing to spend loans money just to get reelected, so the only solution i say long term is term limits. 16-year term for everybody, penalties if they become consultants they're after, no appearances on c-span to push their books. host: allen from atlanta with his thoughts on how to reform washington and the question of

the debt and deficit. we have been telling you about a few republicans share with the willingness to move forward on the jobless aid extension. senator byrd's mtc becomes a factor. the senate is out to honor senator byrd. and reporter from politico has written about the historic honor that the senate is giving to one of its own today. thanks so much for being with us. lying in reposed honor that the senate is granting to senator byrd today is one that has been used before but not for about 50 years. what can you tell us about the history? guest: this is a pretty rare occurrence. has not happened in 50 years. the last senator to lie in repose was senator joe mccarthy back in 1957. lying in repose in the senate is slightly different than lying in state, the honor that most

people are most familiar with. lying under the capitol rotunda would take an act agreed to buy votes of the house and the senate, whereas senator votes -- senator byrd will be lying just in the senate. there was talk earlier that maybe he would lie in the rotunda but because of his 51 years of service and the senate and his deep attachment to that particular body, it's inappropriate to the family and also to senate leadership to have him live there. that well actually closed down -- while his coffin lies there and the senate has a small summer money for him. host: his colleagues have been honoring him throughout the week since the news of is that has been announced with white roses. we say black draped best and white roses in some of the committees. talk to me about how the day

will proceed from beginning to end. guest: today we are expecting the hearst carrying of the senators coffin to arrive at the steps of the capital at around 9:30 a.m., then they will proceed to place the coffin on the senate floor. the senator will actually lie on a wooden platform, that also supported abraham lincoln, -- abraham lincoln's coffin when he died. sort of a unique circumstance. of the coffin will stay there for the course of the day. the the senate chaplain is expected to have a prayer and the members will be able to pay their respects to the family. after that, senator byrd will be transported back to his hometown where he is going to basically like an honor in a courthouse in west virginia that bears his name, and from there, tomorrow, he will be buried. it is a multi-day even and

distinguished guests are expected to attend -- president obama and vice president joe biden are expected to be there tomorrow. host: where was the spot that the senator chose as his burial place? guest: he is going to be buried in arlington, not arlington cemetery, per se, but a smaller family cemetery. his wife is buried there, who guided to thousand six. host: erica lovely has been writing about the history of today's honors for senator byrd. she explained that in the past we have been able to carry live pictures from the rotunda, presidents and have this over the past decade, because this is and the senate chamber and because the senate is not officially in session there will not be senate tv pictures of this today. we will have live pictures of the casket of arriving at the capitol grounds, and then that

is it for that part of the honors. you are seeing the flag flying at half staff this thursday, july 1. let us get back to this question of the morning, talking about last night's effort in the senate to extend unemployment benefits to long-term jobless workers. that effort failing on its third time. senators not able to break cloture. we are talking about the crux of the debate, extending jobless aid and the u.s. deficit and debt. the next telephone call is cleveland, sharon on the republican line. caller: hi. well, you know, i am a republican and i am a little embarrassed to be a republican these days. i actually voted for president obama because i thought that he had the good ideas, and i was very disappointed with the republican party. how are we going to talk about deficit and how the deficit -- that is the most of what thing?

people actually losing their jobs, their homes, they have no jobs. where are the jobs supposed to come from? you heard that other woman called, her place is closed. it is not that they are going to reopen. where is she going to work? i don't under say where they think the jobs will come from? people get up and get a job and the best way to get a job is to be poor and money -- hungry because you don't have money? do you think these people don't want jobs? you think that the live on unemployment? the people calling up and saying that it is right not to vote for this, they have jobs. of those people all have jobs. everyone who calls up and says we don't need to spend money on jobless aid extension, those people have jobs and if you did have a job you would be on the other end because you would not be able to pay your bills. and instead of going out -- why

doesn't congress stay in session to get this taken care of? --ple who don't have jobs i host: we can hear your passive and thank you for being a part of the debate. some of the e-mails we get on this topic -- next is a call from north carolina. george is on our independent line. caller: i do think they need to extend the unemployment for the people. i did we as a people, we have become such a pansy country. look at what we allow congress to take from us and give to

themselves, and now they will take another week off. they just had a week off not to long ago. it's things like at least every month or two month they take -- it seems like at least every month or two months they take a weaker two of -- off. these corporations taking jobs overseas, why don't we force these corporations to pay unemployment? congress won't do that. look at all of the money congress takes to -- from us and is to themselves for salary and health care and pensions and how many congress people are multimillionaires, ex- congressman and presidents getting money from us? bush getting four runs and $40,000 a year plus -- $440,000 a year plus health care. if there are multi, multi millionaires. host: george from north carolina.

this e-mail -- gary duncan has a view about the connection between unemployment and a financial crisis went through. he writes that -- next we have a phone call from columbia, maryland. bill is on our democrats line. caller: i will speak fast so i it -- because i have a lot to say. we have people available to give up their jobs, the baby boomers, anyone born from 1946 through 1964, 78 million baby boomers. the 7000 baby boomers reach the age of 62 every single day. people, if given the right incentives, would retire. many people will not retire because of medical benefits.

the federal government should drop the medicaid age requirement from 65 to 62. and buying fixed mortgages for these people with just a paper change, at a 3%, would drop the money they have to put out each month. and the state governments and federal government can look into -- but we have people right now who would retire if given the right incentives. remember, 7000 baby boomers per day are available to give up their jobs and would do it with the right incentives but the government is not looking at its. not even talking about this pool of people -- they changed america as they have gone through the years. they can do it again. they are waiting and willing to give up their jobs with the right incentives. host: tina tweets --

paul writes -- >> is a call from our banat, a lawyer. any attack, republic of -- next is a call from urbana, illinois. and needed, republican line. caller: appreciate the conversation. the majority of the callers are correct. the solution to the is just get rid oo most of the republicans. i don't know why we fear them and hold them at such high regard. a lot of them, i feel, are idiots. they have no education. they just have power from being evil. i feel that when you are out of work like i have been, you work for yourself, what ever still you have because the republicans have been changing the rules for ever so it is time we wake up

and stop letting them take advantage of us with this work ticket. they are old and a bully folks. we need to get over it. america was founded on lying, cheating, and stealing. it does not make it right but it makes it what it is. and i am tired of us keep being bound by bear lying logic and the rich is getting richer and i have been in recession and from work -- host: thank you for calling in did you see from the front page of "the guardian" from england today that this of and when the debate is not peculiar to the united states. next is a call from new jersey, windy, independent line. caller: thank you.

it doesn't matter what your perspective is -- how you look at life, whether you vote democratic or republican or independent, this is just compassion. these people didn't choose -- no one would raise their hand and say, i don't want to work anymore, i don't want a job, i don't want to feed my family and i choose to lose my house. at this point that, i personally feel that the war is ridiculous. i have been watching. i have seen what you have done as far as having guests on, talking about low war. we are in a very difficult situation financially, but that doesn't mean -- this is not going to make anybody's life different or better. how are they going to pay their bills? they are going to lose more

homes. the embarrassment, the feeling of horror when you can't get up every day and day after day and month after month, after looking for jobs that don't exist, now that are saying, okay, fine, we can't even give you any money, and yet we give money in places we should not. i pray for these people and i think everyone in america has to wake up. they are very angry at their present for doing anything and he began with a trillion dollar deficit. when is this going to end? host: next is a republican caller from buffalo. now listen. caller: i just wanted to say that i completely agree with what void of it had to say, if anything, we should be paying out of once bent stimulus funds because in erie county, new york right now, the county executive pointed out that we received $41

million in stimulus funds and it turned out we actually did not need it to shore up our medicate shortfall. we didn't need it, but to balance the budget -- what did the federal government say? go ahead and keep the money. right now. county, new york, is trying to figure out how to spend $41 million of the federal government said to just keep. how many of these cases are going on? the other thing i wanted to add, for everyone complaining about the war's going on, first of all, i want to thank every single soldier out there fighting for me and my rights and my freedom, and everyone else who is saying we don't need this war, this war is garbage, we should not be fighting it, i would love to see every single one of those people take the place of the men and women out there fighting for us because i do not think they would. host: thank you for the call. those who are regular watchers, center for american progress, a

think tank with a progressive point of view has a new study. 2010 unemployment extension record, congress makes history by not extending.

talking to you about the jobless aid extension which failed on the third try. "detroit free press" hasn't -- has a front-page story. those are some of the statistics this morning. georgia. good morning to miss the on our democrats line. caller: my husband was laid off in october of last year, and through fault of his own, and he is about to go back to work but we have been without benefits since the beginning of this month. how did they expected to have

gas money, insurance, to feed my family and they are going on vacation? i am a bit -- outrage. host: how is he getting back to work? tell us the story. caller: he is going back in two weeks. but we have been begging right now to try to get food. it is ridiculous. i don't understand where these people's hearts are. host: did he find a new job? caller: his company put back to work. there is a short-term job. host: what field is he in? caller: licensed electrician. many people are saying the board taking it manager of the unemployment rate, but this is happening to me, happening to my family and he is not taking advantage of it. we are real people who need help. host: next is a call from north carolina. carl on the independent line.

good morning. caller: or you today? host: very well, thank you. caller: we have been fighting this program for years -- hello? host: we can hear you fine. caller: this stuff has been going on for years with nafta, and a while back president obama made the remark that we need to send more jobs overseas to help other countries. this man has not helped one person in this country accomplish anything. a good example is, look at down in louisiana, florida, and alabama. these people aren't out here trying to get this stuff done and he is -- these people are out here trying to get this stuff done and he is fighting everything they are doing. i voted for the man. the biggest mistake i have made in my life. and i think, a lot -- along with a lot of other people in north carolina, he should either resign from office or be impeached and that is as soon as possible. all he is doing is driving this

country into the grounds. host: from twitter -- next is a call from the jersey. sue is on the republican line. caller: good morning. and taking my call. i am surprised what we are hearing. i don't think we can keep extending the unemployment benefits if we don't have money. that is like me borrowing from my kids to pay my bills. i think the more we tax their rich, the war they will move to other countries -- the more they will move to other countries and take their jobs with them. i just don't understand what i am hearing. i think maybe if we brought back the civil conservation corps, like in the 1930's, where people went out and work in exchange for a place to stay and food,

maybe that could help us. but i just don't think just to keep sending checks to people. we have to figure something else out. host: i want to mix in a few other stories while we continue to listen to your calls. from "the financial times" this morning.

it will go to the full senate for consideration. back to your phone calls, a call from toledo, democrats line. caller: are you there? a couple of things. i was an art and -- an rn, and i could not even get health care. i was laid off. there was a man who said he does not see giving out money will motivate people to what does he think disparity -- motivating suicide? a lot of other things. people will find other ways to get money. there is money to be had. the man who said obama has not help anybody. he helped me. i know i got severely depressed. my son has been deathly ill, six times on life-support. i lost my job because of the self-proclaimed catholic hospital. what am i to do?

let some of these rich people -- yes, they earn their money, and that is fine and good, but they are lucky. let of them live on just half of their wages and see if they can do it. and see how they feel. i can get my son back from the home and they will pay be some way or another, through disability and disability for may. people will find other ways. i had to go into the hospital once, that cost money. i am a caregiver for years and could not even get unemployment. no, people are committing suicide, people are depressed, and obama is helping. host: michael, alexandria, virginia, e-mails.

next is wayne county, ohio. re on the independent line. caller: i have been laid off for six months, no extension, i don't understand. i work construction. there are no jobs around here. 250 on a list of about 900. i don't know. host: what are you going to support yourself? caller: nothing. host: what of your prospects for the future? caller: not very good. host: had you thought about moving? are you going to stay where you are? caller: i can't give my house away, let alone sell it.

you can't just drag up and leave. i could, but -- host: what do you see for the future? caller: i don't know what i see for the future. host: have you had periods of unemployment in the past. caller: two or three months, just through the winter when it was down. then back up in the spring and i went back to work. you drive around here and you see a bunch of idiots driving the foreign vehicles, and if half of the morons bought a foreign vehicle would have bought a domestic vehicle, you know, you got to take care of your country first. i don't know. host: thank you, appreciate hearing your personal story talking about unemployment extension. crystal and connecticut writes

this -- we are talking about the debate over the debt and the deficit and unemployment benefits extension. next is a call from tucson, dean, a republican line. caller: good morning. i was going to comment on the oil spill with the economic situation, if they just put a lot of the people who are unemployed are rum country -- talking about shovel ready projects, by pie would have to -- bp would have to pay them. and we have another disaster areas around the country, flooding in tennessee, hurricanes coming up and all of these things, it just seems to me that is a good way -- because if you are physically able to work, you are physically able to do most of the cleanup work and

stuff. and i also think that -- you hear people talk about big businesses and taxes, if they just give a good tax rate to the businesses and businesses could invest in this country, and unemployment would come down. we have seen it over and over again. instead of tax and spend, they need to just stop spending, cut taxes, and jobs will come back. host: john on twitter says -- from the newspaper this morning, they reported on last year's confrontation between police sergeant and henry louis gates, the scholar at harvard. here are many stories. here is "the new york times" version.

he essentially saying both people involve have the opportunity to lower the temperature and neither took advantage of that. in vineland, new jersey is our last call on this. one needs at is on the line. caller: my name is 2010. i am from vineland, new jersey. i lost my job. i work for a company where my job went overseas. i worked for 42 years. i collected unemployment at different times but i always went back to work.

now i don't have a job. i did go to the unemployment and started going to school so that i could get my ged so i could help myself. and i passed everything on -- except for the math, so now i have to go back and do that. but in the meantime, i have to support myself and i have some family members living with me and i have to take care of them. i know a lot of different situations, but i am a person who worked all of my life and i don't think it is right they are not extending the benefits because most of the people want to work and i want to work. hopefully they will be able to extend the benefits, and i am

going to go back to school and finish my g e d so that maybe i can get into a better job or do something. because of my age, i am going to be 64 years old, the only good thing that happened to me is i just finished paying for my house in april. i have been a widow for 17 years and i did it on my own because i worked. and if i get a job now -- i was making almost 16,000 -- $60 an hour. i will never make that money again because of my age. but i don't want a handout from anybody because i worked, all of the years i worked in did not collect unemployment, i feel i am entitled to it. host: we are out of time. we appreciate your story and others who shared theirs with us today and all of the folks who joined us for discussion and

debate on this policy issue. unemployment benefits extension and the deficit. our next guest, congressman kevin brady from texas, member of the joint economic committee and also on the tax-writing committee, ways and means. he will be here to continue our discussion on the u.s. debt and deficit. we will be right back. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] >> west virginia senator robert byrd served more than 50 years in the u.s. senate, longer than

anyone in history. he. on c-span more and 1200 times. along with speeches on the floor and congressional hearings, watch a profile of the senator and a book notes review of the history of the senate. on the c-span video library. washington your way. >> one of the best quotes about money in politics, water finding a whole. but he writes about political action committees and their influence on congress and won a pulitzer prize for his reporting on tom delay and jack abram off. we will talk to the national investigative correspondent for "the washington post." >> sunday, your questions for syndicated radio talk-show host bill bennett, live on book tv's "in-depth." the first drug czar is the author of more than 20 books for adults and children cared join the discussion on american history, education, and politics. three hours with bill bennett,

sunday part of book tv's three- day holiday weekend on c-span2. did the whole schedule on booktv.org. >> "washington journal" continues. host: join me in welcoming congressman kevin brady, a republican from texas, member of the house ways and means committee and the joint economic committee. guest: good morning, susan. host: yesterday it had at the congressional budget office testified on the commission on fiscal reform on the estimates of the u.s. debt. here is the reporting from today's "financial times." watchdog appeals for urgency in tackling debt.

what does that all mean to you? guest: it is over optimistic. it is an and much more serious position in that and each day we seem to add to it. the debate on unemployment benefits. what you just got done with the callers about -- i think it is having a real impact on the economy. there is this economic train of thought called rational expectations. people know what is coming so they adjust behavior. now i think one of the reasons consumer confidence is so far down right now, it continues to decrease, is people look at all of this debt and they know it is not healthy for the economy, they know it is not healthy for

the budget and they know someone is going to have to pay it back, so as a result of they are holding on to the cash they have, savings rates continue to grow, they are not making purchases, business is are worried about who will have to pay it back and were about a host of other policy decisions. as a result, i think it is one of the main reasons our economy is so sluggish right now. host: 10 you tell our viewers what 62%, what it is estimated to be this year, what it means for the average family, what is the correlation? guest: here is an example. just paying back the bailout stimulus, for a college student graduating this year, it means their share is about $145,000 monthly out of their paycheck is equivalent to a second car payment, for a young person starting out in life. overall, when you look at the world and country's financial

health when you compare what they owed to the size of the economy, we are at 62% today, right in the middle of those five or six european countries who are facing debt problems. as we continue to grow, we move into that tier, not to the greek level but close to it in the next two or three or four years. what it means the -- it costs more to borrow money, they look to tax people or cut services. so, yes, it has a real impact on a family. host: you mentioned you were listening to the callers in the last segment, and you know the scope of the problem, millions of people long-term unemployed, houses that are under water that they can't sell to move. what is the prescription for the way it for? guest: the main focus has to be on job creation and unplug the benefits are a stopgap measure

but most of them are pushing us to get the economy going again. so far to i think the unemployment bill itself has been played with a lot of political games unfortunately. the debt is a real crisis and republicans are just asking that we not add $33 billion, $34 billion to it. so far the bill has been attached to a lot of other spending. just recently -- -- they started offering it as a stand-alone bill. but the boat disaster be on jobs and issues like the debt, issues like higher energy taxes, higher taxes, period, all of that adds to again and stop on new job creation. host: how do you create jobs? guest: stop frightening the horses. businesses are not making the critical decision of rehiring workers or hiring new ones because they are afraid they will be punished. they do look at captain trade as

raising energy prices. they look at all of the new tax proposals from higher income taxes to hire capital gains, regulatory proposals, and they say, we are worried about hiring someone back, let's hold off for a while longer. i think until we stop frighten them and take some of the proposals of the table, we will not see the job reason we saw in the reagan recovery, for example. i also think across the board tax cut on business, 20% for small businesses, where there is a certainty. and then with customers, coming back to the debt, i do think of washington really got serious with a game plan on getting back to a balanced budget to where the public realized, look, this is not going to get worse -- and it is continuing to get worse -- i think it will have input on consumer confidence.

host: already getting questions by twitter, about paying for the war when we got so many fiscal priorities. would you tell people what your opinion is, not just the war but overall level of defense spending? guest: there is no comparison. the united states -- i think our defense budget is higher than the next 20 country's total. we are so strong on national security, both the united states and across the world, one of the reasons why i think the world is more stable than it otherwise might have been. we are far more secure than we otherwise would have been after 9/11. history shows that every time we think things are settled worldwide, we let our guard down, there is another threat and we rebuild again. we are determined not to do that and i think it is the right thing to do. host: new albany, indiana.

john on the independent line. caller: you know, i understand that we have issues in this country. i worked almost all of my life and have never gotten unemployment up to this moment. i have been out of work for a year. the company i worked for closed down. for you guys to sit here and say, we can't find the money, but, you know, for eight years you found money to start wars and all of these other things and give money to the oil companies and all of these companies and turned around who left this country anyway and yet here you are, going on vacation, i and unemployed and have a family to feed and take care of and i am about to lose my apartment because you guys can't get off your but and do what is right by the american people. host: tell us more about your situation. what kind of work? caller: a furniture company.

host: are they closed for good? caller: closed their doors. host: overseas? caller: they are still here in the area but they closed down one of their plants and i was the last one in and first one out. host: what will you do next? caller: i was working maintenance. are you host: going to be looking -- caller: i am looking for work. there are jobs year, little, small jobs here, but they are all temporary that last two or three months. it i am interviewing for jobs, but the problem is, there are so many people interviewing for the same jobs and that it is really difficult, really difficult. people pretend like that there are not people looking for work. everybody is looking for work. everybody is looking for work. you know, and just to throw everybody off the rails like

that, arbitrarily throw everybody off because you can't find the money to pay for it and you -- , on. it is just wrong and i can't understand how you can sit here and look as in the face and say we are doing the best we can. no, you are not doing the best we can. host: i will jump in at this point and thank you and good luck for your job search. guest: absolutely. i think he is in a position a lot of people are, especially those who are new hires and are laid off once the recession took hold. but akzo agreed with one key point, you tell me you can find the money for this? he is right. that is what we are asking for, that this be paid for. there is, i think, a host of ways to cut money that is less of a priority. for its -- for example, the stimulus bill, only less than half of it has been spent so far. to much has been wasted. we have seen $3 million for a

turtle crossing in florida, $50,000 for a hand puppet grants and $390,000 university of new york buffalo, a study between smoking marijuana and malt liquor beer. just ridiculous use of our tax dollars. and johns question, you tell you can find the money for it -- the money is here. but so far, people are not willing to look at the cuts to pay for the benefits that john and others are waiting for. that is our point, let's pay for it. .

the more you raids on employment taxes, the less people higher in the first place. in real business sense, it does not work, unfortunately. host: timothy is from cecil county, maryland. are you there? caller: good morning. i want to start up by sayiig i am 43 years old and i have been a republican all my life but i will take a page out of the republican's own page book. i suggest to the democrats in november, it is said that they think they enter -- the answer

should be no to everything. all of these people, including myself, are out of work. i am in construction. since the january 20 this year, i have had to do two john contacts. i have had 93 job interviews and have not found a job. it is unfair to say that these people are just taking these money and are not doing anything about it. the majority of these people are trying to find gainful employment. once again, last night, they vote no and do not extend unemployment. what do they think they are accomplishing when they seek reelection? host: this viewer tweets --

guest: i wonder who is saying it is a handout? i was there for the debate or every version of this bill. i did not hear that once. all members of congress understand how difficult it is when you are out of work. the debate is two fold. do we believe helping people through tough times is such a priority that we ought to pay for it -- which we ought to. secondly, what are we doing about getting them back to work? short term is one thing, but they really need a job. what are we doing to encourage businesses to hire again? i think that the date is very healthy. i hope everyone listening understand i have not heard

anyone say that this is a handout. if people feel that way, and then i think it is said. host: stimulus funds. i wanted to bring this in from "washington times" -- guest: i think in is the first

admission from democrats that the stimulus failed to jump start the economy or restore consumer confidence. unfortunately, they see it as a slush fund, to use it for whatever product is coming down the road. the public has given up on the stimulus. poll after poll says that they believe it did not do much for a job creation. our argument was that it was never an economic stimulus, it was a political stimulus. the judge only last as long as taxpayers are willing to pay for it. now, i think, the democrats to agree. host: next phone call from kent, ohio. dale on the democrats line.

caller: i want to know, what do you think about the tax cuts? should they be extended for the big companies that are leaving this country in droves anyway? trickle-down voodoo economics, do you believe that is working? when bush took over we had money in the bank, we were in the black, and then he gives out all this money the first year he is in there and it has been downhill ever since. guest: which tax cuts to businesses are you referring to? caller: the tax cut that he gave to all of the rich people. they are talking about stopping them but they are still getting their brakes. big business is still getting

their money. guest: thank you. i think this is a common misconception. and there were no big tax cuts for big business. if you end those tax cuts, it means that american family of pace and average of $3,000 or more than if the cuts were extended. i do not think many people can afford that right now. actually, republicans lowered taxes for companies to create jobs in america, that invest in mfg., here come in the united states. -- hear, in the united states. unfortunately, the energy industry.

it taxes as if they were paying overseas. to not extend them wiil hurt our economy in a major way. it will not put these people back to work who are calling in and are so worried about it today. host: this story from "the wall street journal." there is a 18-member fiscal commission looking at the debt. this story about the meeting -- this is from the co-chair of the commission --

guest: health care, under the new report yesterday, will double, over the next decade or so. the bill itself never bend the cost curve, which was a big concern. it actually accelerated them, which is a problem from that standpoint. you cannot tax back to a balanced budget. we could tax everyone in the country and we would still be running a deficit. at a certain point, you can only tax so much. people's behavior changes. we have seen this in europe.

historically, we are around 18% gdp of tax revenue. even if they continue to increase it, people will adjust their income, businesses will stop hiring, and it will not generate much income. it has to be tightening our belts. there is no other choice. host: let me ask you about social security and medicare. starting with social security, if our obligations are greater than our ability to pay, what is the likely of come of that? guest: social security is easier to solve than medicare and medicaid by a factor of 10. no question, we have to look at everything from 18 people retire, and more importantly, can we put in incentives for people who retire?

you do not get much of a bump from people staying in the workforce. there are some good ideas, bipartisan ideas, on making that money go to work for younger workers. we have to find a way where we do not have just a virtual social security account and depend on these funds in the future. we need something more like state employee funds for teacher retirement funds, with real assets, real interest, and over time, that will help a great deal. host: in the last discussion, people were suggesting that workers should retire earlier. guest: this country is never good at gauging social behavior.

if people understand what they're paying into with social security, it is actually invested in the government. if they see advantages to working longer, saving themselves, and businesses see the value in creating and hiring new workers, that will go a long way to solve the problems. host: maryland. tom on the independent line. caller: i have some cost-cutting measures that i would like to discuss with the senator. for one thing, you only work about 100 days a year. let's say you cut yourself every in half? there is no place in the private sector where someone can go to

work, work eight years, and draw retirement. you need to work for the betterment of your country. you do not need retirement. almost all of you are wealthy. you do not need your retirement. let's stop all foreign aid for two, three years. keep that money in this country to help the american people. the people around the world can get their own help. job creation. there are approximately 12 million to 20 million illegal immigrants in this country. let's deport them and that will free up the job market. that will probably create millions of jobs for the american people. get rid of the illegals and let's see if the american people will not take some of these jobs that your great mr.

bush said that they are taking jobs that americans do not want to. guest: there is a lot there. i get the same sorts of messages at home about congressional retirements, salaries, but unfortunately, they are all inaccurate. members of congress on no work at least six days of the week in our district. retirement has not changed. now, it is the same as federal workers. 1.7% a year in salaries. it is much more comparable to what it ought to be. the point you made about foreign aid, i think people need to understand the severity of debt that susan was talking about. we are borrowing 43 cents on every dollar we are spending.

think about that. if you are borrowing half of almost everything you burn every year, what a terrible financial position that puts you in. everything in the federal budget will have to shrink for us to get back to a balanced budget. we are going to have to change our thinking about the role of the federal government. what are our priorities? i do not believe people can stomach more tax increases. they should be off the table. we ought to be looking at ways to cut taxes to spur the economy. we are going to have to figure out a way, now, in an urgent manner to cut this dramatically to get back to a point where we can -- not just break even -- but start to pay back this horrible amount of debt we are amassing. host: response to this viewer

who says president clinton raised the economy and create jobs. guest: it did not happen with the democrats and president clinton. it happened with the republicans holding the purse strings the year before. actually, the tax increases hurt the economy. in fact, most of the jobs were created in the .com bubble. the top 1% of the wealthy in the united states was more prosperous under president clinton and president bush. president bush actually taxed the top 1% more than president clinton did. i think there are some

misconceptions there. host: texas. mike on the republican line. caller: good morning. it seems we're looking at ideas, philosophy. tax increases is one thing you talked about. i think, by law, we should have to write a check to the government and actually see it. then we would feel it. we are not good on short-term versus long term. these people who are unemployed in getting benefits, i feel for them, but they do not recognize as our debt goes up, if the economy is not doing well, they will have to pay more themselves.

it is a vicious cycle. we have to quit spending more money. if we work in this kind of that personally, we would never bcome out of this. guest: thank you. it is a great idea -- how would congress have asked if the election date was april 16? when they handle taxing and spending differently? -- would and i handle taxing and spending differently? the decisions in washington really matter. we know that we are facing job losses as a result of this drilling moratorium in your area, which i believe was done hastily, an overreaction to the oil spill. companies are already taking

their rigs to west africa. companies are playing off workers. what business can go six months without any revenue and survive? i think the federal judge was right to end the moratorium. the white house seems to be intent on reinstating it. we will see losses between 50,000 and 100,000 because of this. the decisions in washington that congress considers and makes has a real impact on the the mike's of the country. host: indiana "wall street journal" -- i want to put that out there as

i ask this question on behalf of dianne in new hampshire who asks -- guest: actually, they were not put back on the books. we are debating an emergency supplemental which means we will be allocating another $30 million to fund our troops, which is the right thing to do, but it will not be paid for. the public perception is, at least back home, i cannot speak for the rest of the country, but jobs, spending, obama healthcare, is what people talk to me most about each day. what keeps them awake is the

spending. one of the reasons the approval ratings for congress and the president is so low is the public understands this spending has to end. it is one of the reasons we are driving consumer confidence down. host: adrian, oakland, california. democrat line. caller: i am a paying taxpayer like everyone else. i feel like nothing is getting done in congress. you take more days off than any average joe or jane in america. you need to stick to your guns and do your job. this issue is happening in california, michigan, and in your home state of texas.

people need these benefits. they need to be taking care of. at no fault of their own, they are unemployed. i understand we have this debt issue, and we need to take care of the exorbitant amount of spending, but this is a compassion issue. guest: can i ask you this? california has a huge deficit at the state level. do you think washington could find other spending less important than unemployment benefits to pay for? guest: yes, i do i think congressional members could take a pay cut. we could reduce our foreign aid. we give a lot of money to other countries, and but when they need our help, we have to borrow

their resources and pay them back, but we have always given money out to them. i understand that, i am a pro- american, but congress needs to do their job. guest: i agree with you. if we cannot reduce spending, we are not doing our jobs. that is the point. let's find the money and get this done. host: a question from a viewer in a gulf coast state. he said we have to borrow these resources and pay that money back. is that true? guest: i know that there have been offers for equipment to come and that would be helpful. i do not know how the repayment

on that is handled but i know that bp is paying for a lot of it, not taxpayers. host: yester day, the president was in racing, wisconsin. "the wall street journal" covering that. "cutting the debt will be our project." that is something the president said. mr. obama's says, it can be done in a grotto way so that people are not hurt. he was not specific beyond that. this will be a power project for the next couple of years. guest: it will be our project for the next couple of decades. i listened to the president's words carefully.

i noticed he did not say cutting spending is our prospect. the war repeople that is the president believes -- were real people have is the president believes the way to get rid of the debt is to tax people more. we already an overtaxed nation, we are hurting economically. i think this sort of tips of his thinking on this that commission and proposals in the future will be about tax increases merges getting rid of wasteful spending. host: one guest asks -- guest: in full disclosure, i believe that we can replace the income tax for families and businesses, do away with a

number of excise taxes. i believe our tax code is a horrible drag on people. i would love to get the irs out of our lives. retail taxes would be the best course for growth. for lots of people, that would be a change. i do not know if people could get their arms around that change. another idea is a flat income tax. my worry is the irs will still be in your life. congress can go through exempt loopholes, and usually, flat taxes will eventually grow back to what they were before. i would love to have a national debate where people say, look, we need a flat tax or a fair tax.

let's decide what is that for -- best for us. at the end of the day, i think a fair tax would be the best choice. host: duty on the independent line. caller: obama is spending millions in brazil for drilling. no one wants people to lose their jobs but this country is bankrupting people and the government cannot continue on limited unemployment. i know of two young people capable of working but they would rather not work because they can make more money drawing from our taxes. the government can find the money. look at these ridiculous bonuses that wall street got.

guest: the bottom line is, the government can find the money. i think it is in our budget to find this. stimulus money -- maybe we need to stop spending that. interest saving along from stopping the stimulus today, just interest payments from savings, could pay for unemployment benefits. there are a number of areas that we could trim to get to the $34 billion that this bill asks for. at the heart of the matter are people who are of work. host: this and your asking why you voted against h.r. 5297 in the house which would lend money to small businesses. guest: again, the bill was not paid for, but it was using to

reduce spending at the local level. two problems. t.a.r.p. had become a slush fund for any program available in washington. i think that needs to be ended. secondly, this is why washington get things wrong. there are convinced people are credit, because there is notng enough money locally. federal regulators are saying commercial loans are problems, do not do it. local banks are punished when they do, so there are reluctant to do so. small businesses, they are not touched by the sba. they go to their local bank. small businesses are not hiring,

not buying new equipment, not burning on that new worker because they tell me, they are frightened by cap and trade, new regulation, health care costs, tax increases. there are part of the ones that are frightened. another government program paid for by t.a.r.p. funds is not going to solve the problem. host: last phone call from tampa. merlin, republican line. caller: i wanted to go back to the fair tax. i think there are several good reasons we need to talk about it. congressman levin will not allow a jar -- h.r. 25 on the

floor. and lots of people cannot get jobs, they do not have unemployment, but they do not understand that the tax system works against them. i always tell people, anything that creates a $13 trillion offshore money to go out because of the tax code, we should get rid of that immediately. the american need to see that it taxes the poor up to the poverty level. president obama should be behind this 1000%. i cannot understand why you cannot get levin to make it out of there. i appreciate your input. guest: i would love to see if

brought to committee and have a full vote on it. i think people understand how bad the tax code is for them. i do not think everyone understands just how anti- competitive bid is, how it drags down our economy, and how other countries have exploited our tax code to be bused to jobs. unfortunately, washington has a number of proposals that will kill the effort to buy american products. the sooner we get a vote, the better. host: earlier, we said we would talk about medicare, you described it as a "complex" so we can save it for another time. guest: it is the 800-pound gorilla. we are going to have to change people's roles. people want more choices.

they want some say in the quality of the care, but in the cost as well. you can save money by doing this and that, but we need to empower them to help them stretch that medicated dollar further. host: thank you. our next guest of the morning, john tierney, a member of the government oversight reform committee to talk about a new report that he asked for that looks at contracting costs in afghanistan. what it is doing to the safety of our troops and to the cost of the war.

>> west virginia senator robert byrd served more than 15 years in the senate. he appeared on c-span more than 1200 times. watch our 1988 profile of the senator. his interview on the history of the senate. >> one of the best quotations i have heard about money and politics is, it is like wonder that funds a hole. he is a pulitzer prize-winning columnist for his reporting on jack abramoff and tom delay. jeffrey smith on sunday's edition of "q&a."

>> the former education secretary and drug czar is the author of more than 20 books. join the conversation with bill bennett sunday, part of the holiday weekend. get the whole schedule at booktv.org. host: on your screen is congressman john tierney of massachusetts. a report on contract thing in afghanistan. the famous phrase that an army moves on its stomach. we have a $2.1 billion contract there. what are we getting from it? guest: yes, $2.16 billion for

contacting that goes through everything from food to supplies. they are getting the goods delivered. there is no argument on that. but there is a failure on the side of authorities to know who they are paying in these contracts, what impact that might have in terms of waste, fraud, and abuse, and in terms of the counterinsurgency mission in afghanistan. host: that last part is what you seem to emphasize in your report. guest: we are not really tracking a lot of these companies. and they go and hire trucks and drivers and security companies,

which in many instances, turned out to be warlords. they do whatever they need to to get the goods to where they need to be, but they are all set extorting -- also extorting to get the goods to where they need to go. there is also rumors that there are bribes being paid so that these things can get through local authority. host: so in that case, dollars when they go into a taliban or their supporters, simply supporting the people that we are fighting against. guest: we have only had reports of that so far. defense personnel believes that it could be happening. certainly, local militias do not have the same interests as the karzai government.

those things are working contrary to our interests. host: your report has gotten lots of coverage. i even watched a piece on russian news on this. but it is not the first time we have heard about it. the secretary of state has talked about it. it seems we know the problem but the country, the defense department is not doing anything about it. why is that? guest: that is a good question. we have reports coming e-mails, messages to various officials over there, but nothing happens. they do not said anything over the water because of security problems, -- wire because of security problems, and we do not have an explanation monday are not following their own rules and regulations.

host: we want to continue this discussion on how your tax dollars are being spent by the defense department in the pursuit of this war, and for many of you, questioned about the war itself. republicans, 202-737-0001. democrats, 202-737-0002. independents, 202-628-0205 . some video from youtube from a convoy. this is one of the most complex supply operations that our military has faced. why is that? guest: some of the roughest terrain that you will come across in terms of the road. it looks like a moonscape for parts of it. in the most dangerous areas, there are the taliban, warlords that control aspects of that road. it is difficult. it is, in large part, what

brought down the russian army. the supply chain was a real problem for them. host: we found a report of an oil tanker that was hit on its way to deliver oil. the oil used in afghanistan is impressive. the need to get oil long distances. guest: that is apparently part of another investigation that we are doing. it is everything from oil to mraps, to water, to food. it is all essential. host: you have some qualms about the war in afghanistan, it is fair to say? guest: i am not sure that we are embarking under the most efficient and cost-effective mission. there are a limited number of al qaeda in afghanistan.

another limited amount in the border area of the pakistan. al qaeda leaders in yemen, somalia, sudan. everywhere except afghanistan we do not send in 100,000 troops on the ground. we work with indigenous government and other operations cooperative lead to root them out. so i think if we are going to do that, we need to have a system to identify the problem, anyone associated with what they are doing, and go after them similarly. i do not think it requires 100,000 troops on the ground. the counterinsurgency mission has some serious issues, and i hope the president uses this opportunity to revisit it. you do need a government that is not corrupt, which had been a problem in afghanistan, but some

of this money going in could be fueling those operations. we need to see what is a more efficient way to fight terrorism. as i say in the report, there is a lot of use for that money in this country. host: the senate confirmed general petraeus as the afghanistan commander. what does that suggest to you as far as the debate in washington? guest: they believe he is the man to get this job done. he wrote a book on counterinsurgency. i might have some questions on its effectiveness here, when you combine what we have already done in afghanistan, but certainly, he is one of the most knowledgeable people in this area. host: the report about the

strength of al qaeda it is in the "new york times" this morning. one of the country's top terrorism officials said -- let's get to your telephone calls. indianapolis. tracy, republican line. caller: good morning. and i am calling on on the subject of unemployment extensions.

i have been unemployed for one year. i had been working for 25 years. i was fired for the wrong reasons. i go to work on a biweekly basis. there are a lot of people here in indianapolis that are unemployed and cannot get jobs. for instance, one month ago, and the indianapolis motor speedway had a job fair. i went there hoping that we would be able to fill out an application, be interviewed, and maybe have a job. we arrived in the pouring rain and they are not taking applications. all it was was local businesses passing help fliers about their pompany and asking us to go on line. i can do that. i have been doing it for one

year. host: if you could, bring us to your bottom line. then we are going to move back to the subject of us can stand. caller: i am very disappointed, as a republican, that my own senator richard lugar has voted against this bill. host: could you send your thoughts to the unemployment extensions? guest: i empathize completely with what she said. my mother lost his job when he was 58. -- father lost his job when he was 58. i wish people would look beyond the partisanship that seems to be happening here, just say no to everything, and understand that people are hurting.

host: "usa today" has two stories on afghanistan -- on their forum page -- your answer to that would be what? guest: it is not a question of winning or losing. the issue is what are we concerned about? we are concerned about terrorists that are going to attack u.s. interests. we have to look at how we are going to approach this problem globally. this is a political fight between a number of different factions over there. the question is how we protect our interests. host: hollywood, florida. richard on the democrat's line.

caller: i want to take your argument on afghanistan one step further. since the 1980's, it has been nothing more than about hard cash. we created the mujahideen. i have seen video tape of the cia driving by and dropping double bags of hundreds of thousands of dollars which were picked up by the warlords. this goes on today. we are spending hard cash, printed money, and they are distributing it among their own and taking the money on of the country, which was reported today, and are vacationing, buying million-dollar homes in other countries in the gulf. this is our money, taxpayer money, hard earned money that is

going to a totally wasted effort in afghanistan. guest: that is the concern we had. this is a $2.16 billion contract with respect to trucking. but this is not the only international money inserted into afghanistan, by any means. as disturbing as this report was, as the money was going to come of the country -- out of the country, there are also all sorts of other problems that are happening and we do not have a good grip on it. i do not mean to be repetitive, but it is counter to the mission and goals that we have set their. host: east orange, new jersey.

you are next. caller: good to talk to you this morning. what i wanted to say was, we talk about the money to the warlords -- ok. but the money is coming from the streak began -- main street. we need a better policy of getting the money. i want you to explain to me -- i am asking you to explain to me -- how is that money from main street going to afghanistan and iraq, how is it going to impact main street? this is our problem. why isn't the president going after afghanistan like they are bp? we have to go after the afghanistan government. some of that money needs to come back to main street.

guest: i think that is the point of some of these remarks in the report. we have security interests and the way we have to look ahead it is, if the security concern is terrorism, or we prosecuting that the best we can? and i do not think so. i think there is a more cost- effective way to do it. we are setting up a parallel government people who are not instilling confidence and instilling trust in the people. these are the question that we need to be asking. the question is if this is adding to the power security. -- to our security. are there more cost-effective ways to do this?

afghanistan has no economy to speak of. $13 billion total on a good day, and they have not had a good day in decades. the question should be what should be our form of assistance, and how should we pursue this national security interest? our security is well invested and how strong we are and how it -pable we are to take on other issues. host: this story in the papers.

guest: that is exactly what we are talking about. there were some brothers who spent some years in jail in afghanistan for running drugs. a cousin of the president of afghanistan. now they are one of the companies on risk-management that gets to run the security for these trucking companies. they do not have security, trucks, or any drivers. well, one of them lives in dubai full-time. so how much of that money that was given to the contractor was taken as a pass through fee, was taken down of the country, and they went on and hired a warlord to be the security for getting their trucks through?

then the more lord says that he has paid off the afghan police to through the checkpoints. he started to name names and give positions. it is in terrible position. host: the story goes on to say the afghanistan to carry a team look into these investigations. how seriously do you think the karzai government looked into these types of corrections? guest: not very seriously. -- types of corruptions? this is serious business. if you look at the counter terrorism strategy, you know that all this money going in, all of this corruption in the karzai government and fueled by international efforts, it is all

working against our interests. host: sec's bill, maryland. chris on the republican line. -- sykesville, maryland. caller: you opposed the war. i assume that you are pushing for some kind of attenuated approach to this. number one, do you oppose president obama's campaign promise to prosecute the afghanistan war, and do you agree that he is incompetent in executing it? and are you going to open the oppose president obama and put forward another candidate who

can take the approach you want in the afghanistan war? what exactly is your position? are you going to stand up and have occurred for your political convictions, or will you continue to bleed the soldiers dry and allow the president to muddle through? guest: people want to turn away from partisanship tenderly come up -- and generally, but i could criticize president bush for several things. this is an example of the kind of partnership that exists out there. i could criticize obama for having inherited a difficult situation and somehow not miraculously solving it overnight. the fact is this is a difficult

situation that the president finds himself in. i have had conversations with him. is not a question of having some attenuated approach to the system. we are not trying to rule afghanistan. we are not trying to pick a fight amongst the different factions that are trying to govern the area. we are trying to fight terrorism. we should be consistent in that. we do not go into other countries with 100,000 troops in order to fight al qaeda that is there. we should be using our intelligence sources better. perhaps special forces, cooperation with other countries and their intelligence. we can do this in a more cost- effective way that will put our

resources in that effort in a more coordinated and effective way. yes, my votes will reflect that, as they always have, but rather than being critical -- there is plenty of blame to go around -- but we all have to go in there and go after al qaeda. it is a difficult decision to make. i understand the efforts of counterinsurgency are sincere and honest. i just question, given the fact that we do not have a good afghan national police and army -- and training them has proven to be very difficult -- corruption is rampant, which is working against counterinsurgency policy. i think we need to revisit it.

my recommendation is that the president comes up with a plan of how we are going to go after terrorism and cooperate with the rest of the community to talk about realigning the way that we are going about it over there. host: this is a starting point on our conversation, "warlord inc." which is available on your subcommittee website. you mentioned at the beginning, supplies getting to where they need to go. a former cia agent, commentator wrote about this and said, acknowledged that the things were getting there, but said that it was astonishing because any effort to repay canada are dependent on him.

-- kandahar are dependent on him. guest: that is part of the problem of not know who your contractors are. we brought in some top people to talk about all endorsing and contra thing out process. it was pretty well understood, in many cases, that they know who the contractor is, but they do not know who the subcontractor is. in that case, the scenario that they write about is entirely possible. you have to have that sort of disability. if you choose to do things this way, you have to have good oversight of them. you need people on their periodically to ride along, to see that the right people are not just licensed, but are not setting up a parallel militias,

armies, that are paying off bribes. there are regulations under congressional wall for these types of things. they have the regulations, they are not enforcing them. host: next phone call. new york. bob on the democrat's line. caller: usama bin laden sucked us into afghanistan the same way the soviet union got sucked in. i believe we are creating more terrorists in this middle east policy, and this war, american painters around the world, and we need to get out of the middle east. we are creating more terrorists. . .

guest: a weakened defense that they do not want to put troops on the grounds. when in fact, we all pihave a mission to keep our country say. i keep trying to refocus this thing on what are we fighting against? , it is terrorist that have in

mind going after our interests and country and focused the approach around that. i think everyone gets focused on that -- al qaeda is limited in number, but broad in scope. particularly that much of what is happening is happening over the internet. that is what we should be concerned about. i think if we focus on that, we will have a much better debate on that. host: earle on the independent line. caller: lot of people do not appreciate this war. the thing is that if we cannot secure our border, how can we possibly believe we can do anything and afghanistan? you should bring the boys home and put them on the border. that is where they need to be.

not in afghanistan. i know you guys in washington do not like to talk about the bible, but you have to remember what jesus said. your enemy can be a fortresses where it can be vagabonds. that is what they are. that is what the whole middle east is. you have to remember what you are dealing with. thank you very much. host: any comments? guest: i think in the past several years, there has been a significant increase in investment and technology on the border, and personnel. the votes on the appropriations spending bill, there is more bill \ / \ money on security. that has been a serious increase in that. keep in mind, half or more of

the people that are in the country illegally do not a crumb of cost any quarter. they come in legally and state. we need to get that right. -- they come in legally and stay. host: general petraeus was asked about corruption in his confirmation hearings. here is what he had to say. >> there have been actions taken this spring by the afghan government, the establishment of new anti-corruption bodies, the prosecution of certain cases, and also on our side, for example, the establishment of a task force 2010 headed by a two naval contracting officer, that will examine where the contract money is going. not only to our the subcontractors, but who are the subs to the subcontractors.

president karzai has committed to conducting this effort. we will obviously focus on this intently if confirmed. host: anything more to say? guest: obviously this is well overdue. i think it is great they have established the 2010 task force. the department has been aware, they do a lot of reports, and know this has been going on. host: california on the republican line. caller: in reference to afghanistan, afghan, i rraq, compared to great britain it is a far cry from giving foreign

entities access to my bank account. guest: i do not think i understand. host: this is a different question. that is the use of contracted soldiers. this viewer asks, please ask him what forces are contractors verses u.s. soldiers or is that information classified? guest: the information is not classified, unfortunately it is not certain. the best testimony was that there was 88,000 troops currently in afghanistan. some 110,000 contractors. similarly, there are fewer troops than there are contractors there. this is one issue we have been trying to get the department of defense to acknowledge as well.

we would have to know what is inherently governmental. what functions should be done by our own state department or department of defense people and what would be legitimate for contracting out. i am one believe that if it is a security mission, that should be our military. maybe this is the way it should be, and they would have a more difficult time assessing whether we should be in a certain operation. certainly contracting out security has problems with security of basic, cheering and embassy, or some other government facilities or guiding convoy from one. to the other, you have a lot of difficulties with that. if they are not in your chain of command, who do they answer to? can they pick up sticks and go home if things get tough and the middle of the combat?

who do they answer to? if the general is the mo over te and says they have to stay in fights, do they have to? there are various issues that have to be resolved. i do not think the department of defense has look at this deeply enough. they have been advising to do something about this. the department keep saying they're going to. it really has not been completed and done properly we do not think. host: what part of the war strategy is creation of the local militia? u.s. enlist new afghan village forces. uniforms, weapons, and wages. from afghanistan, the men and the remote village are in

uniforms defending their land against the taliban. new legislation hammered out by american and afghan officials and expected to be enacted by president karzai in coming weeks would authorize armed village forces across afghanistan and bring them into the country's enforcement system. guest: it is at least an effort. i think we need to have further examination. it is an effort to bring them under the government. there adjuncts to the police or military as opposed to a militia that is entirely independent.

so i think that as part of their effort to try to address the situation. i think there are lots of pitfalls that could be there if they decide to go the other way on that. this has been talked about 401 l. questions have been raised. it is an experiment, and certainly we can heope it is successful. host: we have five minutes left with mr. tierney. joseph rights for over seven years we have been a spending over 7.5 billion per month. imagine what we could have done with that money to create employment. into pockets -- and whose pockets is the money really going into? the next phone call fro mr. pittm connecticut.

caller: as i look at the wars that are going around the united states is involved in, it seems to be about drugs. what i would like to know is when we finish fighting terrorism in afghanistan and all of the country, will we start looking at the war we have on the people in the united states, which is called the war on drugs. a lot of money is invested in that, and i would like to see that money invested in to giving people jobs and cutting taxes. thank you. guest: coincidently the subcommittee believes the drugs is very much a part of this. a lot of terrorism is funded by drugs. that is whether it is in colombia or mexico or over in afghanistan. there is serious issues. a lot of that ungovernable area and afghanistan are now transfer

stations for drugs. we are constantly trying to focus on that as well with all of the other issues because they are interconnected. i agree with you, it is serious business. it is incredible amounts of money. some estimates are hundreds of billions of dollars. host: to high-paying contractors creates an incentive to stay in the war? guest: a great question. do not have an answer on that. i would hope not. i would as soon not. but they certainly impact the way that the war is prosecuted and how efficiently might be because sometimes it is more productive in terms of income to do things one way. host: georgetown, massachusetts. dan on the independent line. caller: i have contacted your office many times.

you had a new report a couple of years ago. icahn said that if i was too great deal on a curve, you would be high on the curve, but the baseline is low. guest: a backhanded comments. caller: you are talking common sense, and that seems to be less common in our government. i presented you with some information some years ago. but was pertaining to 9/11 kissell. -- itself. it is a real load of substantial evidence that the media never presented to the people of the united states, and all went into the patriarch coulpatriotic sen.

i presented you with a lot of circumstantial evidence. it looks like you responded to me directly and a letter, and you said interesting things. what i need is a hard evidence to do anything with it. host: in the interests of time, it can to wrap ucan you wrap it? caller: there is a report that there is dust all over new york city. host: we have 20 minutes left in the segment. i will stop you right there. there is a small group, very vocal that the government did not sufficiently investigate 9/11.

guest: it is classified, the things have not been ignored. i think people should be somewhat -- i know they are not converted, but i do not believe it has been ignored. i know a lot of allegations have been looked into quite deeply. host: what do you expect specifically to happen as a result of your warlord inc investigation? guest: i expect it will follow up on the recommendations we made. hopefully that is the case. hopefully they will have more transparency in to the contractors. they will review the situation of whether or not this is something that should be outsourced as opposed to brought in to the afghan national army or some other force under the control of the government in afghanistan or international

forces the responsible for it. they're going to review the whole situation of what this infusion of money and these contracts do with respect to fuelling corruption and how they will go after that. hopefully we're going to keep pushing that way. i think it should have been done earlier. we will keep pushing for results on that. i think the largest in on that is a good time to revisit on whether to counterinsurgency status is something to keep going. and the corruption issue and the situation that we have with how many al qaeda are there and are really addressing this thing internationally. host: mr. tierney, thank you for being on. we will take a break. we will go to c-span radio to get more headlines. then we began a five-day series looking at states' budgets.

>> in the headlines, elena kagan appears to be on her way towards confirmation as the 112 a supreme court justice. with republican showing a little appetite for a long-shot filibuster attempt after sparring with her on abortion, gays in the military and other issues. today the committee questions outside witnesses about the nominee. live coverage starts at 4:00 eastern on c-span radio, c-span3 television and on-line at c- span.org. initial claims for unemployment benefits rose for the second time in three weeks, a sign that layoffs are rising. the labor department says new claims jumped by 13,000 to a seasonally adjusted 472,000. analysts had expected a small drop.

laos by construction firms contributed to the increase after homes will slump last month after the expiration of the home buyer tax credit. bp's oil spill will become the largest ever in the gulf of mexico by today based on federal government estimates. the oil that has spewed four 2.5 months from the well a mile under the sea is expected to surpass the 141 million gallon mark. that eclipse of record-setting spill off the coast of mexico from 1979 to 1980. finally, a spokesperson for all gore says the former vice president welcomes a new decision to reopen an investigation into allegations that he made unwanted sexual advances to rent a massage appointment in 2006. the spokesperson says that further investigation into this matter will only benefit mr. gore. police did not explain why the

case was being reopened. those are some of the latest headlines on c-span radio. >> one of the best quotes i have ever heard about money and politics is it is like water that finds all whole. -- that finds a hole. sunday, we will talk with jeffrey smith. that is on c-span "q&a." "washington journal" continuous. >> of the executive director of the california budget project is joining us from sacramento, the state capital. as we begin a five-part series looking at states and their budget challenges. thank you for being with us. california starts the budget on july 1, as many states do. give us an overview of the state finds itself in. guest: california once again

faces a significant budget gap. our budget is out of balance by about $19 billion. i know that is a big number. our budget gap is larger than the budgets of many states. that is about what california spends in the year in the entire state prison system and all of our colleges and universities. if you wanted to balance the budget by getting that out of a product line, like gm, you would have to shut down all of the prisons, shut down the colleges and universities. big problem. host: as we go into more california specifics, we invite all of the viewers. the problems that affect california are specific to the state, but also common among many other states. this is a national discussion

about state budget choices. as you can see from the front page of the "financial times." we're focusing on california for lessons that transcend across the board. tell us about the california budget project. guest: we are a nonprofit non partisan organization that was found a little over 15 years ago to look at budget and policy choices from the perspective of how they affect low and middle income californians who might be affected by various and budget policy choices, and also to encourage californians to become more informed and to engage on budget and policy decision making. >guest: your governor does a regular video update. here is a short clip of what

governor schwarzenegger had to say about the state budget. let's get your reaction. >> the same thing in california is hurting the government and economies all around the world. ask yourself, is it the tax incentives? or is it the unsustainable cost and entitlements of growing government's? as former speaker, 80% of every government dollar in california is spent on public compensation and benefits. he hit the nail on the head. for the sake of our economy and for the sake of our budget and for the sake of our children and grandchildren is future, it is those things that must be brought under control. host: your reaction to the governor's analysis.

guest: i would agree it is the economy that is at the heart of the problem. we are very much tied into the national economy, to the global economy. when the economic conditions are tough, the state budgets are hard hit. of course states spend most of their money on wages and salaries. states, like universities in the private sector, like privatee sector health-care provider, provide services. that is how tax dollars are spent through the economy. professors' salaries. support staff in colleges and universities. support staff for the prison system. i think again that is turning a startling statistic around, but it is actually common sense. host: what particular issues as

california had the other states may not base? guest: california has the toughest rules governing our budget process. california is one of three states nationally to require more than the majority of the legislature to pass a budget under any circumstance. we are one of a dozen states to require a supermajority of the legislature to approve any state tax increase, but we're the only state in the country to have the double supermajority. we're the most perverse states and the country. we have this extraordinary requirement for consensus. you look at californians. we do not agree on a lot. we of northern california, southern california, the padres. coastal california.

we are so diverse. if we have the stuff of budget rules, that is one reason why the budgets are late. and two-thirds required for raising any state taxes has made it any more likely that lawmakers will look towards barrowing, smoke and mirrors to balance the budget. and has made it harder to come to grips with the underlying imbalance. what kind of a california do we want? what public service is do we want and how do we want to pay for them? host: we will be taking your telephone calls. q. let's begin with the telephone call from wendell, california. this is glenn on the independent

line. caller: california, like other states, finds itself in a mess because and not only spend the money foolishly, they imprison everyone they can afford to imprison. they do not want to compromise on any subject at all. they want to imprison everyone they can and run the state into the ground. i hope we can change our mind in november. we have a chance to fix our budget and make america free. have a good day, ladies. host: thank you. if you look at the trends of the past 10 years, the state is spending quite a bit more on the prison population. what is happening there? guest: the fastest single growing part of our buddet is the prison system. a lot of that has to do with a number of federal court order s

that have required additional spending on prison medical care. california is facing a court order a round overcrowding. a final decision can be reached any day now. we have that on the one hand. on the other hand, california has a strong initiative and referendum process. we have things like one of the nation's toughest three strikes law, which does mandate sentences for various types of offenders. certainly the compromise and the level of compromise in california is a tough one to achieve because of the double two-thirds vote requirement that i talked about a minute ago. one of the things we have seen repeatedly in california is lawmakers assuming that they will be able to achieve a large savings in the prison system,

but then unable to come to the agreements over the statutory changes that would be needed to achieve those savings. and certainly our budget rules require an extra unerringln exty compromise. host: 1 on the democrats' line. -- wanda on the democrats' line. caller: i agree with the independent caller in terms of their presence. i think we need to trim at the prison system. and i think just like they have the military industrial complex, we also have that in the prison system. i think arnold schwarzenegger came in touting how he was going to give education bigger -- work

on education after regard rid of gray davis. all of it has been alive. -- been a lie. they sent so many jobs out of california. we are in the state that has , twitter, google, and for us not to be getting taxed, we need taxes. that is what fuels our economy. host: let me start with job creation and the whole world of silicon valley in bringing jobs to the state. guest: california is facing one of the highest unemployment rates in the nation, certainly not the highest.

a lot of that has to do with the nature and origin of the recent downturn, largely in the housing sector california had a bigger housing boom, so when we turn to housing bust, it hurts california harder. the tech sector has always been more cyclical and california. i think we have good days and a couple of bad days. the fact that we're in a global downturn, the fact that we're facing a recovery that i think all of the experts predict will be slow, a so-called jobless recovery, is one of the factors that is over arching the state budget, not only in california but across the nation right now. so we still are at the heart of

an ovation globally, and i and many of us are concerned that some of the budget cuts we have seen in the past several years that are on the table this year will really weaken our public education system, which is why we have silicon valley. why we have the level of innovation we have had come out of california's strong tradition of investment in public schools and public higher education. i think that is one of the things that is at risk in this budget. host: the caller also referenced proposition 13. help me out with sentiments with continuing the supermajority. does that had broad popular appeal? guest: that will be tested this fall. there will be a measure that will go before the voters that would change the two-thirds requirement for passing a

budget, but it would not apply to any tax increase that might be needed to finance that spending plan. i would say it takes half the problem, but perhaps not the full problem. historically voters have shown strong support for the supermajorities. periodically we hear that may be changing. we will have a test this fall. host: colleen on the republican line from new jersey. caller: good morning. i am calling from new jersey. wokçi was in california in the 1980's. the school system was top-notch. now unfortunately hit has fallen. the prison system seems to run the state in california. the presence were all built in

1985. -- the prisons were all built in 1985. one out of every five people in california is in prison. it is known as the prison empire of the world. the people's money is going more towards the present than the school system. here in new jersey we're doing a wonderful job in cutting taxes. we pay the most property tax. we have a wonderful governor that has changed all of that. i really want to see california be on the same path that new jersey is. host: let me show an editorial about gov. christie, calling in the jersey steamroller. guest: again, suddenly we have

seen a tremendous increase on what the state spends and prisons over the last several decades. it is still a relatively small part of our budget. interestingly there was public opinion research earlier this year that asked voters whether they thought most of the state's tax dollars went. prisons pulled the highest -- poled teh highest. he highest. california spends one out of $10 on the prison system. 40 cents on the dollar to education. 10 cents on the dollar to how your education. we are still putting most of our money into education. about 30 cents on the dollar goes to hoping to human services programs. -- to helping human services

programs. i think there is a lot of urban legends on help the state spends the money. in california that is complicated by the fact that about 70 cents out of every dollar that is spent through the state budget is spent by local governments. school districts, county governments, where made in payments to individuals and various cash assistance programs where to help health-care providers. a lot of californians do not see how tax dollars move up from here in sacramento to their local community across the state. host: there is a chart, states seek financial help from the federal government as new budgets began. 30 states are relying on federal aid in fiscal 2011 to help projected state spending, but

only nine have contingency plans if congress does not approve the money. california is counting on 1.5 billion. is california one that has a contingency plan? guest: we are actually closer to $3 billion. we do not have a contingency plan because we do not have a budget yet. california typically runs later than most states. our constitution requires the legislation to send a spending plan by june 15. we missed that date. it is now the beginning of the new fiscal year. for 19 of the past 25 years california has missed that deadline. as lawmakers and the governor moved into the final rounds of budget negotiations, they will certainly be watching washington to see what we might

expect from the federal government to help move, a balanced state budgets and help ensure that there are not deeper cuts that would push the nation back into an economic downturn. host: talking about california's budget as we learn about the state fiscal challenges and the economy. next the san francisco. and caller: california is bosun had the eight largest economy in the world, -- california is supposed to have the eighth largest economy in the world, and yet we cannot afford anything. i was working on something called the initiative, which would simply change -- simply stated revenue and budget would be decided by a simple majority. until we can change the two- thirds vote, the republican

minority will continue to not allow us to pass taxes, to raise taxes or to close corporate loopholes. guest: as i talked about a few minutes ago, the double two- thirds vote requirement in california is one of the things that makes our budget process tougher. it certainly limits options that are politically available to balance the budget. we have seen over the past 15 years, because you can't cut taxes in california by a majority vote of the legislature, to bring back the $1 we face a shortfall, we have seen tax cuts that now cost the state about $10 billion per year passed by the legislature over 15 years. yet it is very difficult to close loopholes, raise revenues,

to bring our budget into balance or bring our budget into balance during tough times. host: the next call is from columbia, tennessee. this is will on the independent line. caller: could morning, ladies. i think you for providing c- span. a wonderful program. it gives us a transparency into all three branches of the government. unfortunately this nation is suffering terribly bad. california has some of the highest revenue from just movie- making. las vegas n, nevada is another e that gets millions of dollars of revenue.

i cannot understand why they do not tax that more closely. that is a washington is right now. they do not tax the rich, the ones that are in control. what i'd like to say is that c- span should be providing other visiting guests. they should provide knowledge and scientific fields as well as knowledge in the historical aspects of not only our country but the world. we need some men of wisdom or wittman of wisdom -- or women of wisdom. true wisdom comes from the fear of god. unfortunately this nation has faltered. it does not honor god. host: thank you for your call.

there is a sweetweet asking how california compares to other states in terms of taxes on business and the wealthy. guest: we are typically in a highly teens around 17th or 18th around the 50 states with respect to revenues that come into government from all sources. california has a somewhat different composition of our revenues than many states. 13, deleon marked a 1978 law that capped property-tax is, ltd. the reassessment of properties for tax purposes. with many respects, we're the mirror image of the nation. new jersey and other states typically finance most of the

local level through property taxes. here in california most of the money ffor the local school comes out of the local budget. we are overall a very modest tax state. and we have a relatively progressive tax system to our income tax. high income californians typically pay more overall. however, it is actually low to middle income californians that paid a larger share of their income. host: next is texas. this is a caller named carl on the republican line. and caller: good job c-span. i really appreciate it. i have a suggestion on the way

california can cut spending. i do not think anybody will ever do it. i think it is a good idea. you would roughly divide california into never thenorthen california and southern california, and have northern california delegates 44 spending cuts and california. the debates would be wonderfully interesting. the delegates could go back to me and say it is not meet that cut its, it is the monsters in whatever part. host: would you like to comment? host: thaguest: we had a lawmakr from the far north in california who wanted to split california into three parts. again, i think we all laughed

but again it goes back to the diversity of california. we have a little bit of everything that there is some place in the u.s. here in california. we have such tremendous diversity, which is our strength in california, but it is also what makes the restrictive budget rules so tough to live with. host: in a few minutes we will take you live to capitol hill. very briefly to show you the arrival of senator robert byrd's casket before the historic applying it in the senate chamber for the first time in 50 years that that has been done in honor of fellow senators to their colleagues. we will watch just a little bit of that. full live coverage on c-span2. next is sacramento. this is on the democrats' line. caller: i do not know where to

begin. i have lived here all my life. i have watched the state going from one of the best states in education, highways system, to where we are now, which is a big mess. my heart sinks every time republicans start leading the way because they cut and slash. right now they seem to want to privatize everything that should be commonly owned, even some of the state parks. they are not processing. we have taxes that are collected and not processed yet. they cculd go into the budget if they would be process a little bit faster. when gray davis was governor we

had an energy crisis that was largely manufactured. he may have gone a little bit back, but they got rid of him. they got rid of him on the basis of tax that was set in lock when wilson was then. if we went down to zero and our budget. host: let me jump in. it is a multi-year history and complicated. i will ask if you can pinpoint the roots of california's financial situation. guest: you can look at it in the short-term it is really the economic downturn in california. four other states that are facing tough budget years as well. when the budget mirrors what is going on in the economic activity, when revenues are tough, the budget and some false.

property taxes are down. demands on the budget also rise. people lose their jobs and look to public programs for cash assistance or programs. they lose their health care in turn to public programs. certainly in the short term it is the economy. in the long-term in california it is a much more complex picture. it is certainly decades of lowering revenues to begin. and it is tough to get the money back. it is the fact that california continues to grow, even in the downturn in california is adding 400,000 new residents per year on average. that is like a whole new city of sacramento. these are individuals who want

public services, schools, roads, water systems. everything that the rest of us want as well. the fastest growing population is the elderly. we have a lot of very tough challenges here in california, and we have a difficult time reaching that level of consensus on what do we want from the government and what are we willing to pay for the public services. host: as promised, i avoid to take a quick break to go to live to capitol hill. -- i want to take a quick break to go to live on to capitol hill. we will watch a little bit of this. senator robert byrd is being honored by his congressional colleagues.

this is the current senator staff of senator byrd. we will watch for a minute as the coffin is taken to the top of the capitol steps where it will be met by the seeator's family.

>> forward march.

>> the body at the 92 year-old senator from west virginia died this week, the longest serving

member of congress. he will lie in repose in the united states and bird -- senate chamber for most of the day today. the ceremony close to carry uca. the senators will be able to pay respects. the last time this was done in 1967. you are watching live coverage on c-span. it continues on c-span2. our guest has been joining us from california as we dive more deeply into discussions understanding the state of california's budget. let's get back into it. we have a question, as population growth become a sustainability issue in california? is the population growing at a desirable trait? guest: probably a little out

of my area of expertise. when we go through these cycles of. very tough budget years, we tend to forget that california still is a wonderful place. we have incredible natural beauty. we have the industries that our hearts of the national, global economy. the most innovative people in the world. to me, i look at it as a good reminder of what is good in california. certainly why my parents and grandparents came to this date. i think it is a reminder of what california can be going forward. host: a number of people asking about the illegal population and the state and its effect on the budget situation. guest: again, i think this is an

area where there is a lot of controversy. california, like other states, does not provide benefits to undocumented immigrants, yet they are an important part of our economy. they are part of our taxpaying population. host: as we learn and discussed california's budget with jean ross, our next question is from california. caller: if we have this whole problem with the budget, where is all the tax money we have been paying for the last 25 years? some of us get laid off, and that money sits in the funds annually. when it comes down to trying to recover it, you have a year to recover it. if you go back to work a year

before that year is up, and you get laid off again, you are done with that. that year is over. everything levitate in is gone. as far as the budget works, where is this money:? -- everything you have earned is gone. guest: i am not sure what fund the guest is referring to. host: is there a state unemployment fund? guest: we are part of the national system, like all states are. in california the caller may be referring to the fact that we have seen the failure of congress to pass extended unemployment insurance benefits several times in recent weeks, but that is really a national issue more than one share in california. host: thing i do want to get on

the table before we close is your responsibility for pensions, which i have seen debt obligations are estimated as high as half a trillion dollars, $500 billion. i am wondering if you can talk about that and how that is being addressed by the state. guest: i am not sure what that figure refers to. i think the dollar figure you sites, sounds a little high to me. california pension systems are actually well funded relative to those and other states. all public employee pension systems have been hit hard by the downturn in the economy. what we have seen in the past several weeks are negotiations between the governors, state employee unions, which have made changes to the pension rules

here in california. it appears that the remainder of the state's employee unions will be negotiated that issue as well. i think that is inappropriate way for issues to be addressed. host: time for quick chequestion from california. caller: isn't the unions really the big problem in california, especially when it comes to the legislature. host: we have about 20 seconds left. guest: i think the real problem is that the revenues that come into the budget on an annual basis are significantly less than the money, we need to pay for public services. we have a tough road to hell. host ifh