the u.s.? guest: 98% of the supply in the united states comes from north america. host: all right. i think that does it for -- we've run out of time for you but thank you for being with us this morning. we appreciate it. for talking to our viewers directly. guest: it's my pleasure. thank you for having me. host: and we'll continue with our energy series tomorrow. we'll be talking a look at wind technology, and then on friday solar power. thanks for being with us. we'll be back tomorrow 7:00 a.m. eastern time. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] .

>> linda! linda! linda! linda! linda!

>> ♪ [applause] >> and i love you. [laughter] i think some of my most fondest memories of this campaign trail will be little ones like that, who have shown us spontaneously and done little things. that really warms my heart because i'm really a sucker for kids. i want to thank all of you for being here tonight and special thanks to my family, some of them couldn't be here, my friends, my tireless staff, and to all of the volunteers, all -- many of you and all of you. [cheers and applause]

because certainly without the efforts of all of our volunteers, i wouldn't be standing here tonight having completed two rounds of the three that we have to go. i also tonight want to thank my opponent, rob simmons and peter schiff. they ran terrific races. and their loyal supporters worked their hearts out for candidates in whom they really believed. this is a very competitive, compassionate and heartfelt campaign but at the end of the day, we are all part of the republican family, the connecticut family. [applause] now, as we all know families don't always get along and they don't always agree.

but in the end, they do stand together. now, whatever our disagreements have been in this primary, i want to make one thing clear -- our party, our state, and our country owes rob simmons an enormous debt of gratitude for his service -- [applause] and we also owe a debt to peter schiff, had 30 has brought enormous clarity and passion to the issues of the economy and individual rights. [applause] tonight i think i speak for every republican in this state in inviting rob and peter to join us as we fight to win this seat for all of the people of connecticut. [cheers and applause]

i said since the day we started this campaign that the support of the voters of connecticut isn't bestowed by the establishment or the pundits or the media. it isn't a birthright. it can't be bought. it needs to be earned. and tonight i'm humbled to have earned your support. [applause] and i am honored to be your republican nominee for the united states senate fromson connecticut! [cheers and applause] >> linda! linda! linda! linda! linda! linda!

>> blumenthal -- >> we began this campaign almost 11 months ago today, and since then, i've crisscrossed this state, i've been to over 660 events, i've bren to many of the towns and cities and i've had some of the most incredible experiences meeting and talking with all of the people of connecticut. i've not been everywhere yet, but i hope in the next few weeks prior to the election in november that i will get to more and more cities and meet more and more of the wonderful people of connecticut. [applause] i want to understand your problems and your concerns and i want to hear about them

firsthand. unlike someone else, i won't need to go to vancouver about 3,000 miles away to know about it. [applause] i understand that there are people who are hurting because i see it all around our tate. i know what that feels like because i've been there. people ask me every day linda, why did you decide to run for the united states senate? and i can tell you it is because i had a great fear that the american dream was in the greatest jeopardy it has ever been in our lifetime and i didn't want to lose that opportunity of the american dream for our children and our grandchildren. [applause] i'm alarmed by the reckless

spending, massive debt and tax increases coming from washington. it's suffocating our small businesses and it's killing our jobs. i believe the direction which our leaders are taking us is threatening not only our well-being but also the well-being of those next generations to come. i think you'll agree with me the answer is not bigger government. it's smaller government. [applause] the answer isn't another billion dollars in stimulus spending, it's less spending. [cheers and applause] the answer isn't higher taxes on job creators, it's lower taxes. [applause]

the great communicator ronald reagan had it right. but this president and this congress have it wrong. the past -- the path which they're leading us is not working. folks, i get it. i understand that experience because i've lived it. i understand the impact that higher taxes, increased regulation and the continuing uncertainty that small businesses are trying to work within today and i understand how that is negatively impacting them. they're trying to keep their doors open and having a difficult time of it. that kind of experience, that understanding is sorely lacking in washington, and we're going to send a senator to washington who understands that. [cheers and applause]

and for the first time in decades, we're going to send a republican senator to washington. [cheers and applause] >> linda! linda! linda! linda! linda! linda! linda! linda! linda! linda! >> i pledge to you today that i will be a voice for change. i will work with republicans, democrats, and independents to forge consensus and drive a new direction. this campaign has never been about political pundits or the establishment. this campaign is about you. [applause]

and i promise you, i won't ever forget that you hired me and that i work for you. [applause] so thank you from the bottom of my heart for everything you have done so far in this campaign. but our campaign starts tonight and it starts with all of you. [applause] thank you very much. and god bless you. [cheers and applause] >> those remarks from the last night in the colorado governor g.o.p. primary governor bill ritter did not seek re-election so dan mays, a first-time

candidate who founded a credit agency defeated former republican governor scott mcinnis. dan mays will face denver mayor john hickenlooper in november. also incumbent michael bennett defeated andrew roam an off for his party's nomination and republican ken buck defeated former colorado lieutenant governor jane norton in the senate republican nomination. we get comments from senator michael bennett after his win last night. this is just under 20 minutes. >> thank you. thank you. thank you. thank you, colorado and first of all, let's express how lucky we are to have mark udall as our united states senator. [applause] and i hope you'll join me in thanking bill ritter for his

incredible service as governor of the state of colorado. [applause] you know, first of all, it is so nice to see so many familiar faces. i can't wait for the party to start. it was just a week ago that the political pundits and the washington oddsmakers started counting us out of this race. they didn't think we were negative enough. that the way to win was to shout the loudest and angriest, to spend more time talking about our opponent than talking about what we stand for. to the pundits -- [applause] thank you. so to the pundits and the talking heads, i have a simple message -- welcome to colorado.

[applause] as all of you know and as most of colorado knows now, this election is the first time my name has ever been on a ballot. and after only 20 months in the senate and on the campaign trail, after traveling over 25,000 miles to all 64 counties, many more than once, many more than 10 and 20 times -- [laughter] from the western slope to the eastern plains, from the san louise valley to the denver suburbs, i know one thing -- washington has a lot to learn from colorado. [cheers and applause]

the sad fact is that washington is full of politicians who are more interested in scoring points and calling names than doing the hard work to turn our country and this economy around. and the gap between what we hear from the talking heads on television and what i hear in town hall meetings all across our state has never been wider than it is today. but there is good news. our country does not end at the potomac river. [cheers and applause] and every week when i return home to colorado, i'm reminded that we have the power to change our politics, that we can start making decisions based on what's right and what works and not what makes the best sound bites. i'm more optimistic than ever that colorado will lead the

way, creating better jobs, better schools, and a brighter future for this state and our country, and i know we can do it together, democrats, independents, and republicans that we can check our party registration at the door, that we can set aside long-held grievances and that we can show washington it's time to get to work. [cheers and applause] coloradans know the stakes are too high and this election too important to settle for tired arguments and political games. they know elections are about choices, about where we stand on the issues, and this november the choice could not be clearer. do we want a return to the failed washington policies of

the last decade that drove us into the mess we're in today? >> no! >> or are we going to move forward together to build an economy that works for every single american? [applause] will we surrender to destructive anger and cynical politics? no. or will we embrace optimism about how much we can overcome and accomplish together? do we want a senator who answers only to the extremes of his or her party, even when it flies in the face of progress? >> no! >> or will we remember our colorado independence, roll up our sleeves and get to work? >> yes! [applause]

>> i look forward to a real debate with the nominee of the other party about the direction we want to take colorado and the country, but tonight i want to take a minute to thank everyone whose blood, sweat and tears went into the last year and a half, volunteering -- [applause] thank you. thank you. volunteering, knocking on doors, making calls and talking with your friends and neighbors, you are the reason we're celebrating tonight. thank you. [applause] to our dedicated staff and volunteers who worked long days and nights, to build this campaign, thank you. thank you, thank you.

[applause] there they all are. and i also especially want to thank the thousands of coloradans who have come to my town hall meetings, some to agree with me, some to disagree, some to share their ideas, some to criticize. all of you have made me better at my job. [applause] by the way, there's something else i need to tell you although you already know it but i can tell you after traveling so many thousands miles across our beautiful state of colorado, we live in the most beautiful state in the

union right here in colorado. [applause] and most important, to my wonderful wife susan -- [applause] >> susan! susan! susan! susan! susan! susan! susan! susan! susan! >> she is unbelievable. and our three little girls, caroline, and lita and pam. this race is about colorado's families and for us it's been a

family project every step of the way. it has not been easy for me to spend so much time away from you, and i know it has been far harder for to you put up with the uncertainty and even cruelty that can come with politics. i love you all more than words can express. [applause] for those of you here tonight and all across this great state who gave your time, your energy, and your support to this campaign, to ensure we can keep on fighting for colorado together, tonight is your victory. and i thank you for that. and to those of you who cast your vote for andrew romanoff,

i will work hard to prove myself worthy of your support. [applause] the issues that have divided us in this campaign are so much smaller than the hopes and values that we share. andrew has spent his career committed to this state, and to our party. i know this campaign doesn't mark the end of that work and i look forward to working with him to build on the progress we have made. [applause] in this campaign we will work hard to earn the votes of democrats, independents, and republicans by offering real-world solutions based on -- sweetheart -- [laughter] based on real-life experiences. see what i mean?

for creating jobs, improving our schools and cutting the deficits that threaten to drown our children in debt. my time at the denver public schools and working with john hickenlooper, our next governor -- [cheers and applause] to balance budgets that improve our city have prepared me to get things done in the senate. and my experience in business has given me a perspective that is different than most people back in washington. but i had absolutely no idea that being a parent would prepare me for the senate most of all. [laughter] i know you all know exactly from the -- from the laughter i know you exactly what i'm talking about. 45 minutes into a long road trip after the excitement wears off, the kids are in the back seat doing everything they can

to bother one another. and every time you turn around, they immediately put on their best smile and point their fingers at the other one. [laughter] well, that back seat is an awful lot like the united states senate. [applause] except for mark. except for mark. [applause] the bottom line is this -- washington needs a lot less finger pointing and name calling and a lot more problem solving. i know, i know we can do this, that we can honor the legacy of our parents and grandparents by facing up to our problems, solving them and leaving more opportunity, not less to our kids and grandkids and it starts right here in colorado.

[applause] i have to admit and i know this may come as a surprise, but toward the end of this primary i got just a little tired of seeing all those tv ads. how about you? >> yes! >> so i took off on a 24-hour tour covering hundreds of miles and visiting 18 cities and towns in red parts of the state and blue parts of the state. i listened to the hard-working men and women who are trying to make ends meet for their families by holding down the graveyard shift in factories, coffee shops, fire stations and hospitals, and let me tell you something -- they are completely uninterested in the political games. i saw some of our most hopeful workplaces like essence solar where i watched as people

created bendable solar cells for luggage and even clothing turning a great idea in colorado. in watkins in the middle of the night i met a group of firefighters just back from an emergency. some were volunteers putting in 36 hours a month, the equivalent of a full week's work, for free, to help their neighbors. it just gets in your blood, one of them told me. and in fort morgan i met a woman who had just completed her nursing degree and was proud to be working a night shift in the emergency room, helping people who badly needed it. she liked working nights, she said, so she could be with her kids during the day. they have hard jobs, and heavy responsibilities. they deserve a government that doesn't add to their burdens but helps them do their jobs, protect and educate their children. [applause]

and one more thing. and one more thing -- they deserve leaders who share the optimism of colorado's spice brothers at the farmers' market in greeley, i bought a shaker of their mixed spice because they said it was great for beef jerky. [laughter] they said they had just gotten started, they told me but their sign behind them showed they had big dreams. "soon to be world famous" it said. soon to be world famous. now, that's the spirit of colorado. [applause] yes, times are hard right now, but together, we will build a future where our kids and grandkids will thrive. together we'll start making

responsible choices and stop writing checks for our children to cover. together, we'll turn this economy around and put our state and our country back to work. we'll strengthen our schools and make sure america remains the world's leader in business, innovation and opportunity. [applause] and together we will win this senate seat! [applause] colorado, it is long past time to cast off the divisive, do-nothing politics of the past and to get to work.

this is the time to seize our place in history and work to meet the shared aspirations we have for our kids, our grandkids and prepare colorado and this country to lead in the 21st century and we will do this together. thank you for your support, thank you for your help, thank you. thank you. thank you. [applause]

>> book tv in prime time continues tonight at 8:00 eastern. the books about members of congress. historians david and jean hiddler on the life of the western star, long-time senator henry clay. joseph wheeland with "mr. adams' last crusade." and the life of former senator jesse helms and the life and career of speaker of the house nancy pelosi. book tv is in prime time all this week on c-span 2. >> i would tell you based on review of hundreds of tapes, hundreds of hours that they're

not conspirators. they're not sitting there saying you know what do you think about that, how did is that going to play, they really don't know what's going on. >> this week marks the anniversary of the 1974 resignation of president richard nixon and almost 40 years later watergate still resonates in american memory. look back at the people, players and events that made history ontline in the c-span video library, all free. it's history your way. a look now at the results of yesterday's elections in connecticut, colorado and georgia. from today's "washington journal." host: house and senate races for cq politics to talk about yesterday's primary results. the denver post front page, buck and bennett. the senate race is set. what happened here? guest: well, it was going to be -- down to the wire. people thought in the democratic primary that andrew

romanoff the former state house speaker was going to give michael bennett a very tough run. it was interesting because both candidates were trying to position themselves as the washington outsider. bennett ran ads for months saying i'd only been here less than a year, i'm not really part of the culture down there. it was assumed the first 10 months of the primary that bennett would have a fairly easy job. andrew romanoff stuck to the outsider message, he stuck to hitting bennett for his special interest money, his pac money he had taken and this race really only closed in the past couple weeks ear here. people were wondering is bennett going to be the next uncouple senator to fall in a primary after utah's bennett and pennsylvania as well. it ended up being -- he ended up winning by a larger margin than people thought. host: some of the headlines are noting that president obama backed michael bennett and some of the incumbents or candidates that he has backed until this

point have not fared as well as michael bennett. is this a win for the white house? guest: definitely a win for the white house. it shows kind of how establishment and money can really stale go a long way. andrew romanoff had -- he spent eight years in the state house and he had a lot of connections with the colorado democratic community, the activists in the state. bennett this is his first run for political office, the first time his name was actually on the ballot. he was still introducing himself to a lot of the voters in colorado. so he was actually pushing for a larger turnout figuring that the more people that voted, it was less kind of the party establishment voting. ended up getting over 300,000 votes in the primary, mostly mail-in primary ballot. so going back to your question, i think it was a win for the white house on this one. it's interesting that former president bill clinton endorsed andrew romanoff in this race and did robocall for him that went out monday. but an all mail-in primary, 46

out of 60 some counties were mail-in. a lot of people had their votes in by the time that call went out. it showed why honey was so important, people were voting from july, the ballots went out on the 19th all the way through yesterday. bennett could use his money to pique his message over the course of a couple weeks whereas romanoff morged his house in the last couple weeks to get enough money to keep his ads on the air. with the all mail-in format you had to have your message going that entire time. so by the time clinton's robo call went out, a quarter million votes were already in. host: he won 54-45 percent. he faces ken buck in the general election. if you look at the pictures in the denver post there is michael bennett with his daughter, no tie and ken buck there with the tie. wanting to look not like he's

part of the washington establishment? or is this part of his personality? guest: i was out there the end of july doing a couple stories from colorado. and if it is a -- you know, an act he's putting on he does it very well. he never is senator bennett, always michael. when i met up with him at one rally he was wearing a shirt with a frayed collar and had holes in part of the collar. he doesn't like wearing a tie. the first time i met him on capitol hill right after he was appointed last year i remember him kind of ripping his tie off. i saying i hate wearing one of these. that's kind of his shtick. ken buck likes the cowboy image. his boots were a symbol of this campaign and almost got him in trouble a little bit in one of the comments he made about cowboy boots versus high heels. remember that? host: how do these two fare? what does it look like host: guest: it's going to be a very tough race. there have been a few polls in recent months that has bennett

down to whatever republican was going to come out, but public policy polling out of north carolina, a democratic firm, they did a poll over the weekend that showed to be a statistical tie. bennett up by three but a 3.1 margin of error in that poll. regardless of what happens, this is a key senate battle ground for the paul. the nrc is ralying behind ken buck. the washington establishment was behind jane norton, the former lieutenant governor, had john mccain campaign with her last week. john cornen, the chairman of the nrc did a joint fundraise are. she's the one that the party was behind. that's what got the tea party folks riled up. with the reason that ken buck's campaign surged earlier this year. he was contemplating getting out of the race last fall after she got in in september. his money had had dried up, a lot of enthusiasm about her

getting in from the national people, kind of the -- she got of the lot of the headlines and the reports were he was planning to get out. he stuck in it and sort of as she came to be seen as the establishment candy, the tea party rallied behind ken buck. he wasn't a natural tea party person. i was talking to him, he admitted he wasn't one of the originators of the tea party, he's a district attorney in wells county. but sort of -- they turned to him because they didn't like this establishment candidate. and so he started to gain moment number the spring and the summer and she ended up skipping the state convention. she was worried among the hard core party activists she was going to get embarrassed and come in second place. she got on the ballot by petition and he wins the convention. host: how is he doing moneywise? guest: she still again establishments goes a long way is maybe a theme here. she still i think had -- wasn't

quite 3-1 but she outraised him -- host: how is he sitting in the fall election? how is ken buck sitting heading into the general election against michael bennett? guest: he'll need to start raising money real quick. the thing was about michael bennett that his money, he spent $4 million on this -- no, more like $5.5 million. his money was his key advantage going into the fall. he may not be well known but he'll have the money to compete. he had to blow through $5 million in his primary. he still has several million dollars in the bank and more money will come in now that the primary is over and democrats come together. i saw tim kane in the lobby downstairs, he's headed to colorado to do a unity rally tomorrow. so buck is going to need the money. he's going to need national money to pour into the race.

the nrsc republican establishment is already ralying around him and try to get him the money he needs. host: the governor race, the republican primary in colorado. guest: mays one. host: dan mays won 50% to 49%. i don't know that's the final percentage tally of that race. how was dan mays as the denver post puts it an unknown, underfinanced gubernatorial candidate who has never held public office. how was he able to pull this out? guest: you capitalize on big gaffes and some stories that came out about scott mcinnis. mcinnis was the frontrunner and this plagiarism story that came out about scott mcinnis that he plagiarized this policy paper, paid something like $300,000 to write, was a big story in colorado when i was out there the end of july. that week i think it was a week and a half old and the story was still going on. everybody wanted to talk to scott mcinnis at that point. the problem for republicans

here is that tom tancredo is in this race and will definitely pull from mays' voter. he's a hard core conservative in colorado which is only good news for mayor hickenlooper, he's going to be the far and away front runner in the general election host: how about moneywise, all these candidates? guest: i don't know what the tally is at tend of the primary. i know hickenlooper had the money and will continue. he didn't have as tough of a primary. department have to spend as much money. host: we want to include you in this conversation. new york, al on the republican line. go ahead. caller: i just want to make a couple of comments about the tea party. host: sure. caller: first of all i believe that they're getting in an extremely bad reputation all right from the political environment. number one, the tea party members and -- have experienced the effects of all of this,

their financials in the stock market has lost tremendous amounts of dollars, the values of their homes have lost tremendous amounts of dollars, their children's education systems lost tremendous amounts of dollars. we've witnessed our politicians vote on bills without reading them. we're seeing this lack of competence, of doing their performance in congress and the senate. and this is what the american people are actually seeing. now, you have the politicals saying they're the bad ones. the tea party ones are the bad ones. for recognizing what is happening. it's a real shame that the disconnect is with the politics from the people. and i believe that it's not just a democratic problem and it's not a republican problem, it is a government problem. this financial disaster that

befell upon the american people, you want to go ahead and put blame somewhere, it was never -- it's never looked at as a government problem. host: we got your point, al. how did the tea party do yesterday? guest: the tea party did very well with ken buck. some other races where they may not have done so well. in georgia there was primary run-offs in georgia yesterday. and in the seventh district to replace john linder who is retiring, there was a tea party candidate there. running against rob woodall is the name of linder's former chief of staff who won last night. woodall had the establishment support, newt gingrich came in and endorsed him at the end, the tea party candidate did not fare well in that election. but in the ninth district congressman tom graves was elected in a special election, back in let's see may, june, july and august, he had a may

special election primary, went to a run-off in june that he won against a former state senator named lee hawkins and then had to do the general election primary in july and ended up winning last night. and he built his campaign in that special election on the tea party. he was definitely the tea party backed guy. got endorse ylts for growth which is seen as a champion of the tea party movement. and he ended up winning handily last night about 10 points. there is no democrat in the general election. he will be the next congressman or he will earn a full term i guess is the way to say it in the ninth district next year. he was running in the seat of nathan deal who resigned from congress earlier this year to run for governor and nathan deal actually as of right now i believe he's still ahead in the governor's race in georgia. host: that one hasn't been called yet. guest: right. he's a couple thousand votes, that may go to a recount, they're waiting for

provisionals. the interesting thing about deal, he was in third place at the time that he left congress. he wasn't expected to make the run-off. in the primary he came in second behind karen handle the former state of state, sarah palin endorsed her. he has turned his campaign around and is now leading by a couple thousand votes. host: do we know when they'll make a decision? guest: they have to wait for the professionals, the overseas battles ballots to come in and if it's within a certain percentage point she can ask for a recount. we'll be wait a little on this one host: host: norfolk, connecticut, democratic line. go ahead. caller: thanks for taking my call. i just finished working the connecticut prime in stamford, connecticut, though i live in norwalk. they pulled me in as a moderator, i'm sort of a virgin moderator. didn't really know what was going on and yesterday morning

we started to have a fiasco in the morning because the tab you'llators weren't available. there was a wagon train of supplies to give anybody. we're supposed to open the polls at 6:00. we started to have some problems. it was a very interesting race, i must say. i was supporting a republican candidate for congress who got into second place. i'm not real happy with the first person. i'm happy that linda mcmahon won, i guess. what i wanted to understand, get the people to sunds the tea party --, to understand, the tea party, the tea party are people just like me, democrats, republicans, independents, all kinds of people, black, white, hispanic, i promise you that, and they don't just stay with one candidate and if that candidate doesn't make it, they try to figure out the next move. because the strategy is to try to keep you know, the

government of the people for the people, all that stuff. now, i just want to make one other point. let me do that and i'll get off. in 2006 the people that were responsible for the fiscal dilemma we have right now were democrats. i voted for them and they got in. so from 2006 to 2010 we've had the control of the house and the senate with the democrats. i am getting tired of people talking about george bush and the eight years. i didn't vote for bush, i didn't even support him. but we have to start being honest. 2006 nancy pelosi fought up on the podium and that was the control to 2010. i want to tell you that people -- host: michael, let me jump in here. if spending is a big issue for you, what do you make of linda mcmahon spending so much of her own money on this race in this primary, i think she spent $26 million of her own money.

a.p. is reporting this morning that she said on a morning show that she is ready to spend whatever it takes up to $50 million of her own money saying it's money i've earned, and money i'm willing to invest. what do you think, michael? caller: well, you know, here's the problem. you're absolutely right because as the tea party supports these candidates, my candidate didn't have a lot of money so he couldn't go up on an ad and we had to do door to door, i had to make phone calls for him. i mean i believed in him from the heart but my point is -- guest: who were you supporting? schiff? caller: no, rob murkle. he's fantastic, a great guy and i'm sorry he lost. there was another candidate under him who kind of challenged him. but i want to get back to that money thing because thank you for asking that.

that was the thing that bothered me. i kept saying why do you have to have so much money to be in a campaign? and i understand linda spent $50 million on her campaign, but you know what? i started to surrender with that after a while. then i started to say they're all doing it. they're all raising money, they're all spending and the ones -- the one who won that congressional race, he's a millionaire. and he was able to have the money to put the ads up and everything. host: michael, we got your county. john mcardle. guest: a couple points on his call. one interesting story about her spending, i heard a story from the campaign operatives, the people who go door to door. on a regular campaign you're lucky if have you a black berry to go door to door to track your voters. i understand some of hers had i-pads going door to door. some of her staffers going door to door had eye pads. a lot of money.

$23 million is a lot of money. $50 million or more from her in the general election is amazing. it put her at something like the fourth biggest spender of all time in the senate race. he made a point he gets sick of george bush's name coming up. i think he'll continue to get sick because democrats will mention george bush a little bit more in the next couple months. host: are they finding there is traction in that? guest: from polling i've seen, polling from both sides in the past couple weeks, one message point that definitely works in democrats' favor is that this financial mess was handed over from the bush years. it definitely does still strike a nerve with people who are being polled. it was republican and democratic polls. but i think you'll see democrats kind of go back to that message, bring up george bush's name and try to get people fired up a little bit from how they felt back in 2008. host: when linda mcmahon faces

richard bloomen thall. how does he fare? how does he look heading into the general election? guest: how can you look when you're looking at $25 million more? it's going to be a close race. he's very well known, has a lot of connections. he doesn't have the baggage that she does. you saw in the republican primary peter schiff, one of the candidates that she faced, probably went the strongest on some of the baggage message, her work is the former c.e.o. of the wwf. an ad of her kicking a gentleman in the groin repeatedly and kept repeating it in the ad. from what i know of the wwf and some of the clips i've seen that have been sent around and youtube but haven't been a commercial yet, there are a lot more out there. maybe not blumenthal you won't see him use this in his ads but the connecticut democratic party, the dfcc come in and talk about the violence, the --

what was the story about the drug use, the steroid use in the wwf. you'll see all that on the table in the general election. it's going to be a nasty fight. but she's going to have the money to compete and flood airwaves again. two interesting statistics i thought you would want to know. democrats are very happy that linda mcmahon total got 49% of the vote. they're saying more republicans voted against linda mcmahon than voted for her. it was a three-way race. but they take comfort in that. the other one going back to the colorado race, there was i think as of this morning 68,000 more republicans voted in the republican primary than the democratic primary. republicans very -- said this is a sign that national republicans are saying this is a sign colorado republicans are more excited, the enthusiasm gap that you always hear about, they had 68,000 more votes last night. republicans are going to come back and have that many more

voters in the fall. two fun statistics. host: derek in bowling brook, illinois. go ahead. caller: how you doing? three quick point. first about the tea party. where was their voice when the republicans won the majority, there were several moderate republicans and they pretty much squashed the conservative voice. ronald reagan was a conservative, george bush, those guys were moderate. so they just couldn't get their voice through because the party leadership, but after they took a whooping in 2006 and 2008, now you see the conservative kind of coming back. the last eight years when george bush was president, people got to realize that if george bush was driving, the democrats were in the passenger seat sleeping. why weren't they the party of no if they disliked his policy? they had more numbers than the republicans had have now and the republicans are doing their job, they're trying to stop bad policy. if the democrats had such a problem with george bush, they should have stopped his policy.

that was their job. the democratic party, they need to retake their party like -- the tea party members, i'm a black american from illinois. we triring to retake the conservative -- republican party with conservatives and if the democrats can retake their party, the people can retake this government. host: all right. guest: interesting point talking about trying to retake the party. you had some democrats and liberal democrats trying to retake their party in arkansas senate primary from earlier this year. when groups like move on.org, labor groups championed bill halter against blanche lincoln. that was a race where the establishment rallied around blanche lincoln and she won by the skin of her teeth, had to go to a run-off. but i think it's happening on both sides out there. people are angry right now. when candidates come into "roll call" and cq and we're talking

about these different races, we ask how are people feeling right now? and angry is the response we get most often. host: both sides, liberal or -- jshes yeah. host: it's interesting when you look at the connecticut governor race, where former ambassador tom foley won the republican nomination and will face dan molloy who defeated ned lamont. he ran on the anger from the left over foreign policies running against george bush's strategy in iraq, and now he lost. guest: he couldn't re-create the magic this time around. it was fairly i thought surprisingly easy win for molloy. but i think with foley i think it's going to be a tough race in the fall. host: baltimore, maryland. brian, independent line. good morning. caller: how you doing? host: good, brian.

caller: just a couple points. i hope you give me a chance to get to them. first i want to tell you, i enjoy your show. i definitely do. it gives insight where everybody else doesn't, and i'm a 25-year-old guy, i'm a young dude, and the funny thing, i realize, i'm in finance and everything that has to do with politics and every time i listen to anything dealing with politics, it always else revolves around one thing and that one thing is money. and i have my own shop and what i do is i educate people about money. so people don't know anything about money. and i blame that on the lack of education. host: brian, we'll talk about money here a little bit. many people are saying this is going to be one of the most expensive midterm elections. how much does it cost to run for a house or senate seat? guest: how much does it cost? depends where you're running,

new york city, or philadelphia media markets, or running in you know, rural georgia. listen, these reports, financial disclosure reports, when we're looking at candidates and you know, who has made a mark this quarter, $200,000, $300,000, $4 hoopt, you're seeing house candidates raise $500,000 in a quarter these days. host: which means they could end up spending about how much? guest: a couple million dollars on a house speet. that used to be what you spent for a senate seat. now you've got linda mcmahon spending $50 million. some upcoming primaries that are coming up in florida, there is some big money being spent. the one i wanted to talk about was alan grayson, raised a on the of money nationwide. he's a guy who has got support from around the country because he's seen as this progressive champion. and he's raised millions. do you remember the don't get

sick and if you get sick die quickly was his statement on the house floor that fired up republicans? hundreds of thousands of dollars poured into the candidates running against him. but he also raised hundreds of thousands of dollars that quarter. so that's going to be an interesting race coming up. host: the senate race, too. in the democratic primary there. guest: probably a better example. host: who is that? guest: billionaire real estate investor jeff green is running against congressman kendrick meek in the democratic primary. green, his pockets are limbless and what he's willing to spend was up early and often with ads, continues to be. that's going to be a very expensive race. the republican primary until charlie kris dropped out was very expensive. and the general election, meek or green versus charlie cris as an independent and mark arube yow is going to be incredibly

expensive. money is mother's milk in politics. host: a match-up between rube yow or green, guest: rube yow -- host: cris comes out ahead? guest: cris comes out ahead. republicans think his numbers are only going to fall as we get closer. people like to say that they're going to vote independent but when they get to the ballot box a lot of time that independent vote dissipates. we'll see how strong his numbers hold up. interestingly enough, right when charlie crist dropped out of the republican party and ran as an independent democrats were excited. this is going to split the 34ru7b vote because crist is a former republican. crist is going into democratic circles to find support. there is a big democratic fundraiser in d.c., who is holding a fundraiser for charlie crist, i think this week sometime.

he's gone to florida democratic circles to find support. he may be pulling from kendrick meek, too. and i think right now we have this as leaning republican still and marco rubio, his camp does think the numbers will fall his way in the end. host: in california there are interesting competitive races in that state. bob on the republican line in san francisco. caller: hey, how you doing? the speaker pro tempore: good morning. thanks for waiting. caller: you're welcome. you know, what, all these things i hear, i called in to comment on the tea party. first of all, i've got four points and i want to ask a question and you can hang up on me any time. what the a moderator? and election moderator. make sure you're voting for the republican candidate or the democratic candidate? what is that? host: he's referring to the caller from connecticut. guest: i believe he was one of

the -- both sides get to have officials at the polling booth to make sure that they're watching what's going on. caller: you can't see it, you want to vote for john jones, the republican and democratic see you vote for john jones? is that the deal? guest: no, i don't think they're there to push one side or the other. they're there to ensure their party's interest just so -- i think they're to ensure the other side isn't doing that. both sides have moderators at the polls on polling day. guest: you don't get, -- caller: you don't get the point. in california we have people that can't understand the language or don't see well, and they want to vote for john jones for president, and the republican and democrat supervise they're voting for john jones for president. host: all right. do you understand what he's getting at there? guest: i think he's concerned they are unduly influencing the election being there. i think always a concern on election day.

that's why there's -- the secretaries of state have reports of election fraud. every election there are plenty of reports of that. host: gerald on the democratic line in greenville, north carolina. you're next. caller: yes, the caller from illinois didn't understand why the democrats weren't being a party of no, but during that time every time there was an issue that the democrats disagreed with, they were branded as unpatriotic. that was just my comment. host: tom on the republican line, good morning. caller: good morning. there are perfectly good life lessons here when it comes to what has happened to the democrat party. all they do is demonize, criticize, and play the blame. after two years of president obama, the best they have is blaming bush. we are not bush. demonize the tea party. demonize anybody that disagrees

with them. they are the party of inaction. all they know how to do is take money from the people and that doesn't create jobs. that creates more debt. host: tom, we got your point. yesterday the house approved that state aid bill, $26 billion for states. do you suspect that that spending along with the stimulus and other things become an issue in the general elections? >> democrats, i remember previous cycle, the idea the do-nothing congress. democrats definitely didn't want to be seen as the do-nothing congress. they passed some big bills now they have to defend them. this one that they passed yesterday i think is going to be especially good on the campaign trail. who doesn't like funding teachers. host: for their base. guest: yes. yes. i think you are going to see members go out during this recess now that they are finally out of town and pitch some of these bills they passed. then you also have big ones you have to defend as well.

health care, cap and trade coming up on the campaign trail. we'll see. host: houston, texas, nancy. independent line. caller: good morning. host: good morning. caller: i think that political campaign ads on tv are silly. has any studies been done, does anybody actually watch them? and are they effective? host: good question. guest: what's the -- host: does anybody -- guest: everybody hates negative campaigning but they work. and so people do it. you see these ads over and over again enough and the message does start to stick. people -- these people wouldn't be spending this money on these campaign ads if it didn't work and hadn't proven to work. repeatedly kicking the man in the groin i think you are going to see more of that coming up. what was the campaign ad in the primary in arizona, j.d. hayworth, john mccain one coming up in two weeks.

his -- one of his ads i think worked very well was j.d. hayworth, a former six-term congressman on an infomercial he did. government grant infomercial how you can get free money out of the government without having to pay it back. j.d. hayworth has been trying to run to john mccain's right. immigration issue, definitely, but also fiscal conservative issues. and that ad that mccain ran, he made sure to use this infomercial that j.d. hayworth made in 2005 or 2006 right after he left congress. it was a very effective ad. it got a lot of buzz. a lot of newspaper articles written. now mccain's latest one is an ad that hits hayworth for his ties to former congressman jack abramoff. a disgrace in that scandal if you remember. these ads, they work. people wouldn't spend the money if they didn't work. host: where the polling stand in that race, that matchup?

guest: that was getting close for a while. until this infomercial story hit. i think mccain's going to have an easy night that night. that's the big one to watch there. there's also a house primary to watch in eighth district of arizona, that's congresswoman giffords' district. a republican seat for the republicans this fall. i think it was a 52% mccain district in 2008. one of the districts that republicans plan on falling back and sort of the republican column after the -- those democrats wave in 2008. we have a tea party guy named jesse kelly against former state senator jonathan payton. that one's up in the air. kelly has been in the race longer. payton got in early this year. so there's -- that's going to be a close one to watch. august 24 as well. host: next phone call. richmond, virginia, george,

republican line. caller: thank you for taking my call. i'm somebody who is a big fan of ken bucks and i feel like, i just want to see what you think of this, even though there's a mess in the g.o.p. in the governor's race with tancredo jumping in, doesn't tancredo's presence help buck in the sense that you already have an energized tea party who drive buck. i saw some of the video from the colorado republican assembly that norton didn't show up to. and there is a real passion for ken buck, i think at least among the conservative base in colorado. doesn't tancredo sort of help bring out people that will -- definitely be voting for ken buck november 2. >> i think you made a great point. i think what you're saying as some of this establishment support rallies around ken buck, maybe you'll see tea party people. this is the reason why they

didn't like jane because the establishment was rallying around her. but tancredo being on the ballot may continue to drive the tea party votes. even if they get annoyed with ken buck if he does embrace the nrsc and national party, they'll still be there in the fall. host: has sara palin or other high profile republicans weighed in on this race. guest: jim demint. senator from south carolina, he's a incumbent but champion of the tea party movement. he's one who is pushed back against the republican leadership. he and mitch mcconnell have gone head to head in a couple races. you require the kentucky race, the republican primary there. so he was one of the key people who got behind ken buck last spring, i want to say, and sort of helped energized him. he definitely has the tea party credentials. even though he wasn't one of the originators, you would think

tancredo would be an original tea party person in colorado, even though buck isn't that he's run the grassroots campaign. he's hoping voters will still be there in the fall. host: memphis, tennessee, good morning. caller: good morning. i'm going to say all this rhetoric about these voters is a bunch of baloney. when ronald reagan was elected, he said blood, sweat, and tears. why did it take ronald reagan 12 years, 12 years to get us back. you're shaking your head. now, they want this man here to do it within six months. you tell me why? host: sounds like criticism of president obama, disagree was the criticism. guest: give the guy more time to get everything back on track is what he's saying. i think these days i mean people

want everything to happen now. we are in the age of instant news. we are in the age of -- i see my job where you have to get the story up on the internet. you don't write for the paper. you have to get the news on the internet and do your story for the paper. it's not a next-day news cycle, it's immediate. i think that translate into a lot of facets in our society, including people want to the economy to turn around now. what the caller is saying, give the man more time. host: conservatives upset with him burks you also have, we have seen this play out over the last couple days, the white house versus the left. and there's anger on the left toward obama as well. is that going to play out in the primaries coming up and the general election? guest: it goes back to our talk about the enthusiasm gap. republicans hope that that anger between the white house and the left continues and so progressive, liberal whatever you call them, activists, hopefully they'll stay home. won't be as energized as they

were in 2008. i think it goes back to our conversation about you're going to see in george bush a little more, he's a person that can still get people energized. get the democratic base energized. we'll see. host: let's go to minnesota governor race. yesterday those primary results, former u.s. senator mark dayton was able to win the democratic nomination. he now faces state rep tom emer. -- emmer. how does this shake out for the general election? guest: i think pa lengthy not seeking re-election is the interesting thing there. because a lot of people assume he's having a presidential run. we'll see -- we have seen a lot of posturing for 2012 play into a lot of these races around the country. sara palin -- sarah palin, mike huckaby endorsing these races. in the georgia governor's race, i believe it was palin endorsed

handle and i think it was gingrich who endorsed nathan deal. you saw some of these proxy fights. host: we still don't know the outcome of that one. but nathan deal leads by 1,000 votes? guest: yeah. and again we are waiting for the provisional ballots on that one. i think the interesting point on the minnesota one may be it's pawlenty senting himself up and how the 2012 fight is playing out. host: back to minnesota and talk about mark dayton re-entering the ring. he resigned from the senate not wanting to be in the senate. now he's decided to run for governor. guest: a lot of people say the political bug, you may hate it while you're up here, you miss it when you're gone. you hear a lot of former members talk about it. he's back and he made a statement in that race. host: spending a lot of his own money as well. host: jane, democratic line,

good morning caller: good morning. time of year with campaigns, negative campaigns just really drop me -- drive me crazy. i have been a democrat for a long time. i think because i was brought up, that's the way we voted, i have seen the light and i believe i'm going to switch sides. i like tea party. one of the things i just disgust me about this negative campaign, tell me if i'm right, some of the negative campaigns are things that these politicians will say about one another, seems to me it's a person like me were to make comments like that i could be sued for libel or slander. are there different laws that apply to these politicians during their campaigns? guest: you see politicians get sued in civil courts and also complaints to the federal election commission every cycle. about libel and slander. so no, these people, they are under the same laws that we all are. and it happens every year. i'm trying to think of one from

the cycle, one doesn't come to mind particularly bad one. but it happens every cycle. you see the federal election commission take up these complaints all the time. host: back to phone calls. one last phone call here. san francisco, bob, republican line, go ahead. caller: hey. i'm sorry i called in earlier. i wanted to know, i got a couple of comments but i wanted to know what a moderator is. host: bob, you're calling back? we just discussed that. caller: no. nobody ever told me what a moderator is. some guy told me a political person. host: ok. are you referring to the call that we had at the beginning? caller: the election in missouri or somewhere in the middle of the country. host: i think it was connecticut. you touched on this. guest: i would love to get the other caller back on the phone so they could talk of what their jobs were. host: the moderator in many cases is what? guest: i know that both parties, both sides have people at the

polling -- at different polling precincts to watch, to ensure that there is nothing going on. i wish i could give you the actual definition. hopefully that other caller would call in. host: we have to leave it there for today. we'll have you back on to talk more about campaign 2010. could you give us the take away from yesterday's results? guest: yeah. i think the take away in the democratic and colorado race, the bennett race, was really the one to watch. the power of incumbency and money there was actually for a guy who never been on a ballot before against a former statehouse speaker, who had connections throughout the state, the establishment support, national party establishment support, and money there was key to bennett winning the race. we saw the power of the tea party movement in ken buck's victory. surged throughout the spring and summer and held off jane norton at the very end there.

we'll see if he can rally both sides. that is going to be a key battleground this fall. host: will you be updating throughout the day on the georgia primary governor runoff race there? guest: i won't because i don't -- my specialty is senate and house. but they will be watching that throughout the day. i'm particularly -- especially nathan deal being a former congressman. we are interested in what they do. host: thank you very much. guest: thank you. >> you can see washington journal every morning here at 7:00 eastern on c-span. in about 45 minutes we'll have live coverage of a day long summit on bullying. the federal education department brings education, health, and law enforcement officials together with corporate representatives to talk about the impact of bullying and what works in combating it. officials from facebook, the cartoon network, and dairy queen will be there. again starting at noon eastern in about 45 minutes here on

c-span. book tv in prime time continues with books about members of congress, the life of the western star, long time kentucky senator henry clay. joseph wheelan documents the postpresidential career of john quincy adams, in mr. adam's last crusade. william links recounts the life of jesse helms. and the life and career of speaker of the house nancy pelosi. book tv is in prime time. all this week on c-span2. >> here you are, senator. not a bad desk, either. daniel webster used to use it. >> daniel webster's not here? >> harry truman in 1939 hated this movie. just despised it. at the time harry truman was seen as a senator from the pendergast machine in kansas city. and i always wonder if he didn't think at that point at least the

movie was looking at him and his relationship with the political machine back home. >> senate historian donald richie on washington movies and his new book, the u.s. congress, a very short introduction. sunday night on c-span's q and a. a look now at the role of lobbyists here in washington from today's washington journal. . host: our guest is the head of the american league of lobbyists, here to talk about proposed changes. the seven -- the lobbyist call bluff on the town-shall exemption. -- on the daschle exemption. there's a quotation from him who says to politico -- i provide analysis cannot access. i offer strategic advice on public policy, including analysis --

why is that a problem? guest: i have always believed at transparency and accountability is a good thing. if it walks like a duck, and talks like a duck, you are registered like a duck. people have gone to the white house 39 times a year, but do not register as lobbyists. to me, that is obfuscating the rules. most lobbyists are following the rules. for someone to determine not register is a problem for me. host: by not registering, these individuals do not have to disclose the specific clients they advise, issues they're working on, or how much firms ke from their advice -- politico. what is the current law right

now? guest: great point. to currently register, you need 20% of your time spent as contacting members of congress. in need one or more contacts, and need to spend $3,000 or more in the quarter. so, a lot of people are saying i am only working 19% or 15%. so, when i go to washington for a meeting, does the 15 minutes i'm in the meeting, or the hour that i am driving? we believe that threshold needs to be lowered. we do not want to capture the mom and pops, but want to make sure that people are following the rules. as the government looks to regulate lobbyists more, we're one of the most heavily regulated industries i america

we have to file six times perh year timesow much we get paid, who pays us, what issues we're working on, what agencies we visited, how much we donated. these are private companies. host: your league says that is good? guest: more transparency and regulation. if it captures those who are going under the radar, absolutely. host: what changes would you like to see? guest: we're working with watchdog groups. you don't think we would be working together, but i feel so strongly because i'm proud of being a lobbyist. i represent some great people. i don't think there is anything wrong with a registry. a couple of years ago, roll call said 20% de-registered. you cannot tell me they return to arkansas and became farmers.

they are just not registering any more. host: why wouldn't daschle want to be a lobbyist? guest: it is a good question, and would have to ask him. there's nothing wrong with it. if you are representing your people ethically and effectively, there's no problem. host: are other benefits to not registering for daschle and his company? guest: he does not have to file the paper work like the rest of us do. host: are their financial benefits? guest: i don't know about that. whenever you call yourself -- worst of it in your contract and retainers. it is probably not a financial benefit. it is probably more about not jumping through the same hoops as the registered lobbyists do. host: there are republicans as

well. house members who have lived who do not register but who are working for law firms. gut: yes, the rainmakers. you cannot tell me that they're not picking up the phone in making a call. that they will send in an assistant and take the meeting. host: you are proposing at the summit foundation to eliminate the 20% rule and allow the threshold to $5,000 in expenses or $2,500 per quarter in income. guest: that is the son might -- sunlight's decision. the definition of a lobbyist needs to be re-evaluated. 10% downking at 15%, which will capture the people

sitting there, but not those cong into town like the court reporters, for their flying days. what is a lobbyist? it is a great question. this is why it is so complicated. the lda states -- i will give a couple of examples. let me read this so that i get a correct. if a lobbyist is retained, and does not -- and worse more than 25%, but does not get paid more than $3,000, and does not make an context -- it does not constitute as lobbying, even if it work 50 percent something but if they make more than $3,000 per qrter from and work less than 20%, they do not have to register. what most people do not

understand -- there is a misperception -- our job is to educate and inform people. people think they are backroom deals. our job is to go into the office, tell the store. we cannot lie, because if we do, we lose credibility. in this town your reputation is the coin of the round. our job is to educate and inform. haveately, the legislatureors to make the decisions. important is that lobbyists never vote on the floor. i love how legislators pass the buck every now and then concerning evil lobbyists. in 18 years, i have never voted on the floor. host: what about campaign contributions? guest: campaign reform is critical. i have met with people -- the public financing side, because

of believe that is the seminal issue. if we are able to address the campaign issue, the lobbying issue can stand on its own. the information will never change. you always need meone up in the washington protecting your interest. the average american is ready to put to thousand dollars or $3,000 io electing their politicians. i am trying to figure out how the system can change. host: so, you do not foresee any changes to the way it works now? guest: i would love to see changes. legislators do not want to spend 20% of their time fund-raising. we get hit up all the time, then monized. i would rather be at home with my son on wednesday night instead of going to three fund- raisers. host: you say that you get him up all the time. how does it work? guest: it is usually an e-mail campaign or faxes.

i get about 15 or 28 solicitations per day. host: from house and senate members? they ask you to show up at a fund-raiser the night? guest: yes. grip and grin. hi, congressman, thanks for having me, hall is the campaign going? the check is already sent. it is not a quid pro quo -- is not a hey, by the way, i' here, and i want you to vote for thi that is not the way it happens. showing support for someone who believes in your philosophy, or your clients philosophies. host: we're talking about hold.ing with david wen caller: thank you for c-span. i went to speak to the guest in

regards to help democracy has chand, to where lobbyists have taken over washington. how much does it all number the spinning private citizens spend on the campaigns? there are 39 lobbyist for every house member or senator. revolving door o can have asee how we democracy that americans can thrive in when you have so many special interests there represent major corporations instead of those small interests of the average private citizen. guest: it is a great question. first of all, i believe every american should be a lobbyist.

u should be your own ad begin. the government is doing something to you or for you every day. but if you cannot be here, you hire someone to be here for you. it is really interesting that people say special-interest because every interest is special. people always call them special interest groups if ty do not agree, but a public interest if they do agree. lobbying is some important that it was put into the first amendment, the right to petition government. it is all-important, a part of democracy -- but the american people need to take charge on accountability. i always hear that the lobbyists are doing this or that. no, the lobbyists do not come here without a client or cause. host: by do some clients or uses have unfair advantages over others? corporations over small, middle

class groups? should there be a cap on how much you can not be for one cause? guest: no, because if you do that, it smacks of almost fascism. america was built on capitalism. we built a better mousetrap. there are some things in the stimulus package i did not agree with. companies are not too big to fail. if they do, someone else comes to pick up the pieces. for example, i represent a number of small non-pfits. back to the question, members of congress have about five dozen bills before them. they cannot be experts on these bills. for my non-profits, the come here and have to get their voice heard. they do not know how to lobby or the political process. they hire someone who does. that is where the value of a lobbyist comes in. host: john from alexandria,

virginia. caller: i have been lobbying for four years, and dave speaks the truth. i have my own small logging company. there's a general misperception of lobbyists and lobbying. there many loopholes. i like dave to address this. large law firms and public relations firms, and all sorts of other consultants do not have to register. i think for exposing that, that is a loophole in the law. so, dave, perhaps you can explain that? guest: yes. lobbng was a $3.50 blion industry last year, a raise over 2008 -- much of it had to do with healthcare. things like grass roots law is not can afford, neither is pr. those are probably billions of dollars more, even more than direct lobbying such as when i go up to capitol hill and meet on your behalf. that is an issue that needs to be addressed.

you look at some of these -- ad buys with lots ofoney spent there -- yet there's no accountability there as to who it is run by. transparency is good. sunlight is good. host: these public relations firms are spendg money or gathering it on behalf of the cause, for certain legislation, pooling money -- and you say that is lobbying? gut: yes, you see these full- page ads and that is a formal logging. i'm trying to get it in front of a legislator so that they can of least glance at that. the court-reporting issue, or the tanker share -- that is still try to influence legislation. host: is there more money in that band in direct lobbying? guest: i do not know because

there is no accountability and that part of it, b on the direct and, we are very accountable. you can search, to a direct lobbyist makes, but not on the public-relations or grass-roots firm. host: the republican line. caller: sir, you project a lobbyist to be some who just gives information. i would certainly think that you could hire an auditorium and have all the legislation -- legislators come. and you ge a speech on what particular thing you are lobbying for. i'm just wondering how a lobbyist shows on his expense report. we have a friend in the congress. one day he opened his garage and there was a case of scotch i there. someone he had spoken to no

doubt a lobbyist had asked him what kind of scotch -- or what his favorite liquor was. he mentioned a brand of scotch. about one week later, that case was there. only he knew who delivered it. i find that offensive. i also find it offensive when a particular senator believes the last day of the senate to go formed a lobbying firm. it leaves a really bad taste in your mouth. guest: i am a miller lite fan myself. your example is back in the day before other logging restrictions are put in ace. for example, right now you cannot go up and by a member or staff member a cup of coffee. you cannot take them to lunch.

before other lobbying restrictions are put in place. people are in violation if they do that. host: there is a gift ban. guest: you can bring a baseball bat -- but not the case of whiskey. host: these laws were put into place when? guest: 2007. before that there were other loss -- $50 or $100 cap per year. t taking a staff member of to lunch, i honestly think -- if i can buy your ethics forunch downtown, there's a bigger problem in washington. but the lobbying committee excepted the new rules without pause. host: how have things anged since then? guest: we spend more time and a small office, smaller than this room. sometimes there will be two or three lobbying groups squeezed into a house office. it has not changed that much.

your job is to deliver information, provide education on an issue. the staffers need to make decisions, then take it to their bosses. there are 5000 bills introduced -- they cannot be experts. the healthcare bill was only one of those 5000. host: is their staffs that reduced? guest: yes and no. yes, it is reduced because you do not get a chance to meet the staffers. we said that we would go out to lunch once per year -- began to trust lobbyists and understand who you really are. nowadays it is more hit and run. you have to go in and immediately establish the relationship and get your message out within a few minutes. host: ivy, the independent line. caller: your just addressing the question i was calling about. it seems much of the legislation is addressing lobbyists and

legislators. i was car about the law concerning lobbyists and money spent, even time with the staffers. ultimately, they are the ones who really do the work that writes the law. then a congressman or senator will base their decisn on what staffers say. th staffers have the revolving door that takes them into industry or logging. they're back in the swing of things and get rehired to work on someone's campaign or in their office. in essence, is a they're both a revolving door, and what is the legislation that governs lobbying of staffers? guest: there are rules if staff at a certain level comes out of a committee or a sior staffer, that they cannot lobby for a specific time line. members of congress and the senate have the same type of revolving door. a member of congress has put up

that they want to increase that time line. for the logging committee that is great -- it is fewer lobbyists out there. but when you limit the ability of people to do work, i'm not sure that is a fair assessment. i agree they should not be working immediately on issues they have just been on the hill on. but the staffers are key. i love being a lobbyist and working with that. as a former congressional staffer, i understand how busy they are. they need the information quickly. th is why lobbyists are hired. we know how to get across the message so that they can take it to their boss. host: these staffers have expertise, areas they focus on. they become immersed in that. why shouldn't they be able to lobbon an issue they know a lot about? guest: you are exactly rht.

if you become an engineer at toyota, you will not then go out and become a cook. you will become an engineer at honda, or someplace else. you will use thekills you know. i once asked a congressman who was retired, now a lobbyist. i asked him why he is doing. he says dave, i grew up in arkansas. i came to washington, was on the agricultural committee for 20 years. i do not know anything else. people hire me for my expertise in agriculture. host: lincoln, on the republican line from indianapolis. caller: my family has been part of the national federation for the blind for the past few years now. basically, we have lobbyists could go to congress and say what we need we needpets in our

lives. hybrid anding the electric cars because we cannot hear them. many people including me have almost gotten hit by them. we are petrified of them. we have been trying to get them to put some sort of thing to make them make noise. host: go ahead. guest: this is a great question. this is exactly what people need lobbyists. they need to have their story told. i work on closed captioning, to get it on television. it took about six years to get it passed. you think it would be easy, but it was not. the 30 million deaf and hard of hearing that excess. the girl scouts, mothers

against drunk drivers, telecommunications people -- everyone has a lobbyist here because there are so many competing voices here. your job is to be about to get a great message management, work for that, and help with this hybrid issue. i know that congress is looking at it. it will take time. it does not mean no all the time -- it just means no right now. keep working on it. host: earlier this month "the washington post" had a story about revenue. a jump in the first half of this year. eight out of the 10 most successful shops brought in re revenue during the first half of 2010 than during the same time last year. the financl-services overhaul legislation and climate change generated more than $28 million in revenue.

to come, -- washington. caller: i was wondering about the citizens united case, and was wondering what the avage return on lobbying dollars is. guest: l me answer the first part first. the u.s. chamber spent $134 million last year on lobbying. i don'think they got that amount of return. -- would hundred $44 million. they won some issues, and lost some. nothing is guaranteed when you spend on logging. with the citizens united case, i see it both ways. in your stand the freedom of speech aspect. personally, i'm not sure corp.

has the same rights as an individual. i do not think there will be a flood of money as everyone thinks. the companies are beholden to the stockholders. spend what they can get an immediate return on. from our point of view, lobbying is up over the past year. people understand the value of advocacy. if they are not here, they understand that they could be left out in the cold. for example, one of my clients is in the telecommunications space. they are fighting the goliaths and they are the davids. we make sure that members of congress know this issue is out there and that mom and pops could be devastated. they did not realize it before we took the voice to them. more people understand the value of logging. host: tom, on the republican

line. caller: with the load of bills in associate research, it is not possible to be expert in everything -- do they rely on obvious to understand the technical matter and make recommendations to their boss? guest: they absolutely do. it is amazing. you could have scientists come in, and the talk about the specific widgets or technology. there will pitch their thing to the staffers. the staff will look at the lobbyists and ask us to break this down. how will this affect my boss, the district? the lobbyist can cut through the minutia. we're kind of like the interpreter between the client anmember of congress, and needs. the lobbyist can work both

sides. host: have you er written a bill for a staffer, for congress? guest: i have reviewed many bills. the staffers will come to you when they do not know the subject. they will ask if this means this -- is this what we're going ford for for the intent? host: you hear that lobbyists are riding the language and the bills, and staffers included. guest: i do hear about that. i have no firsthand knowledge of it. host: do you think it is a breed? guest: bottom line, no bill goes without all parties' approval. even if both lobbyist is just to drop something -- it still has to go through multiple drafts. there are multiple safeguards.

you do not want that type -- as a lobbyist, first of all, you don't that type of image. you want to get things done, but not in a shady way. host: texas. caller: i wonder if you could answer a question for me. do you think that lobbyists get greater access than individuals do? and if that is true, what kind of things can we do to gain greater access for individuals? i know a frid in california has tried for years to even get a phone call with speaker nancy pelosi. he has never been successful. . .

numbers d you're putting your message in a way that the staffer and pelosi is going to hear you. host: do lobbyists have to play one side and not the other, do they lobby democrats or

republicans? is there a back slash versus supporting a democrat and supporting a republican? guest: absolutely. there is backlash. this is where knowledge of the political game comes into play. i have friends on both sliles. and i work with both sliles. there are some firms, if you look back in the 1990's, that were only republican firms. and now all of a sudden when the democrats took control, they don't have any per anymore. over 18 years i've learned to make sure you provide -- you provide information information on bothides, make friends on both sliles. sometimes if you're trying to introduce a bill you need to make sure you have this senator, this senator, you know they don't get along, you get a senator that does. it's knowing the game. host: washington, d.c., independent line. caller: i was wondering about the grassroots side what you have been talking about. a gentleman called in and said how is it that a lobbyist versus

a citizen is getting access? i would say to say it's much easier for a citizen to get access because frankly that's the person that's going to vote for that legislator going forward. and i have to agree with what dave said. grassroots is the key. you know, frankly, we all have a responsibility as citizens to ma surwe get the process. if you get up this morning and rode public transportation to work or actually have a job to go to, you ought to thank a lobbyist for that. guest: one of the way to meet those legislators is going to town halls too. that's another area where you can go there and get that one-on-one time. and go to the district offices. you don't have to be here in washington. meet with the staffers. if it's something they're interested in they'll ask you back when the legislator is back.

host: dennis, republican line. go ahead. caller: basically my comment is i have found that working in washington, d.c., is an absolute maze to sort of negotiate your way around downtown there. and in fact, the lobbyists that i've been in contact withn the past have made that process that much easier. and frankly we would not have been better prepared when we went to the hill to talk as we would have not been if we had gone to a lobbyist. frankly, i don't really see -- i see they provide a much-need service. and you want to get your message across, certainly you have to do the grassroots, you have to do

other things. you wouldn't go mountain climbing without a goid. washington, d.c., is a bigger mountain to climb. host: jeff, independent line. jeff. caller: good morning. this is jeff. host: you're on the air, sir. caller: i wanted to -- there's been a lot of comment about the role of the lobbyist in providing information. i'm interested in dave's comments about what role a lobbyist would play in providing -- contributing to the political campaigns of the members that they work with beuse that seems to be an area that draws a lot of criticism from lobbyists. and i'm interested in if he sees any need to change the regulations in connection with that. guest: as we mentioned before earlier in the show, i think there's a real opportunity for campaign finance reform. if you ask most lobbyists they're interested in campaign

finance reform as well as the legislators. the problem is how to get it donend nobody's come up with a great solution for that campaign finance reform. is it dealing with -- if you're asking for an earmark, is it having the members of congress not solicit a lobbyist? it's very simple to fix the problem. but unfortunately these members of congress in the last segment shows how much money they need to raise. if many of congress is going after an earmark they shouldn't be soliciting those lobbyists in those industry. they should solicit a senate rule. they should stop sending the faxes. host: go ahead. guest: the problem is the lobbyist under the supreme court has submitted that a donation is political free speech. you can't ban a lobbyist from donating to somebody because they're a classified person as a lobbyist. you can't have the members of congress stop soliciting the host: we have a tweet here from a viewer. maybe the solution is to write laws that are simpler to

understand so we don't need a lobbyist/interpreter with an agenda. guest: that would be great. the laws are so complex that, you know, the difference between a shall and a may is enormous. so i agree that common sense would make it easier and -- but once again, i think every american should be a lobbyist. i don't think getting rid of a lobbyist is a solution. i think members of congress are accountable is a solution to you. host: do you get to see legislation before it goes before a committee, before it goes to a markup? guest: a lot of members of congress will send you a draft just to say are we going to get opposition from you because what they want to do is clear the decks before they go into a hearing or a markup. host: so you get to review the legislation, you send back your notes and say this -- guest: we usually have a meeting with them and say what's your intent here because our clients are -- your constituents may have a problem with this.

and we want them to look gd. we want them to succeed. host: when you say clear the decks what does that mean? guest: no opposition in the way. when they go for a markup, they want to know when they go in a markup or a hearing they're not going to get outward oppition. so what they're doing is they're saying, can you review this, make sure this is in line with your -- you may totally disagree and they want that information too because, say you have at&t and verizon on one side and my folks on the other, they want to know where the opposition is. host: is that appropriate? guest: i think it is because if you don't they're going to be fighting toth and nail all the way through this -- tooth and nail all the way through this. they have to get that information. if they don't float you a draft, i mean, sometimes a draft is -- come back and here it is. even though you say i want a shall and not a may, it doesn't mean you will get it. that's what our folks want. host: how long does it take for

a bill that you want to be passed to get through the legislative process? guest: there are no guarantees. that's the one thing about, you know, legislation. there are no guarantees. i mean, the closed captioning bill i was talking about. 30 million deaf and hard of hearing americans. it should be a no-brainer. it took six years for access. sometimes they come to you and say, can you pass this in two weeks? well, if i could do that i would be paid a whole lot more. but, no, that's not the case. st: blacksburg, virginia, james, democratic line. go ahead. oh, james i think i hit the wrong button. jane, are you there? caller: yes. commenting on the situation where i wrote to my representatives. it was in the ninth congressional district in virginia, rick boucher and jim webb and received a letter from a lobbyist named trent

bowserman. and then i found out that he worked both for rick boucher at one point and then worked for jim webb. the issue is the contamination coming out of the ammunition plant. i don't understand where why they have a lobbyist wring an email. i wonder if that's legal. guest: i can't speak to the specifics, of course. was he a staff member for webb now or -- caller: no. he has been a paid staffer for boucher. i think it's hill and noleton or mething. -- nolton or something. host: ok. guest: that's kind of unusual, very unusual, actually. maybe boucher, i'm just speculating here, maybe boucher said i'm not quite familiar with this, can you answer this? you should have gotten an answer from your member of congress. host: carol, independent line. caller: yes.

mr. wenhold, you continually say that the american people have a voice in the government. the experience with regard to the health care bill and everything deny that. i understand that the authors of that bill were with united health care. at the same time they were authoring this bill,here was something in the neighborhood of 64,000 health care for pharmaceutical lobbyists milling around washington. and in spite of the 2 1/2 million people that assaulted washington with their voices to put an end to this travesty, we

were completely ignored. host: david we nembingshold. guest: i think this -- host: david wenhold. guest: i think yr voices were heard but maybe others were heard louder. or maybe the legislate -- legislators have an agenda. the health care bill may not have been a great thing for you regardless. and you look at the party vote, it was almost party line. so it's very difficult to say that you don't have a voice. you absolutely have a voice. that's the whole point of the first amenent. the fight is not over. you need to continue to contact your legislators and make sure they hear you. host: we hear from a viewer who describes shall means you will do it. may means you have an option not to.

democratic line, go ahead. caller: thank god for c-span. i just wanted to ask mr. wenhold just two things. how many lobbyists approximately are to each congressperson, if you know? host: we heard 39-1, i believe, was the figure one caller put out there. do you know? guest: it's not per congressman. math was never my strong point. there are 13,000 federally registered lobbyists here in washington. host: and more outside? guest: there are probably 50,000 more arod the states. host: that are coming to washington, d.c. or lobbying the state government? guest: lobbying the states. host: independent line, billy, go ahead. caller: thank you for my call. now, i personally think one of the worst things that ever happened in this country to have lobbyists and people up there running through the halls

casting money around in dlars does things in washington. the average citizen gets no response also you marched on washington and created a b disturbance. host: david, go through a y of lobbying, what does it entail? guest: well, a day of lobbying is cometely different every day which is what i love about it. you usually have five, six, seven meetings scheduled for your clients. a lot of conference calls, a lot of phone calls and emails from staffers talking about your various legislation. i think to the speaker's point is that you hire lobbyis here because you can't be here every day. that's the point. you know, it's an expertise thing that you're hiring. i'm a pretty smart guy. if i had an appendicitis i wouldn't go digging around. i would go to a specialist. let them know this issue is

continually out there. it's not all the time. if you go -- right now in august, staffers are pretty casual. the members are out. not a great time to lobby. not a bad time, eithe if you want to lobby the staff. if you have an issue coming up pigtailed d this de girls grow up to be the first black secretary of state? he is telling us about a major event that the best health-care reform. this is an account of what it is like to be on the road with her dad.

from what we're hearing, it is going to be hot, hot, hot. >> learn more about these and other books come out in our 2010 fall preview. watch booktv every weekend and get the full schedule at booktv.org. >> c-span radio is available in the washington/baltimore area, under iphone and ipad, with the c-span radio app, on-line around the world at c-span.org, and now listen to c-span radio through your phone. c-span radio is available any time. it is free, but check with your phone service provider for any additional charges. c-span radio, even more available, on your phone.

shortly we will bring you live coverage from the washington hilton hotel in washington, a coverage of the summit on and bullying, bringing together health and education and law enforcement officials talking about the impact of bullying and and effective -- facebook and the cartoon network as well. until then, your phone calls from this morning's "washington journal." on congress and campaign 2010. the phone numbers are on your screen. here is the front page of "the denver post."

that is the front page of "the denver post." the results broke down like this. in the republican primary, buck defeated norton. maes beat mcinnis 50% to 49%. mike bennett beat andrew romanoff 54% to 45%. we want to get your thoughts this morning on camping 2010 results, as well as what we saw from congress yesterday. they approved $26 billion in state aid, and another $10

billion to avoid teacher layoffs. we can show you that to vote in just a little bit. also from "the washington post" this morning -- we want to hear from you and what you think the results mean for the general election. that is "the washington post" this morning. also, the breakdown of the $26 billion jobs bill -- in "the washington post" this morning. the vote was 247 to 161. three democrats voted against the bill. 24 lawmakers were absent for the vote yesterday. new york, jim oon the line for

democrats this morning. caller: thank you. government, this country, we're not going forward. we're either going back or we are going right. we are not going forward. this might sound terribly liberal -- i do not think it is. many of the european countries seem to be going forward with their trade policies. it seems like we're almost getting it all wrong as far as repealing the tax cuts -- we cannot even get that. it was reported on tmz yesterday that kim kardashian

bought $1 million worth of cars for her family last year. the wealthiest people in this country do not need a tax break. it amounts to hundreds of billions of dollars. the middle class and the lower class, we need a tax break. the middle-class and lower class people should not be worried about the tax breaks for the wealthy. thank you. host: there's an article this morning in "the new york times" on a new study about the tax breaks. it looks at a lapse of tax cuts for the rich. a report circulated yesterday on capitol hill. it said the president vowed to cuts for about 90% of american household.

host: it is a fight that is likely to come up when lawmakers return from august recess. johnnie, what are your thoughts this morning? caller: it shows me that the republicans, c-span, and fox -- c-span is a kind of part of fox.

people are stupid. you think people are stupid. they are deliberately trying to tear down this economy. they're trying to keep people from getting jobs. they're doing everything they can to hurt middle america and the lower class. people can see this. people are not stupid. as long as people are reluctant -- people are not clear to vote for them. host: we are going to talk about the primary results a little bit more. we will talk about it this morning. at 7:45 a.m., john mcardle will join us and give us his analysis. ."re is "the washington post

the breakdown of the stimulus that has been put out by this administration. it also includes what president bush did as well. they showed that the $26 billion state aid package passed tuesday s to about over $1 trillion in spending and tax measures to stimulate the economy so far. you can see the breakdown of the stimulus bill that was passed in 2009. infrastructure got a $147 billion. tax cuts got $190 billion. extending state aid, which was what passed yesterday, $26 billion. hire act, about $17 billion.

former president bush, under his administration, passed about $170 billion in tax cuts. atlantic city on the line for independents, good morning. the >caller: i think that peopln the middle of the country -- the advantages of being -- [inaudible] they want to make sure that people are doing [inaudible] host: we're having a little trouble hearing you. we will go on to the democratic line in washington, d.c. caller: i'm very concerned that the democrats are going to lose

this fall simply because the republicans are energized. i hope that's not the case. we're going to have a lot of gridlock. nothing is going to get done. even though a lot is not getting done now, it will be even more so if they win. host: benjamin on the line for republicans in mississippi. benjamin, you're on the air. what are your thoughts on congress or campaign 2010? caller: i just want to let you know that mississippi is probably the poorest state in the nation. tea party.for the two-part hey, there are some things that we all need to talk about.

host: we're going to leave it there, and remind you and others to turn your television down when you're on air. here is the headline in "the new york times" about the state aid package getting past. -- passed. host: the stimulus money was being released immediately. mr. sanford joins several other governors who initially expressed hesitation, but later relented. woodbridge, va., johnnie on the

line for democrats. good morning. caller: good morning. i have to let the democrats know that they're doing a lousy job of letting people know what the republicans are doing. the republicans are stopping the banks and other lending institutions from lending. they do not want any job to be filled. i do not see why the democrats cannot bring that out in the people. go after these people. harry reid -- talk like cram puff. these people are very vicious. they do not want the banks or any lending institution to give a dime to anybody. small business has got a problem because every time they want to raise the minimum wage, there the first one to holler. they're going to run us out of

business. it does not make sense. host: here is "the new york times" headline. it means mortgage rates are likely to remain at record lows for some time. that is "the new york times" this morning with their headline on that. "the financial times" has this headline. that is "the financial times" this morning. also, other headlines about congress. here is "the wall street journal" this morning. we want to show you a little bit from yesterday's floor speech by

charlie rangel, and we can come back and talk about that as well. >> all of my life has been, from the beginning, a public service. that is all i have ever done. been in the army, then a state legislator, then a federal prosecutor. if it is the judgment of people here, for whatever reason, that i resign, then, heck, have the ethics committee expedite this. if this is an emergency, and i think it is, to help our local and state governments out, what about me? if i were you, i might want me to go away, too. i am not going away. i'm here. host: that was charlie rangel yesterday on the floor giving an unexpected speech. if you want to see the whole 30-

minute speech, go to our video library, c-span.org. you can see a link at the top. you can watch the entire speech. here is "the wall street journal" on the speech this morning. his own lawyers and closest friends advised him not to give in. on wednesday, he will throw a birthday party in manhattan. house speaker nancy pelosi said he should keep his comments away from the house floor. she wrote in a statement that the committee is the proper arena for ethics matters to be discussed. the article also concludes --

, on thes, missouri line for democrats. caller: the majority of the people of missouri want the health care measure the president is proposing. the vote that we had this last week on the health care bill -- i am an educated voter, and it was stated on the voting ballots in such a negative way, using almost a double negative to make a statement. the average voter may have voted yes, thinking they were voting for the measure, when actually it was stated in the opposite

way. if they wanted the measure to pass, they needed to vote no. the average voter may not have realized that. just for the people of missouri, i just want the average voter around the country ,o know that in missouri even though it did not pass, we really wanted that measure. the ballot did not give us the opportunity to make the right choice. yota --n update ontario on to here is "the washington post" -- here is "the new york times" this morning. that is front page of "the new york times" this morning. houston, texas, on the line for

republicans. caller: i want to mckee, on the last lady who just called. essentially, she is singing, who are you going to believe, me or your lying eyes? basically, the people of missouri are so stupid that they did not realize they were voting against obamacare? give me a break. these people are leeches. they feel the government is the absolute solution to all their problems. they do not understand that every public sector job held in the government is created by the private sector employee taxes. these people have no understanding about the basic economic working.

host: your connection was not that great. we will have to move on to heath on the line for republicans. caller: good morning. it is 17 minutes after the hour and no mention has been made of the passing, fatally, of senator ted stevens. it is a shame. when mr. kennedy died, it was front-page news. everybody had to eulogize senator kennedy, and there's been no respect for senator ted stevens. host: i was just about to get there with those headlines. a lot happening yesterday in the news on capitol hill and in politics, so that's why we brought in the phone lines. that includes the passing of ted stevens. here is the headline of "the new

york times" this morning. creating the trans alaska pipeline, which made the state risk, and protecting the state's fisheries from exploitation. that is "the new york times" this morning. they also note that he was heavily criticized for funneling billions of dollars to his state. the watchdog group and mr. stevens regularly got alaska more per capita than any other state, often through a earmarks. it says he was the emperor of earmarks and that he accumulated projects worth $3.4 billion, which is a record amount. that is the headline in "the new york times" this morning.

front page of "the washington post" -- "former senator dies in crash." the survivors include sean o'keefe. that is the front page of "the washington post." the headline in "usa today" this morning -- we will go on to the big bear lake, calif., on the line for independents. caller: thank you very much. in southern california, they have a lot of processing regarding the money that the mayor and some of the other people who are made politicians are making in that city.

over $1 million, the highest in the nation. i would like to congratulate the mexican americans for getting involved in starting this investigation and continuing to protests. at one time, i was really against the mexicans coming over and taking the jobs. the more i see of them, they are more involved in the politics than the so-called regular americans. i want to ask them to stay organized and keep up the good work. on the other hand, a person asked, why aren't the banks lend any money? i ask that they read the book "the big short" by michael lewis, and you will see a lot of the reasons politicians are doing the things the way they are. and one of the reasons they're not giving any money is so the banks can continue to own the property. without the property, then the

prices go down, the value of the property goes down, and then they can resell it and make a profit. the other reason the prices are so high -- the politicians want the prices of homes to go up so that they can put more tax on them and make more money for the state that way. and then he goes on to explain a lot of the other details. it is quite fun reading the book. there's some humor in it, and taking a subject that's in the news today. host: we sat down with the author, as well, and if you go to c-span.org and plugged in his name, you can find our interview. an update on the connecticut senate race and the governor race. the results of those two races. mcmahon won the nomination over

simmons, and now faces blumenthal in the fall. tom foley won the republican nomination. san francisco, don on the line for republicans, good morning. caller: good morning. i hope you're getting me ok. host: yes, we can hear you. caller: sorry about the plane that went down. i'm always sorry about plans that go down. thank you for your service, elected official who went down in the plane. i called to talk about the republican-democratic stranglehold on government. i just wanted to say one quick thing about the missouri vote. politicians and people who write

the bills do the language so that people misunderstand. they do misrepresent themselves as best they can. they call that legalese. legalese is supposed to be easily understandable. it is not. anyhow, the reason i called in today was to wake up the american voters that the republicans and democrats, together, do not really care about the americans. they care about getting reelected. they care about getting money in their campaign fund. that is it. we need to do away with the electoral college. it will take a >> we are leaving "washington journal" at this point to go to the washington hilton hotel for the summit on of bullying. the education department is bringing together held a law

enforcement officials with corporate representatives to discuss the impact of bullying and ways to stop it. we will hear from officials with this book, cartoon network, and dairy queen. -- with facebook, a cartoon network, and dairy queen. this is live coverage on c-span. >> demi lovato to be a celebrity spokesperson on bullying. she will be running around with the jonas brothers. if you have teens or tweens, they know who the jonas brothers are -- talking about prevention. we have the head of the turner system's animation and young adults media division, including a cartoon network, boomerang, cartoonnetwork.com,

and other products. michael also, i am pleased to see, was involved in some of my favorite films, "being john malkovich" a and "traffic." thank you for bringing pleasure to me and my wife with those wonderful films. finally, he is on the advisory board of facebook. when we talk about social networks, we are happy to have him there. he also provides a legal and policy advice to technology companies. we were talking in the hall, and he was also a commissioner at the u.s. federal trade commission, where he worked on technology, convergence issues, on-line issues, and has been a leader in the online safety space. we are very happy to have these folks here. we're going to take of --

kick with michael from dairy queen international. [applause] >> sorry, we need to pull up the powerpoint. ok, good afternoon, everyone. let's try again. good afternoon, everyone. >> good afternoon. >> thank you for the introduction. i also happen to be a father of three, experienced a pretty significant series of -- and 32 or 33 years ago, experienced a pretty significant series of bullying episodes with not one llies.o polbu i am pleased and hobbled to be with you today. we don't have a lot of time, as you know, so we want to jump to the things -- the roles that

corporations can play in this process. i will talk briefly about some dreams and initiatives. and the potential will corporations. starting with the dreams, almost everyone here has probably are to give it some version of this a dream in some way. -- almost everyone here has probably articulated some version of the stream in some way. -- this dream every day. we want to halt to create a movement to put -- help to create a movement to put an end to bullying. i believe this needs to be a social movement, with kids themselves leading the movement with adults to help them along the way. what the movement to change the culture in schools and communities -- we want the movement to change the culture in schools and communities to make it virtually impossible for bullying to occur. to have the movement ultimately lead to the type of federal and

state laws protecting kids in helping the families, these are the dreams and visions that we are trying to chase down. many of you might be familiar with these things. this website was launched years ago. teensagainstbullying.org. all sorts of resources that schools are using are around the country -- schools are using around the country. this has grown into something much larger because of the involvement of so many organizations this will give you the flavor of every kid-ce -- a kid-centric resource. very importantly, the award- winning

pacerteensagainstbullying.org, with cutting edge navigation tools, and almost all the content written and produced by teenagers themselves. very importantly, as i mentioned, the idea of national bullying prevention month, pulling together all whole movement to have less participate in raising awareness around bullying prevention -- un raising awareness are run bullying prevention. it involves potential participation on any of your parts in national bullying prevention awareness month. our hope is that one day, the u.s., canada, maybe the world stops during national bullying prevention month as we focus on this very important issue and cause. yes, probably thinking on the big side, but that is the way we think it needs to unfold for something important to happen. information and resources are available throughout the month on at this web site.

pacer is involved with corporate partners, up from demi lovato and the jonas brothers, ibm, and on the panel, we are in the process of developing nice relationships with the facebook team and cartoon network and cnn. we believe that these types of corporate sponsorships and partnerships are critical to get because and message out to a very wide audience, and as many eyeballs and years as possible. specifically, demi lovato has become our national spokesperson for teensagainstbullying.org. she is the next hannah montana, and she is passionate about the cause because she was bullied in high school and feared for her life and her mother had to pull her out of school. she has used for art, music and

acting, as a channel and heal from the experience. she has millions of tween and teenage follow words. when she talks, they follow. when she asked them to do something, shthey do something. that is why we're so this on the social media and are rich in general, and her concert tours, which are about to begin, where she reaches hundreds of thousands. this is what she looks like integrated into the teenags against bullying. this is a setup for the two key messages i would like to share with you today. first is the importance of collaboration. i can tell you, from a potential corporate sponsors and point, somebody working on pacer's

behalf with organizations that supply the dollars and resources that so many of us need to get the movement rolled or keep it rolling, we have a network to come up with definitions as i mentioned today. nothing drives corporations more crazy than those who might be willing to contribute thousands of dollars than to have a poorly defined cause and not understanding the differences they can make. i want to point out how much amazing activity is going on but how fragmented and decentralized much of it is. there are so many complementary strengths in this room, and i think there is a general perception that we have not reached a tipping point with all of our collective efforts to tip this thing over and become a true movement in many ways that could lead to the long-lasting change we would like to see occur. if it does not come together like that, it is hard to get private sector funding for what we are trying to do.

kids need to lead -- need us to lead, because we control a lot of the resources that they will need to get the work done to it as it relates to the potential corporate sponsors, there are so many things that corporate sponsors to do to help kids themselves and their families and the schools which they attend and the community spirit of fund-raising and underwriting are obvious ones. corporations can do a tremendous amount to bring awareness of the various causes and issues through various non-profit organizations and civic organizations, you don't have the platform you could get to expose the cause or the issue to millions of people read the contract operational expertise and legal expertise -- they can bring operational expertise and legal expertise. and social relevance and life style but th.

the right type of organization aligning themselves with us -- there is a lot of great brands out there, whether they are clothing brands, digital brands, social media prints, who are closely connected to this cause without fully knowing or understanding it. as a brief example, i happen to be the incoming chair for the children's miracle network board of governors, represent all of the different corporate sponsors to raise money for the children's miracle network hospitals. there are about 25 or 30 of us corporate sponsors and we raise $140 million a year, 175 children's hospitals around the u.s. and canada. i assume everyone in this room, from researchers to ngo's pacific agencies, you would appreciate the extra funding for your cause. true? remarkably, $140 million is raised year for the private sector for these children's hospitals.

do ase're able to corporate sponsors is engaged in activate our employees and customers to raise those funds, and we can also enable all of the fund recipients to do the work today are supposed to do, which is held the kids themselves -- to do the work today are supposed to do, which is to help the kids themselves. i wonder if there is a corporate sponsor model for the bullying movement, and if there is is a way of figuring out how to collaborate and clarify our cause and our needs to further our access to the cause that we are working on so hard. in closing, so many of us share the exact same dream, although maybe the definition of the dream it varies slightly. everyone of us sitting in the room and do. my sense is -- i think secretary duncan said it himself -- we need to realize it. the fact that we are all in the room together is a great start.

the fact is that we have to go much further than that to further our complementary strengths. there is the ability of corporations to reach out to families and into homes and schools. it is incredibly important to them on many levels. we have to provide them a clear channel and a clear vehicle for doing that. ultimately, kids and their families need us to do that, because this causes bon has gone unaddressed for far too long. that is where various entrepreneurial or ganizations or corporations can help us accelerate the pace of change. i thank you for your time and look forward to answering questions later. [applause]

>> now we will hear from stuart snyder. >> i am just looking for -- you have a slight, right? ok. -- a slide, right? ok. ♪ >> be fit. >> with cartoon network. >> tony hawk!

>> can i skate with you? >> eat healthy. just fun,it isn't it's important. 160,000 children stay home every day. >> i feel scared. >> they are getting bombarded by these people telling them they wished it would kill themselves, they will beat them up the next day. >> our campaign of verbally abusive behavior and -- a campaign of verbally abusive behavior and threats of harm. >> her name is the be prince. -- is phoebe prince.

>> bullying is not a new problem facing our nation's schools. why has it gotten so severe? at least 41 states have legislation addressing bullying. >> routinely harassed, threatened by other students. >> i found him buying an extension -- i found him hanging by an extension cord tied around his neck. he was 11 years old. this can happen to anybody. >> with kids afraid to stand up to bullies, the problem is not going to go away on its own. >> schools recognize the problem of bullying, and many have programs -- >> we need to get the programs to work. >> no fighting, no teasing, and no names. we need to take control of the situation they might see and make them feel empowered to

change. >> let them know that some things are not okay and they do not need to put up with it. >> almost 1/3 of the students reported having been bullied at school. clearly there is more work to be done. >> thank you. good afternoon, everyone. usually at this time of day i'm deciding whether our hero should have more episodes so that he can continue to save the world, or that scooby-doo and the meddling kids should be given another mystery to solve. i have a fine job, but it is one that comes with responsibilities. i thank you for allowing me to be to date, and i want to thank you for the generous invitation, because as a parent, this is an

issue that is very close to my heart. as you gathered from the clip reel you just saw, cartoon network has a longstanding history of empowering and motivating our viewers to create positive change and live a healthier lifestyle. as part of our responsibility to give back, we have created such a various campaigns as the movement that is touring the country and inspiring kids to live more active lives, and support first lady michelle obama's "let's move" initiative, and rescuing a recess, bolstering daily recess programs in elementary schools. in both cases, we secured in the st.'s leading partners to provide research while we provided -- industry leading partners to provide research while we provided the offense and the national distribution that other word out to kids and

educators and decision makers. it is a partnership model that works we are seen in more than 97 million homes every single day. we looked specifically for groups with expert information that audiences and their families need to know. our partners have included many of the countries most renowned organizations -- the national pta, the centers for disease control, the robert wood johnson foundation, the national education association, the food and drug administration, and many more. i am here today to expand those partnerships and to help stop bullying. i am a dad, two daughters, one in high school and one in college. i represent the many parents from cartoon network, turner broadcasting, and time warner, all of whom are passionate about the needs and concerns we see

in hear firsthand in our own ofs' lives and in the lives our young viewers. our interest in this critical issue came about naturally. more than a year ago, from conversations about our own childhood experiences, as well as those from our kids. the idea is to do something meaningful with bullying prevention, and it began to crystallize with in these discussions. we began to ask ourselves, what with the next steps be? what did we do that would be most effective -- what could we do that would be most effective? it inspired a leadership team to begin the process of exploring the topics that resonated with kids. we went to them directly. our research people began asking kids around the country, what was most pressing on their minds? kids told us that they realized

there was very little they could do themselves to affect the war overseas, or even the economy at home. they already knew or were at least aware of what they needed to do to stay healthy and how they could help the environment. but what they really wanted to know was how to deal with bullying, in all of its forms, whether it happens at school, on the bus, on the playground, on social media websites, or on the cell phones rep. they shared that they did not feel control, and they wanted useful tools that they would be able to handle and openly prevent bullying. we had our marching orders. young people to believe that they can change the world, and all of our kids -- and all our kids want is information and inspiration to stop the crisis that is bullying. we began the task of researching

the issue, seeking out the very best it buys from the most trusted partners to guide us in -- the very best advice from the most customers to guide us in providing accretive in multi- platform program. we met with a wide range of the leading experts on bullying, listening to their concerns and priorities. it became clear very quickly that he needed to find a way to give our audience is the confidence and the skills needed to create change, whether by direct involvement or by telling someone in authority. the experts each agreed to serve and partner with us as part of our bullying prevention advisory board, helping to ensure that whatever we generate will provide the most useful tools and information available to kids and parents and educators alike. i would like to recognize several key individuals who are with us today. each of whom have graciously given their time to counsel and

educate us bullying and its prevention. -- educate us on the critical issues surrounding bullying and its prevention. the executive director of project change. [applause] it also gives me great pleasure to introduce our most recent , director of education for the anti-defamation league. with direct and roads to schools and educators and local school boards, the adl has a long history of the social projects for anti-bias training, allowing people to learn the impact that bullying and bigotry have on the social fabric of schools.

lastly, i want to introduce the vice-president of social responsibility, who has been working closely with the advisory board. [applause] i have been given the infamous ku effort to minutes. -- cue for 2 minutes. there is going to be a lot of editing out. bear with me. after months of research and discussion, we set a specific focus of what will be the first national program of any major kids' television network addressing bullying pri announced a brand-new social initiative aimed at educating and empowering individuals who have the most power to affect change, the bystander. research has shown that 75% to 80% of students in schools are considered witnesses to bullying.

they are the single largest group who might be empowered to take action or prevent or reduce a bullying occurrences. in may, we announced that our program would launch on october 4, in recognition of national bullying prevention month, which was proposed in champion of five years ago by the pacer organization. their director is your day. thank you for your leadership. -- their directories here today. thank you for your leadership. i am pleased to share the official name of the cartoon network's contribution to the field, stop bullying, speak up. it will give them confidence and skills they can use in difficult situations. finally, as part of turner broadcasting's overall commitment to these critical issues with as many audiences as

possible, we listed the help of our sister network -- we enlisted the help of our sister network, cnn, which has covered issues of bullying for a long time, as you saw from the clip reel. cnn has committed to a series of editorial features on bullying this october. it will provide a better overall understanding for bystanders and parents who can help us affect change. in addition to this, to help kick off our efforts, i am thrilled today to announce that one of cnn's most preeminent journalists, andersoon cooper, will serve as the host and moderator of a major town full discussion on bullying as part of this initiative. it will be part of his award winning prime-time series, "anderson cooper 360."

[applause] 1 important message i want to emphasize to everyone here is that this is not a short-term program for cartoon network. we are committed to investing our considerable leverage with kids on a long-term basis, whether it is on the air, on- line, or for special events across the country. to wrap things up, thank you for all comi -- for welcoming us here today and working with my colleagues and i to address this national crisis. with your help, we will create the content that will truly make a difference our goal, a very simple -- stop bullying. get those kids who are scared to go to school every day back in the classroom. turn that 35% of kids who say they have been the cyber-bullied

into cyber-allies. stop bullying by having us all speak up. thank you. we look forward to working with you. [applause] >> now we will hear from mozelle thompson.

>> good afternoon, everyone. [laughter] thank you for your kind introduction, and to secretary duncan, and to the assistant secretary jennings for convening this important summit today. you know, i have worked on these issues dealing with cyber- bullying, but also related issues of cyber-racism and cyber-hate for quite a long time, back when i was at the federal trade commission, and with facebook since 2006. there are a lot of public policy issues that it website like facebook -- a website facebook has to deal with, because it is out there and growing.

but there are few more important issues than the one we're talking about today. and the important work the company is doing to make the internet safer for young people. today i am here to discuss the ways that facebook is confronting bullying, and how it is creating innovation for this important problem. i will begin by giving you a little overview, a little bit about the company. how many of you are actually on facebook anyway? ah. it is not just the kids anymore. kids, better check your friend lists. i will talk about a robust 60 tools facebook has come and how it is responding to cyber -- robust safety tools facebook

has, and how it is responding to cyber-bullying. facebook recently made two important announcements. it reached its sixth birthday. it is six years old. amazing, isn't it? it also announced that there are over 500 million people on facebook, larger than the population of the u.s., germany, and japan together. now, one of the things that you realize is that facebook is a big community of people. in some ways, 500 million individual networks. like in the real world, it is difficult to protect all people all the time. but we all can work together to .ake the internet safe for

facebook believes that companies have a responsibility to be as innovative and creative when it comes to safety as it is in other aspects of the business. now, the overall approach facebook has in its mission is to give people the power to share information as it makes the world more open and connected. but a key element to that is creating a safe and comfortable environment, so that people have control over what information they share in who they share it with. for that reason, facebook has always been proactive on safety issues. one example of facebook innovation is the use of real- name culture. that was not always the common wisdom. people thought you might be safer if you are all anonymous. but using the real name action

accomplishes a lot. -- actually accomplishes a lot. it makes the website unattractive to people who would do bad things, because you can find them. it also attracts people more likely to adhere to community rules, because interest is community policing. there are the people who know you and squeal on you if you do bad things. and kids actually squeal on you. we also have technical systems in place to flag and block fake profiles, and unusual site activity. we asked teenagers specific questions to get a better response to make sure they are really teenagers. diyo