price quite badly. of course, as you know, the regulatory authorities have had their leadership changed. there will be very severe consequences, as there always are when something goes wrong. i do not think he has suggested that this is anything other than a very serious accident for which there will be consequences. host: our guest is adam boulton. he is with sky news. thank you for joining us today. . . thanks for joining us today. that is all for washington journal. we will be back tomorrow morning at 7:00 a.m. eastern

time. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] . .

 >> "washington journal"

continues. host: jane oates with the department of labor, assistant secretary for employment and training. talk with us about unemployment benefits. guest: thanks. i am delighted to be here. host: president obama will turn up pressure on the senate to pass an extension of unemployment benefits monday morning, according to a white house official who said that obama will tell the story of americans in need of the extension and he will have strong words for republicans who previously supported and of one extensions under republican presidents but refuse to offer relief for middle-class families today.

talk wh us about where we are at here regarding the extension of unemployment benefits. guest: has been eight weeks for two and a half million people since they got the last check. acting we all know -- we hear e stories about how long an american can live without a paycheck. clearly an unemployment american is having the most of the coke in making it. so, we are really optimistic and really hopeful that the senate will -- delighted the president is taking such an active role. host: you are assistant secretary for employment and training administration. what is your organization's role in working with states to get unemployment benefits to citizens? guest: part of the department of labor at works in direct partnership with the states to use the unemployment compensation system but also the work force investment system, which is the system of training and information versus those who are -- so those that are dislocating get the information

they need to get back to work. guest: host: states have different ways of doing things. the new breakdown how will vary from state to state? guest: first of all, each state -- and we provided a map for your viewers -- each state has legislation that is kind of the umbrella for how the state will administer unemployment compensation. this year we put out millions of dollars of the state can modernize. part-time workers in most states are not eligible for unemployment. even though we know that many people can only work part time because they cannot find full- time employment. h., we have two different maps. a top us through them. guest: the multicolored map tells you where we were in may when the extensi -- when we were still giving three tiers of benefits. that tells you the weeks each

state offered. the map with the fewer colors is what is in existence today. i did many will have questions of how many weeks i am entitled to and hopefully this affirmation -- and i know you will put our 800 number -- they can get specific information. host: the number that she mentioned is the part of labor pulls the 3 line -- 877 -- us2- jobs. if you like to call land -- how is the unemployment insurance program set up? who is responsibl guest: normally the stes are the ones who pay. normally they are 26 weeks and the average benefit is right now across the country $300 a week. but each state puts their

ceiling, each state decides what the mimum will be in their particular state. under the recovery act, congress and the president put two new programs into being, and both are 100 percent federally funded. when you hear people talk aut 99 wee of eligibility, anything betwe 26 weeks and 99 weeks is 100 percent some -- 100% covered by the recovery fund. host: anything you are involved in all in terms of job training and to problems of how to find a job? guest: yes, our office also runs the one-stop career system. we know we have given you the service locator website. if folks are not aware where they are in the communities. they can help you write your resume, ramp upour skills or put you into a full-fledged longer-term training. i would really encourage everyone not to wait until they have exhausted their benefits to visit that one stop. because the sooner you get ready

retooling, the soon you will be ready to take a job. host: in "the new york times" by peter goodman,fter job training, still scrambling for a job. talk about the record 6.8 million americans who have been officially jobless for six months or longer. the profile of one gentleman who was trying to find a job in new york, in brooklyn recently applied for welfare benefits because it cannot find the job. he said the training was fruitless -- no one is hiring. mr. goodm reports that 100,000 americans have enrolled in the programs only to remain out of work. it intensified skepticism as training for a cure for unemployment. what advice you have four folks thinking about going into some of the job-training programs or taking on debt to go to college for some work force prepared as trning. guest: i think people uncovering that should really think carefully about it because it is

something that haunts you years after you are placed in new job. but i think the article, if you were to read into it, it clearly says we are seeing improvement in how we are focusing job- training on jobs in demand. his story is tragic. we don't want anyone to go through training and not get a job at the end of the training. but clearly the training has to be aligned with labor market information. that means a line with real jobs available in your community. we are finding -- and the story says that jerry -- says that -- when people are lined up the " right training they get a job right away and if you look deeper and the story, someone trained in machine design, clearly said he finished training and got a job next day. i don't want to minimize. this economy has been really tough on older workers and young workers, especially people of color. we see double-digit employment -- unemployment in african-

americans and latinos. that is a huge, persistent problem that we will have to do a heavier dose to respond to. host: in the story from "the new york times" it says the obama administration argues expanded job-training already delivered success. it talks about how women are having more success finding jobs after they are given job- training. peter goodman reports that among those unemployed for six months or longer at the end of may, more than 60% were men, according to the bureau of labor statistics. more than 39% in their mid '40's r older. it can be harder for them to find a job. guest: absolutely. no one is sugarcoating the fact that for every single job today

there are five people on and floyd looking for that job. so, clely when you know that the supply and demand is n working in your favor, the more tools you have in your tool kit, the better chance you have of being the person who gets the job against the four other competitors. host: i mentioned the numbers you can call. we also have a line set up for unemployed callers. let's go to texas, john, republican. good morning. caller: i question is on unemployment, the benefs. those thousands of college graduates went to school and cannot work because they cannot find a job, but they don't get anything on the extension side -- not what was paid in, the first 26 weeks digging after that whe congress extends some think it is taxpayer free money. the second part, how many of these people in the texas workforce commission or all of them across the country are

calling to make sure that everyone who is on unemployment is out there looking for work rather than take in the word for it because a lot of things -- times people can sign up on the internet and there is no oversight and that is where fraud can come in because people can sit there and sleep late. i think of anyone is on the extension side of on and on the benefits, that ought to be out there fro7:00 in morning until 5:00 in the afternoon looking forward. guest: thank you very much, john. let me answer your first question about college graduates. to be eligible for any state for unemployment benefits you have to have worked full time. unfortunately many of our college graduates have worked part time to support them -- themselves while in college but have never been full-time employed, so therefore there are many few that are eligible for the basic 26 weeks and all of the federal extensions are billed on your eligibility for the base 26 weeks but is second point we cannot agree more.

we think that t states, in partnership with federal government, are really trying to vigorously pursue the fraud component of ui. actually states randomly search, check with people about where they are searching. some states force you to send in cards every week about who you actively searched with. and then the state randomly follows up. we are doing on-line tools for states to work on this. so, this is a persistent problem and one that,f you know of someone -- and this could be all of your color -- if you know someone fraudulently using this system, please call our 800 number and you will have our commitment that we will go after fraud in that sysem as -- rigorously as weak hand. host: floor -- fort lauderdale, florida. independent line.

caller: this is a broader question. talking about fraud within the syem right now. i am looking at the big picture -- the fraud taking place on the balance sheets of large banks and timothy got near's program programto giehner's recapitalize the banks, and this could be very encompassing what is happening in the labor market right now. we are all scrambling right now but the big fraud is going on and i would hope that you would support somebody like elizabeth warren to help out people who feel it is necessary to go out and commit fraud because there are no jobs in thenemployment field. guest: elizabeth warren is such a leader. my time as a staff person on the senate, i got to see her work

and she is just a terrific advocate for working people and doing the right thing. in terms of secretary dieter -- geithner, to be honest my only interaction with him is when we have to sign the checks for those borrowing out of treasury. i know the department of labor undersecretary solis is working on fraud to make sure we get every ounce of money the taxpayers are asked us to oversee with such care to the benefit of the american people. i have to assume that directive is coming from the president, and i have to assume secretary geithner and his dad is doing it with the same diligent efforts that we are. host: texas, tammys a democratic caller. good morning. tammy, hello. you are on with jane oates. caller: i just have a couple of questions. one, there are a lotf people

in texas who have lost their unemployment benefits and there are no jobs down here. president obama is trying to do hisob. has congress ever tried about trying to work on what we get paid and tried to make bills on what we get paid? back withcongress get god and quit demanding -- there are people out of work and they get paid every month and we can get their bills paid but there are no jobs out there. president obama is trying and nobody wants to help. guest: hopefully we are going to see the first to changing congressional action in the senate tomorrow when, god willing, they vote to extend unemployment benefits, which they have not done in eight weeks. in terms of jobs, hoping people who've exhausted benefits will look at opportunities they have

with the department of labour. we just put out $75 million to the states for a concept that is as old as the hills and somehow has been lost over the last several years, on-the-job training. that means this money will be used to actually put people to work with real employers and tried to give them an audition. we will subsidize up to 50% of the wages while the tining is going on for up to six months. and those folks will walk away having a relationship with an employer and having something real on their resume. we are very hopeful that this will be so successful tt let -- next year when congress comes back they say let us do more. we do this with internal money that we he through the national emergency grant money, and we think that this could be a game changer. i firmly believe one business sees somebody who is talented, they are not going to let them go. they are going to say i want that employee and i will not let my competitor pick them up. i hope you will be in touch with

your local work force board for you or for the folks in texas, where -- these 99 errors are a real concern for all of us. not just for people who have temporarily lost their benefits because the senate has failed to act, but we think that they 99ers, who will not get any more benefits even when the vote ppens tomorrow, need something different. notice, i am not saying something new because on-the-job training is not a new concept. it is just a concept that we dusted off we toooff the shelf. host: you may have those who have expired benefits even if the government does act. what about the people who get caught in the window, if the senate does act benefits can be continued. how does the process even work? guest: your state will be in touch with you on how to reactivate benefits. this is very difficult for the states. i don't want to minimize the fact that the states are working

with antiquated i.t. systems, and when they have this kind of paus, it takes them a few days just to get it back together. some are the states are still programming with cobol, people out there who have studied things in college know that it was a 1970's and tension and not a 21st century invention. but the state will get back in touch with you. and if you have any questions, again, called the 877 number that is on the screen, because we get you specifics on your state once the vote happens tomorrow, how long it will take for your state to get up and ready. host: louisville, ky. republican line. good morning. caller: yes, my comment is -- i realize these people need that money. and i want them to get it. get it out of the

stimulus that is unused, just like the republicans are saying, and not increase the debt? let's reasonable. guest: i think everyone is very concerned about the debt. in fact, as we are preparing our f y-12 budget we are at a 5% decrease across every domestic department. the president has really given a firm directives that we are going to do what we can at each department to reduce the deficit. hear what i have to say to you, the stimulus money is spent. it is out there trying to do at is meant to do, create jobs, give people temporary assistance where needed. but unemployment has been something that our nation has done as an emergency any time we have had a recession. and i hope we are not going to

try to balance our federal budget and reduce the federal deficit at the of hard-working people like you. we can't say to people, we are not going to give you your unemployment check because we are worried about the deficit. and i hope you would agree with me -- i am happy to tighten my belt act eta. i think everybody in this administration would be happy to tighten their belts but for people will are worried about how they will pay their rent, how they will put food on the table f their children, i don't think -- this is the time for us to not pass this extension and denied them the money. i know this is not what you were suggesting, but for right now there is no other source but to add to the deficit for what i think are critical needs. host: let us go to walt who is from denver, an independent scholar who is unemployed. caller: how are you doing? you talk about college people. i am an early-year-old person. i left the work force about a

year before this whole thi blew up and went back to college to retool because what i was doing, i knew i was not going to be the to do it until i was 65 or 70 years old, so i took the opportunity to do that. now i paid into the system continuously for 30-plus years and took some time off to go to school, graduated, got a bachelor's degree, so forth and so one, and i just can't find anything. there is nothing out tre. even in my old career field, it is in a depression. that is in a depression right now. so, there is really nothing for me out there. people are looking for experienced people in the field. i am a career changer, so it kind of knocks me out. in the old field there's nothing

there. i can't get anything from anybody. guest: walt, i am so sorry for yourself which. you did the right thing, trying to retool, not having a crystal ball being able to look into the future to see what will happen with the job situation. the unemployment system does not help people like you unless it you can go back and file a claim. it sounds like you were in school for a year. it is hard for me to give a definitive answer without knowing all the facts. but if you did voluntarily leave your last job, you would not be eligible. the reason for separation is one of the defining elements of the unemployment situation, unemployment compensation such addition. but what i can suggest is you go to your local one-stop. u may be able to get some help. you definitely will be able to assistance in job search. you may be able to get somebody

at your local one-stop who can look at your skills from aviation -- you did not tell us what you were retooling for -- but looking at your skills wondered decades and aviation, with what you are retooling for, they may be able to really up figure out what area of you would have such a great customize resonate -- resume. i know colorado is hurting just like other states, but i encourage you to go into that one-stop, get what a professional and see of they cannot map out a better job search plan becking get you a job quicker. host: "the new york times" profiled one unemployed woman, terry sadler, who lives in kentucky. jesus says and not worry about tomorrow but -- because tomorrow will worry about it self. it is clear she has trouble mustering enough faith.

are you hearing about a lot of these personal stories? guest: when the secretary travels, when i travel, people are always coming up to us saying, we are searching, we are looking, there is nothing available, we are retooling, doing what we need to do, and it is tragic. we can't afford get that work is such an important part of how american citizens -- we can't afford get that work is such a bore part about americans define themselves. in her case, peoplere leaning on their religions, churches, food banks are overwhelmed with a need, they are leaning on families. everybody seems to be trying to help in this situation. but for many, many people, it has now gone on for a year or

longer. and they have just exhausted every resour that they have. host: lancaster, south carolina, democratic column. good morning. go right ahead it. caller: i have two questions. i worked at a job over 37 years and they went somewhere else. i hear about -- it makes it seem like we are being given the spirit -- and this. did we not pay unemployment -- into unemployment for the 30 years i worked. my second question is, he said the maximum was 99 weeks, if i understood it right. guest: yes, with the federal extension. caller: and the first question -- and paying into unemployment, did we not pay into unemployment? guest: actually unemployment is funded through an employer tax, so your employer pays it.

0.8% of the first $7,000 you make every year. that is what the employers pay. literally because of your hard work you put into that, in terms of your work but in terms of actual dollars it is 100% employer funded. host: carl, republican, west virginia. caller: i am a very conservative person but i am a compassionate person, too. but i recall going up and down and apalachicola in the 1950's and i remember lyndon johnson in the great society -- you recall that? guest: yes, sir. caller: what happened there, he made us all dependent on the federal government and there was no incentive for anyone to try to help themselves. so, you know, the way i see it, if you really want to help, why

don't you do something about paying child care for single moms so that they canork? . guest: to our partners in the

federal government, health and human services. we agree with you. we think that sing moms really are making a decision about is it worth it for me to go to work by the time i pay truck -- a child care and transportation? there is really nothing left to support my child. the government does have those programs. the federal government is listening to a single moms around the country, to look into their eligibility of the program. they should look into their older dodi to the snack food program and wic, which gives mothers a chance to give their children nutritious foods. this is not a handout. this is so that you can be sure to give your children what they need so they can be healthy. host: an article in the open court seattle times" argues

that extending unemployment is making travel hunters too choosy. what is your reaction to that? guest: i spent some time in seattle with senator patty mary a few months ago and we met with hundreds of people. this was months ago? -- this was months ago. they were panicked about not being able to find a job. unemployment replaces about one- third of your wages. very few people can live on one third of what they have been accustomed to living on. i think it is just the opposite. i think people are taking the

first jabr available in many situations because they are afraid there is not going to be a better paying job coming down the pike. i would say these benefits are lifelines. they are not allowing people to be choosy. they are allowing people to feed their chiren while they're waiting for the first job that mes along. host: how let's talk with tom from vermont. hi, tom. caller: good morning. i'm calling about the letter that came out july 8 that terminated unemployment a matter what your they were on because the unemployment rate was verified to fall below 6.5% unemployment. and i think that is great that vermonts doing so well and i would like to credit jim douglas, bernie sanders, patrick leahy and also brian dewpoint for these efforts. however, what do all of these people do who are still

unemployed, looking at all aspects, in the hardware stores and food places and everything else who cannot find work? because i i understand -- because i understand that the census workers are no longer working and we are immediately cut off immediately. guest: i apologize, i am not familiar with the vermont letter. but i can tell you a number of states sent lette are to folks explaining the delay, buand many states have done very worried that the federal government would never act on the extensions. if you would call the number that is on the screen, if we can get you specific information about the letter. and the triggering off in states where the unemployment rate has

gone there and may very well be a prlem, but because of the timing of this letter, i am hesitant to give you a mre thorough answer than that. but i am happy to do it later today once i have reviewed the letter. host: states with high unemployment, including nevada, michigan, california and ohio, those are all in the 12. -- 12% to 14% range. those with low unemployment include new hampshire, nebraska, south dakota and north dakota. est: those governments in those low unemployment states would be quick to tell you that it is still double what their unemployment rate was a year ago. i think everyone is struggling. clearly mining in the western states has been a huge help, states like wyoming and montana and the dakotas.

they have rarely relied on their natural resources. but in those states that are battling persistently high unemployment -- rhode island, michigan, california have been double-digit for 14 months. when you think about what that means, how do we attract businesses ther i was just with the secretary in northarolina at a new business last week that may be separators for the lithium batteries really hoping -- i know the president was in michigan during the same thing -- that company has doubled its work force with stimulus dollars. i think there we are finding in a gray area -- when people to years ago started saying what is a green job, we start looking at solar panels, these new lithium tteries. i know i spoke to a company in south carolina that 100% of

theirusiness is international. maybe the lithium battery will lead us back to what we will agree is a balance. host:isted call from a democrat line in maryland, good morning. -- let's take a call from the democrats line in maryland, good morning. caller how can they take somebody's wages away from them? some people that do the job do not make enough to make ends meet. so, when you get unemployment, it is really not enough. when you combine them both and a look at what is going on in this country, out in the w guest: thank you. i would just say to you that i hope lots of callers are listening. your two senators have been supporters of this from the beginning. let's just hope they can convince some of the others of their colleagues in the senate

to vote the right way tomorrow, to vote for people who are good americans try to find employment. this bill would give them the extension they need until the end of november, only up to 99 weeks so they can put food on the table. host: dallas, texas, republican column. good morning. caller: good morning. i am a republican, i just turned 47 in june. i lost my job in may of 2009 after 12 years with city financial. i have not been able to find anything. my benefits have run out. i am getting ready to lose everything. i am a republican. these guys have to vote this thing in for these people that have run out of their benefits.

i don't have anyone to turn to. i do not know what to do. . i do not have anye to turn to. i do not know what to do. guest: mark, i am so sorry, first of all. people who he been hard- working like you, nine years with the same company. that says that you were a good worker and your company valued you because in that industry, you would have been gone before. i hope that you have been able to access the opportunities, the services at the local one stop in texas. i spent some time before joining the administration in new jersey in saudi financial sector collapse while i was working for governor corzine -- and saw the financial sector collapsed while i was working for governor corzine.

people who worked in the financial sector could easily be trained to be middle school or high school math teachers to get the job they needed or to be a part of the community. in second place where we had a great success was a back room and financial-services at hospitals. if you could work with numbers, you could easily learn the skills to do all of the new building that is coming in health care. all of the things that were lined in health rit -- health i.t.. i would still encourage you, and i know this is very difficult to hear. i hear of your frustration, and again, i give you great sai the. but let me give you some advice. get into that one stop if you have not already, some down with a career counselor.

look at your hard skills and your soft skills and try to get real live with something else through some retraining. host: ron in missouri and the independent line. good morning. caller: i hope so. i have been working all my life and i'm ying to find any jobs that are out there. i do not care what is, cutting down trees. [unintelligible] host: ron, your breaking up on us. unfortunately, we lost him due to recession. let's move on to gail in ohio. caller: i have been off unemployment over a year-and-a- half. i went back to school to do medical assistin now i am finished and can't find a job.

if there are jobs in this small town, they are all taken. imad how to drive 30 miles from my own just $49 to $10 -- at the -- just for a $9 to $10 job. now i'm living off of my 401k. i have no money coming in. i am still supporting a 15-year- old, trying to get him ready for school, taking care of him. no medical at all. i got some for my son. i do not know what else to do. i have tried all i can possibly do and then you have people that say we are lazy and are being picky. i am not being picky. i am just trying to find a job. host: since you did the

retrning, the uc that you would have been better served -- and do you see that you would have been better served if you have retrained into a different field or have followed different paths? caller: yes. i thought this would be a good feel to get into, but now they are saying i have to have experience. i am state certified. i went into phlebotomy medical a assisting. i have my state certifications, but they are saying after our experience. host: we are hearing this from a lot of callers, that they lack experience. guest: espially in their mid to career changers. that is why we went with his on- the-job training model. we think that -- a gail should look into this. ohio is a state that is going to

look into this. we think that getting people into the employers will help get them higher. i would use this as an example, the incredible increase we have seen in staffing services. ou know, all of the kinds of fol that give temporary help. they have seen an increase for the past eight months. it tells us that employers want to take a look at someone on the job site before they hire them. hospitals can participate in this. gale said she had training in phlebotomy and things like that, hospitals can be a great place to do this. and again, it may just be enough. the folks of the business, whether a hospital or other, will want to take a look at that employee. host: let's move on to david, republican collar. caller: i am a 36-year-old man and i am a strict southern conservative, but this issue has really made me rethink that.

i feel that my state and my own party has turned their back on us when they put their stamp of approval on other big spending and they say they cannot support this. i will be voting democrats this time. that is something i never have done. my question is, does it matter if you work for years for a company or 30 years -- work for four years for a company or 30 years? once your approved, and you get your pension?

guest: my blanket answer would be yes, but i would encourage you to call us so we can give you the specifics of thecase. when used the example of four years or 40 years, that would on make a difference. but six months would make a difference in terms of eligibility for unemployment. that is why you need to give us your specifs when youcall in and we can give you and specific answer in terms of your state law and your job experience and the eligibility that you would have. but for most people, if you were eligible for the base 26 weeks, you would be eligible for the federal extensions. host: let's go over that u.s. department toll-free line 1-877-

these great issues to bring up. thanks for the callers. >> president obama scheduled to talk this morning about unemployment and the economy. he was expected at 10:33, running a little late. we will have his remarks when he starts in a few moments. until then, more on the economy and the administration's business policies. guest: the coast of cnbc's "the call." thanks for joining us. guest: good morning. thanks for having me. host: you recently broke the glass between the administration and business has been the high drama of the summer. guest: i think this is a bad aspect of the economic problem. guest: there is a bad aspect to the economic problem. you see these business roundtable and others that are

really in a blood war with the white house over taxes, regulation spending, trade, they're all very outspoken about it. the ceo of verizon started this about one month ago. people that pick up on that are asking for business investment tax relief. they would like to have much greater certainty about a rash of regulations coming out of health care, financial bank regulations and other areas. many economists believe that a business investment would be the best job-gainer. we have a very iffy economic recovery. my own point of view on this is that the white house should listen to what businesses are saying. we have the highest corporate tax rate of the large countries

around the world, we should from more -- promote more business investment. president obama has done this with the smallest companies, why not make it universal for all american businesses? the war between the whe house and big business is not a good thing for the economy. host: what are some of the key criticisms you have about the direction the president is taking? guest: the fears of higher taxes are difficult. it affects the cost of investment in new projects. for my money, you want to create jobs, you need help the businesses and capital to finance them. why would we raise those tax rates on capital or any form of investment? with taxes rising in the obama care health care program, that is one k point.

i note that businessmen i have interviewed on our show, they are concerned that these significant budget deficits and a large volume of over-spending, it sets up a strong possibility that tax rates are going to rise in the future, even more than people are talking about right now, which is a deterrent to investment. this massive confusion about the cost and implementation of these regulations, we justad a bank regulations bill passed the senate last thursday asking of corporate end user is using the market to hedge derivative positions for crops and agriculture, interest rates or currency, things of that sort, airlines hedging jet fuel, will they be able to do it? how expensive will be? in general there are a lot of

factors working against the normal function of business. you want to clear up that uncertainty. there is a lot cash out there, as much as $2 trillion by some estimates, sitting on corporate balance sheets. the trick is to put it to work. right now there seems to be a fear, a worry on the part of business that the future is so uncertain. without this new capital we will might get a healthy recovery. host: you write "the best thing to come out of the administration this summer was timothy geithner's pledge to me to place a limit on tax rates for investor capital gains and dividends. no one wants to see an increase in these tax rates, but at least these pledges mean that the tax rates will stay low." what is the implication of that? guest: if secretary timothy geithner and have his way, the

bush tax cuts expire at the end of this year. those are across the board. personal tax rates for all income levels, plus capital gains, dividends, and the estate tax. what he told me in an interview that i had with him about 10 days ago, his pference and the preference of the white house is to take the dividend's tax, which is scheduled to expire at 15%, not to let it go to 40%. he would like to cap that at 20%. the capital gains tax is scheduled to go to 20%. he would like to put a cap on that. the health care bill will raise that more in a couple of years, but that aside. i thought that timothy geithner was the least instructive. i would rather not raise those tax rates at all. but at least there is certainty that those key investment tax rates will stay historic low.

i gave him high marks for that. the troubl is, that is just one piece of the pie. a lot of people in business are worried that we will not get certainty regarding a myriad of other issues. i think that timothy geithner was instructive, for a few days the stock market responded positively. those investors and firms, you want to know that your after-tax investment return is going to be high and up to justify whatever cost or expense it takes to start a new project that might hi jobs. what we need to do here, i think, clear up these confusions and uncertainties. no. 2, to tell you the truth, business is taxed too much. i would like to see that change. i would like to see full-fledged tax reform, get rid of the loopholes for large firms and small firms. you would see a much better jobs

recovery if we help business, not government. st: doug, good morning. welcome. caller: having the capital gains tax lower than income distorts the economy. the difference in taxation will move money away fro wages and into profits, artificially expanding the financial sector, making a bubble more likely. capital gains and regular encompass more likely contributing factors in the great depression and the recent recession. we should gradually moved to axing capital gains the same as gula incumbent, letting the free markets work.

guest: i have some sympathy with that view. what the caller is saying is interesting. i do not agree that the capital gains tax caused the financial meltdown. far from it. but i will say this. i do not know why we tax savings and investment. the $1 of income that you are on the job should cover all of that. why tax it a second time as capital gains when you sell an asset you might have purchased with the end come? why tax, for example, the so- called death tax or inheritance tax? it has already been taxed several times. why not simplify the system, get rid of the credits, deductions, and exemptions, make it so that you can put it on a page or two, keep those tax rates in line, do

not tax savings at all. why should we tax capital gains and dividends? we have taxed at once, do not do it. we should not tax capital. we should try to tax consumption as much as possible with a neutral tax system. i do not agree with the caller 100%, but he makes some good points. host: ocean city, good morning. caller: it was reported on your channel about seven minutes ago that there was a mistake om the treasury department in terms of closi you're going live to the white house where president obama makes remarks on the economy. >> good morning, everybody. right now across this country many americans are sitting at the kitchen table, scanning the

classifieds, updating their resumes, or sending out another job application, hoping that this time they will hear back from a potential employer. they are filled with a sense of uncertainty about where their next paycheck will come from. i know the only thing that will entirely free them of those worries, the only thing that will fully lift that sense of uncertainty is the security of a new job. to that end, we all have to continue efforts to do everything in our power to spur growth and hire. i hope the senate acts this week on a package of tax cuts and expanded lending for small businesses, where most of america's jobs are created. we have a lot of work to do, to make sure that we are digging ourselves out of this tough economic hole.

even as we work to jump-start job growth in the private sector, even as we work to get businesses hiring again, we also have another responsibility, to offer emergency assistance to people who desperately need it. to americans laid off in this recession. we have a responsibility to help them make ends meet and support their families even as they are looking for another job. that is why it is essential to pass the unemployment insurance extension that comes up for a vote tomorrow. we need to pass this for men like jim, who is with me today. he worked as a parts manager at a honda dealership until two years ago. he has posted his resume everywhere and gone door to door looking for jobs but has not gotten a single interview.

he is trying to be strong for his two young children, but now that he has exhausted his unemployment benefits, that is getting harder to do. we need to pass this for women like lesley, who lost her job at a fitness center last year and has been looking for it ever since. because she is eligible for only a few more weeks of unemployment, she is doing what she never thought she would have to do, she is turning to her father for financial support. we need to pass this for americans like denise kitson, who was laid off from a real- estate agency earlier this year. she has been interviewing for jobs but so far nothing has turned up. meanwhile, she is falling farther and farther behind on her rent. she is worried about what the future holds with her unemployment benefits set to expire. if we need to pass this all americans if not able to find work in an economy where there

are five applicants for every opening. if we need emergency relief to help them pay the rent and cover utilities and put food on the table while they are looking for another job. for a long time there has been a tradition under both democratic and republican presidents to offer relief to the unemployed. that was the case under my predecessor when republican senators voted several times to extend emergency unemployment benefits. but right now these benefits, benefits that are often a person's sole source of income while looking for work, are in jeopardy. i have to say, after years of championing policy is to turn a record surplus into a massive deficit, people who had no problem spending hundreds of billions of dollars on tax breaks for the wealthiest americans now say that we should not offer relief to middle-class americans like these three people who really need help.

over the past few weeks a majority of senators have tried not once, not twice, but three times to extend emergency relief on a temporary basis. each time the partisan minority in the senate has used parliamentary maneuvers to block a vote denying millions of people much needed relief. these leaders in the senate advancing a misguided notion that emergency relief somehow discourages people from looking for a job should talk to these folks. that attitude reflects a lack of faith in the american people. because the americans that i hear from in letters and the meat in town hall meetings, americans like lesley and jim and the knees are not looking for a handout. they desperately want to work. just right now they cannot find

a job. these are honest, decent, hard- working folks who have fallen on hard times through no fault of their own and have nowhere else to turn to accept unemployment benefits and the emergency relief to help them weather this economic storm. tomorrow we will have another chance to offer them that relief, to do right by not just jim and lesley antony's but all the americans who need a helping hand right now. i hope we see that. it is time to stop holding workers laid off in this recession hostage to washington politics. it is time to do what is right, not for the next election, but for the middle class. we have to stop blocking emergency relief for americans out of work. we have to extend unemployment insurance. we need to pass the tax cuts for small businesses and lending for small businesses. times are hard right now.

we are moving in the right direction. i know it is getting close to an election, but if there are times when you put elections aside. this is one of those times. that is what i hope members of congress on both sides of the aisle will do tomorrow. thanks very much.

>> we have a special web page set up where you can find hearings, speeches, and analysis and colleagues to outside organizations tracking the money for the stimulus. that is c-span.org/stimulus. a little bit later today, the department of homeland security and the pentagon will hold a joint briefing for security measures for the southwestern

border at 11:30 eastern on c- span. the house and senate gavel in for business today pretty houses starting at 12:00 eastern for general speeches, legislative work gets under way at 2:00. among the issues is unemployment benefits, additional war spending, and a couple oil drilling bills. that is live on c-span and the senate is gaveling in at 2:00 eastern. the will of the swearing in of robert byrd's replacement and a vote of expanding -- a vote of extending unemployment benefits. right now, on c-span 3, an event featuring u.s. and chinese academics live all day on cspan 3.

>> this week, the u.s. second court of appeals struck down the fcc's indecency policy. we will talk about the decision with an attorney from fox news and patrick nolan who filed a brief on the case. that is tonight on "the communicators" cspan to. >> the senate judiciary committee will vote on tuesday on the nomination of elena kagan as supreme court justice. watch live coverage on cspan 3 and learn more about the nation's highest court in cspan's latest book. it provides unique insight about the court and is available in hard cover and as an ebook. this morning, "washington journal" looked at the impending

visit of david cameron to the united states and the oil spill. service created by america's cable companies. >> "washington journal" continues. host: adam boulton is the political editor of sky news. thank you for joining us this morning. we are happy to have you on the eve of david cameron's first reserve to the white house as prime minister. tell us about what you expect. guest: it is always important, the first meeting as prime minister with the president. and it is very exciting for officials to meet their opposites. of course, the two men have met before, most recently at the g-8 in canada. but this time around there is a certain urgency, particularly to afghanistan and the level of carnage and loss of life among british and american troops and other nato forces. that is really forcing the agenda. and david cameron, like barack

obama, has got the message out that this is not his war. he will do what he can to get british troops out as soon as possible, probably 2015 by the time hemostasis at the next election. secondly, -- probably 2015 by the time he faces an next election. secondly, the ties over the credit crunch. everything is going to be overcast by the oil spill. it may be the bp is a multinational company with as many employees in the u.s. as in britain, but it is fairly crucial to the british pension industry, for example. trying to discuss -- and i'm sure we will not get the details of what the options are for handling bp. i think that is going to be very important, indeed.

going beyond that, matters that are on the common agenda, such as what to do about nuclear power of friction in iran, threats in north korea and elsewhere -- nuclear proliferation in iran, threats in north korea and elsewhere. but i think david cameron will also be discussing the special relationship between britain and america. they do see each other as the kind of the faul-- the fault partners. host: give us a sense of the president's comments, the administration's comments. we have certainly been hearing about it. guest: everyone can see in environmental disaster and everyone is synthetic to those who have been affected. with that said, there has been a feeling that given that there are thousands and thousands of rigs in the gulf of mexico, many

of them run by exxon or other " companies, to be in this as kind of a british problem, to target personal attacks on turning a word -- tony heyward and suggesting that there is some of our cases stemming fault with the ndp has angered quite a lot of the -- with in bp has angered a lot of the public. and perhaps it is being slammed very hard in the america media and elsewhere, whereas for example, union carbide caused far greater problems, and killed many people in india and did not get anything like the hammering from the american media from the damage it did in india. host: for more you are seeing on the ground, is it true that the british people are taking this

personally? guest: lots of people to have environmental concerns are just as angry about bp has anybody else, and there are lots of demonstrations against bp at its headquarters and the museum's its sponsors and the rest of it. but there is a feeling to a certain extent that the american media reaction has chosen to put bp in the corner because it is associated with britain and that an american company had this accident to them it might be treated rather differently. host: sky news conducted an online survey. this was not a scientific poll, but 1200 people responded and nearly a third -- nearly a third responded that they believe the u.k. and u.s. relationships is more important than it was then before the gulf oil spill.

and that the relationship between the administration is more negative. guest: i think there's the realization that no one is interested in the company if it goes out of business. -- no one's interest is that if the company goes out of business. i think there has been quite a bit of intervention in the affairs of the company. although, the conventional wisdom among those following this event in britain is that both the chancellor and the chief executive are unlikely to be your next time -- this time next year. host: when both of the leaders went to the g-8 summit, what was the message said mr. cameron brought home to the people in the u.k. about that exchange?

guest: it sounds a little cheesy, i suppose, but the big excitement was that the president and prime minister wrote in marine one, whereas britons do not tend to look after other leaders to the extent that the president of the united states is looked after. then, of course, there was the meeting in the context of the world cup. there was quite a lot of discussion about so ago. but the most in question -- but important question was that david cameron appeared on the financial letter to carry the day. he had been arguing, as far as britain was concerned, that there was not room for an extra stimulus to the economy because we could not afford it because our tax were going up and big cuts were having to be made.

there were some moves coming out of the white house said they were much more in favor of a second stimulus. and we have the outcome, which was that there was no second stimulus. in policy terms, that was seen as a success by the cameron administration. host: let's go to josh. good morning. caller: i sent out an e-mail to quite a few media and they will not really talk about it for send e-mails back. basically, the chairman of simmons and co. international that was on the ratigan show on july 15 made some very inflammatory comments on a possible bp cover-up and government cover-up. they just reiterated all of those facts on the news. and he is calling for the rest of the executives and stating

that there is a whole that is spewing 120,000 barrels of oil per day. he is not a fringe character. he has been on many mainstream shows. he has a page on wikipedia and was on the council of foreign relations. i just wonder, furthering an agenda for himself or some videos -- there is a large program going on. will this be what they are talking about when they need to 9? guest: a cover-up of what exactly? a coverup of the events leading up to the leak, or the size of a leak? host: we lost him. my apologies. we have already moved on. guest: right, i would say there will be an investigation leading

up to what happened on the explosion on the reagan. clearly, the u.s. authorities are involved in that and if they thought that something had gone wrong there, already could have intervened. as far as the cover of the scale of the disaster, i think it is true that in the early days bp would concede -- and i was down in houston at the crisis headquarters in may -- that there was an underestimation of the lead early on and they have revised those estimates. and of course, those estimates are coming from federal authorities and state authorities as well. "cover up" is an easy term to use in terms of conspiracy theory, but it seems to me this is a disaster and many are concerned. host: this from nbc, bp had

myths it lobbied british bolivia prison transfer. -- for libyan prison transfers. this, of course, is over the pan am flight 103 bomber on mcgraw he. guest: it is a little bit more complicated than that. in the last days of tony blair as prime minister, tony blair and colonel gaddafi signed an exploration deal for bp. at the time this followed a sort of warning towards colonel gaddafi by tony blair. one of the issues that libyans said they hoped would come out of it improved relations was a prisoner exchange. libyans held in britain in general and britons held in libya. that was not directly related to

the flight 103 bomber. nor would -- was it that britons would have liked usindressing in return. what happened a couple of years later is that he was released on compassionate grounds. he was dying of cancer. the problem is that was last summer and he is still alive. a lot of people in britain and other states are very angry. but no one has yet managed to show -- it stretches credibility of it -- a direct link between bp lobbying and his release. host: this was just released today that both the scottish

government and the u.k. government have denied bp lobbying for his release. it says it has yet to receive an east is a request in the senate inquiry. certainly, it is something they will be talking about. guest: yes, it will. although, it was a scottish decision. i think there is a lot of politics going on in this and it has proved to be an and barbara the decision to release him. there is a certain element in which the scottish government is kicking back and if it can transfer blame to the larger government, it will do so. cameron was not elected then. cameron of the time was on record of being -- as being critical of the release ofal-

megrahi. i think he would say to the american people, i am angry like you. host: let's go to chris in connecticut. caller: the realy here is that what this also shows is that there is unlimited supply of oil in the ocean. we need federal raid control when it comes to the price of gasoline in the u.s. to -- federal rate control when it comes to the price of gasoline in the u.s. the charges way to buy because there are abundant supplies in the ocean. host: we're focusing now about meeting between president obama and the new prime minister of the u.k., david cameron.

do you have any questions about that? caller: yes, they have problems with the oil drilling in the gulf and their problems and do not want to solve them. guest: what we have discovered is that deep water oil extraction is a high risk business. it is taking place be -- a mile beneath the surface. and when this happened and the rig blew, they did not have the things in place -- i can assure you there were hundreds and hundreds of people working on engineering solutions to this problem, but they did not have an automatic answer. it has leased for three months. that has brought to all of us the reality of the risks of the oil business. host: let's hear from teresa, a republican in tacoma, washington.

caller: i believe it was a libyan doctor who died in the lockerbie bombing and he had three months to live. obviously, it was a false diagnoses by someone who wanted him released in the first place. nobody seems to bring that question up at all. i think it was disgraceful. guest: i think it was true data libyan -- that he had access to a libyan doctor, but not true that the diagnosis was made by a libyan. it was made by one of the best cancer authorities in skoglund. a scottish doctor -- in scotland. a scottish doctor actually examined him and had no reason to give him the prognosis that he did falsely. of course, it has turned out to be wrong.

host: our guest, adam boulton, is the political editor of sky news. during the 2010 general election campaign, he monitored the first ever sky news debate between gordon brown, david cameron and nicolenick clegg. what incident -- what inside did you gain from that? was it clear that there was a winner? did david cameron come out on top? , guest: what it did was transformed the british election. the third candidate come on it clegg, did extraordinarily well. -- the third candidate, nick klatten, did extraordinarily well and as a result we have an interesting consortium of parties.

it really did change the face of british politics in a way that we had not predicted. caller: you have been talking a lot about the press on bp and those kinds of things between americans and british people. but the main media is talking about bp and they are nbc branches. they are owned by general electric and that is a competitor of bp. they want to keep getting those tax grants. ge also got $138 billion from the obama fdic. nbc is owned by general electric. guest: a political reality is that when something goes wrong, someone -- people look for

someone to blame. when you're talking about the technical difficulties in dealing with the owasco, to a certain extent -- with the oil spill, to a certain extent, what could the u.s. government do? you look for someone to blame. bp were the obvious responsible people. when you 10 -- when you get angry with people, you tend to pick out a person's fault. affaiand likewise, the media believes a certain way. if your not involved in a certain company in a particular disaster, that i think it is a natural instinct for journalism to jump in and start pointing the everything is to blame. host: robert indiana,

independent collar. caller: if you look deeper of the libyan situation as to what caused the whole situation, we have the time were invading libyan airspace with our aircraft. and there was some other altercation, i cannot remember the facts about it. and we shot missiles into the and killed quaddafi's son. guest: there was a great deal of hostility between the zero companies -- countries as a result of the bombing that was ordered by reagan. as you say, round 100 casualties in tripoli. and around the time that tony

blair to open up these new warmth relations with colonel gaddafi and he gave up his support for international terrorism, gave up voluntarily as weapons programs to would -- international inspection, at the time that was seen as a major gop political gain. it was also seen that libyan oil wawould be coming back on the street for western companies. obviously, al-megrahi, who was responsible for the pan am flight has been seen as the counter side to that. there as been a lot of doubt in britain as to whether he was the person actually responsible or simply put up by colonel gaddafi as the price of settling the matter. although, he was convicted in a scottish court. what was interesting is that in

both the case of the bp oil spill and in the case of libya, the driver behind it was our enormous thurston for oil -- thirst for oil. host: gordon, republican in lisbon, maine. good morning. caller: a quick question for you. has the prime minister's itinerary been laid out as of yet? and will he have the privilege of speaking in front of the full house of representatives? guest: no, he is not going to do an address to congress. i think the reason is very simple. he was only elected a couple of months ago and has not earned that honor yet. he will be giving a speech with mayor bloomberg as those in new york city to the nasdaq stock exchange. but generally speaking, in

britain, we consider invitations to address our parliament, and you do to address your congress, as an honor. it could be compared to barack obama being given the nobel prize early on in his career. it would be a bit premature for david cameron to speak to congress. that said, he is going to go to congress and meet with congressional leaders and with the vice president as well as the president. host: adam boulton is the author of the book, "tony's 10 years of." he has also won the supreme judges award. what will britain's be looking to see when david cameron comes home? what do they want to see him stand up to obama on? there's one piece that i read

that said that he does not need to be president obama's pool. he needs to have some sort of presence. guest: yeah, there is the feeling with tony blair and particularly with tony blair and george bush that there was a closeness in their relations over the iraq war, which was highly controversial. some people felt that tony blair was a bit eager to please the united states. just being prepared to stand up and say, britain and america are friends, but we do not have to agree on absolutely everything. if you say jump, i do not have to say how high, things like that. but also in terms of body language and the way they interact with each other during whatever news conference that

they end up giving, people know that the last prime minister that we have, gordon brown, was a bit of a social misfit. he was a bit awkward in publications. i think people will be hoping to see prime minister -- a prime minister newstands alongside the u.s. president and looks comfortable, looks as if the u.s. president will rate him as an equal. and barring accidents, david cameron will be around for the next four years, so in that sense, it is worth barack obama investing more in this relationship than it was in the case of gordon brown, who was only your for his first year of office. -- only here for obama's first year of office. host: go ahead, you're on with adam boulton. caller: i am on the air?

host: do you have anything to say? caller: with a company like bp, how much are they worth, and you think there's a chance of them going belly up? guest: we know that the share price dropped dramatically and there comes a point where if you're sure try -- your share price drops very low, the your in danger of -- you are in danger of takeover. there was talk that exxon was interested in bp. although it is a very large company, one of the top four companies in europe, i believe, and globally also, pretty much in the top-10, it has taken a tremendous hit. we have seen some very well-

known brands in the past go down. this is possible. although, actually containing the cost of all this out -- of the oil disaster and the compensation of the people provided, that this does not get into -- of the people, provided that this is not getting too punitive legislation, it itheree for the long haul. host: next call from ohio, go ahead. caller: the person responsible for digging a well, the platform, and bringing it online knew that he cut a lot of corners, and got it as cheap as he could, got his well in early and he would get huge bonuses.

i think this whole disaster is all around these people looking at their huge bonuses. host: when you hear the word become monday you think british petroleum or big corporation? caller: big corporation. host: ok, that would be different. you keep hearing about british petroleum and amerada on that word, but -- but as petroleum, and hammering on that word. guest: if a personal remark is made about you, you tend to make it -- take it personally. there has already been a great deal of investigation into what went wrong. one of the things that i discovered out of this, which i have to say i did not know, is

that i did not know that rigs are actually built and operated by other companies. in this case, an american company. and many say that they have been jailed by another american company, halliburton. -- hav >> we will go live to a briefing on the government plan to deploy troops on the border of mexico and arizona >> temporary support to border protection of up to 1200 national guard personnel to serve as a bridge to longer-term enhancement in border protection and capabilities. dod has been working closely with the white house, the

department of a homeland security, customs and border protection as well as the southwest border state and the national guard, obviously, on the details of this deployment which we are here today to talk about. at the request of the department of homeland security, the national guard deployment will provide a 1-year bridge to be able to enable customs patrol to hire approximately 1000 additional agents. this is a tough challenge and the defense department looks forward to this partnership. today, we have with us alan bernstein who is the commissioner of u.s. customs and border protection, john morton, the director of customs enforcement, and general craig mckinley. each of them will provide remarks and take your questions. gentlemen, welcome to the briefing room and thank you for

coming in briefing us today. >> thank you and good morning ladies and gentlemen. i am allen burson with customs and border protection. this nation has been engaged in the latest chapters of bring the southwest border under control in terms of confronting the threats that we face there. this morning, with my colleagues, director morton and general mckinley, we address the next stage in this ongoing effort. since the janet napolitano took her place as the secretary of homeland security in the administration of president obama, we have seen a building of cost efforts but an increase in the resources devoted to the southwest border in an

unprecedented way. we have seen in the edition in accordance with the elements of the strategy we have consistently fought -- consistently followed with infrastructure personnel, strategy, and technology. secretary napolitano announced the active deployment of 1200 national guard troops on the southwest border. that will begin on august 1. the efforts of the national guard will be to support the personnel of dhs -- that dhs has placed on the border since 2009. in accordance with the deployment of the national guard, in august, we will see an increase of approximately 300 agents and cbp officers together

with an increase in the technology that will be made available. we have mobile surveillance systems we have used with great effect in detecting and facilitating the apprehension of illegal entry of both illegal aliens and drugs coming across our border. we will also deploy as of august 1, 6 additional aviation assets, a-star helicopters and other aircraft to assist along with the infrastructure of the agents and to the technology we have in place for the protection of the border. the national guardsmen that will deploy on august 1 although preparations have been under way to make that possible and we will continue to ramp up in ways that general michael in will discuss -- general mckinley will discuss, will support dhs

personnel on the border. they will supply entry identification teamwork indications to our agents to permit our agents to react to the illegal entry across our border whether it be illegal immigration or illegal narcotics trafficking. what we see then is a continuation of efforts that have been under way but also an intensification of that that will be followed over time with the president's supplemental appropriation for the southwest border. there will be two additional unmanned uas aviation assets for deployment.

what we have seen as a result is a decrease in illegal alien and trade amounting to 23% across the border, an increase in the seizure and interdiction of drugs amounting to 50%, and an increase and a 30% seizure of weapons. this indicates the direction we are moving is the correct one. it also acknowledges that we have additional work to do with the announcement today. the deployment of august 1 of the president's supplemental budget and the additional efforts we will be taking in concert, we expect to see this

progress sustained. >> good morning, i am john morton, the assistant secretary of homeland security. promoting border security is an essential part of our mission at ice. we are dedicated to the investigation and prosecution of organized criminals engaged in border smuggling whether that be the smuggling of people, cash, firearms, or drugs. our office of enforcement and removal is our sister agency cbp to ensure that illegal aliens and border crossings are remote. last year was a record year for ice on that score. we removed 387,000 people from

the united states. many of them more criminal aliens. those were the nine highest numbers in our nation's history. we will further increase our efforts along the border, efforts already at an all-time high. as of june 1 of 2010, we have deployed an additional 300 ice special agents and removal officers and intelligence analysts along the four southwest border states and mexico. we are heading the national guardsmen who will serve as intelligence analysts in the four states along the border to help us focus on our crossbar -- border smuggling investigations.

we are placing evidence -- emphasis in the sector in arizona, an area favored by smugglers and the principal point of illegal entry in the united states along the southwest border. this is how we will augment our efforts in arizona which will be by opening a new investigative office in ahu arizona to focus on cross border crime and will deploy it border deployment jump team of specially trained agents in douglas, arizona. that is in southeast arizona where the rancher was murdered. we will deploy additional ice attorneys to prosecute illegal re-entering the country after removal. we are presently prosecuting every single felon who reenters

the comp -- country through the tucson sector. we will be able to jointly investigate with mexican authorities the smugglers who operate on the mexican side. we will have a total of 40 ice police in mexico city, the largest we have ever had in mexico city and that will make it our largest office in the world. these enhancements build on recent advances we had earlier this year and late last year. in april, we conducted operation" in plain sight."

47 people engaged in smuggling through in nogales. this was the largest smuggling investigation of its kind. we took out a network of five different transportation companies directly involved in illegal immigration. in march, we opened our state- of-the-art flight operations center in phoenix for the removal of individuals in the company illegally by air. this center has already supported the removal of 12,000 aliens found to be living unlawfully in the united states. in october, ice and cbp jointly started a program with mexican authorities to prosecute mexican drug smugglers apprehended on the u.s. side of the border and prosecute them back in mexico.

thank you very much. >> commissioner berson, secretary morton, it is a pleasure to be here. we are 40,000 men and women making up your national guard and i am working on behalf of the adjutant general on behalf of the border states to say that we are very pleased to be in support of our interagency partners, the 12 other members of the national guard that will be assigned have already started in the preliminary planning stages of the effort. our ramp up will be over time and we will make sure that all our soldiers and airmen are well qualified, well integrated, and well-briefed on the mission at hand. we are pleased because along the southwest border, we have had an integration effort of counter-

narcotics for over two decades with 300 of our men and women working with the enter agency partners. this augmentation force will be one in which our department will fully coordinate and be in support of the lead agencies here. that concludes my brief opening statement and i would love to take your questions. >> we will open it up for the press. >> there was a car bombing across the border and you talked about the interdiction of illegal immigration and drugs but i wonder how much of this now passed to sort of read direct its attention to the kind of violence that seems to be more escalated across the border.

>> since 2006 when president calderon took the decision to confront organized crime particularly as shown by the summit between president calderon and president obama, we have been deeply involved in assisting mexico to deal with the violence that has been generated with this confrontation with organized crime. the interest -- the incident in juarez is a big concern for both governments and will look into this to ascertain exactly what kind of explosion -- explosive devices, if any, were involved. the violence with which we have seen since 2006 has been increasing in the last two years and that is a great

concern. this latest incident is one in a long string of violent incidents. the precise nature of it is one we need to work with our mexican colleagues and counterparts to discover exactly what it was and what implications it may have. >> they national guard being deployed, will they help and that sort of intelligence work? >> not directly, but this effort to secure and rendered more say the border in balls confronting trans-national criminal organizations. to the extent that the national guard will assist law enforcement on the border to protect and trees -- to protect and trees and analyze those, the general has indicated there is a connection but not a direct connection. >> i have a question about the

guardsmen. when will all 1200 be deployed? when will they all be there? can you tell us what kind of training they received ahead of time? what can you tell us about their rules of engagement? when will they be allowed to use lethal force? >> the training is on going pretty planning for that trend will take place over the next several weeks. we believe that our criminal analysts will receive training in texas and arizona and our entry identification teams. we believe we will be fully ready for the month of august as we ramp up but surely by september, we should have a powerful forces in the field working with our partners. we want to make sure that each and every soldier or airman, because they could come from the air national guard or the army national guard, has been fully trained.

the use of a force will be well coordinated and they are the same as our counter-narcotics teams that are there now. self preservation only, self- defense only, and obviously the agents that we will be assisting will have lead in any type of engagement. those are the general rules of engagement we are passing out to the field. these cards and will be under the command and control of their governors and adjutant general so that the state will retain control over the individual members of the national guard. >> commissioner, the white house had said before that the members of the national guard would not have direct contact with migrants pri is this still the role of these particular national guard members?

if you could also give us a statement in spanish, we would appreciate it. >> the traditional relationship between law enforcement on the border and the national guard which is a longstanding one of at least two decades will also prevail in this situation. the national guard is there to support the efforts of law enforcement, not to have a direct law enforcement role, not to confront and was confronted with any particular threat. this is a question of supporting law enforcement. the national guard has done that extremely well in the past and we trust they will do so again on this occasion. [speaking spanish]

>> [unintelligible] some of said the border patrols operating on the old arizona patrol and how was the cbp regulating them? what about the black list? i understand the cbp received a blacklist in april. what happened with that list o if there were investigations regarding that list? >> let me start with the last question.

we are investigating the circumstances of how the list was received a ice, but at this point there does not seem to be any indication that the list was used in any way to conduct an investigation or enforcement action. that is the initial assessment. >> am i correct that your question dealt with the reports about a militia on the border? i have seen those reports but have not actually confirmed or been advised as to the specific activities. in the past while the rights of all americans to express themselves is respected and guarded, it is very critical to operations at the border that there be no interference with

low activities of law enforcement. -- law activities of law enforcement. that has been made clear to those who are present on the border, that they must comply with all law and much -- must not interfere with legitimate law-enforcement activities. i would suspect that would be the guidance here as well. >> general mckinley -- [unintelligible] is the national guard during specialties that cannot be obtained anywhere else? >> they worked with our interagency partners accidentally over two decades. that area between the agents and us is well understood. we will supply those things which homeland security has asked us to supply and those are

criminal analysts and entry identification team specialists. we will do some work, as the secretary said, with intelligence analysis. those are specifically the jobs we have been asked to do. the national guard has been involved at home but also overseas in our efforts in iraq and afghanistan for these are efforts that i think will bring synergy and realty more together. our men and women will do a great job when asked. >> president bush did something similar to this a few years back with more national guardsmen on the border, yet the problem seems worse than ever. why did that fail and what will

be different this time? the last time they were there to allow more agents to be hired, why did that plan fell and what is different about this time? >> this is a continuation of an ongoing effort. this is not an end point. this is a continuing strengthening of the border. this is happening in unprecedented ways in terms of the resources as we move forward. the addition ice jams andabp agents that have been requested continues to give us additional resources that we need to continue to assert control over the various corridors of the southwest border. i would suggest that we look at that as a process of continuing to strengthen the border rather than as some endpoint. we have to continue on the

president's direction to bring this border under control and be able to deal with the trans- national criminal organizations that continue to attempt and smuggle narcotics and aliens coming north and take the guns and money going south. to this extent, the guard is -- has been a pride and tested support along the border and i am confident they will prove that again in this instance. >> will this now be a pattern where every few years you have to call in the national guard? >> i think each case will have to be dealt with on the merits as this one has been. i believe those on the past proved that we continue to resources the border and build on the efforts that have been

done and assess the progress as to whether or not additional resources are needed. >> we have seen an escalation of violence in mexico and the cartels are using car bombs. are you more concerned about this situation? will the u.s. government provide better help perhaps with the military to apply their experience from iraq and afghanistan? >> as i indicated before, the nature of the explosive device contained in the car that led to the death of the federal officers in mexico is still under investigation and needs to be identified. the fact of the matter is that violence has been proceeding and aix-les-bains in mexico as a result of this award -- and escalating in mexico as a result of the civil war and those cartels.

we see this as part of an ongoing threat that we have been cooperating deeply with the government of mexico to confront. this effort involves providing assistance, information sharing, and certain technical assistance. i don't have any information as to what possibly might be done in connection with this, but i am sure it will be the subject of consultation. >> can you tell us more of the troops along the border? [unintelligible] >> those discussions are ongoing and no agreement has been reached and there has been no flights. we have been in the southwest for some years use uav assets to provide situational awareness and to permit us to detect and