veterans and later alvin si lau seidman talks about the budget. "washington journal" is next. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] >> a report in the "new york times" said more u.s. double was bought by u.s. do best tick investors. the programs to help with troubled mortgages has already 600 thousand drop out and joe biden says when it comes to this november's elections. democrats should not worry. power will be maintains in the house and the senate. we'll take that conversation if

you want to weigh in and tell your opinion on whether or not democrats will hold you another and why. call (202) 737-0001 for republicans and (202) 737-0002 for democrats and (202) 628-0205 for independents. again the vice president says come november democrats will hold the house and the senate. said that last night in an event we have that on c-span.org. we'll see clips? just a few minutes if you want to wayn on other means do so at journal@cspan.org and make your comments off twitter as well. twitter.com/c-spanwj. this morning from the chart section of the "new york times". floyd north said for a change, u.s. debt is staying in the united states. in the first six months of this

year, the treasury numbers indicate foreign governments reduce treasury security holdings by ten billion. not since 2000 when the united states was holding a surplus it did not need had it had surpluses of a calendar year. overall they purchased more treasuries than did overseas. and then foreign governments in 2009 and then at the beginning of this year. they came as government borrow together pay out spending. these figures exclude the federal reserve spending as a result that purchase is in sales are not counted. that's from the "new york times." want to point you to the vice president statements from st. louis. yesterday this is from the associated press they're write up. biden tells democrats they're safe. vice president biden predicted

voters would reject a republican tea parties and democrats will maintain and obtain contract in november. >> on november third, the day after this coming election. there will be in washington d.c. a democratic majority in the house and the democratic majority in the senate. that will be the case. [applause] and we're not illegal, i'd book on it. >> comment now and call in. (202) 737-0001 for republicans. (202) 737-0002 for democrats. michael on the independent line. what do you think of the vice president's statement? >> i think democrats might get

back many there. depending on what kind of tea party candidate is running. people want less government, less taxes but you have to know what they want to beat rid of they can't give a definite answer so you have to say how you are going to do it. >> so, there's an influence guy tea party this november and a significant one? >> i think so. depending on who they run against. if they run against somebody moderate, democrats side, i don't think they'll weigh in. you need somebody to be moderate and have balance of what's right for americans. we as americans don't think that way anymore. we put ourselves debt and let congress and whoever president is do it. we put ourselves there but what we have to do to get back on good footing. we like knowing that. the american people can do it ourselves. >> what do you make of the vice

president's confidence and the way he said what he said? >> well, you look at their trying to do the thing with most people, i think some of the tea party people but all the people want to go on and don't want to go and meet the press cnn. come on here where people can ask straight up questions. to me, they're running for cover. can't none of them tell you how they going to get there. >> next call from the democrat line. oscar? west virginia? >> good morning. i don't think it makes any difference. the first thing you have to realize is the fact that bin ladin has destroyed america along with george bush. the purpose of the war was to spread democracy and what's happened is bin ladin has demonstrated hypocrisy is

rampant. >> the government doesn't work for the people anymore and that's my comment. >> off of twitter. carolyn goes this way and says, i've been thinking the same thing. she's glad that the vice president isn't folding up under the media pressure/assertion office doom. next caller is from indiana. republican line, don? >> how you doing? i think that mr. biden's comments are living proof that liberalism is a mental disorder. him and obama have the same problem. they're surrounded by a small group of supporter and that's the only thing they listen to. they don't pay any attention to the real world and what's happening. when they pushed that health care bill through. millions and millions and millions of people understood that the democrats don't care

what the people want. they think that everybody, all the voters are just idiots and have to be guided and run by the elites in washington and out here in the real world. what the democrats consider fly over country is where all the votes come from. and those people come election day are toast. they're going to have a great big shoe print on the backside and it's all going to be over. >> so as of november the condition of the house and senate. what do you think? >> i think we're going to take a majority by four seats and majority in the senate by seven seats. >> milwaukee, wisconsin. robert on the democrats line. florida your coming up soon. milwaukee, go ahead? >> yes, i would just like to say that the tell cats will hold both the senate and the house and that's merely because the

republicans are somewhat - i would say like they hate blacks. they hate hispanics and they hate muslims and they hate poor whites and if you don't go along with what they want, they're against you and the man who previously stated that he feels that barack obama and vice president biden are out of sink, i'm sure there's many republicans that need health care just like anybody else. thank you. host: fort walton beach, florida. independent line? >> good evening. obviously i disagree with the last caller. i work in heavy construction and there's no - there's no prejudice involved with - in

this case in health care requirements or the like, but as to the house and the senate being retaken, obviously i can only hope that the representative rest and the independents continue with their enthusiasm and go forward. host: so you this agree with the vice president or agree? caller: no sir, i disagree emphatically. host: what kind of factors as far as people who vote, at least think it might go your way rather than the vice president's way? caller: it's not my way, it's our way but yes, sir. obviously the disappointment with all of the financial take over and health care and pail outs and excessive taxing and if they let the tax increases go forward or allow the taxes to - the tax reduction to go forward,

i think the economy they call it double dip. i really think we'll pay a horrendous price. host: that's fort walton beach, cory on the independent line. as a segway he talks about how some prepare for the possibility of tax cuts being taken away. gary fields this morninging in the "wall street journal," upper income tax players plan for tax. arch brown planned for better tax advantages and erin dpor don is buying stock and mike henry is considering selling tim per. the four among afroing high income of taxes an assuming they'll see higher taxes this year. or next year. more than four months they're making plans to mitigate impact. it isn't clear what will happen. gary fields writes this morning

when the bush tax cut. president barack obama want them extremed for houses with less than $250,000 and individuals making less than $200,000 a year. the cuts should continue for everyone some say and then there's the default. if congress can't reach agreement everyone's will rise. the rate should go from 33 percent to 36 percent and then 35 percent to 39 point 6 percent. our thoughts this morning are to the vice president's statements made yesterday concerning house and senate. race come this november. he's saying democrats will retain power in both bossed and we want to get your thoughts on it this morning. numbers on your screen. hit us up by e-mail and twitter this morning. leesberg virginia. go ahead. >> yeah, i'd like to know what was the last thing that joe

biden was right about? was it dividing iraq into thirds? you know, outside of the leftist media that c-span has come to in habit there can't be six people on the planet that take joe biden seriously. >> and any thoughts on how soon senate conditions come november? >> it's difficult to say. it's so corrupt i think it will depend on the influence of the groups that do the dirty work for the democrat party. it'll be interesting. >> new jersey. parry, independent line? caller: yes? host: you're on, go ahead. caller: he is a dreamer. hello? host: go ahead with your statement. caller: mr.ed by sen a dreamer.

host: go ahead. caller: okay. i'm turning this thing off. mr. biden thinks that he is a dreamer. the house and the senate never going to be able to work out the problems. this government deceiveed the country and deceiveed the people with everything they're going to do. i'm unemployed from 2007'. what they did for us? nothing. nothing! i don't know what it means to have a job. don't know how to get understa. i just - i'm lost. host: so come november you will vote? caller: i don't vote not republican. i probably vote for the tea party. not democratic, never again.

host: kingston, illinois. republican line? caller: high i'm from a loving state. we love sara pail in here. i love glen beck. but i want to know why handty thinks that everybody that watches him hikes him? i agree with joeed byn. nobody is stupid. i agree with everything he said. host: come november, the house and the senate? caller: we've doubled luck with two democrats that are great and you know it's wonderful. people could take whatever they want to take. it's the stupid people that believe in sarah palin. she doesn't know what a state is. if you live in the states you know the difference if you live in alaska you don't have a clue.

like her preaching about giving oil people money. she should be struck by lightning or something. host: we'll leave it there. i've been saying this is off of twitter, by the way. someone identifies them as oversight of government. senate democrats will gain a majority caucus and democrats will gain the house. share your comments. to give you more of a flavor of the vice president's thoughts come november here's more from his speech last night. >> there's a choice for americans and there's not between the democrats and the almighty but democrats and the republican tea party. the party of repeal and repeat. the president and i believe and we said it repeatedly and i think you do too, it's much worse to accept the situation we cannot bear rather than to steel the spine and embrace the change

even though change is frightening. host: statements to the democrat national committee. if you want to see the full statements go to journal@cspan.org if you go to the front page and scroll down, you'll see recently held events section and in there, there's the full statements from the vice president as well as other information against c-span.org. find that video and watch it in it's entirety. columbus ohio. kim in the democrats line. >> one caller forgot to say about the grace. i do agree we're going to hold the house and the senate. i am a democrat and i love barack obama. i kind of feel bad about what i see our country going through right now and how the republicans are playing games, but i truly think we're going to hold something. like i say the tea partyers have

alerted us and for them to think we can spit on our congress men and do dirty stuff like that. sarah palin when people find out what she's really about, you're going to lose it. host: previous caller said probably at least he said he would vote for the tea party because of situations in his life and your saying tea parties - we're going to get the democrats on board and put them out in the poles? >> well, yeah. we - well you see what the tea partyers yell about and how fox news and the republicans have set them up to yell about things that having nothing to do with nothing and it hurts me too. it hurts me to see our people yelling about stuff that really, we all could be yelling about the same thing. i think we're mad about a lot of the same things. it saddens me.

tea partyers have alerted us truly. we're coming because of that, we not kids dying in the street every day. if this is white kids dying in the street every day this would be called epidemic. we're coming for a lot of reasons. host: republican line, mike, las angeles? caller: i'm of hispanic descent and i want to tell you the same thing i tell my students every day. this is - you should enlighten your audience in terms of how the media works in this country because what i tell them is the elite media serve ass fence and the democrats serves the left and you need to understand that to grasp the issues relative to politics in america. what i mean. that's my plan and here's my support. starts with the "new york times". they all get the lead from the "new york times" and los angeles times. they control all the stations

and the left controls pbs and virtually all the cable stations with the exception of fox. they castigate fox. the liberal immediate ra likes to do that. they control virtually the entire media nerms of numbers it's a disservice. host: all that said, mr. i'd energy's statement especially concerning november? caller: that's pure - well,ed by sen protect i'd the liberal media every day. they carry water for the democrats and it's redundant. republicans will pick up 70 plus seats and at least ten in the senate i think. so realistically i think you do a disservice. i think you've tilted a little to the left and there's something going on with who's receiving your calls. you've become less objective.

host: disagree with your statement but thanks for calling in. this is from the "new york times". about the mart gaming relief program that the government runs. it says that while millions, well the obama administrations mortgage program originally aimed to shield many from for closure. millions say they need help avoiding for choe sure, release friday shows the drop out rate was very high. 96 thousand trial modifications were counseled by lenders in july. the number of cancel asiaations. 422 thousand mortgage modifications over seen were considered permanent as of july. up from 339 in june but the pool

of candidates are shrinking rapidly. down from the enrolled in september when the program was new. georgia, good morning. john? democrat line? caller: thank you, c-span. ultimately what the last caller was trying say which i totally disagree with his conclusion, but he was trying say, how do you come to the truth and finding all the truth with all the media, whether they're liberal, fox news, more conservative republicans, how you finding all the truth? listen to what the president said during his campaign. this man has done exactly what he said he would do. now if you listen to him and you agree with him then i think ultimately the democrats will in fact, keep the house and the senate. we do not have presidents who

tell us truth. and that's what the president is hoping. that we listen to what he said. he did what he said he was going to do and he did it quick and kept on. gave this country universal health care. many, many presidents have tried to do that. he accomplished it. what happened during the bush administration with the shifting and shipping up top overseas and reduction of manufacturers. we have not seen manufacturing increase in this country since 2007'. are we xoing through a tough time? absolutely. but again, listen to what he said. judge him for what he's doing and i think they'll continue with the house and the senate. host: robert in nashville. on our independent line.

good morning.? caller: yes. i think the last caller there, i don't know what planet he's living on, but talking about the president doing exactly what he said he would do. the best way to tell when he's lieing is when his lips are moving. biden and below pelosi talked how much cheap tear health care would be and now the numbers are coming out. telling they're candidates that it's now not going to be cheaper. instead of the first family and the white house they should be the first vacation family. rest of the united states struggling. host: can i turn your statement to what we're trying talk about come bidens statement come november. caller: he's on the same planet as last caller. they have about as much chance

of retaining the house as a one-legged man in a butt kicking contest. it ain't going to happen. host: why you think that? call all what i'm saying. they are misleading the public. the housing market. more for closures. record unemployment. higher taxes. who do you work for? do you work for poor people or people with money? host: joyce, republican line from houston texas. caller: i want to respond to the man that said that the republicans hate blacks and hispanics, et cetera. well i want to say that, let me say that i'm a few years shy of 85 years old and i'm a black senior citizen. the democrat party have done more harm to my people than the republicans ever think about and you all are just talking about the tea parties i'm a tea party

goer and i get treated royally and i'm one of the blacks that don't believe nobody owe me anything so i'm not looking for anybody to give me anything. i'm out there giving and i get so tired of hearing people say that they're picking on obama because he's black. i don't care what they say, obama is by racial and if he could get on the campaign trail and trash his white grandmother that took him in when his black grandmother didn't want him. what in the hell you think he'll do to us! he and michelle hate this country. country that's been good to them. host: thoughts on the november election? caller: i'm sure we'll pick up some seats but i don't know how many. we just need to get all the hatred of the republicans out because the democrats host: you think democrats will retain the house come november?

caller: no, i sure do not. host: okay. thanks. pine level, north carolina. johnny, independent line. caller: how you doing this morning? please don't cut me off. this lady called in from texas, bless her heart she told the truth. she should be in politics. maybe she can straighten this mess out. what i wanted to say is they outstanding to quit bringing president obama and george bush too. this mess started if you look at the archives of the newspaper. bill clinton and ross perot and george bush senior. ross perot told bush and clinton what was going to happen to this country. clinton had a chance to get bin laden and didn't do it. that's all i got to say. host: c democrat line.

washington d.c.? caller: i think the democrats will maintain the seats but they need to actually come down and lay out the facts. people need to stop listening to a lot of these people and use a computer and other information available to enlighten them. if the republicans get in with the tea party now. what tea party now the republican tea party. first thing they'll do is talk about taking the social security and privateizing and putting stock market like they wanted to do before. think where these people would be now. if they have done that if the democrats think from doing that last time. that's what they're talking about now and with respect to everyone all upset about the debt. they need to look at it. ten trillion dollars debt create i'd three republican presidents. reagan, bush and bush. it's factual. look it up. stop listening to people when

they talk about the - obama and this quarter. when reagan was in office it was up every quarter. same with bush. host: republican line. florida? caller: good morning, pedro. i think they're going to lose this and the reason is - there's a few good reasons why. one is whenever you got a president in a congress citizen putting a debt on our grandchildren it's nothing but plain old child abuse. they're paychecks won't be the same because of the way they're spending so much money. one of the other reasons is i think the christian people will wake up and part of this paying for foreign o abortions and it's going to come up we're paying for them and i think christian people don't want that blood on their hands. i think there's several good reasons to not to re-elect.

we have a congress man that spending money every time we turn the t.v. on and people is tired of that stuff so they'll elect the other man. ho host that's floyd from jonesville, georgia. talk about our news maker program tomorrow at ten o'clock in the morning on c-span. our guest is a democrat from massachusetts is the chairman on energy and environment and during his discussion with reporters, looking over the bp oil spill. one of the sub topics was safety of seafood from the gulf. >> fda has determined it's safe and i, myself have had seafood every day for the last seven days so i think that we have to have the confidence that the fda is acted the best public interest. i say that while stipulating

there's still questions that have to be answered and more research that has to be done. host: ten o'clock and six o'clock in the morning, see the whole conversation tomorrow. edward marquee the chairman of the house of commerce subcommittee on energy and the environment. back to your phone calls. boston, massachusetts. independent line. kathy? >> thank you fort span. it's a terrific show and i think you folks do an amazing job letting people air their views. i just wanted to weigh in. i wanted to say something about the democrats holding the senate. it's sort of their ploy to talk things out, but i don't believe they will they'll probably be some evening out. i don't know - the republicans will gain control but i think

hopefully they'll be more of an evening out so that we can get a little bit more sense for some of the bills that they're putting through in there. host: from the "wall street journal" off the associated press. this is the final report issued on the fort hood shootings. military has to make sure supervisors have access to soldiers personnel records and be aware that work place violence and the final report on the fort hood shootings. the reports recommendations address some of the government failures and other problems uncover inned the pentagon probe launched after the november 5 shootings that left 13 dead and dozens injured on the texas army post. they to not provide a

comprehensive study of violence indicators and lacks clarityness. ashville, north carolina. republican line? john, go ahead. caller: when joe i'd energy talks about republicans creating all this problem for the financial meltdown it makes me want to puke. they were equally involved in spreading out bad mortgages and loans in congress. when mr. obama said he wanted to share the wealth in this country. too many income people were living off the backs of the low income people and michelle goes over to spain and walks around in a thousand dollar shirt and thousand dollar shoes and lives high off the hog. it's not to be the ultimate hypocrisy. joe biden should look at what they did to spur on and cause the financial melt town just as

much as republicans and the now the programs they're creating and have created democrats are failing. you said it yourself and they just don't get it in canada they make it hard to bye house because it should be. here they made it easy and created a pebble and you and i are dealing with it now. host: what us it mean in november? caller: democrats move so far to the left that people are rejecting it and they'll move more toward the center. but we have in this country moved so far to the left and right every time and the moderates on both parties are too afraid to reign the other people in and that's why they voted for the health care bill. modern democrats would never have wanted that bill but now we not a bad bill. host: the real reason companies aren't hiring is headlines here. neil across the industrial parks and office towers of the chicago

region and in more than a dozen interviews. senior executives see americans paying down debts and adjusting spending the match they're often reduced incomes. it's a different era. chief executive of the industry with 30,000 u.s. employees that make lighting systems are hiring and investment decisions have to be prudent and reflect that. there's little evidence the economy is slipping back into recession but sales comes and fits and starts and the customers can't predict what they want the buy in the future. indiana? thanks for waiting? . steve on the democrats like? caller: thank you. pedro, when there's a group of people easily influenced to go into war and let the plantation

owner to enslave another map, women and children. i believe the democrat will lose because those same brain dead people who were influenced to go to war and die in the civil war in order for mankind to be enslaved are the same ones today who are being lured by the tea partyers and other republicans. they're totally selfish and hypocritical and brain dead. these influences are the wrong thing. host: you mean democrats will maintain or you think that'll be a switch. caller: i think there going to be a switch. these people are sick. truly sick. host: virginia. harry on the republican line. caller: good morning. petro, how are you. i'll give you a prediction and then a commentary if you'll let me. i think the house goes

republican by 46 seats and a small majority of that. very small majority and the senate remained democratic by two o three seats and a small majority for the democrats in the senate. in effect here, this will push things more to the center. or at least force the entire body politics and the executive and the both sides of the congress to cooperate a little more to you know involve each other a little more. they'll have to if they want to get anything done at all. as for mr. biden. ever so folksy vice president. i think the expression whistling past the grave yard is something he'd probably understand even if he can't relate to it. lastly, you know, we talk about the programs as if that's the

drives force in america for voters. i'm not saying votes are inconsequential. they are but mostly as a backdrop. the country tends to vote on fairly big perceived themes and right now, the majority of this country feels like it's not going the right way. it's something wrong and that's even if they can't put their fin fairs on it they'll try to change something up and that's all i got. host: minnesota, independent line? caller: yes, i just wanted to illustrate a few things that have happened over the last 30-40 years. i've been a management consultant and executive in business for 40 years. i have spent time trying help get ross perot elected. the plight this country resides in today. exists because we fail to run

this country like a business and ross perot was trying picture all of that for the people and unfortunately, only about 20% of americans are really intelligent enough to grasp that. he laid it all out and said that the exploitation of labor by the temporary agencies, the low wages and the corporations not doing what they say they would do hindered labor movement and all of that obstruction and it was illustrated real well by ross perot and those that tried to help ross perot get elected and had he got elected, i think the complex of the country would have been much different. host: u.s. times has a write up

on washington d.c. on ford's theater. there's a new center that will take place near her that will aim to expand the lincoln experience. he writes construction on the enter began as part of the 50 million dollars that over halled a space museum. roughly the 25,000,000 that are center partnership will open in february 2012. 203 years after lincoln's birth month. some new exhibits will be nontraditionle the. it plans to show case a sculpture that will stack replicas a top to highlight has much has been written about lincoln. the center will explore how he's been portrayed or used in popular culture with coins and lincoln logs. and the museum space will concentrate on the area just after lincoln's death with the

tobacco barn where booth came to an end in his reign. maryland on the democrats line. good "morning call" call i'm a registered democrat and i vote for the democrats, but this is the way i see it. the democrats have the political power, but the republicans and the top one percent with money and wealth control this country's economy. these wealthy people are not going to release any investment until the republicans in control of congress and senate because that's when they clear off the table to invest their money. as long as democrats are in control, this economy is going to be just the way this one is right now. the american people have to make

a decision. as long as president's obamas program is noble, it'll continued to be stifled until the republicans get back in power and then things will pick up. people have to hold they're nose and work for the republicans or whatever, but until they are - i'm not prorepublican or nothing like that, but something has to give and i think that, well the republicans might have to take over and that's when rich people and all the investments will schedule in. that's the only time they feel confident with their money. wanted to point to the summer series. 9:15 monday through friday. energy and the financial reform bill. next week, starting monday at 9:15. defense will be the topic and

series segments taking place monday through friday and we'll look at the f-35 air program and then tuesday we'll look at mine resist consistent ambush protected vehicles. those types of top ticks. drones are the topics on wednesday and their use on and in the warfare and then military pay and benefits on thursday and the rehabilitation process on friday. those leaving military back to civilian life. those issues. that takes place monday, through friday on the "washington journal". all segments start at 9:15. you can watch them later on the c-span.org along with other series as well. chicago, illinois. terry. democrat line. caller: good morning i believe the democrats will hold the

house and the senate. i know that this country is really, the capital is something based on the rich staying rich and the poor staying poor. middle class is now - dissolving and i truly believe the people vote in their own interest putting democrats back in place regardless of the media and what they're saying. most media outlets are owned by conservatives. that's why you go to the drum beat of all the democrats will lose. i believe in the end if the democrats get the message right they'll win. how can you vote for a group of people that sit on their hands just to win election in november? you have to challenge mentally to put them back in office so i believe the democrats will gain control again. host: michigan, you're the last call.

go ahead. mike on the independent line? caller: yes, i believe the republicans will probably take some seats this november. and i just wish people would try voting for independents and i believe that the republicans and democrats just playoff each other to kind of get each other elected. i know it sounds kind of strange, but i just wish they would give independents a chance. host: when you say republicans will take seats. in the house or senate or both? caller: probably both. i don't think an overly amount. i think people are just kind of getting tired of government altogether being involved in their lives. host: our first segment this morning looks at stimulus funds that have been spent, yet to be spent and will be spent.

our guest is "wall street journal"'s louise radnofsky and she'll be back to talk about this with you. we'll be right back. s louise r she'll be back to talk about this with you. we'll be right bacs louise radn she'll be back to talk about this with you. we'll be right bacs louise radn she'll be back to talk about this with you. we'll be right back.'s louise r she'll be back to talk about this with you. we'll be right back." louise ra she'll be back to talk about this with you. we'll be right back. >> one of the things i regret about political and rhetorical life in washington is that, every major figure from the president on down is merely reading what somebody else and some committee has produced. >> philip wrote speeches for the secretary of state mr.

insurance. wrote about architects and the people in power. sunday night he'll share insights on washington on c-span's q & a. >> i'm not saying senator mitchell's report is entirely long but bryan's statements about he are wrong. let me be clear. i've never taken steroids or, h.d.h. >> roger clemmens indictment for falsely testifying in front of congress. go back and read it or watch it all on-line at the c span video lie prayer for free. watch what you want, when you want. >> there's 48 hours of nonfiction books and authors every week. today we have the debate of the size of the government in 21'st century.

on sunday. investigative surf gist looks at malaria and the question of why it kills near i a million of people every year. visit book t.v. dot org for times. "washington journal" continues. >> our guest for the next 45 minutes is louise radnofsky of the "wall street journal". one of the things you cover is stimulus and stimulus being very important topic or one that's greatly discussed over the last few months. where do we stand as far as what's been spent and committed in the stimulus fund? guest: helpful to think of three big pot office money. the largest pot is the tax cut. tax credits for families and a host of other a finance provisions and that money is nearly gone. then there's the aid going to schools and medicaid and that money is almost run out also.

the third portion is the part that people most commonly think of is stimulus. infrastructure the money for roads and projects. that money has dpon out much more slowly. host: why so? guest: it's government money spent in ways that are complicated. host: does that mean as far as states actually have it? and not yet spent it or the states have it and they are waiting to at least position to spend it? guest: well you've probably seen a couple of labels that are slightly confusing the first label is made available. the states or contractors know they're getting money and some cases even a contract has been signed but a money has not been paid out. the second one is money made available. you might carry out economic activity.

the federal agency. host: part of the problem is when they get the money and the rules to follow as far as how the money is spent and how it's an applied for? guest: there's a lot of rules but the obama administration said the spenting bill will be accountable in government history. host: one of the transparency issues is the idea of jobs created or saved for the effort. where's that number stand and- has there been questions about it? guest: there has been. there's a standard used through most of last year for the stimulus dollars reporting directly to and reports available on recovery dot dp ov that has been scrap and this year the senate is jobs funded. a number of people on the payroll that your paying salaries using stimulus dollars. the reason they made the switch was that it created quite difficult for some recipients to

understand because they were thinking about it hard and thinking would this person's job have existed if the stimulus wasn't funded. host: recovery.gov. according to them. is the $426 point 1 billion committed and $275 point 2 billion were paid out, do those numbers agree with the way you look at these numbers? guest: all that makes the numbers tricky is the cost is reevaluate i'd the congressional budget office and it puts the cost at $862 billion. primarily because some of aid provisions were anticipated more than originally thought. food stamps has increased and it

was under estimated. they didn't know how much people would apply for them. ho host what's been - what could states say is an end result of stimulus funds and the ability to provide jobs and also infrastructure and things like that? guest: hundreds of thousands of teachers have kept their jobs and that accounts for half the jobs probably that have been created or saved or funded considering the standard in the past. that's been a tricky issue for administration. people don't necessarily understand or appreciate the fact that somebody didn't lose their job and that certainly doesn't mean the republicans can make a pay out. when the money ran out and congress had to go back earlier this month and renew it. it's tricky and they probably didn't win a lot of favors doing it. on the other hand it's not

entirely clear who would have lost out if the money hadn't been renewed. host: what about road projects. where do they stand as far as state's ability to con complete the project? guess guess these are probably the biggest success story. they're out quickly. highly visible. you'll see signs probably stuck in traffic. i don't know how you will feel about that but they're fast moving and have been all over the country. that's one kind of infrastructure spending. they hope it'll be a lasting legacy. these move more slowly because they're a lot more complicated. for example high speed rail. host: we'll continue this discussion of the "wall street journal"'s louise radnofsky but if you want to call and ask questions about it.

(202) 737-0001 for republicans and (202) 737-0002 for democrats andnd (202) 628-0205 for independents. our first call is from maryland. thomas on the democrats line. go ahead, sir. caller: yes, seems like to me you're saying the stimulus money is being, like doled out in a certain way but when we look at the will it call scene and seen the republicans have been obstructive to everything why would we think once the money reaches the state level that the republicans at the state level wouldn't be trying to be more there too. if the states are stimulated then obama is stimulated. if the states are repressed, then it reflects back to where the r republicans.

the stimulus is more should have been directed to our hands because how can you stimulate an economy, if you give me $50,000 i'm not going to save it all. i'm going to spend some of it. save some of it. manage it. you had trillion office dollars put out there. why don't you give each american taxpayer $50,000 a career for 20 years? guest: those are two really interesting points. the money to states even control i'd republicans generally are spent in the same way as democratic states. the reason the states at that level and stand the money is kreeshl for plugging budget gaps. there's an argument they could resort to other measures but the money available from washington a lot of governors including republicans in the south where the stimulus is considered

unpopular haven taken the money and run with it. that's interesting as well. they've turned up the stimulus events and cut ri ponce and locals that voted against the stimulus have too. it's not entirely clear that they're anticipating people will make the connection or they can say this particular part of the stimulus is something i like as problem. your other point why the money was not given directly to people is a good point. stimulus is a lot of different things to people over the years. stimulus previously was really the label associated with the tax rebates and big checks at the end of the bush administration for example. we've seen from research, people have spent that money in slightly tint ways. they spent it, saved it and used it to pay down. with the tax credit and recovery act that's eight dollars a week and people tended not to notice it so it's not clear how their

behave adjusted. host: that come back to the height house selling stimulus? guest: white house made a lot of effort particularly around tax time to remind people about the tax credit. at that time it was money they would have received through the payroll and the issue was whether or not they would pay it ch it. you wouldn't have been $400 out unnecessarily but $89.00 is sometimes hard to tell in your paycheck unless you check it closely. host: there's an interactive website that shows the states of the united states and what various states have been awarded and what they have been received. if you go to arizona about 4 pint 6 billion awarded. 1 point 9 billion with recipient reported jobs of about 11 and a half thousand. next call from arizona. dean on the republican line.

go ahead. dean, are you there? let's try detroit, michigan? caller: good morning. i would like to first say that this is a country that has it's christian you day o but we're watching a lot of people that are ill-informed and if we recognize we have a responsible behavior to be truly informed my question is how many people visit that website. i hear people screaming independent and republican but most people don't know how the government truly works and who truly benefits here if we look over the past seven years if you can say in your life things have gotten better because this didn't happen overnight. this took time to build up. it'll take time to get out of.

i would caution people that it doesn't matter your title but when you threaten people's lives and put all this hatred what you're doing is destroying the possibility for any and everybody to have a peaceful christian life. jesus was a peaceful man. guest: very excited for if members and journalists there's a wealth of data, some of which we've used points, but the point is they deserve credit for it this. the data is out there and it's been a lot of fun to work with. recovery.gov site to some extent has to explain to some extent very, very complicated things to people and sometimes it has explained that less well, but overall the information is there and it's interesting. if you u look at the state level

there's opportunities to drill into it and to some extent be a journalist yourself. host: tucson, arizona. teen on the republican line? caller: hear me now? all right. i agree with the first caller as far as money. the government doesn't produce anything. the government is a service industry and if you don't have anything you're getting money back from. even infrastructure jobs are temporary, necessary repair jobs. we need manufacturing jobs in this country. the guy said about giving everybody $50,000. realistically that's more for the stimulus than anything they've spent money on. because education even is a production job as far as money. it does help people get better jobs. if there is jobs but we have to

have our manufacturing pace back. that's what i not to say. thank you. guest: there's a diverse an of funding. some of it is going towards manufacturing jobs primarily in green jobs and clean energy sector and the idea is retraining folks particularly in the auto industry to get jobs that hopefully out last funding in the senate. that's one possibility. more generally the nature of the stimulus and what joe biden likes to refer to as silver buck shot it's thinly spread across a number of different areas and as result it may not make a result in one particular area or may not be visible. host: states using stimulus to plug budgets. what happens when the money goes away and there's still a budget to deal with? guest: well the hopes were originally that the states lost revenues through taxes, and that

would not be permanent. it would not be long-term. the idea was the recovery act would tied them over for a couple of years. we found the states went through the money quickly and a lot of them were still desperate with massive holes and more than half the states had based they're upcoming budgets for the fiscal year on the assumption they would get more medicaid money. but they were pretty much playing a game there. host: texas has been awarded about 14 billion dollars in stimulus money but paid out about 4 billion or so. why is this dissparty between the reward and reseat. guest: there's money awarded and they know they get it and the money that they're enacting and the money they have. it necessarily hasn't left washington. . .

i would suggest that they could have just -- they would have to change the tax code, but that would be, you know, the lower mean income on your tax code is what $9800? and i think it should have been raised to $25,000 for single and $50,000 for couple of

married people. i think that would have really helped out our country a lot. >> guest: well, the tax credit went to single people making $75,000 or less or couples making $150,000 or less. in that sense it was reasonably closely targeted towards people who were more likely to spend the money than save it. so that's been helpful in that sense. now, more generally, most of the jobs available through the infrastructure spending have pruen to be jobs in the manufacturing industry but also white collar work with much higher pail scales associated with it, particularly with people in the research industries and in the administration business, too. there's a lot of consulting jobs going on. host: tampa, florida is next. $9.4 billion awarded again there. and then the funds received,

$3.2 billion. tampa. democrat's line. good morning. caller: thank you very much for the opportunity. you know, first of all i'm not sure what the stimulus fund is all about. and -- although i've been listening to your -- i forgot her name. i'm sorry, the lady, the young lady. and from what i know in the past, i thought the stimulus funds was to generate jobs and eradicate unemployment. that was one of my thoughts. although i would be happy to receive whatever allowance when that ever happens, because neither the year o before or last year or have i heard anything that i'm going to receive a stimulus fund and i lost a lot of money during that stock market deal. that money went to these companies, et cetera. but that's water under the

bridge. i think that my bringing the stimulus funds should concentrate on bringing jobs back to america. especially from places like china. also, i think that by the stimulus funds should be used to upgrade our industry, reduce unemployment, and bring our market housing market values back and the industry back so that our people who are residents and united states citizens can go find jobs in the construction business and so on and this is one way of bringing people back to work. and so they can support their families. host: do you know if the stimulus funds are going to be used for that light rail project in tampa? caller: that's boon going around in circles like for years. they should have done that when they upgraded the infrastructure, the highway 4,

which cost me about $-- about five traffic tickets for going beyond 55 miles an hour. so, any rate, you know what, if they do have -- if they concentrate on light rail, that would be wonderful. host: we'll leave it there. guest: i'm sure the state appreciates the revenue from your tickets, although i'm sorry to hear about that. you make an interesting point. there's been a lot of comparisons to the new deal. what the new deal did and primarily in its earliest forms was it actually physically went out and hired large numbers of people to do particular types of work. some of the case of the civil works administration. now, they it was the winter between 83 and 84 because the program was presumed doing an

excellent job, too good of a job and they were concerned about the amount of money associated with that. what the stimulus has tried to do is be a lot more targeted both in terms of the infrastructure and the tax provisions that we've discussed so we haven't seen the mass hiring of people literally taken from the unemployment roles and given work to do. the administration i think was probably trying to do the type of work that they could justify in the long run. what it has done is generated fewer direct jobs in the immediate term although it's probably important to note we're talking about direct jobs that people can look at the stimulus and know that's funding the work they're doing. the administration plans in the grander scheme the funds includes indirect jobs, whether it's the guy who sells sandwiches to the construction workers. >> host: was i wrong about the light rail in florida? guest: you'll have to check,

but florida has gotten a lot of money for high speed rail. host: one of the things, and it's become a political issue. that's been the right rail. scott walker is running for office and talks about the rail, talks about the funds being used and made it into an ad. guest: this has been really interesting. what we've seen is the majority of republicans, not majority but certainly a large number of republicans and at this point probably half of those in the house have either written letters of support to federal agencies pointing out particular projects in their areas or attended ground-breaking or ribbon-cutting ceremonies for that. the standard has been for republicans not to attack specific projects in their districts. what this candidate has done is said if i were elected i would do everything in my power to stop this money coming to my state. host: here's the ad.

>> make no mistake, we're trying not to. but you, president obama, and milwaukee mayor, are trying to spend $810 million to build a high speed train line between milwaukee and madison. >> let me be clear. >> no, let me be clear. i would rather fix wisconsin's crumbling roads and bridges. >> this isn't about me. >> you're right. it's about our hard-working families that are going to have to spend $10 million a year to keep a train running that they may never use. this will begin this fall and end in 2013. stopping run away government spending is. i'm scott walker. if i'm elected we'll stop this train. working together we can help put the government back on the side of the people again. >> yes, we can. >> work to lower government taxes.

host: so this is a political issue. guest: he's campaigning to stop the train. it's very bold and it will be interesting to see how it plays out. host: jacksonville, florida. you're next. thanks for waiting. caller: i do have a question for the young lady but i would like to say something about the high speed train. florida, particularly south florida and middle florida, they need desalization plants. right now the st. johns river is being destroyed because they are taking millions of gallons of water out of the st. johns. right now, we're involved in a lawsuit with georgia and north carolina trying to stop water from the apalachicola river from being bombarded. you have an issue with gang crime, which is severe in florida now. i don't know who in the devil they think is going to ride the train. so i guess we have no water. instead of taking that money and building plants which can take sea water which we have plenty of and turning it into

drinkable water and maybe saving some of our riffers, maybe that would help. but my question for the lady about the "wall street journal," he made the statement that if the united states does not start putting taxes or tariffs on the products that come into the united states from china knowing the manipulation they do with their currency, knowing that they close their market, they have a america tile market, they do not practice free trade. and yeth, this young lady knows that if we were to put one tearive on one item coming in from china, the "wall street journal" would be up in arms. they support every free -- let me give you president obama and his stimulus. he spent stimulus money on the vote for gm. where are the batteries being made? in south korea with whom he just signed a new free trade deal with. he just sent $500 million to

mexico to build a plant and to start assembly plants down in mexico. i mean, a country builds wealth from industrial production. host: we'll leave your comments there. guest: well, the stimulus, i've tried to grapple with this issue in different ways. there's a buy american, which says that certain purchases can only be american. but it's proven to be difficult because they've been trying to sort the particular item they need to compete the work is not available in the united states. so regardless of how you think of it, it is important to think of this as one of those delays issues that we were talking about before. people wanted the money to be spent in a certain way and it is, but the crux is the consequences is sometimes there's delays. host: orange park, florida. frank on our democrat's line.

caller: hello. i agree with your stimulus fund. i think we need more money. and that lady was talking about tearives. i believe we should increase the tarives on imports. host: back to your stimulus question. why do you think we need more money? caller: we need the money to expand. host: is there discussion about more stimulus funds? guest: there have been discussions about another jobs bill almost going back to the time that the stimulus was passed. there was questions about whether a second stimulus would be needed. they're never called second stimulus by the people proposing them and they are by people opposing them. and you can see how that occurs. but what we've seeb is the renewal of the money for the states, about $10 billion for schools and $16 billion to extend the medicaid.

for infrastructure, it's something if mayors and local governments are campaigning for it. they say that as the people in charge of their cities and the cities are the particular engine for the economic recovery they should be getting the money directly and have a whole host of projects they would like to fund. host: is there a time frame that this has to be disbursed by? guest: it is. some of the larger projects could be running for years. but in this case, the idea of shovel ready would be quickly. host: the next call is from michigan, which is receive or awarded $7.6 billion. it has received to date about $3 billion. the recipient reported jobs is about 17,000. shannon, thanks for waiting. go ahead. caller: when we received the

stimulus, it went to roads that were not necessarily needing to be fixed. they just added on-ramps and stuff. it could have gone to education, parks, stuff that is needed, not stuff that doesn't need to be fixed. why fix something that doesn't need to be fixed? we have other things that need to be fixed. small businesses, you drive down the road, they're gone. they're no longer there. why not help them? i guess that's what i have to say. thank you. guest: the stimulus legislation was crafted by members of congress in d.c. all of whom knew about the specific needs of their districts but also had to reach a compromise. so there's an argument that parts of the bill are not necessarily as well thai lord as they could be. when it comes to transportation

funds, the decisions were taken at the local level and approved. but certainly we have heard that some projects have been picked over other projects which might be deemed to be more necessary because they could be completed faster or more straightforward or what other reasons state officials had. host: for businesses that get the money, say road construction or whatever, do they generally go to larger corporate businesses or for smaller businesses like the caller mentioned? guest: there are some requirements for funds to be set aside for small businesses. and it really depends on the type of project. small businesses are better placed to bid for the paved road projects. the larger ones have wealth of knowledge and expertise in the government contracting business, and in that sense the more experienced practitioners seem to have done better host: is it also up to the locate to parse out the types

of business who get the money? guest: it depends on the types of stimulus contracts. some have been administered directly by the federal, some state, local government has had an opportunity to make some decisions. it's really varied. host: our next call is from raleigh, north carolina on our republican line. chris, thanks for waiting. go ahead. caller: i've heard a lot of people say they should have given the stimulus money to people, like $50,000. wasn't that what republicans were saying all along, let the people keep their money through tax can you tell us instead -- cuts instead of the democrats funneling it through whatever unions they want to do with it? guest: one of my favorite stories over the last couple of years has been the web sites that various states set up in the first couple of months both before and after the stimulus bill was passed. what they did is an exercise in

open government. they asked people what do you think we should get the money? now, what the web sites failed to convey particularly effectively was the limited resources that the state was getting and more importantly the limited amount of control they had over them. they couldn't have spent them over what they wanted. the state of ohio couldn't decide to take the money that it was given for the department of education and cut everybody checks. but there was some discussion elements in that including an $8 billion fund for states to use however they wanted for their government services. and we saw a couple interesting decisions by states where they thought the economic future was. host: such as? >> we saw om tax credits in the field of rehabilitation and prison services. in the end, a lot of the states decided with the $8 billion they could spend whatever they wanted, what needed was still the school budget so they added that to what they had. host: the caller from florida who talked about that

desalization plant, what about green jobs? guest: green jobs are a big way the obama administration. the department of energy got $15 billion which is almost as much as the department of transportation, the department of transhave the shovel ready projects. and the idea of the green jobs is a triple whammy, jobs that come outsourced and tend to lower the heating bills of low income families. and then thirdly, contribute to the long-term energy efficiency and energy. host: about ten more minutes. white plains, maryland. you are next. mary beth on our democrat's line. caller: good morning. thank you c-span and thank you to the reporter that you've got on. it's unfortunate in some way that is the weatherization

projects are tied to low income people. it seems like it would be much more effective for it to be a general across the board program. and the reason i'm calling this morning is because my husband is a construction contractor and we went all over the south the last ten years working on roads projects in georgia and a lot of the southern states, and what i noticed during that ten-year program is that the states were talking about their rainy day funds. that's what they called them. and it seems like wherever we were, a lot of that money was tapped into in the last ten years. so some of the projects that the federal government has released money for under the federal stimulus program, these were projects because no one in the states could make up their mind on their taxes. and because the states followed with a lot of the estate tax

reductions, the states also followed on that, too. so in some ways do you think that we have set up a kind of a conflict between the states which tapped into those rainy day funds over the last ten years and then what's now required by those states in a bad economy? and like i said, we noticed that because we would pick up papers when he was doing construction jobs in texas, georgia, alabama, all through that southern what you might call the southern ark. i would be glad what your reporter has to say about that. guest: all the states are in different financial positions and have varying rates of unemployment as well as other issues affecting their budgets. what was interesting the way the aid was administered it was primarily on a formula basis

that goes back 30 years, and because of the school based on the number of small children you have in your state. so not really a strong connection to economic need in the form of unemployment or that was taking into account necessarily the budget position of the state and how it got itself into that. it wasn't looking at that at all. the main point of oversight that they exercised was to guarantee that states weren't going to make schools cut backs that they found to be unacceptable. that was the condition of getting the money. but not necessarily the particular history of that state. host: tennessee, $4.8 billion in thruss funds, awarded $1.6 billion received with recipient reported jobs about 15,000 plus. donald on our independent line. go ahead. caller: good morning. i am grateful that we still have these kind of shows in america.

i believe it should have gone in the hands of consumers since that's what we're wanting to do is stimulate the economy. you've got to provide the consumer with a way to get the goods and services what they want. isn't it ironic that it seems like the bulk of the money went to corporations run by the people chastised by this administration and they walk away with millions of dollars in bonuses. the way the stimulus economy -- the stimulus program is run is kind of like going to a strip club. you can spend a whole butch of money, get a whole bunch of stimulation but are you going to get any satisfaction for every dollar spent? it's not going to happen. thank you for the time. guest: the caller makes an interesting point in that the stimulus and the bailout are two terms that are almost used sometimes interchangeably by people and including occasionally by people in washington. the stimulus is the american recovery and reinvestment act,

the bailout for main street, the idea that you could spend lots of money and help unemployment. and the bailout is the troubled asset relief program and that's the wall street targeted approach. host: detroit, michigan is next. go ahead. caller: hello. host: you're going to have to turn down your tv, sir. caller: i can't get it host: go ahead with your statement. caller: i have got it right here. now it's down. host: go ahead. caller: all right. i was just calling, a couple of people mentioned tarives. and it's odd to me that there is an existing bill in the legislature. it's been in active law for several decades that 85% of the sugar consumed in this country has to be grown and processd in this country.

and it's just curious to me with all these free trade agreements why there isn't also an accompanying law that says that 85% of all of the, for lack of a better word, junk or crap that we buy in these big chain stores doesn't have to be made, processed and manufactured in this country. host: we've addressed that. but if there's anything else you want to add. detroit, michigan. caller: first, i want to say that i'm getting a little concerned here about c-span, because two days ago we had dick army, the tea party guy. yesterday, the day before we had that guy from the tax people, the right-wing tax people, and now today we've got this foreign-owned "wall street journal". so i'm getting concerned that c-span is being owned by the right wing. but having said that, there was

-- i'm wondering why lose didn't tell that woman who was talking about why they weren't helping small businesses that there's a bill pending in the congress right now that the republicans are holding up. you see, the president is trying everything he can with this stimulus to create an environment that gets money flowing again. big business is sitting on the sidelines holding on to their profits and they refuse to release money and create jobs. cnbc, all them people every day sit up and bash the president just like the "wall street journal," foreign-owned "wall street journal" and bash the president and they said point blank they're waiting for change. they're waiting for the republicans. so that guy that called in earlier that was talking about how things, the economy is going to stay stagnant until republicans are put back in office has a good point. now, miss, i have a question

for you. i want to know, and please don't give me the standard answer about big business is scared, they don't know about what the regulations are going to do and they're not sure. i want you to tell me the real reason why big business corporate america is holding back and trying not to help this economy. the dow can't even get over 10,000. guest: well, let me come back to something that we were talking about earlier in terms of small businesses and the stimulus. in addition to there being some of the contracts set aside for them and there's also a very interesting lending provision that is being administered and we've seen loans go to a lot of small businesses including in the washington area. there's a local wine bar that

has been able to get a loan. and in that sense there's an interesting part of the stimulus in which a smaller amount of money is being used to leverage economic activity. so for some people that's been one of the real success stories and an interesting aspect of the economic experiment being undertaken here. host: colorado, 4.2 in the stimulus funds awarding. 1.6 in funds received. about 17,000 jobs created. aurora, colorado is our last call. ann on our independent line. caller: thank you for taking my call. i am just have more of a comment. i have disappointment in one of the largest stimulus and that was federal reserve that bought toxic morning assets from the private market financial system to the tune of $1.2 trillion. and this wasn't a stimulus that

was spread over states or over teachers and low income people for tax breaks. it was just to a few financial institutions specifically to buy the toxic morning assets. and there's absolutely very little discussion about that in how that came from deregulation and how can we as voters really make a wise decision when that largest piece of stimulus has been not discussed. and it's all been focused on the congressional stimulus that was divided up between states of the 7 or 800 billion. so it's really discouraging for me that we don't have a more inclusive discussion of all of the facts of stimulus and how they work and the stimulus doesn't work why was there such a huge stimulus by the federal reserve and those types of things. and i thank you very much for

taking my call. guest: the caller is talking about the bailout which we were talking about earlier, the different portion of the overall economic activity that is the obama administration is undertaking. so in that sense, the stimulus and bailout and certain other economic actions including the help for the auto industry all do factor in together. that's something that the white house tends to look at when they are assessing the overall impact on the economy. and it's actually based on everything that's happened in the last couple of years that they come to their projections that without activities, actions such as they've taken there would have been 3.5 million fewer jobs in the economy. so that's the big picture that they're looking at. what you'll see in recovery.gov, and it's a different number, there's 750,000 jobs directly funded by the stimulus or created or saved by last year's standard. so for a lot of callers,

there's a lo of confusion as well between the jobs numbers that we're talking about here. host: all the information on recovery.gov, how does the administration gauge success? guest: jobs was the standard that they set. so when the legislation is being discussed. a lot of times it's going to be a crucial issue. for democrats who voted for the legislation and indeed for republicans who opposed it, probably their definition of success to some extent will be the results of the mid-term elections in november and also two years down the line. host: thanks for your time. next, by the way if you wanted to check out information as far as the stimulus things we've done as far as segments and information that we have on the stimulus, you can go to our own c-span website. we've set aside a special page looking at the stimulus, scapiling all the interviews

and facts that we've done over the years and months and there it is compiled on c-span.org. we're going to take a look at what happens to when military men and women leave iraq and go back into society. the christian science monitor has this as their front page story. they're home. now what? and we'll talk about what happens when veterans return home.

>> joining us from boston is michael fair el, a correspondent for the christian science monitor, he has the

recent cover story looking at the issue of the veterans who return home from iraq and afghanistan. they're home, what now? what does this story mean in light of the end of formal operations in iraq? >> well, i think that it really gives what what we hope to do with this piece is really kind of focus our readers on sort of the next stage for as many as 2 million service men and women who have served in iraq and afghanistan. many of them are coming back, moving out of military back into society. many of them are returning, many of them are going back to war in afghanistan. and we wanted to kind of paint a big picture about what the service men and women face as they reintegrate back into society. some of the issues that have gone on in iraq with the unique

aspects of that warfare. and i think that now is the time that there should be a great deal of reflection about how we transition people who are coming back from some intense fighting, some people have had multiple tours of duty, some people are coming back dealing with issues like traumatic brain injury or post traumatic stress disorder. and so there's just a lot of thing that is we wantsed to bring up and it now was the moment to do that. host: you in the piece as far as talking about these larger issues, you have a picture of marine lieutenant connell mike zakia. tell a little bit about his story and how it fits into the story. guest: sure. mike is a great guy, really has a really interesting story. he is sort of a third

generation marine. he signed up i think right out of high school, ends up going to college and then enlisted, becoming active right after that. he ended up going into iraq to train and serve with the first iraqi army battalion. and he moved into fallujaha during the heavy fighting there in 2004, if i'm not mistaken, and it was really an intense time. when he was in iraq, he was diagnosed with post traumatic stress disorder. he was injured and received a traumatic brain injury while he was there. and then when he came back, things just kind of if he will apart for him. he -- fell apart for him. he couldn't cope. he knew he has ptsd but didn't

know what else was going on. he had a really difficult time with the v.a., with the military trying to get his t.b.i. diagnosed and get the treatment he needed. his tory is reflective of a lot of stories that you hear in the media, stories that you hear from other soldiers coming back. i think his case is interesting because he is kind of made the transition back. he's in business school now, he's dealing with his ptsd and t.b.i. through various means and has become a very active hern who is helping other vets from iraq and afghanistan also kind of transition from war. host: on the larger issue then, how are v.a. hospitals and the like ready for especially this new influx of people coming in from iraq? guest: i think the varmint would say they aren't -- v.a. would say they're not as

prepared. there's been a lot of progress made from 2007 when the v.a. was really kind of under water with this issue. they've frankly everyone's been playing catch-up with the problems in the aftermath of iraq. we just didn't anticipate the war was going to last this long, that we were going to be facing the kind of warfare that we face there with improvised explosive devices and suicide bombers. so -- and so there's been a tremendous political effort, there's been a lot of money thrown at the v.a. and they've testified before congress that there's still a lot of work to be done. granted the military and the v.a. have made great strides in coping with this issue. but i think that from everyone from the service men and women coming back who are now dealing with the bureaucracy of the v.a. to president obama have

said that there's still a great deal of work in front of them. host: our guest is with us until 9:15. the numbers are on the bottom of your screen. tennessee is our first call. go ahead. fred on our independent line. caller: thank you. i would like to bring up that we have a record amount of suicides, 120 a week from the vets from these illegal wars. someone definitely ought to be prosecuted for war crimes. that's it. host: when you're dealing with these issues, or at least the people you talk to, the notion

hoff of how it affects a family often comes into play. you talk about one man's story. how do families get affected? guest: it's for many families very tough. you have on one hand husbands going off to war and wives for multiple tours. so that extends the amount of time that they're away from their families. that's difficult. but then when you have people coming, transitioning back, if you have someone coming back like as mike, barely handed with his experience at the time with his fiance. he almost set his house on fire. and after that happened, which was sort of the trigger to get him the help he needed, they deal with counseling and work

to get the issue straightnd out. but i think for many families it's a financial burden. it's an emotional burden. and but for many others i think the reunion of coming back from war is one of plenty of joy as well. the caller brought up suicides and that's definitely a problem. and i think it's hard to say where the numbers are. we've seen numbers that are kind of all over 2 place. but it's -- over the place. but it indicates that something is going on with this generation of soldier, either it could be ptsd related or possibly connected to t.b.i. issues. host: does the military mandate that a soldier go through some type of counseling or at least process before they go back into normal civilian life? guest: there's a screening. there has been implementation of screening processes.

and i think that there's a recent piece by npr that probed that and found some real holes in it. one of the other issues that we found in talking to the troops coming back is that it's easy to kind of fudge these or cheat on these screening tests. because there's a stigma attached to mental health issues within the military. i talked to one marine who came back recently from afghanistan and he said he was dealing with some ptsd issues but he doesn't want to go through the military in having to be evaluated through the v.a. because he is afraid that it's going to sort of be a black mark on his military career. so i think there's screening. i think some people would like to see more intense screening.

and that is something that i think the military will continue to evaluate and improve on. host: there's a story this morning that gives a list of some of the process that's gone through for someone coming back. it says that before a troop returns, their families attend seminars. the first day after arrival soldiers receive legal counseling including contract insurance, entire units go on group leave typically for a month, enter a restoration phase. and after several months troops will go back to operational training, i guess if they're going to be refolded back. anything you want to add to that? guest: i think that shows that the military is really taken a hard look at some of the problems of many of the soldiers coming back from iraq and have worked to deal with that. i think it was a different kind

of exit process for a lot of people who came back after some of the most intense fighting in 2006 and 2007. and so i think that shows a real degree of progress in the military. there's certainly a lot of room for improvement and the military is, you watch some of the congressional testimony, there's certainly take a lot of heat for not addressing issues relating to some of the mental health problems that we're seeing as a result of iraq and afghanistan. but those sorts of programs certainly show some progress and attention to the matter. host: dayton, ohio, republican line. good morning. caller: good morning. and thank you for taking my call. i work with an organization, we train disabled and we've been working a lot with veterans coming back from the war. and i'm really disappointed in our government.

they do not take care of these gentlemen. there's no funding available for them. for these dogs. they need these dogs desperately. a lot of guys can't even leave their homes. and with these dogs they can do that. there's nothing out there for them. i'm really disappointed in our government. there's just nothing. we've been told we can only take care of their basic needs. their food and their shelter and their medical care. it's all we can do for them. really? that's sad. us as a country? they're giving their lives for us and that's all we can do for them? host: to add, you also talk about the role in outside groups in helping in this process. go ahead. guest: the sentiment from the call ser something that we heard often when talking, especially to advocacy groups but also the number of sort of charitable organization that is are out there. express a lot of the same

frustrations with the government and the process that's going on. you know, there are tremendous amount of service organizations nonprofit groups, many of them are run by former veterans of iraq and afghanistan who are out there to assist perhaps where the government can't, where the government won't, perhaps where the government say shouldn't be. there's an organization that builds houses especially equipped houses for troops that are coming back with multiple amputations and the founder there says, listen, i'm doing this i don't think the government should be doing it but i think we as a society should be helping these guys out as much as possible. it's a group called troops for our homes. and they're out of connecticut.

they'll go out and seek out these men and women, they'll often start out of walter reed building connections with guys coming back with double, triple amputations. and they'll work with them through a process to find a house for them, find land, and build a house completely free. it's an incredible process. and i had a chance to meet with this organization and see some of the guys that they were working with. so there's a vast amount of -- there are a lot of people that want to do something out there and there are a lot of organizations that are helping. i think it's a matter for many who are coming back to for finding the right ones. host: i mentioned leslie light foot she founded something called veterans home sted. she is standing in front of a

group of homes. guest: leslie is an incredible person. she has been involved with veterans issues for a long time. and she has started up basically a kind of residential facility, if you will, for the vets coming back from iraq and afghanistan. and it's billed as being the first all-encompassing facility . it's in a lovely sort of rural setting in massachusetts. at the moment i think there are only a few veterans there. it's still kind of finishing up construction. but there are groups like hers. for instance, if you get accepted into her program, you get brought in. you can go to counseling for t.b.i. or ptsd and then you can attend near by college.

so leslie is one kind of representation of a lot of groups that are out there. i think she is doing something really unique in that it's this all-inclusive facility. and i think that if she had her way there would be one like that in every state. and she is also someone who is talking and working with the v.a. and so you have a lot of people who are out there and the nonprofit sector who are doing interesting things. they are also working within the system so the v.a. can learn from them and see, what are the best practices? and to go forward and deal with people who are coming back with some really unique issues. host: michael farrell is a correspondent with the christian science monitor and writing about veterans issues. next call is missouri on our

democrat's line. caller: good morning. thanks for taking my call. first obviously i'm a veteran and proud of it. but i just wonder if mr. bush and mr. cheney and mr. rumsfeld ever goes to a v.a. hospital and actually sees our veterans that are coming back with their arms are blown off, their legs are blown off, their eyes lost their eyes and severe head injuries and all that. these people don't have a conscious. i don't know how they can live with themselves. i think they should be brought up on war crimes. and not only the numbers of americans veterans, but we should talk about the whole number, the total number of injured people and killed of the american veterans, the coalition forces, the iraqi people. how many iraqi people have been forced out of their homes

living in refugee camps? how many of iraqis have been killed because of this unjust war? host: michigan. josh on our independent line. caller: thanks for taking my call. i want to get back to what the guy from missouri was saying. how many millions of iraqi civilians have been slaughtered by people we're fighting and by our own actions? i mean, the fact that we go to iraq for what reason do we even go there? and i understand that, i mean, i have all the respect for our soldiers, but these people did sign on the dotted line and they do deserve to be treated a lot better. but all the attention placed on our troops. there's places where 3,000 people get wiped out in the blink of an eye and nobody cares. host: if you would like to respond? guest: one of the things that's interesting and reflective from these two calls is that you

hear even in opposition to the war from iraq, you hear great respect for the american soldiers. and that's something we kind of dealt with because it's really kind of shows where we have moved since, say, the period after vietnam. you know, there's a tremendous regard for the service men and women coming back. so i think what's interesting is that, yes, there's tremendous opposition to iraq but you still see a great deal of respect for service men and women who are coming back. the other thing i would like to say, we do in the same issue that my piece is in, we talk about sort of where iraq is seven years later after the war. host: there's an accompanying piece, iraq's score card what's been left behind. fort payne, alabama.

republican line. caller: yes, sir. i would like to make a couple of points here right quick if i may. first, i've been a disabled vet for over 24 years. every three months i have to go for a mental evaluation, counseling. every month i have to get my pills renewed. now, the v.a. is supposed to pay mileage. they don't always do that. and, unfortunately, being a disabled veteran, what you get for that is $649. ok? people of america speak about how they respect us and everything else. but what they don't ins is we're living homeless, we're living well below the poverty line. we didn't sign up for that. we did not sign up for actions that were unbecoming of the united states of america. and thirdly, john mccain has been in the senate and in congress for i don't know how many years.

and from a band of a brotherhood, i would expect a whole lot more action from him on veterans issues. now. i don't know who you have to talk to or how you go about it or how america actually wakes up and actually starts taking care of the thing that is are important like the children that are going without checks from their dead beat fatsers or their disabled veterans who are basically killing themselves because their minds aren't right. host: we'll leave it there. mr. farrell. guest: i think the caller brings up a couple of interesting things. one of the issues that's very frustrating for especially younger veterans is once you have these 20-year-olds coming, 25-year-olds coming out of iraq and having to deal with a system like the v.a. the v.a. is improving but it's

still very antiquated bureaucracy. it's an all paper system. and so one of the vets we talked to in the piece, a guy from virginia named ryan, he is just -- he goes to the v.a. and he is just kind of blown away that everything is going so slow. to make an appointment you call up or you go there and it's not like anywhere else, any other doctors appointment you have where they give you the day, you go home and you wait in the mail and they mail you what your appointment will be. now, i think that the v.a., as president obama said recently, is moving quite swiftly to try to change that. but this is a dinosaur of a bureaucracy and changing it is going to take time. the other interesting thing the caller brings up is mileage.

and i think for a lot of veterans who live in rural areas where there aren't many services for veterans driving places is becoming a real burden. and finding out that, one, they pay for mileage is kind of a big issue or for many, and then having actually having them reimburse it for many is another headache. so i think that for guys like brian and there are many others like him, they just get frustrated with the v.a. and sort of dealing with the level of bureaucracy and just give up. and sort of trying to cope with their issues, especially mental issues outside the system. so i think there's a great deal of frustration among all vets and i think you're seeing that especially among a lot of the younger ones. host: one of the fackyoids in the piece says it has hit 14

pft 7% in march of 2010. guest: and interestingly enough, i found out from one of the groups we talk to that a lot of people who will continue going back essentially because of the dim outlook for finding a job. especially a resoistist -- reservist. if they have an opportunity to go back they'll go back because there are very few job prospects out there. and i think the cautionary note is the more times someone goes back, the more likely they are to suffer severe injury, death, or possible t.b.i. or ptsd. host: florida, mary on our democrat's line. thanks for waiting. caller: thank you. my name is mary from bradenton, florida. i have a beef, sir.

with the media. i don't think the media pays attention. i totally agree with the last caller who said about the homeless vets and the guys with brain injuries. but i have a total -- the media is not right. they're more focused on who is sleeping with who than the vearnts who are coming home. the other day when they went into war you had tons of media. when those guys came home, how many media people did you see focus on that? everybody is scared to say something about the media. they're more focused with who the congress is sleeping with. and that's why i've got a beef with the media. the government can do a lot better. i have a 23-year-old nephew that has been in the air force for 23 years. 23 years. he's going for 25. but they do not focus on the right things with these veterans. that's what's got me angry.

guest: well, here we are talking about the issue. i have to say the caller has a point. if you turn on much of the media on television there's little coverage any more of iraq or the veterans issues. but i was sitting at my desk the other day and did see every network news channel is focused on the last combat troops leaving iraq. and i think the media has done -- if you go back to 2007 and look at the incredible "washington post" series that revealed all the problems at walter reed, and so i think that is it's out there. where some media may be falling down in more interested in other things, the stories are being told.

host: next call is cincinnati, ohio. ronald, independent line. go ahead. caller: one of the issues is these guys coming back, i'm a vietnam vet. so you've got these people coming back. they don't want to deal with it because of the repercusions of society. can you see what the brand is you tell your neighbor that you're a vet? they look at you and they worry about you. but they don't really worry about you really. they worry about what could happen to them. so there's a lot of stuff about coming back to society and it makes it hard on them. and then when you hit somebody, you don't know you do it, you're asleep, you don't even wake up. and then there's somebody standing there with a knife in their hand. you realize i made a mistake. how do you deal with it? well, i go to the couch and she sleeps in the bed by herself. but then nobody is going to deal with this.

and then the veterans are going to get kicked to the curb like we did in vietnam. they'll slet them slide away. host: go ahead. guest: i think that a couple of things. . .

there is certainly at a societal of you -- veal. i do not think it is the same as it was in the 1960's 41970's. we know all lot more about mental health issues than we knew perhaps then. >> you think the situation is developing because of the repeated tours of these guys to iraq and afghanistan? guest: yes. there is also more awareness within the military about diagnosing it. in vietnam, it was never diagnosed. now, at least we are at a point where we have these issues out there and there is an effort to do something about it. host: go-ahead.

guest: the perception is different, but it is lingering. host: you said there was the perception if someone talked about this it could affect their career. guest: i do not know. that is a good question. i think many of us in the military would say, yes, there is a reality. perhaps it is not something many will admit to. but i think that again is also changing. it is definitely a real perception of the active-duty servicemen and women. host: do you know if some type of counseling is available for people who are over in combat during these types of situations? during the process, not waiting until they come home? guest: sure.

mike was in a combat stress treatment center in iraq. others have been in that. there have been efforts to deal with this in iraq. there is also a greater effort to cope with traumatic brain injury. that is more a difficult thing to do in combat, but it is definitely starting to happen. host: sanford, fla. on our democrats line. caller: i want to say to my grandson who keeps me supplied with the christian science monitor subscription, there is nothing any better. please everyone, listen to me. every war there is, a lot of the wealthy become much more wealthy on the war. and my last remark -- i hope that full brainless bush has to

swim in a river of blood until he draws his last breath. host: next call is frank on our republican line. caller: yes, i want to know where is the bin laden? where is he and what can we do to catch him? host: you can address those -- guest: i do not know where bin laden is. i wish i knew where he was. host: talk about what the v.a. does in ramping up their programs to deal with this. manpower, that kind of thing. guest: sure, post-walter reed scandal, there is a lot of political will and pressure on the va and a lot of money spent to try to cope with these issues.

they have opened several, what they call polytrauma units around the country. they closed one in washington. i know there is one in richmond, va., for instance. they have people coming back with multiple trauma as, mental issues, other injuries, and really dealing with the affects of iraq and afghanistan. i think one thing people should realize is that people are surviving injury much more than they would have in previous wars. the va is starting up those centers. they are also doing lots of work on ptsd an traumatic brain injury. they are trying to streamline the claims process, which i

mentioned, talked about a little bit before. there is a lot of attention at the v.a. to try to get to where we need to be. they also have a lot of veterans of other wars they are trying to deal with. i think one sort of military experts i spoke with, he said, you know, the va is a system that was kind of -- the money was going away, and they were seeing their clients passed away, they had mainly a second world war group before the iraq war started. they are having to catch up pretty quickly just within seven years. there has been a lot of money spent in a lot programs going on. i think for veterans, they will see this improvement probably over the next five years at the va. >> fort campbell, kentucky is next. and on the independent line.

-- ed on the independent line. caller: i have always had great respect for you, and my respect has shot up 50% from the questions you have asked your guest. there are no politics in this question. what are you going to do, and how much are you going to betray and ask these questions when this war is done? after all is said and done, i could care less about the politics. are you going to tell the american people what is going on and help these veterans? thank you very much. i will get off and listen to your answer. host: mr. farrell? guest: i hope so. the hard question is when the war is done in the combat troops

have moved out, there is still 50,000 in iraq. everyone is supposed to be out by the end of 2011. i guess that could be a date when the war is done. yes, there are losses. what we did with this piece, we try to give a broad view of the issue that veterans are facing and society is facing as the war comes to a close in iraq. i hear many stories that could shoot off in facets' that we only brushed over. there are issues of female veterans coming back and entering into a male-dominated v.a. system. where in some places there are very few services for a 30- something woman, now a veteran, dealing with ptsd, sexual dramatic issues. there are issues of homelessness

and suicides. i think the monitor will continue to shine a light on these issues. i hope i get a chance to do more of the stores. host: brian on twitter asks if there are thoughts on the roles of veterans in the american legion and vfw? guest: i think both groups are definitely trying to help veterans in iraq and afghanistan. there are some other groups out there. veterans for common sense are doing really great work. these are staffed by iraq and afghanistan veterans who are very smart and are very sort of strategic in their advocacy and the mining for data, and they are talking to the va, so there is a dialogue that is going on between these groups and the

administration and governing agencies that is healthy. host: birmingham, alabama on our democrats line. caller: hello. host: go ahead. caller: i work for the birmingham the day, and i think there are things that are misrepresented -- i work for the birmingham v a -- va, and i think there things that are misrepresented. we provide services for mental health patients. we provide services for people experiencing problems p ptsd. we have world i and world war ii veterans. there is a detailed population that is out there. we also have a particular social worker that is helping to bring these people back into society.

to teach them social skills and recovery skills. there is also a program out there that is trying to get every homeless veteran of of the streets. we have a gentleman who is the coordinator of the program. not only does he make an effort to pull these veterans from out of the streets, he also tries to get them back into the work force. he also has a lady who meet one- on-one with these patients to give them more assistance and teach them more skills, so they can help to push them and let them into the work force. host: a question, if i can. for those looking for others services, what is the average time between signing up for these services and getting them? caller: we see veterans on day one. day one. i cannot speak for the va in other areas, but i can speak for

the birmingham va. all we want is for them to come in. they need to take the first step. host: ok. we appreciate your input. mr. farrell? guest: she is right. there are a lot of services at the va, and part of the process is getting there. the claims process can take some time. the va has programs and they are adding programs. but when you talk to veterans, there is still a great deal of frustration in dealing with the bureaucracy of the va. many veterans are not close to the birmingham va, even the ones with sort of rural issues, getting to the veterans' centers and hospitals. but sure, there are programs out there. part of the issue is finding the right one and mining the va

bureaucracy. i think that while there are programs and they are doing things, i think the va would admit there is still much work to be done. host: one more call on the republican line. rudy, go ahead. you are on, sir. caller: nobody is talking to me. host: you called to make a statement. caller: i am sorry. i do not understand. i will call back later. host: reporting on this piece, what is one thing you have not addressed? guest: i think one of the things i would have loved to follow and get more into is the issue surrounding female veterans coming back and their unique issues.

you know, some of the work i did looking into the piece was talking to female -- a female veteran. it was really difficult for many women first to go into the va. a large percentage of female veterans are taught not to do it at all, to seek outside care. that is really interesting and troubling. that is also the largest-growing segment of the military. one of the things about your back is, you know, -- about iraq is, you know, there is combat everywhere. even if you are not serving in an official combat capacity, with iraq being an asymmetrical war, they are in a combat mind. there is sexual trauma in the military which is largely unique

to female soldiers. that is an area that is ripe for exploration and more reporting. the homeless issue is also something that i think -- there have been some figures that suggest the homelessness among vets' in this generation are rising faster than in other generations. i would love to probe that issue and figure out why that is and what is the dynamic there, the factor of the current economy. i think there are a lot of issues, a lot of issues to tackle as the war comes to an end. to start looking into. host: michael farrell, correspondent for the christian science monitor. you can find this article online. we have included a link on our

website. thank you for your time, mr. farrell. guest: thank you for having the host:. our last segment has to do with the deficit. we are joined by an economist who has thoughts on how to tackle that. laurence seidman. he will join us in just a few minutes. we will be right back. >> one of the things i regretted about political life in washington is that every major figure, from the president on down, it is merely reading what somebody else on some committee has produced.

terzian is a literary editor of the weekly standard. sunday night, he will share his insights on washington. >> i am not saying senator mitchell's report is entirely wrong. i am saying the statements about me are wrong. let me be clear. i have never taken steroids. >> with baseball legend roger back andindictment, go watch all the hearings on baseball online in the c-span video library. all free. every program since 1987. watch what you want, when you want. >> there are 48 hours of nonfiction books and authors every weekend on tv. this weekend, a debate on the size of government in the 21st

century. afterwards, a talk on dart but, america's greatest idea factory. -- darpa. for complete listing of this weekend's programming and times, the b visitooktv -- visit booktv.org. host: joining us now is laurence seidman. our topic for the next 45 minutes is the deficit. how you look at a number like $1.30 trillion in reference to our deficit? guest: ok. we are in a political deadlock. there are people who are alarmed, and i agree, at

continuing a deficit anything like we have now. that would be dangerous for our economy. the national debt would skyrocket. on the other side, and i agree with these folks, we have an alarming, high unemployment rate. we seem to be making a little bit of progress, but our economy is much to stagnant, and we need to stimulate the economy. that may mean temporarily raising spending, cutting taxes, which in the short run, would increase the deficit. each side says, you've got to do with my priority first. i do not want future deficits to save money. on the other hand, the other side says it our top priority is to get unemployment down from its 9% level. the way to handle this is to deal with this together. you have to reassure both sides. each side does not disagree with

the other side. but i want to talk about this morning is to urge congress to consider simultaneously enacting two statutes. one, to deal with the budget deficits in the future. is callednubar -- -- that is called nubar. this begins in the year 2013. the second is a temporary fiscal stimulus package that would have a terminator, meaning an automatic phase out, so as our economy gets back to normal, it would phase out completely and not cause future deficits. host: let's take the two in order. the first part, there would be a specific role. you relate that to an exact number of the unemployment rate. how does that work? guest: this is my intention. economist for -- this is not my

invention. economists have advocated this for many here. it is a normal unemployment balanced budget rule. remember this, folks. every year, congress would be required to plan a budget, to plan a spending program, to set the tax rates, so that non- partisan technicians at the congressional budget office would analyze it and say, if the economy is normal next year, as a normal unemployment rate, what does that average? i will use the example of 6% this morning, but every year it would be recalculated. if the economy next year is normal, but the cbo estimates -- the cbo would estimate, and they do this all the time. what spending would incur on the programs congress has enacted? if the cbo says the revenue

coming in would be enough to match the spending plan, they sign off. they have met nubar. if that is not the case. if the plant -- planned it spending is above the normal economy, it would be a percentage cut in all spending programs, all taxes, a percentage increase in them, so that automatically congress would be forced to balance the budget. host: to the 6% figure you mentioned? guest: with the assumption that next year's economy would be normal. when we get back to a normal economy, as long as it is normal, the next year we would have a balanced budget in the future. that would take care of our growing debt problem. we would have no future debt problem. if congress will enact and

followed the procedure of nubar. host: say it drops to 5.5% or 5%, what happens? guest: if the unemployment rate next year is below normal, and we have a boom, we will have more of a budget surplus in those years. if the economy drops into recession or high unemployment, less revenue would come in and that you're there would be a deficit. on average, we would be balancing the budget. we would be balancing the budget as a economists have taught for many years. we will not get into a debt problem. you do not have to balance the budget every single year. we have to run surpluses in boom years, and we should be allowed to run deficits in recession years, so that provide some temporary stimulus to the economy.

host: is the 6% no. an arbitrary number? guest: in using that for illustration. for the last 10 years, been normal unemployment rate -- the normal unemployment rate, if you calculate it, it would be approximately 6%. every year, it would be recalculated. that is automatic. the cbo would take that number and say, what will the budget be next year if we have a normal economy next year? and it must be balanced if next year the economy is normal. host: journal@cspan.org. one person sent and a question. he says if you raise taxes,

you're taking away from the producers to grow the economy, are you not? guest: i have only had a chance to speak about the first of my two statues. that statute is to require every year, starting in 2013 -- we need a little lead time for preparation -- starting in 2013, congress must plan a balanced budget. they can do that anyway want. they can cut spending down and not raise taxes. they can raise taxes and not cut spending. they can do some of both. i am not recommending for congress which way they should do it. every year, they need to plan for a budget that the cbo and non-partisan technicians estimate would be balanced if the economy is normal. what i have not gotten to elaborate on yet is what we do now for the other priority, which is to bring down the very high unemployment and galvanized

our economy into recovery -- and galvanize our economy. that is a stimulus plan that would involve cutting taxes and submitting a temporary increase expenditures, but they would be phased out gradually across the terminator in the stimulus plan as the unemployment rate of our economy comes down from its over 9%, 9.5% today, down to normal which is roughly 6%. i absolutely agree. in the middle of a recession, we must not raise taxes. in the middle of a recession, we also must not cut spending. for the long run, we need to get the spending down and keep a balanced budget. which way you do it in the long run is up to congress. host: north carolina is the first call. on a republican line. you are on with laurence seidman with the university of

delaware. caller: yes, good morning, gentlemen. i am sitting here with my grandbaby. pardon me if i have to get off the line. guest: i understand. i remember those days. caller: correct me if i am wrong, but i think the last two years that our deficit has been the largest in the past 65 years -- am i correct on that? guest: it has been very large. world war ii may have been different, but otherwise. caller: we were saving the world at that time, so that is different. guest: caller: yes. -- guest: yes. caller: i am so sick and tired of the two-party system.

they are doing nothing but playing against each other. guest: what i would like to do is bring about a compromise with the two priorities of the two parties. those priorities are important and i agree with them. but they can be reconciled. one party is emphasizing, we cannot continue deficits this high permanently, or we will get into deep national debt trouble. i fully agree. the other party says, we cannot continue with 9% or higher unemployment and stagnant a economy. we have to stimulate the economy and get people back to work, producing more and hiring more. i completely agree with that. we can do both. the future budget deficits can be brought down if congress will immediately enact a normal unemployment balanced budget rule, as i explained earlier. the unemployment rate can be brought down if we have

temporary large tax cuts, and some increase in target government spending programs. both have to be temporary. they have a terminator that phases out as the unemployment rate comes back to normal. let me elaborate for a moment on how the temporary tax cuts work. we used one element of this in 2001, and it helped. in 2008 it helped. in 2009 it helped. we sent checks out in 2008 to every family. it was called a tax rebate. we need to keep doing that. we did it in 2008. we did it again in 2009. we actually did it through covering withholding. we need to do again, because our economy turned out to be weaker than we thought. what would you do if you got $800 every six months from the

federal government in a tax rebate check? hopefully he would be prudent and you would save and pay down debt with a good part of it. that is what our studies show. you're probably take $600 of the $800 and use it to pay down debt or said. but about 25% of it, you would spend on goods and services. there was an article in today's "washington post." they do not have customer demand. they are looking for consumers ready to spend. they see consumers likely doing retraction, having over-borrowed over the last two years. the federal government will send those checks in 2008 and 2001, and if they make them larger and repeat them every six months until the economy comes back to normal, people will take some of that money and go to the

stores. when the producers in the country and the retailer see consumers are ready to spend, they will produce more, and to do that, they will hire more. that is what they are looking for. we need to do that until our economy is back to normal. we need to combine nubar to prevent this from going on permanently, but we need a small, temporary stimulus of mainly tax cuts and stimulating consumer demand, as well as some other elements. host: on the spending side, what do you do as far as entitlement spending? guest: on the long run, we have to take a hard look at our budget. what congress should be doing is watching carefully what the president's commission on fiscal discipline, that he set up early in the year, which will be reporting by the end of this year, what they will recommend in terms of in the long run

getting or spending getting in our spending growth to be slower. additional tax revenue if you need it. so that social security, medicare, medicaid programs -- the programs that will be out of balance down the road, not immediately, that we get those in line. and make the tough political decisions on how to do that. host: on our independent line from new york. caller: thank you. with all the guest workers doing the jobs that americans will do, would it not make sense to have some of these people leave? it would cost nothing. guest: well, we have important issues concerning international trade that need to be addressed. i want to point something out. we had international trade issues in the late 1990's.

we have an unemployment rate below 4%. we had an unemployment rate in the 4% signto -- 4% to 5% range. we can get the unemployment rate back to normal if we implement tax rebate checks. $800 every six months until the unemployment rate is brought back to normal. we should work on our long run international trade issues, but we do not have to solve those to get our economy back to normal. we can do it the way we have done it before. tax cuts, tax rebates in people's pockets that they will mainly use to save and pay down debt, but partly used to spend. that will stimulate production. host: your thoughts on stimulus as it is currently done in

states and programs? guest: there should be paid by the federal government, temporarily, to state governments said they can keep teachers and police and firefighters from being laid off. they can keep maintenance work on highways continuing instead of being shut down. it is just common sense. if you put the money into the states, they will keep those people on board. that will stop the rising unemployment from that source. if you get money into people's pockets, they will go out and spend. host: next call in iswintersville, ohio. -- is wintersville, ohio. caller: the morning.

-- good morning. i would like to speak about the trade deficit. something needs to be done about trade and in addition to what your saying there, because we are importing so much more than we are exporting, and why not raise some of this revenue we need to raise by putting tariffs on a lot of this stuff that is coming into the country? a lot of these companies are leaving the united states to build their plants where they can expedite the low labor rates. i think they should threaten them with taking away their articles of incorporation in this country. guest: i think you're raising a very important problem. i've got a lot on my plate here just in the time i have got to emphasize the two things i want to emphasize. the normal unemployment balanced budget rule, to make sure we do

not have skyrocketing deficits in the future, and stimulating the economy with temporary tax cuts and temporary spending, like federal aid to states. i cannot give in to your very important problem. i just want to point out, i agree with you. what our exchange rate is relevant to other countries like china plays an important role in our position. we should take a hard look at that and make sure our exchange rate is one that promotes our exports and discourages imports from those countries. there are other measures we can look at. i just do not want people to think that we have to solve that problem in order to get our unemployment rate down back to normal. we have the same problems -- we had those same problems a few years ago. but we have an unemployment rate

below 5% and a strong economy. we had it in the late 1990's. the two things that we can do right now to get our unemployment rate down and to make sure we do not have skyrocketing budget deficits in the future. i think what is promising potentially here is why one side says our top priority is to stop permanent, a continuous budget deficits from skyrocketing our debt. the other side says our priority is to get that high unemployment rate down. even though that is the top priority of one group or the other, they do not disagree with the top priority of the other. the side that says, we want to get the budget deficits down permanently is not against bringing down the unemployment rate. if it can be done without high budget deficits. and the other side says, i want

to get the unemployment rate down, we need fiscal stimulus short run, but no, we do know what skyrocketing budget deficits. what each side is waiting for is for the other side to say, let's do this simultaneously. let's do my priority at the same time we do your priority. that is what i am appealing to congress to consider doing. host: next caller. caller: in texas, the -- in taxes, the president has made us a promise. every year, prices are going up. an ordinary man has to pay for all of this. how are you going to keep adding money when nobody has got no money? guest: can you say the first thing you said again? caller: barack obama, when he was voted in as president -- the price of cigarettes --

guest: the prices of some items , and cigarettes i am sure is one of them, have been going up. but we actually do not have a price inflation problem overall in our economy. the inflation rate is 1% or 2% a year. most countries in the world meet that their target to have 0%, 1%, or 2% inflation. some prices may have gone up. but there are others, government data show, that are going down. our big problem is not prices right now. our big problem is that production is low, hiring is low, unemployment is high. that is what we need to immediately address. host: new york, new york, greg, your next on our independent line. caller: good morning.

host: good morning. caller: i was just wondering if there have been studies done that showed the root of the problem is the high concentration of the greedy son of of guns on wall street? you cannot say you are not talking about that there, laurence, can you? there ain't no way in hell this is going to work, what you are talking about. guest: here is my bumper sticker. my bumper sticker is "reduce future budget deficits through in normal unemployment balanced budget rule, passed by congress." and stimulate today's economy to get the unemployment rate down. i know that is along bumper

sticker. he would have to tailgate to see that. seriously, these are things i see looking out of the window. i see the capitol building. there may be some congressional staff ready to work. i of a few hours after the show. i would be glad to work on the statue's anytime today. so with a lot of other economists who would support one or both of these elements. so, no, we can do this. we can do both together, and there can be bipartisan support. nobody is against either element, but they have different priorities. host: this works? guest: this is all old stuff. many people have for many years worried about a government and a country that can get in trouble if it continues to run high budget deficits, unless its debt

skyrockets compared to the size of its economy. eventually foreign creditors will say, we are not buying year government bonds, and that can produce a crisis. this is old stuff. secondly, stimulus, by cutting people's taxes, spending -- sending tax rebates checks to put in people's pockets so they will not lay people off -- they can continue to build roads, maintain them and so on -- it is common sense that that keeps people employed. so, this is not something that is abstract and here radical. it is old. it is understood. one side says, do mine. the other side says, do my priority. and each have to get together and say, i agree to do yours if you agree to do mine. host: texas.

ed zachary on our democrats line. caller: good morning. i would like to ask your guest about a comment from the minority leader john boehner. he said that in order to address the national deficit, we should raise the retirement age to 70, and apparently he is hoping to tap into the last big piggy bank, our social security, and i just wonder if you agree or disagree with that proposal? that is all. thank you. guest: again, i want to keep my focus on the two things i have been emphasizing. balanced the normal unemployment balanced budget rule, and the temporary stimulus to get unemployment down. let me respond briefly to what you said. the president has set a fiscal commission to look at everything

in terms of our long run situation. medicare, our tax revenue sources. those are going to involve hard choices by commission reports at the end of this year. both parties of congress are going to need to make compromises. we did this with social security in the early 1980's. we had president reagan and speaker o'neill, the democratic speaker of the house, and they supported a commission headed by then-chairman alan greenspan that promoted reform on the tax side and spending on social security. it was able to put back several decades of difficulty with our social security program. we can do this again. social security is in very good shape for the next two decades, but then we're going to have a mismatch between our projected

spending in the tax revenue coming in. but it is very fixable. it is fixable. we just need tough decisions on both sides of the political aisle. so, it has got to be done simultaneously. to pick one out alone is not the way to do it politically. you have to have a bipartisan commission that signs on with the leadership of both parties. you have president reagan on the republican side. speaker o'neill on the democrats' side. you have to agree, we will not attack you for this element of or that element in it. it improve the situation for several decades. we can do it again. host: what if unemployment does not get that low? what if it stays or maintained that the current level? guest: then we do more stimulus. let me ask you -- if you say, i do not think stimulus works.

suppose you got $800 every six months, and you were going to get that as long as the economy was performing sluggishly? which you really spend zero of it? some would spend most of it. some would save it or pay down debt. that is the prudent thing to do. our study showed that on average people would spend 25% of the next six months. every time the government sends them that check, they would continue to do the same thing. this is an abstract theory. it is plain common sense. -- this is not abstract theory. as long as you give them money, they will go out and spend. that is what producers are waiting for. host: but it would depend on some kind of borrowing to maintain this? guest: absolutely. it would be maintained by

borrowing by the federal government. when the economy has above normal employment, the government has to send in checks to state governments, to private individuals. where does the government get the money? in the short run, it has to borrow it. chairman bernanke supports the policy in a recession of having the federal reserve do some buying up of the treasury's bonds the treasury is borrowing to get the money to send those rebate checks out and sending money to state governments. that is sound economics in a deep recession. what would be on sound is to continue this one to come out of recession, and that is why the stimulus measures must have a terminator clause in the legislation. the terminator clause says when the unemployment rate comes down to 8%, cut the amount of spending. when it comes down another

point, cut it 50%. you cut it 100% when it is eliminated to stop additional deficits. host: cape coral, fla.. caller: thank you, laurence seidman. i like what you are talking about. our cable stations have tended to dumb people down when it comes to economics. one thing i would like you to discuss, can you compare the difference between of government borrowing for an economic crisis such as war, such as between borrowing for stimulus? i borrowed a lot of money to go to war. we have a nice tax cut that made things worse. i would be interested in your opinion.

guest: in normal times of the economy, as a general principle, you need to be willing to raise tax revenue as much as you are actually going to spend in normal times. you should be running balanced budgets. that is what nubar would require congress to do. whether the spending is for military or for war, we all have different views on whether certain military spending is worthwhile or necessary or not or wrong. as an economist, we are saying in normal times, if you are going to spend for anything, you need to be willing to raise the taxes to do it. in normal times, you should not be cutting taxes while raising spending for anything. whether it is military or domestic social programs.

in a recession, when temporarily the economy needs more stimulus, that is when you temporarily should cut taxes, temporarily raise some spending to stimulate the economy. that means borrowing. that means temporary deficits. how'd you make sure they are not permanent? you make sure there is a terminator clause in the fiscal stimulus package where it phases out as the economy comes back to normal. host: new jersey, carol, good morning. caller: good morning. i cannot believe this. our legislators road the red carpet on the exploitation of industry in this country. they imported property. now we are scrambling to feed off the bone. the federal reserve has no money. the federal reserve issues money through the auspices of the

treasury. it prints money. it distributes the money. it requires the taxation on the money to be remanded to the federal reserve, which it was not their money to begin with. what is this sideshow all about anyway? and when will the end be put to it? thank you. guest: let me briefly tried to explain something. every textbook in economics, whether written by conservative, moderate, or liberal economists teaches how the federal reserve and the treasury work. the federal reserve can put money into the economy when it decides to buy u.s. treasury bonds, u.s. treasury securities, and the federal reserve authorized many years ago by congress, but has the power to in effect print money in order

to make those purchases in government bonds to put into the economy when the economy needs to be stimulated. it does just the reverse when the economy is in a boom and there is too much spending and it needs to be -- every economist -- every book on economics explains the same process. we will wants to stimulate an economy when it is in recession, but we want to restrain -- -- restrain an economy when it is in a boom. this is perfectly feasible. i invite the lady, i invite the caller to look get any economics textbook for further details on this. host: baltimore, maryland.

on a republican line. -- on our republican line. caller: you say the stimulus will be temporary and once the unemployment level gets to a certain point, it will go away. but people will be getting money. they spend that money at the time that they are getting it. once they spend it, then everything goes back to the way it was. what is to stop it from been continuous, over and over again. we will be back at the same place again. guest: that is a very good question. experience has shown us this -- people get very anxious. they get pessimistic, both individuals, families,

businesses. people are worried about the future. as the economy revives, producers to consumers are willing to do spending and a rev up production. they go from being nervous too much more confident. once the natural positive attitude of the public starts to come back, they see the economy improving. the government can gradually phase out stimulus, and our private economy is strong enough in normal time to keep the spending going. sufficient to keep our economy

strong. what the government needs to do is it needs to tell people, we will keep sending out the $800 checks to families every six months until the economy improves. we should tell people this will stay only until the economy improves. gradually, we can reduce and phase out the government stimulus and our private sector will be stronger and we will have a strong, healthy economy. host: kansas city, missouri, democrats line. caller: [unintelligible] i would like a check every six months for $800 or some sort.

there are probably other ideas on how to fix this problem. my idea is making being an economist of felony. it is all your great ideas over the past 100 years. thank you very much. guest: i wish we were as powerful as you seem to be giving us credit for. but really, i do not think that is the case. there are many different ways to stimulate the economy. i am advocating a stimulus package. and i am emphasizing the key element is getting rebate checks out to ordinary people, ordinary families. there's certainly should be other elements of the package. we should sit down and work out a package everyone can agree on.

but we need to make it temporary so it phases out so we do not get into temporary budget deficits. people are rightly alarmed. we will not keep this spending up indefinitely. the answer is no. there are economists, i think, who would agree with both elements. host: alabama, will, independent line. caller: good morning. i have an idea. so wen't we repeal nafta will have some exports? i believe that congress should take a pay cut, and i believe each member should start paying into the social security fund instead of taking away from it. guest: the one thing i want to

say -- there are a lot of things we could get into. there are two things i have been emphasizing. the normal balanced budget rule, which would prevent future deficits on to become out of this recession, and the temporary stimulus that will get us out of this recession. we can do at those things while we are working on other problems. i want to point out when you mentioned nafta -- i do not want to take that issue here. but that was enacted in the early 1990's. in the late 1990's, despite nafta, we had a low unemployment rate, about 4%. we can get unemployment down by the method i am talking about without necessarily solving every other long run problem. that is what i am urging us to do. host: laurence seidman