wire. at 8:30 a.m. eastern -- eastern, author kate zernike talks about her new book. and dylan loewe will focus on of all elections. "washington journal" is next. host: good morning. and as for being with us for " the washington journal" for this friday, september 10, 2010. the president is having a news conference at 11:00 a.m.. the question for the morning is -- is college overrated? this is from "the washington post" style section this morning. here is what the front page looks like this morning with the question, is college over rated. some families turned away from higher education and favor of real life lessons. but all numbers are on the

screen and we will begin taking your calls in just a couple of minutes. on the phone to start the morning of is -- from "the washington post." talking about a taxes and tuition on capitol hill. what is the story you reported on yesterday? guest: we did a little story about how workers on capitol hill, 0 $9 million in back taxes to the government. host: is this a number we have been looking at in the economy for a while? guest: yes, the amount is about the same as in 2004, a 2005, 2006. but a drop-off in 2007. that means the number has gone up 37% in the past two years.

host: is there a reason for this? guest: no one really knows because they don't release the names of people who old money. this data comes from the irs. but most tax information is a secret so they just give us an aggregate number for the entire capital hill. so, be can't tell the reason. host: it could be members of congress as well as staff. you cannot tell whether it comes from the democratic republican side. but you're reporting seems to suggest this number has a political implication. that you talk a little bit more about that? guest: i think most people when they hear this, they are upset. they hold members of congress to a higher standard because they elected them to serve the public and to write tax laws. and the fact that the staff and

members on the hill might not be paying taxes while making everybody else pay them is quite offensive to most people. host: are there statistics that compared to the population at large? guest: that is hard to do because of the way the irs keeps the information. the amount of debt owed to the government overall has been rising since about 2000. and the amount of debts on capitol hill has been rising faster in the past two years. host: you say in your story is not just capitol hill but there are dealing with seasonal white house. what can you tell about that? guest: we don't know the white house necessarily but the executive office of the president, which includes a lot of other buildings are around the white house. there are 41 employees there who

0 close to a million dollars. host: how does that compare to the bush administration years? guest: about the same. not a big increase. interesting, given the change. host: what is likely to happen as a result of this number being so widely reported? guest: i hope that people hold their members of congress accountable. there is a bill on the hill that would look at the federal work force in general. and if people are federal workers and delinquent in their taxes, they would be fired. it is about 100,000 government employees who hold about a billion dollars total to the government. host: what are the politics of the bill that suggest that people would be fired if they are delinquent in their taxes?

guest: it is one of those things that is hard to deny. right now it is only republicans who want the bill. there are no democratic co- sponsors. democrats said that if you fire a government worker who owes money, it is not necessarily more likely that the government is going to get their money back. host: timid is a washington was database report, and the story that broke on thursday about capitol hill employees to zero $9.3 million in overdue taxes at the end of last year. thank you for giving us more details. the we are also using "the washington story -- "the washington post" style section. this is their front page. it leads this way --

she quotes a hedge fund manager who says -- the question is, what this

economy today and a change in the way the economy is built, is college overrated? we will begin with wellington, delaware. this is gene on independent line. caller: i was just talking about this with my family over the weekend. i tell them, i graduated in the early 1980's and i cannot think i have never recouped -- i am not working in my field. all of my friends, the only one who is working in her field is working for the government as an accountant. the rest of us have child self employment. the experience was good, i made friends, but i do not think even today from what i am seeing -- they learn one topic, the focus on that and they did not really broaden their life. they are out of their parting nine times out of 10. tea party nine times out of 10. it seems like futility because i barely make ends meet.

people say it was my ticket to success and i did not see that. people going back for mba's and barely keeping their jobs. where is it getting us? host: what was your degree? caller: in music. i tried teaching and working for various organizations and churches over the years. i love the field but no one wants to pay you. but i see that with friends who are civil engineers, who are teachers. they could never find a good enough paying jobs that they could raise a family. two people are now working and they are telling themselves to make ends meet and they are all going this spring, too. should we -- should we really spend as 40,000 or $50,000 a year sometimes? host: the next voice. rancho, caught -- california. republican line. caller: it is rancho, san diego. i think this person is crazy who

says college is a waste of time. where would you be without a degree in the best job market -- in this job market? i joined the navy when i was young, i got my -- degree at night and i got a master's degree. it is the best thing i ever did. i am not putting -- if you can get a degree in music and you know what you can use its four -- use it for. i was more practical. computer science. i had my local level degrees in business and management. if you do not have a degree -- you are not going to get looked at. this person is crazy. all i can say is put it in the military and hope he has a good job skill what he gets out. but if you just let them go out here and flip burgers, what are

they going to do? host: thank you for calling in from rancho, san diego. there are statistics in this style section piece. comparing the unemployment rate at large. in 1970 when the overall unemployment rate in the country was 4.9%, college graduate -- graduates, negligible, 1.2%. this year it is nationally at 9.6% and for college graduates risen to 4.9%. next is lincoln park, new jersey, talking about the value of a college education in society today. denise, democrats library caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call and thank you for c-span. i don't think colleges over rated. i think we really need it. the problem, as i see it, is the economy is shifting. things are very expensive. and the cost of tuition is

extremely high. but there are ways to manage that. you need to have an educated populace and we need to develop appropriate critical thinking skills among all levels and socio-economic levels. and i really think that college education is the one way to achieve it. of course, one has to be savvy in how the market themselves. how they manage their payments for attending school. there are always ways it could be done. i do believe it is necessary, not only for the individual but for the sake of the future of our country. i thank you so much. i am an educator, by the way. i appreciate you taking my call and i thank you very much. host: thank you for weighing in to talk about the cost of tuition. the washington post cites statistics over the education department of the past 10 years. prices for undergraduate to which a woman board at public institutions of higher learning

rose by 30% from 1997-1998, to 2007-2008. private institutions, by 23%. we will go back to telephone calls. the next call is from houston. john, republican line. caller: i don't believe it is particularly overrated, however, i do believe there are so many people and talents that don't belong there, that they are not properly prepared and they cannot perform in college. my question is, i need a good plumber, i need a good electrician. who says you have to go to college to succeed in this world? there are lots and lots of jobs in the trades and crafts where people can be as successful or more successful than someone with a college education. in that sense, it might be overrated. but in an of itself i don't

think so. i just think there are too many people going because they are expected to go, that there is peer pressure, parental pressure. and that is my take on the topic. host: thanks, john, for weighing in. "the washington post" store has a foot gallery of famous people in society who do not have college degrees. at the top, bill gates. below that, steve jobs. washington redskins owner dan schneider. computer magnate michael dell. dreamworks michael geffin. people who are successful in our society without college degrees. michigan. this is randy, democrats line. caller: thank you for "washington journal." i and a school board member also and your question is quite interesting because i had a complex time at times. i have to educate the children in our school and i want them to be the best they can be before

they get into college but personally, i don't think the united states created the jobs for the people when they pushed college. i am 53 years old. i listened to how growing up -- if you look at some of the statistics you read. i believe one of them is if you look at a person who graduates a high-school graduation in 1968 -- i do not know if you have that on there -- but i do believe this is a correct statement -- that they today would equal the third year college education. i guess the last caller was right. there are plumbers, electricians, mechanics, there are a lot of people out there that are needed for stuff that really makes this country run. and it is the security of our country, so we can take care of each other. but i don't believe that -- when they pushed for college back in

the 1970's and 1980's, when this data that was then never created the job base for all of the kids. when i worked in the shop, i worked at one gm plant that had 16,500 people. can you show me a computer job that creates 16,500 people jobs in one building? or one little complex? that is the problem we have. computers are great but they are made for productivity. productivity means less people to do what you have to do. host: i question for you as a school board member, is one of the statistics you use, the number of graduate students to go on to college? is that how you recognize achievement in your school district? caller: yes, some of it. in fact, there is one. because out in our little area of -- and this is nothing bad -- but football is the big, like in a lot of towns, the big picture out here. but when you peel that back, we

never send anybody to any sports with three letters that made money, but we have a lot of people who have also should degrees from our schools, bachelors, and masters. so that is how i will approach it in a discussion of somebody brings it up and we are discussing something. it began to the point where they feel sports is more important than education, i will bring that up to them because education is the most important. i need my sports to have the kids might open up so we can educate them, but out here, we don't send them to the nfl or any other nba pro team or anything but we do have to have them educated. but i do believe the country just did not, when they pushed for the college education when they first started pushing for it in the 1970's and 1980's, we did not create the jobs we need it. >> ok -- host: ok, thanks for that. a tweet --

this theme is also picked up today in david brooks' column in "the new york times." along piece -- a longer piece but this is what i wanted to work into the discussion.

our question is, is college overrated. the next call comes from virginia. brenda, independent line. you are on the air. i am going to move on to cape cod. bill, republican line. caller: the last two or three callers told my thunder. it could tell us about your own experience. are you a college graduate? caller: no, ma'am. but i was born at the right time. i was board in 1947 and when i got out of high school, i could go to work anywhere as far as having good benefits. the phone company, electric company, gas co., so on and so forth. but those jobs are no longer available because of

productivity and technology enhancements. host: and the decline in the manufacturing base, are those kinds of companies still around? caller: i was never in the manufacturing field. i worked for the telephone company and the telephone company now has been replaced by cassell phones. the telephone jobs today are what the railroad jobs in the 1950's when the 707 came in. but that is not why i called. there is nothing wrong being a plumber, electrician, or a skilled finish carpenter. all of those people complaining about not having jobs and standing in unemployment lines, those people i bet are not good plumbers, not licensed plumbers or electricians. or people who either don't care for got a useless degree. it sits on the wall and there cuticle and a wuther it and they watch it once a week, but what good is it any more?

you will not see a good plumber or electrician or craftsman without a job. thank you for listening. host: thank you for the call. according to statistics on wikipedia about education in the united states, there are 4352 colleges, universities, and junior colleges. in 2008, 36% of enrolled students graduate in four years, 57% completed their requirements in six years at the same college they first enrolled in. interestingly, the united states ranked 10th among the best of countries on the percentage of adults for college degrees. next is a call from philadelphia as we talk about whether or not college is overrated. dennis, a democrat line. caller: i have a three experience. working behind the bar, i worked with many people who were going to the university and working their way through school working

behind the bar. after they got out, they graduated, and either could not find a job for what they graduated from school for or, if they did, they found themselves making more money but behind the bar so they quit the job that they were going to school for. they ended up quitting and went back working behind the bar because they were making more money. i also was close friends with a gentleman who was senior staff at a mental health facility. i will not give the name on the air. he only worked there five years. what the facility was doing was hiring ph.d.'s and master's degrees for the amount of money for a bachelor someone with an associate's degree. they were trying to squeeze as much money -- trying to get as much money from people with higher degrees.

and i will tell you something. my parents, if they were alive today -- my father always told me, you get yourself a good trade and a good skill and you will be set for life. never in his years would he have thought that he was going to live at a time when the more experience you have, the more education you have, the more you are seen as "overqualified" to where you cannot get a job because the more experience you have, and the more degrees you have, the more education you have, that automatically dictates that you earn a higher salary. which is what they do not want to pay today. it is also seen as a hindrance. host: thanks, dennis. next up is tracy calling on our independent line from albany. you are on the air. caller: good morning. i just think how it is a little over rated. you go to school for knowledge, to be educated, but they are not

teaching you self-sufficiency. at the end of the day, you are given knowledge to go out and work for somebody else, to have someone in charge. plumbers, electricians the those are all jobs where you can be self-sufficient. i don't care how much money you make -- you will still be living paycheck to paycheck, allowing five figures -- owing five figures. it should be all about opportunities. have a good day. host: tracy talks about the amount of debt. on forbes.com a blogger has a posting about college degree on debt. doing the math after losing her first job. she has statistics.

60% of the college graduates have debt and average of $22,700. graduate school is where they really start learning on debt, taking on an average of $12,700 a year in federal loans. 40% of ph.d. candidates borrower and those who do take on an average debt of $36,900. what about professional schools? the low end, association of american veterinary colleges reports that new bets graduate with a median debt of $103,500. and medical students, they take on an average of 139,005 runs and $17, according to the american medical association. but the payback appears better, particularly in certain specialties. that is on forbes.com, a blogger. we are talking to you about a

question asked by "the washington post" today. is, is overrated? if you're in washington here. richard, republican line. caller: i think in a way we are asking -- or "the washington post" may be asking the wrong question are not enough. you have to evaluate if you are a parent, grandparent, or student, why you are going to college, why are you sending the young man or woman to college? it is more than just getting a better job. you learned life skills, to write well, speak well. i am 50 years out of a small liberal arts college out of buffalo, new york, and i thank god i went there. not for the money that i made. because of the friends i made, the values i learned and because of the general life skills and because of what i was taught.

what i could give the backed -- give back to my fellow americans, the world, and even to my country. i think there are more values. but i think our educational system has become an immense business. it is a situation of goodwill where they tried to create all of the loan systems and so forth, but i think it is shameful -- i hire internes and they come out of school with $100,000 in debt. i think we need a new systems -- system which it through a scholarship, work, work study programs, that this debt is reduced or eliminated. host: next is a call from poughkeepsie. woody, on the independent line. caller: good morning. a first-time caller. a long time watcher. i think that the previous caller

kind of hit on something that was absolutely right. the problem is that the education system is selling you the product of education, and that the same time responsible for the accreditation of this education. i think if we separated the two and allowed people to just come in and take final exams and take tests that accredit you, aside from just being educated by this company, you could still receive the accreditation. a lot of people through life experience and through self education could probably pass a lot of these tests. host: thank you so much for your call. by twitter -- is a call from michigan.

scott. no. caller: i think colleges way overrated. i sister has a college degree. -- psychology degree, never used it. i have done advanced hydraulics, cryogenics and all kinds of things. i really did not think the degrees kids are getting are worth a whole heck of a lot. host: have we ever been out of a job when you wanted one? caller: i work for myself and i am 50 years old. i only work as hard as i have to. it is not like i am going out there and shaking the leaves. but i've got a big background in hydraulics, industrial. i have picked up little certificate along the way from companies. and i went to some schooling.

but i think really my kids now, they are getting business management degrees and step of that nature and i tell them, it is worthless, would be going to do with that? host: thank you for your comment. "the washington times" has this him as its top story. green jobs.

right next to it is a chart that looks at what they are calling greenback dollars, allocated among different technologies and areas in the economy. next is from new london, connecticut. bill from the democrats' line. caller: i heard a lot of people talking about the plumbers and electricians. i am a general contractor so i know what it is to be bad. i can tell you that -- be that. more than 90% of the work i do is for people who have college education. if we were all plumbers and electricians, we would not need each other. that is a pretty small niche. in touch -- tough times, we are self-employed and it is tough for us, too, because nobody is building. this is eight years of bush. this is the worst one i have been through and i have been

doing this 40 years. host: thanks, bill. mort zuckerman's column is on public sector job growth compared to private sector. in this, he sees a coming warfare -- class warfare between workers and the private and public sectors. getting a lifetime benefits paid for by the taxes of the private workers. our question for you this morning.

is college overrated? next is massachusetts. good morning to ed, republican line. caller: thank you for c-span. i agree that college is overrated. in my opinion, college tuition may be the next big bubble to burst. host: i have heard that recently by commentator on either television or radio. can you talk about what you are seeing? caller: you have been citing a lot of debt statistics about how students how do you have to take on more debt than before just to finish a college education. we know there is not enough jobs out there to fill the expectations of these students who have been educated at such great cost. my point is they will not to be able to generate -- or they will have a very hard time generating income streams to service that debt.

that debt market is going to collapse. that is why i say that bubble is going to burst. and in some ways, is already bursting. by extension, that means that market, the financial markets associated with tuition prices and income streams required to pay off that debt will be the next big short. host: what does a burst bubble in higher education look like? well colleges close down? how does it play out? caller: look at this way. one thing that has to happen is the government has to get out of the business of financing college education because -- and student loans, in particular -- because money is fungible. it gets channeled through to pay for higher professor salaries and gets passed on to college tuitions. so, if the government stops

subsidizing student loans, interest rates, student loans would go way up. then students would not be able to afford taking out the debt to go to college. do you think cases like boston college or princeton or harvard are going to let classes set half empty? i don't think so. they are going to cut prices because their job is to put students in those chairs. so, the tuitions will have to come down but it is going to require the government getting out of the business. host: thank you. a statistic related to his comments also from "the washington post" article. from "the chronicle of education." 31% of loans made to community college students are in default. 25% of all governments do that loans, four-year colleges,

graduate schools -- are currently in default. 31% -- next is a call from baltimore. brian, independent line pretty caller: how are you doing? thank you for taking my call. i totally agree with the last gentleman who was on the phone. it costs so much. i know this because it is funny -- the same thing worked for me. i am a young guy and i paid over $30,000 to work on cars, the best school i could find. i got a great job. the economy -- unfortunately nothing to do with me. but i stopped doing that. but i own my own company now and i made more in profits from that and i never went to college for it. took a couple glasses that did not cost me 35,000, 40,000, and

making over six figures. you can take the same loans that students get and invest it -- $60,000, like most kids getting their masters or bachelors, good schools, and invest it into a mutual fund and get 11% and come out on top doing that. but using that same amount of money to get a job that will only pay you an average 35 or 40,000 a year. the cost of living is so high, you don't get as much on your investment. i think that is the number one problem. something has got to change. i help people all the time with the same problem. i did not see it really going away because at the same time college in schools are still a business. host: next is another marilyn's color.

owings mills, maryland. caller: i am full-time student. i work for a software development company that was started, multimillion-dollar software company, started by two men who never went to school. the ironic thing is, they hire only software developers with computer science degrees from the very best schools. host: what is your take away from that? caller: not everyone should go to school. not everyone. these two men had a way of thinking that is remarkable to me. i see them every day. i've worked very closely with them. not everyone should go to school. school teaches you to problem solve and look outside of the box. then how you apply the degree and how intelligent you are from the get go will depend on what type of job you get. i have seen many students go to school, get a good degree and not be able to apply that because they just never applied

the problem saba's skills they learned in college to the job or just hoping that the degree would get them into the door. host: emma sends this tweet -- franklin, pennsylvania. republican line. caller: good morning, susan. a technical note that is imperative. i hope president obama and even secretary of education are listening. within the last five years i have done research out of my own curiosity as to what colleges and universities may become the basis of some humorous motion pictures. but i reads the university of iowa and i was sick, and the registrar was kind to tell me in short -- the very famous article that was an "life" magazine,

june 3, 1966 about the nastiness of what everyone to call its -- profit education, higher education, even the nastiness of which funds. fairfield, iowa? they sent me a copy. not the university of iowa -- pardon me. catching my wins. the fairfield, iowa, public library has copies of that article and they know what i am talking about. in short, as i am saying this. when you think of the prices of anything like schooling and higher education, it is like president obama said at the university of michigan this past spring, what does it mean to be overqualified after you out of high school and not a long college with a well-rounded education and even at the undergraduate level but as i close only to say this i repeat that article from june 3, 1966, street and out everything because as the record store told

me this, my friend, as i speak to you now for anyone listening it is in fact, she says, it the cannot be challenged, it has to be, she said, the most destructive article ever written of united states education even at the undergraduate level and i thought, out, she is correct and if she ever gets a chance to be -- be on the program to say that. host: we have to run. thank you for your call. a tweet -- >> is a call from virginia. mandy, and democrats line. caller: good morning. i am retired fifth grade school teacher but i taught other grade levels as well and oftentimes the students will say to me, why are we doing this, about one subject or the other -- history and math were two great favorites they would rail against. finally one day i took the time to answer the question even

though it meant we were not going to get such and such a lesson completely completed. i said you are not doing this so you would have a big mass of facts. you are supposed to be doing this because -- so you can exercise a part of the brain that will not be exercised unless you do this. the fellow who said why you are supposed to learn how to figure things out yourself, he was exactly right. we need to stop requiring a four-year degree for all of our students. some people do need to go into the trade and so forth. we need at least a couple of years of college. i do not think there is quite enough time in the 30 years we have for elementary school to get our students ready to make the decisions about what subjects to take in college. but by the time a man is 20 the knows something he is interested in and how to use his brain for something more than just fight or flight. this is the whole problem. i don't think our education system is communicating with people why they are even doing

all of this stuff, as my kids used to say. so anyway, that is my thoughts on the matter. i don't think college is overrated. but four years of college is too much for a good many people to afford and they don't need it. host: thank you. just about out of time. "the wall street journal" has the construction of the $60 million memorial and pennsylvania tomorrow. the first lady and her predecessor laura bush will be there for a ceremony at the crash site for united airlines flight 93. c-span will be providing live coverage for that. tomorrow is the ninth anniversary of the 9/11 attack. a silver spring, maryland. tiffany, you get to be the last worker caller: first of all, i just started college. my views on this is that, is an overrated? no. but it is definitely overpriced.

i have done a lot of shopping for college. eventually i settled on a community college. so far, it has been worth it. i think it also depends on what kind of field you are trying to get into. if you are trying to get into psychology or stunt like that, you are not going to automatically get a job. but if you get into something like graphic design ordinary arts, he just might be able to get a profit. the lady before me is absolutely right. you don't necessarily need to go through four years. two years would probably be better because people would be more able to afford it. host: a regular from our twitter community has this tweet. it is not working for me. there we go. so, the question, it is college overrated. lots of opinions. thank you for sharing.

in just a few minutes, siobhan hughes, from dow jones will look at the gulf oil spill and what we learned from the various investigations including bp's. later on, and look at the tea party is from kate zernike who has a new book "boiling mad." and our next guest who thinks the democrats are set for a generational run of power. two views of the long term in politics. all ahead on "washington journal." >> saul olinsky is considered the father of modern community organizing. >> he defies all of the types of what the rabble rouser is

supposed to be. >> he spent 10 years working for alinsky and writes about his experiences in "radical." sunday night on c-span's q&a. >> the bottom line is we need our border security and we cannot afford all of the illegal immigration. >> it has hurt us, hertz arizona's economy and we see the stories every day. >> with a midterm elections about 50 days a rate -- away, follow campaign 2010 online in the c-span video library. it is easy to follow the candidates and issues anytime, all free, when your computer. book tv in prime time. tonight, in depth with author, advocate, an animal scientist who will talk about her life. she did not speak until she was about four years old and was diagnosed as autistic and she is now an animal science professor at colorado state in university.

tonight on c-span2. "washington journal" continues. host: let me introduce you to our first guest. siobhan hughes, is a senior energy writer for dow jones newswires. we have been having over the summer a series of investigations -- the independent commission, the congress, and most recently bp said out its own report on what was at fault and causing the blow out in the gulf of mexico. have we learned anything from all of these various inquiries? guest: it is too early to say there is a consensus yet but what we did learn from the report is that the problem started with the -- host: what is the implication? i've got a diagram from "the wall street journal" about the sequence of failures and it has

the illustration of the well. the cement is what part of the process? guest: the segment -- and i did not know if the viewers can see this diagram -- it is at the very base of the well. the trick here is the cement was mixed with nitrogen. cementing is tricky anyway but adding the nitrogen -- the mixted nall whole -- the knicks did not hold, causing hydrocarbons. host: what is significant about bp's analysis -- and a lot of people saying they are tried to diffuse the blame for liability reasons. but they are suggesting that the gusher came from the center rather than the wall. help us, who are all laypeople, understand what it means and the significance? guest: the big thing is that during the hearing, a lot of people in congress really went

on offense against bp and said the problem might have been with bp's own well-designed. that it tried to cut corners, that it tried to cut costs. it used these centralizes. it used just one single pylon and they should have used two. and bp was really looking bad. with bp's own investigation, what they said it is it was absolutely not the well-designed but the problem of originated somewhere else with halliburton cement. and that helped bp out a lot because it really does put the blame on a lot of other shoulders. if bp's analysis is correct. we don't know that yet. the cement that bp test it was not actually the cement that was used. it was a facsimile. the blowout preventer still has not been analyzed. so it is probably too soon to say bp's analysis is correct. but nonetheless, it is a

starting point for bp to make a case it is not solely responsible. host: we want to get back to this question, this discussion about the safety of these raids and the whole and a discussion. -- the whole energy discussions. there were side by side hearings, one in houston and one in washington, about the causes of this spirited there is another one starting next week in london where bp officials will be called before a british government to talk about culpability. governments trying to understand that they can regulate perhaps differently. you had a chance to watch, reflect, read, see all of the advertisements from bp about their commitment to the gulf and the cleanup. we will mix it into the discussion this friday morning, a september 10. the phone lines are beneath me on the screen and you can also send a message by twitter or e- mail. faug

one of these bp ads have been ubiquitous, about bought by's commitment. let us play that and talk about what their new report might do. >> no oil has been floating in the gulf for weeks but it is just the beginning of our work. bp has taken full response ability for the clinic in the gulf, and that includes keeping you informed. my job is to listen to the shrimpers and fishermen, hotel and restaurant workers and find ways to help. that means working with communities. we have 19 centers in 40 states. we have made over 120,000 claims payments. more than $375 million. we committed $20 billion to an independent claims fund to cover lost and, until people impacted can get back to work. we will keep looking for oil, cleaning it up as we find it,

and restoring the gulf coast. i was born in new orleans. my family still lives here. bp is going to be here until the oil is gone and the people and businesses are back to normal. until we make this right. host: now, siobhan hughes,, as we are watching this, understory on the report -- your story on the report. from a liability standpoint, what happens as they tried to point fingers in other directions with the responsibility and the committee with -- commitment regarding the cause. guest: gross negligence. what they are saying is we were not grossly nan -- negligent. no conscious decision that caused the disaster and that has big implications for the fines they will ultimately pay. $1,100 per each barrel spill. if you are not grossly

negligent. with gross negligence, it goes up to $4,300 a barrel. more than triple, almost quadrupled. that is what is at stake. host: that is separate from the $20 billion cleanup fund. guest: that is correct. host: with regards to the cleanup fund now being administered by kenneth feinberg -- and a refer to it in the advertisement -- they referred to it in that advertisement. "usa today" has a story about this.

you have any knowledge on this part of the store? guest: not on that part of the story but it certainly feeds in to one of the bigger seems, the difference between the marketing, advertising imagery, and then some of what is coming out behind the service. even that $20 billion number that bp has widely floated, when you look at the contract between bp and the u.s. government that mandates payment, that is between a far away bp subsidiary and the u.s. government and one group has raised concerns that bp may be able to get out of paying that $20 billion should business not go its way. that is a worst case scenario but certainly a risk people have raised. host: let us begin with a phone call from sam from los angeles. caller: i think it is curious

that british petroleum does not take any responsibility whatsoever. they are trying to lay the blame on everybody else. it does seem perhaps that's the fact that the cost could be much higher, because of their role in negligence. i have no trust in them whatsoever. host: sam, let me ask you about going forward. just based on what happens here, what do you want from either industry or federal regulators regarding the border drilling? -- deep water drilling? caller: some safety measures in place. i think it was outrageous there was no plan and so much oil gushed out. if the risk is that high there should be a way to seal it within a much shorter period. host: the support it can be -- continuation of drilling and exploration? caller: i think there are so

many resources down there that it is inevitable it is going to be done. but there needs to be a better way, a better risk factor. host: thank you very much. sam from los angeles. i will let you pick up his point. guest: the caller hits on a couple of key themes. his sense that bp took very little responsibility. it matches with the feeling on capitol hill. congressman waxman, congressman markey rustout statements really questioning why bp did not look more closely at its own actions. the notion of what safety procedures would be put in place -- we are seeing some of that coming out of the interior department now. but they are still slow in developing and they are not there yet. we did not know what this new world of regulation is going to look like. host: what happens to the minerals management service, the regulators? guest: it is renamed. bureau of ocean energy management.

the former director has stepped down. they hired a new leader that was a justice department inspector general. and the agency has been on a tear to reverse some of bush administration rules to really investigate what needs to be done to make deep water drilling safer. host: do they have any more funds allocated or staffing? guest: not yet. what i've been told by people on the hill, they were a little late asking for funding. but they are trying to get a budget amendment for the fiscal year 2011 budget. host: washington state. patrick, you are on the air. caller: good morning, thank you. i have a question for misses hughes -- mrs. hughes. when this all got going, in the news i heard that they used sea water i believe in the cooling of the pipes as opposed to a

mineral oil. i would like to know if that is true and who made that decision to use seawater. thank you. guest: what the caller might be talking about is the use of sea water to replace some of the heavy drilling mud when the well was undergoing the integrity test. industry officials say that is a very common practice. the problem with the concern was that a cement plug had not been in place before the change had occurred, so when you replace the heavy drilling mud with the lighter seawater you end up with a case where the hydrocarbons could more easily rushed to the surface. host: a question about the timing of the bp investigation comes from this view were. have waited for the full investigation? guest: it probably helps it gets

out ahead of a lot of the criticism that are likely to continue coming its way. from its own point of view, it is helpful. host: brooklyn. a telephone call from thomas. republican line. good morning. caller: while i do believe in renewable energy, i think it is unrealistic that we are going to get away from the use of oil. concerning the incident that happened in the gulf, one of the things i would like to see -- there are several offshore rigs in the gulf of mexico. i would like to see an emergency response team in the gulf of mexico that is fully trained, staff, and paid for by the oil industry so that this way when this happens we have an emergency response team that has been prepared to deal with these incidents. like a said, i think the oil

industry or natural gas exploration industry should pay for this because we do have to seek out these resources in and everywhere else with an american. host: thanks, thomas. sometime during the summer there was an announcement by a coalition of oil companies to do some been similar. what are the details? guest: exactly right. one of the details is companies wanted to come together and have these big containers ready ahead of time so that you don't have to fabricate one at the last minute in the event of a massive spill. sort of being a step ahead of the game instead of waiting until something happens. host: related to that, there was some controversy about the help offered by other countries might have had different kinds of rigs. that would be part of the investigation. what would you tell us about those ships that might have had the types of equipment needed

getting into place as early as the could have? guest: i don't know a whole lot about foreign flag vessels. i do know it was very controversial overseas, that it risked turning into a diplomatic issue because other countries almost felt there was a chauvinism in the u.s. that we just would not accept outside aid. host: i mentioned the british will be looking into deep water horizon incident and the energy and climate change select committee will listen to tony hayward and mark bligh wednesday, september 15, as part of the committee's inquiry. what about here at home? what is next for congress? guest: the house energy and commerce committee is going to complete a final report by the end of the year. that is going to be its major

contribution. . agencies that are investigating this bill. so eventually the thought is people will be working from the same set of data. for now with the b.p. report it was really b.p. working with the limited information it

could get. host: siobhan hughes with us as we talk about the b.p. latest report and all of the other investigations going on into the gulf of mexico disaster. the next comment comes from wisconsin, bobby on the independent line. good morning. caller: good morning. the last caller said renewable energy not being a good possibility or natural possibility for the future but i don't think that's true. i think that things like this b.p. oil spill shows us we need to overcome the obstacles that we have to creating renewable, sustainable energies and those obstacles are keeping b.p. from actually pay for its crime here. mussolini said that corporatism is fascism and when you have the corporations like british petroleum and halliburton in charge of stuff, especially in

charge of cleanup and stuff like that, then we're never going to -- we're never going to actually be able to move towards a society where we have renewable and sustainable energy sources because they're going to continue to make messes and just go and clean them up and then pacify us. host: siobhan hughes. guest: the incumbents -- they have gone back and forth and back and forth. right now the fossil fuel energies haven't had to give up much ground and we'll see what comes next. host: linda, independent line. caller: i love c-span. i have no idea why you're doing this b.p. stuff again but i have learned one thing, that america loves to have someone to hate. they hate b.p. when all we have to do is look at ourselves.

regulations were ignored. balls, joe from msnbc was yelling, we're destroyed, we're destroyed, and in the same breath wanting the people to come down there. lookality ourselves. they have to regulate this money. b.p. is giving them money, but people have just got their hand in the till begging. i'm tired of b.p. wait until we start the hearings to have more about it. there was a lot going on today that c-span could have discussed. host: thanks so much. guest: one of her comments, look at ourselves. as the former interior secretary, kempthorne, came to the hill and that was the point he made. he said, when i used to come down to the hill to testified,

i wasn't told make it safer, it is, why aren't you expanding drilling? and there is a self amount of reflection going on in washington right now. host: when will the drill be sealed? guest: soon. we are told soon. the relief well is not 100% yet. guest: what is the status of the relief well and the factor in making the final determination in sealing it? guest: they have said all along, we can't say it's fully sealed until the relief well is fully completed. host: this is mark, republican line. good morning, mark. caller: good morning. i have a question for you. who insured them or are they self-insured? who reinsured them? is a.i.g. involved in insuring them?

a company like b.p. has to have insurance for accidents and things like that. guest: i'm pretty sure, and i don't want to give the impression here, the big oil companies have the ability to self-insured. they make that much money. that's why you see b.p. selling off assets to fund the $20 billion fund. they have the money. host: siobhan hughes is our guest. we are talking about the investigation into the deepwater horizon and b.p.'s contribution to understanding about what went wrong there. next, is a call from kingman, arizona. this is ken on the democrats line. good morning, ken. you're on the air. caller: good morning. my question is -- why weren't there any safety procedures in place at the time of accidents that could have shut this whole thing down? that's what i wanted to know.

guest: there were safety procedures, and at least, according to b.p.'s report, every step of the way the safety procedures failed. so the cement, which was supposed to be that first barrier against hydrocash ons, that failed -- hydrocarbons, that failed. and if you find the well this integrity, people misinterpreted that data. when hydrocarbons, there was an influx of hydrocarbons in the riser pipe, they didn't pick up an extra 40 minutes. the blowout preventer, b.p. was unable to activate it. despite all these precautions, every single barrier failed. host: let's go back to the liabilities. you talked about the negligence factor and how important it was to determine the extent of that negligence. where are the areas of penalties that are possible for b.p.?

guest: b.p.'s version of events and what other people might say -- what b.p. has said that's culpable is well site leaders on the well misinterpreted this well integrity test. they didn't pick up on the fact that pressure readings were inaccurate. where other people might say b.p. has liability is, for example, when you test the cement to make sure that it's going to hold, there's a final test that you can do called the cement bog line test. b.p. opted not to do that and halliburton has said it was really b.p.'s responsibility to do that. so that's one example of where b.p. could be found culpable. host: but they would be found culpable in civil court in the basis of lawsuits, is that really -- guest: it's lawsuits, it's civil but then it's also criminal. host: and the justice department is investigating whether or not there's enough grounds for criminal charges?

guest: the justice department is investigating that. host: next is palm beach, florida. keith, republican line. caller: thank you for being here to answer our questions. host: good morning. caller: doesn't this go even way further back on the safety situation? we have two callers now that mentioned this the exxon valdez happened during the first bush administration. we had clinton and then bush ii and then president obama. after the exxon valdez there was a law written that these guys were supposed to have a response team with boom. they even had contractors that they all pay for these response teams in the gulf. now, the government was supposed to follow-up, also, make sure that this law was being followed so, you know, it's not only b.p. it's all of us, the government, everybody failed in the situation. i heard reports that there was only like 400 miles of boom in the gulf to respond to these thousands of wells. and whether that report was

right or not, they had to make thousands of miles to go and help in the gulf. we are not holding the people accountable that are supposed to be accountable. in my opinion on b.p., they really need to pull all their ads and be quiet, start leading by example and do great safety programs instead of apologizing for this. their apology is never going to be accepted. they need to start doing something as an example. thank you. guest: another thing that the caller didn't bring up but deepwater drilling got very big in the years after the exxon valdez and there was an area where regulators didn't really keep up, didn't fully evaluate the risks. it's been likened to really going to the moon. that's how scientifically and technologically challenging these activities are. host: just on his comment if

b.p. should stop advertising and start putting its money where its mouth is. your piece on the report writes -- "b.p. is walking a fine line. the company must show a good-faith effort to determine what caused the blast." talk about that fine line and what musting going on the senior management discussions. guest: well, b.p. can't come out and say we had absolutely nothing to do with this. it was -- -- it was its well, it was in charge of this, it's the number one deepwater drilling in the gulf. but at the same time it doesn't want to go too far with a mea culpa because it's going to put its own corporation on the line. i think some people -- a lot of people probably feel that instead of walking that fine line b.p. steered pretty far to one side of it and pointed the

fingers elsewhere. host: with this report this week? guest: with this report this week. host: next is red banks, new jersey. this is a telephone call from plark, democrats line. go ahead -- mark, democrats line. go ahead, mark. caller: how are you doing, ladies? host: fine, thanks. caller: i just wanted to see and ask you a question if the executives of b.p. are directly profiting off of this disaster by being involved with ownership rights from the disperseants companies? guest: there are people that had ties to b.p. and people in congress have raised questions about that relationship and whether it locked other disperseant makers out of the picture but in terms of ownership that's getting a little bit beyond what my knowledge is and what i think is at issue here. so the investigation in the cleanup is a whole separate

track from the investigation, the causalities of the accident. host: that's right. new orleans, louisiana. this is a telephone call from kathy. kathy is on our independent line. good morning, kathy. hi. caller: hello. i am just furious. i have one undergraduate's degree which involves criminal justice. i have two separate m.b.a.'s. i was told when i called in that you were a writer for dow jones. you don't seem to know anything, absolutely nothing. host: well, kathy, that is -- caller: b.p. is the predominant arbitrator of this whole entire fiasco in the gulf area. i want to see people go to frigs. i would like to see people --

prison. i would like to see people hung up and strung out and killed because they have destroyed our economy. and you are sitting there looking like you're sitting on a stool -- host: kathy, we really don't need to have thed a hom anyones. we don't need people to call and insult people sitting at the tables. apologies to her strong words there. she wants people go to prison. guest: that could happen. we have to see what the justice department does. host: the whole question about this new report coming out is to address people like kathy who don't sound like they're ever going to be convinced about b.p.'s turn of events. guest: and people won't be convinced about b.p.'s turn of events. certainly not in capitol hill and the gulf coast. host: talk to us a little bit inside your newsroom about your particular emphasis on business

coverage. how have you teamed up the various aspects, the regulatory, the business and financial investigations to cover this big story? guest: it's hard. it's a weave you do every day because these pieces feed into each other. when you figure out what regulations come out, you figure out what cost that could add to businesses. you think about who loses and who wins, for example. the maker of the blowout preventer might come out ahead if there are new blowout preventer mandates. people will have to buy them. host: we talk about b.p., the culpability in the gulf of mexico. this is robert, democrats line. caller: yes, good morning. host: good morning. caller: the reason i called in over here, i appreciate the great effort that b.p. makes in terms of putting it literally to the gas stations over here. i'm concerned that part of the culpability here lies with the

federal government for their lack of ability to provide the backup support in a user-friendly manner to have submergeables, culpable devices and working with our great companies. this is based on the fact the tight reviews we've had with the exxon valdez spill and i'm just surprised that we don't have these in place to not play i got you with the b.p. but to actually act in a user-friendly basis to have these entities in place that could have been financed by a minimal amount of money, for example, small little tax added amount of money put onto each gallon of gasoline. why weren't these put in face by our federal government or our state governments? could you please comment on that. guest: speaking generally, there's a big -- part of it is there's a huge funding issue. the amount of money you would need to get into all of these aspects is pretty large.

the former minerals management agency, now the bureau of ocean energy management, has by its own admission been outmanned and outgunned and i don't know how much more the federal government will do if it gets more money and with that money what it will be able to do. host: can you summarize the report -- the report also has a number of suggestions going for the safety of these rigs. can you summarize the importance of what they suggested? guest: one of the ones that stuck out for me was this need to really exercise more oversight of contractors. sort of seems obvious. the question was -- why wasn't this being done anyway? it's a fair point. and communication. you're dealing with a lot of different things. you're dealing with the cementing workers, the companies that make the equipment, that certify the equipment and certainly one has

to see you have to be careful. host: when you watch the inquiries of the hearings in houston, a scene that kept coming up was who ultimately is in charge? and is it clear in looking back over the investigations, is the clear line of authority for the operation of these rigs established in procedures? guest: it didn't feel to me that it was. certainly as a practical matter, the buck stops with b.p. because it's in charge. but as a day-to-day matter on the rig, when people are negotiating with each other figuring out what steps to take, it just never really felt clear. host: next telephone call is from ocean springs, mississippi, billy, republican line. good morning. caller: good morning. how are y'all doing this morning, ladies? host: great, thank you. this is a fact of life for you in your neck of the woods. what can you tell us about the situation down there for you?

caller: it's really bad. my only concern is we need to prevent it from ever happening again to draw waters. it happened. we all got to unite is what we do as americans and pull together and let's get it cleaned up. we hear now that the oil they sunk in the two-mile hole, and the two-mile hole is starting to rise now. and b.p., the only thing they could really do to help us is be honest and clear and that's -- let's all unite and clean it up because pointing fingers and grumbling is doing nothing but taking away what we got to do. protect our waters for thousands of years down the road. people really, you know, you can get mad and not accomplish nothing. you can unite and accomplish everything. host: now, a question for you. are you in a line of work that was directly affected by the

spill? caller: yes, ma'am. i own an air conditioning company here on the coast. i can see a difference, what people have to spend to get stuff fixed. i mean, i never had a problem with payment before and now the payment is just -- i mean, if i don't get it when i go through the door, nine times out of 10 i don't get it. host: are you intending to apply from relief from the oil spill fund? caller: it's really hard to show what the economy has done and what b.p. has done. i'd rather go forward and just grit my teeth and just hope i can hold out until this gets better. but there's one thing i would like to ask b.p., they're putting monitors on these life vests. it just started yesterday. nobody knows what these monitors are. i think they're air monitors to see if the fumes are coming up from the oil or -- but i don't -- nobody really knows here whatter in. they're not telling nobody. that's what i was saying about

being honest and clear. people will help. there's a bunch of good people here that will help but they have to come clean and say, this is what we need to do, this is how we are going to do it, and you can pile money on top of stuff and still not solve the problem. host: thanks very much. appreciate your call. guest: honest and clear, those are two areas in which b.p. really fell short for a lot of americans and it started with the estimates of only 1,000 barrels of oil a day was spilling out of the well. since then i think people felt the company had been less than forth right and that's almost always going to hang over this issue. host: next is a call from woodlands, texas. so this is charles on the independent line. good morning, charles. caller: yes, good morning. my question is -- b.p. is building tankers on the west coast that pump or receive 300,000 barrels a day. host: ok.

charles, your tv volume is up. that's what's causing the lag there. can you hit the mute? caller: let me turn it down. host: thanks, sir. for all of your callers, when you get on the air, hit the mute button. caller: they knew they couldn't recover that amount in one day. and that -- they -- all the companies came out and said they could. and that's ridiculous. and you can't put a typeline out that's a mile long and say that you can recover and make all the leaks. so anybody who is drilling knew that was not possible. i mean, any tanker person knows that. and the second thing is, when the pressure went up, when you're pumping in any type of transfer, you know when the fresh goes up something's wrong. and you go back and start looking at all this in those 40 minutes here, 40 minutes there. there was a lot of people involved that knew things were going on.

when you go to this -- taking out the alarms which were mandated, and these are foreign-led vessels, so they can go anywhere they want to to say who is going to be the third party, but when you start taking out alarms and you disable them, that's criminal. the coast guard will come take your certificates. if i was a sailor on a ship and i disarmed any type of state of equipment, they'll come snatch my papers up and have a hearing. host: ok, charles. anything? guest: tankers on the west coast, that is outside my daily work. i'm more gulf of mexico oriented. host: maryland, republican line. shreveport, louisiana. caller: when this first happened, i knew an engineer, young scholar who was paid $600 a day in room and board and now i know someone who's working

$300 a day and i just wondered, what kind of -- who is paying those kind of salaries and what they're doing. thanks. guest: you brought new information to the table to me. i haven't had a glimpse of the inner workers of people that was sent to houston. that was ground zero where secretary steven chu tried to shut this well-off. host: will there be an investigation about that response about how many people were brought to fwear, what the lines of authority, b.p. being in charged, as opposed to thad allen and how that whole part was -- that responsibility was delegated? guest: the spill commission has much broader authority to investigate what went wrong so we're going to be seeing a lot more than what b.p. came out in its report this week. host: and when is the spill commission's deadline? guest: their initial -- they're going to come out with their initial report in november. and then you won't see a final report until, i'm told, about

january 12. host: and who are the heads of that commission? guest: it is will riley, former head of the e.p.a., and mr. graham, former florida senator. host: tulsa oklahoma. this is vivica, democrats line. caller: hi, susan. i know this isn't in your line, ms. hughes. my daughter worked for b.p. from 2001 to 2003 in alaska. and she was warning them -- this is before the corrosion problem with the pipeline. do you remember that? where they had to go before congress. cal, two engineers up there that were her bosses weren't listening to her and they would move her around from department to department and then finally they told her that she didn't belong with the company any more. this is richard wilham and dave mcdowell. then, about two years after she left or maybe a year the big pipeline up there croded.

richard was before congress, if you'll go back and look at your c-span films and videos. he was up there with his right hand raised telling the truth. well, he didn't tell the truth. they weren't watching the pipeline. they weren't doing core ocean correctly, and -- corrosion correctly. did they get rid of those guys? no, they transferred richard to houston, texas. now, he had other problems that he's been under investigation within the company, sexual harassment for one. my daughter wasn't part of that. he would come to the job drinking. this was an old boy -- good ole boy system and it still is and they're not going to do anything, really, to undermine their paychecks or their business. thank you very much. guest: again, this is information you brought to me that is certainly new and interesting. i wonder if you've reached out to anybody to explain your concerns. i think for reporters, one of

the things that people don't realize is that it's hard for us to report unless people reach out and talk to us. there's a real value in communication. host: one point of view from this viewer, ja 08, they write on twitter -- the cost of damage will not be borne to the people responsible. what we heard from siobhan hughes, from the deepwater horizon spill, we appreciate her the analysis of what went wrong and what analysis that means for their liabilities going forward. thank you so much. guest: thank you. my pleasure. host: the rest of our program will be about politics in the year 2010. our next guest is kate zernike who's written a book called "boiling mad: inside tea party america." we'll be back in a bit to talk to her.

>> c-span is visiting communities as we look at the most contestly house races leading up to the mid-term elections. >> i'm the local president, local 1647. we have almost 6,000 employees there and today is our annual pig roast. we're here to get out the vote for people who are labor friendly. for congressman kanjorski and barney and vess tack. >> thank you. >> i was in the are a reen corps. -- i was in the marine corps. >> oh, marine. >> i got to give them their due. >> i'm so proud of you. really, it's an honor to represent you. >> paul kanjorski has represented the 11th district since 1985.

the district that's made up of five counties in this part of the state which is northern pennsylvania. it has voted consistently democratically. it voted for obama by i believe 11 points. kanjorski won the district by four points. he didn't do as well as obama which is why the republicans think they can win this district even though they're heavily outnumbered. they have a very good candidate in hazelton, mayor. lou bar leta, who took shots at kanjorski and failed. because of the things going on they believe they can win. >> this is mayor lou bar leta. >> i recognize him. >> want to say hello. >> i'm sioux. -- i'm sue. great job you're doing. we need someone like you. >> the challenger is lou

barleta, i was selected hazelton mayor in 1999. barleta was, you know, born and raised in hazelton. his family owned a well-known amusement park down there. he's very popular in his home city. hazelton is a small part of the district. he became a big champion of anti-immigration legislation. hazelton is the forefront of local municipalities trying to impose anti-illegal immigration rules. the city council, with the mayor's blessings, penalized those who rent to illegal immigrants. and barleta has gained a very high profile locally and nationally as a proponent of dealing with illegal immigration. what's unique about this race is barleta has been named one of the national republican congressional committee's young guns which means that's going to be a race they target with money in the fall. and that's really interesting because it's such a heavily

democratic district. it's not a district you typically see republicans go after. and the only reason they are is because he's the candidate and he has shown he's came close to beating kanjorski. they believe in this climate he should be able to beat him. paul kanjorski has been congressman for the district since 16985. until 2003, the district did not include scranton. since 2003 it has, so he represents the three largest cities in northern pennsylvania. scranton, hazelton and wilkes barey. -- wilkes-barre. he was part of the rewrite of the financial reform package. he succeeded by several years a very popular congressman named dan flood and tried to immolate him in some ways in terms of bringing home the bacon, bringing federal money home.

kanjorski is making the case for himself that he has the seniority to bring back the bacon that the new -- that the new congressman would not have. plus, he's in the majority party, the democratic party. >> longevity and seniority is much more than just term of years. it means that you know who the people are in washington who are in the 2,000 most powerful positions in the federal government of the united states. and i worked with most of those people for a period stretching back 26 years. >> the 11th district is an older population. at one time lackawanna county is one of the -- was one of the oldest counties in america. the median income falls below the state income. big employers is education, health care. manufacturing has -- used to be -- it's been on the slide for years and has taken a big hit

even before this recession. it's considered working class and it gets, you know, it's targeted a lot by the presidential candidates because full of swing voters, people showing they will go both ways when presidential elections were all around. the unemployment rate was much higher than the rest of the nation during recessions. this latest recession we were actually lucky. we were more in line with the national rate although we're a little bit above it. because the nature of the recession and certainty about the economy, that's going to be the key factor in the race. and the interesting thing is they haven't really talked about that much yet. >> the congressman has been there 26 years. most people tell me say that's long enough and time for a change. when americans voted for change, they didn't want to change america. they wanted to change washington. and i don't believe they feel that that's the change they got. and i believe we're going to get it right this time.

>> we rarely have someone challenging an incumbent congressman three times. and with a third time being the best -- his best chance of winning. if he doesn't beat him this time i don't think we'll see a fourth time. >> "washington journal" continues. host: and on this friday morning, meet kate zernike. she's the national correspondent for "the new york times" and has been covering the trends of campaigning 2010 and in mid stream has just published a new book about the tea party, "boiling mad: inside tea party america." thanks so much for being with us. guest: sure. thank you. host: well, there's so many ways to take this but let me start with your view that this is not a flash in the pan organization, that it's here for the long haul. guest: well, i think this is an organization. there is no one tea party headquarters the way you can call up the r.n.c. or d.n.c. host: call it a movement? guest: yeah. there are umbrella groups but

this comes down to national groups across the company. i see strains of the tea party movement like the one of the 1960's and the 1970's. i think these sentiments have been here for a long time so it won't go away. the tea party see themselves like the moveon.org of the right. if you talk about freedom works that helps the tea party, that's what they see them becoming. they see themselves a fixture here, get out the vote, an organization that can help get out the vote and be a voice for conservatives. host: with their relationship with the mainstream party apparatus you know that their interest is not being absorbed by them in any way but a hostile takeover. guest: exactly. that is their goal. in many places as i talk about in the book there were places that the republican party and tea party are really in

hand-to-hand combat. i talk about bucks county, indiana, where there is a district where tea party activists were involved in getting republican politics and the republican party said, thank you very much. we're not interested. they actually went to great lengths from stopping the tea party activists getting involved in their party there. host: we like to talk about party politics and also specifically about the role of the tea party in this year's election and going forward. and to do that we have our traditional three lines, republicans, democrats and independents but we have a special line set aside as well, fourth line for people who are tea party supporters. 202-728-0184. careful you're dialing it. 202-628-0184. and you can tell us about your motivations and your goals with your support of the tea party. i want to show a photograph right here from inside your book of kelly carrender. who is she?

guest: we could call her the first fey partier. she, long before -- it started with rick santilly from cnbc going to the floor of the trade saying this is ridiculous. i am going to call a chicago tea party in july. well, two weeks before that had happened, kelly, a 29-year-old actress and teacher in seattle, washington, had held what she called an anti-porkulous protest. she took it from rush limbaugh. she felt like the stimulus bill, she couldn't stop it. she called her senator. she couldn't get anywhere. she said i will take it to the streets. it will probably fail but i feel like i have taken action. she got help from a blogger who mentioned the protest on her blog. and so kelly became the first tea partier and she is still

involved in tea party politics. host: and she was involved in a -- she was an obama supporter? guest: her husband was. he got tired of her ranting. i'm not sure he's come around to her political views. host: what are the most common misperceptions of people who support the tea party? guest: well, i think the big one i hear is people always think the tea party is about social issues. they think this is the christian conservative right, this this is anti-abortion and anti-gay marriage, that this is part of their platform. and it's true that many of these people are conservatives and don't support abortion rights be and don't support gay marriage. some of them do. but they don't want to talk about those issues. they feel that the republican party, which is their home base, or they thought was their home base, focused too much on

those issues and lost sight of spending. they feel that the republicans were just as responsible if not more as responsible in spending. host: people tried to label tea partiers as racists. what did you find as view of civil justice and race relations? guest: i think it's complicated. first of all, i'd say within the tea party movement there is a fringe and that fringe expresses racist sentiment. i have them in the book and we see them on the signs. i think one thing that makes the race debate very difficult to get around -- i don't think -- most people i talk about in the book are not racists. they are not people you think of as bigots. but hard about a movement when you talk about states rights to say -- to not make people think of george wallace and jim crow a plus and to think, you're trying to get us back to preslavery days.

i think it's going for hard for them to beat back the charges of racism. and there have been high-profile things, when the house was voting on the health care bill, when race sentiment was said. they said, this didn't happen. i think what they should have said, this is a fringe. we disown this. we don't want these people in our movement. in is not what we're about. host: even though this is broad-based and a bottomup movement, there are common touch stones that you say are shared by people who support the tea party. one of them, malcolm gladwell's book "the tipping point." guest: this is a work that dick army's group has been very -- has been very instrumental in growing the tea party movement, they often encourage tea party groups to read this book to learn about marketing social ideas. they also encourage them to read "rules for radicals." they encourage them to read

"the stash irkish and the powers "-- the "starkish and the powers." it's this counternarrative that's being developed around the tea party. they have some books, some how to organize and some about ideology. host: paul zolinsky is a name, a supporter of president obama, the name came up as a model for organizing grassroots involvement. the moveon.org organization also points to him as one of their inspirations. we asked the author, nicholas van hofman, here is him talking a little bit about saul alinsky. what would his basic tactics be in organizing?

>> to find out what the situation is, that is the beginning. he had no set of set tools. he believed that you had to address yourself to the realtses on the ground and that your tactics had to be -- adjust themselves to what was there. you couldn't do it the other way. so the first thing and the most important thing about organizing, in his opinion, and i think he was right, is you have to know what is going on where you hope to do organizing. you cannot do it the other way. >> what's next? >> next comes from what you learn. that's what's next. >> how do you get an organization that's effective and make change? >> piece by piece.

i mean -- you know, there is no formula. i mean, a lot of people today say the alinsky message, the alinsky this, the alinsky that. alinsky's belief in what was right and what was wrong was endured and always the same. but what he would do in a given situation depended entirely on the entire situation. host: kate zernike has been learning about the tea party and saul alinsky, one of their big motivators. this description of how saul alinsky's principles worked, have you heard them being applied by the tea party? guest: oh, absolutely. saul alinsky one of their big heroes. it's a little bit of a hard sell when people who are training local tea party groups saying you should read saul alinsky, be a community organizer and they say, oh, and grown. of course, sarah palin made term organizer a term of

division. the tea partiers said, we need to model ourselves on obama. they don't agree on obama as much but agree with him on organizing. and going back to the race question, i think one of the things about the debate about race what is has obscured is how the tea party is organizing. whether you agree with the tea party or don't, what you need to understand is how they're organizing and that's what i tried to get out in the book. host: an example of one of them, and this will be the last, is diana rhymer. tell us about her story. guest: she was a -- she worked in the moderate -- she worked in macy's and sher husband discovered they were underwater in their house. they looked forward to selling the house. they had debt. in her frustration she turned on fox news and she loved the patriotism. she thought this was a way to

be patriotic. this was something to do, frankly. within months she quit her job at macy's, even though her and her husband were in debt. she is one of the key organizers -- excuse me -- for tea party patriots, which is a national group. host: let's get some calls. randy on the republican line. good morning, randy. caller: hey, good morning. my -- my comment this morning -- i'm wondering in the course of your -- writing your book, i know that the teat party is often portrayed as angry -- tea party is often portrayed as angry and at the forefront it's a style of government that is pushed upon us that we disagree with. but to what extent do you think that anger is being driven by the media coverage of the tea party? people see how they're being treated on tv. you know, they're just normal people and they're like being

portrayed so differently. remember the anti-war protest, how patriot -- dissent was the highest form of patriotism? all of a sudden that went out the window when conservatives started participating in the democratic process and we all became angry, racist, you know, pieces of dirt who were having a tantrum or something. and so i'm wondering to what extent is that driving people, the need to just shove it back in the face of the elites and say, no, you don't know me, you don't know how smart or dumb i am and quit trying to mischaracterize me and villeify me as some out of the mainstream cook when i just want to see my country run in a responsible manner. guest: there is a lot of anti-elisist anger in the tea party movement. a lot of that is driven at the

media. one of the popular signs you see at tea party rallies is, "listen to us," and "how dare you ignore us?" . that is directed at congress. when i did a poll in april, we asked people -- we said, are you angry or are you merely dissatisfied? and the tea party supporters chose angry. they said they were not dissatisfied. they were angry. and then we asked them what they were angry about. and they said, angry at government. i think the primary thing is government. with this movement sazz with most populous movement there is a heavy dose of that there. caller: yes. the young lady's book. i think where she might have made some misfakes, possibility that when she looked into this, what she should have looked into was the 1968 election for

george wallace. i think that's what it was. and looked at the beginning of the tea party, which wasn't called the tea party. it was george wallace running for the presidential election, became the southern and the mid west strategy. that is factual. look at the counties today and look at the people involved. the hardcore base, the republican party, is george wallace voters from these counties and that is the 19% to 20% republican party and that is the tea party. now go back, do your research and write a second volume of your book that shows the voters and where they came from. thank you very much. i'll hang up and listen to your answer. guest: thanks. you'll find a chapter that goes into the history and starts earlier with the goldwater campaign and i think it does lead into wallace. i talk about the history of the tea party movement. as i said earlier, we do see roots of this, not only in the george wallace campaign, but also in the tax revolt of the

1970's and 1980's. host: when wallace comes into the picture, what tone does that bring to their stance? guest: absolutely that's where you get the race question coming in. and i think there is a -- i think whenever -- and this is why people, again, have trouble separating race and the tea party movement because there is this feeling of we want to keep hours and there is very much an us versus them. when you talk about them, it always brings up the -- the them are the poor, the disadvantage, blacks, etc. and now i would say illegal immigrants as well. host: the last part of your book is a long survey. "the new york times"/cbs poll of tea party supporters. i was struck, while the tea party was exponentially higher in a lot of the categories, in is a lot of dissatisfaction registered again and again among all respondents. guest: absolutely. again, there is a strong anti-establishment feeling in the country and it's again -- it's against the media, it's against doctors, it's against

lawyers. it's against every institution that we used to think of as sort of the pillars of our society. it's interesting if you look at a pew poll on this, again, i mention this in the book, the place that americans reserve their respect for are, i think it's technology companies and one other area. it's the province of the entrepreneur. we see people -- we have become, we really pride individualism. i think the tea party comes out of this feeling that the government is trying to stop people from getting what's -- from fulfilling that individualism. host: what overall are the major supporters expectations for 2010? guest: oh, they're huge. i think their energy will carry them over the line. in a lot of cases, the tea party is extremely well organized and they're extremely active and having parties three or four times a week and the candidates are coming and raising money.

but the reality is the numbers are stacked against them. so in some places this energy will be misplaced. just because the demographics of some congressional districts are just so solidly democratic. in other places, as we saw in alaska, with joe miller, that organization is really going to count. host: "the new york times," lisa murkowski is considering several things, a write-in effort, which william and carl says it would retain that senate seat in alaska. we're talking about the tea party and its roots and overall direction and what it might mean for 2010 with kate zernike. next telephone call is from las vegas and this is a tea party supporter. chris is on the line. caller: good morning and thank you, c-span, for being there to speak the truth to the nation. we've been involved with the tea party for a couple of years but we were picked up in the

abuse and corruption that we were made the point of and we think that's a myriad of possibilities that emerged in the first tea party. nancy pelosi and the democratic party seems to want to pin the tail on the donkey of the tea party but there is no tail. they tried to promote dick armey as the de facto leader of the tea party. in fact, i was so outraged at that attempt to put a tail on the donkey that i gave an email back to them. the diversity of the tea party and the myriad of a different -- of different political point of views is the impetus and formation of the tea party. it's a multiple mindsets that come together with conservative values of limited government, of responsibility of finances and getting god back into the

country instead of throwing god out of everywhere because this country was founded on god and we don't believe that -- although there may have fringe elements that have racist tones, most of us do not hate blacks, do not hate muslims but we hate what certain elements are doing that have been swept up and portrayed as those elements of society. for instance, the black panthers or the muslims, building the mosque in new york. niece are being portrayed as the mainstream, and we have elements of all those faiths in the tea party and are pleased and thrilled to have them there. we only want people who have conservative values and family values and down of earth familial foundation values that the country was founded on. and we want to adhere to those fine principles that our founders came up with that will lead and guide this nation to

prosperity. host: chris, may i interrupt you about -- i'd just like to hear, since you're in nevada, your views about your electoral chances in the senate seat? caller: we're quite concerned about this race here. the tea party -- the tea party and sharon engel here is a marvelous candidate. however, she's at a financial disadvantage to moneys that may have been circumvented from the stimulus plans to support candidates, to buy votes for the democratic party. they're trying to bring about these problematic immigration plans to bring on all of these hispanic voters who snuck into the country, avoided the process of qualifying and getting across the boarders to make sure they're real, live, viable citizens as owe --

opposed to criminals. host: there is a lot in that call. let's start with leaderist. guest: sarah palin in response to a fairly sophomore question said, i think the republican party would be wise to absorb the tea party movement, as much of the tea party movement as possible. they like sarah palin but couldn't believe she said this. they don't want a leader. the power of this is this bottomup grassroots nature. host: there is another big national convention coming up in october. guest: yes, in las vegas. host: what do they hope to do with that? guest: it's interesting. there are some divisions. as you heard from caller, he talked about the need to put god back in our lives. a lot of tea party issues don't want to talk about faith and family. the tea party convention in las vegas does feature people who

at the convention in february were criticized for speaking about -- for raising questions about president obama's birth certificate. so we got some of these same people coming back. in many ways there's going to be some of that strain of the tea -- string of the tea party movement will be there in las vegas. host: this person from twitter says that caller was an infiltrater trying to make a religious movement out of an anti-government movement. show me the god signs in the crowd. guest: well, there is this belief among the tea party faithful that the signs that the -- that are either racist or distasteful in the crowd with brought on by democratic plans. a couple weeks ago when i was in town for the glen beck rally there was this street corner confrontation of people saying, "show me the birth certificate" and someone else saying, "these guys are plants.

they're here to make us look bad. keep moving. keep moving." there is a sense that most tea partiers don't want to see themselves portrayed in this way and so are very protective of their image. host: canton, ohio, is next. richard. good morning, richard. caller: thank you for taking my call. i am a fierce independent and i don't really support the tea party or either political party. my question is, i think everybody is pretty much of a sham. if you take dick armey and newt gingrich and many, many of the republicans who were in power for years and held congress for 10 years, these are the folks that gave away our -- they gave them away overseas. i don't see anybody, one soul, saying bring us our jobs back.

we are suffering as a nation because our people don't have jobs. so i really think that when the tea party talks about their family values and so on and so forth, what is the family, what are their values? so they see america from a different perspective. i'd like to hear, finally from your guest there today. 10 years from now, what will the tea party or any third party movement have on the political -- what effect will it have on the political system of the united states? thank you so much. guest: i'd say -- there's a couple things in there. first of all, a lot of the tea party doesn't want to talk about faith and family. that's not their movement. they want to talk about smaller government. in terms of where i see them 10 years from now, i think this movement, i think they do become another interest group. they are not interested in

becoming another third party. they looked at ross perot's example and me saw that took away votes from republicans. i think what the tea party has done so far in the season is move the republican party to the right. what remains to be seen is whether these candidates can win in the general election. if they do we may see sort of more tea party ideas. things like phasing out social security, phasing out medicare, privatizing them, perhaps. we may see those become more part of the debate. there will be much more pressure in congress about smaller government. but if they don't win, then i think a lot of people in the republican party are going to say, look, we tried with these conservative candidates, they can't win, we need to go back to the middle. host: one quote i pulled out of the book was a woman who became a tea party supporter and here it is. "barack obama's fatal state is he came between me and my

child's future." guest: that's jennifer stefano and she talked about the way a lot of people looked at the republican class and the republican revolution of 1994 and there was so much hope for them. and what happened is the republicans didn't reduce spending. in fact, spending continued to go up. and so when she -- when she talked about barack obama, what she's saying is -- and the republicans, the debt is such -- is at such a level that her child is going to be paying for it. .

caller: in the past, i have usually seen democrats and republicans at odds. usually, we try to come together. i have faith that we all want the same solutions. we want to get there in a different way. ever since the election of obama, it is frightening me quite a bit from the standpoint that we have the sarah palin movement. we have the tea party movement. i am saying all of this disconnect with the glen beck

who has a nasty and violent town and he was just destructive. he comes out and calls a rally to go back to god. you heard the one congressman who screamed," you lie." are we all going crazy? as a democrat, i support democratic views. i always thought we worked together with republicans. ever since the obama election, i feel there is a huge disconnect and that people are drawing on lies and making a lot of money off of fear mongering. whether health care is right or wrong, i think we were trying to do something correct and i think republicans or the tea party move and would come in and help make it better not come in and start saying destructive things about birth certificates and things of this nature. where are we going with this?

this frightens me to no end of where we are going and what this looks like. host: do you think the national temperature is higher than it was in the bush administration? caller: i think it is the most frightening thing i have ever seen. i have white and black friends and we disagree on things but we have already moved -- we have always moved to get it. i can feel the tension is now. daily i see the tensions. guest: i think a lot of this has to do with the economy. i think a lot of this anxiety -- the tea party says they are angry but they are also fearful about the economy. i think that is where a lot of this is coming from. [inaudible]

>> the cspan local content vehicles are traveling the country as we look at some of the most closely contested house elections leading up to the midterm elections. >> i am the local president at the local 1647. we have almost 16,000 employees. today is our annual pay gregory we are here to get out the votes to our labor-friendly. for congressman cantoris key and others, we thank you. >> we will be there.

i worked with the dod and the army. >> i am serious. i am so proud of you. you are an honor to represent them the republican congressman has represented the 11th district since 1985. >> the district is made up of five counties in the state which is northeastern pennsylvania. it has voted consistently democratically. they voted for obama by i believe the 11 points. the republicans believe they can win this election because they have a good candidate. he has taken two shots at can joski >> this is the mayor.

we just wanted to come by and say hello. >> i am his better half. great job your doing. we need someone like you. >> i wish the whole country would do that than of the challenger is the hazleton mayor. he was born and raised in hazleton. his family on a well-known amusement park there. he is very popular in his home city. host: we apologize for it we had a major technical in -- interruption. we lost our microphones on the set but i think we are back in order now. we are continuing our conversation about the effect of the tea party. we have a telephone call from cumberland, rhode island. you are a member of the tea party? caller: yes i am. my question to your guest today is -- i guess you are right.

in the tea party, there is an anti-elitist view point of washington and maybe the media. is it well-founded? you used to work at ""the new york times." that is considered the vanguard of the elitism. is "the new york times the latest? --elitest. it seems like washington does not listen. look at what people are saying. we have supposedly the worst economy since the great depression and their primary concern has not been jobs. it is about cap and trade and health care and everything else. thank you. guest: i still look at the "the new york times." certainly they have that reputation. this book came out of stories that i did for "the new york times." i set out to talk to people

about where this is coming from and what their concerns were. i am interested in the concerns. i don't think that is an elitist point of view. i absolutely think that the tea party feels that government just wants to get in its face and get its way. in many ways, the rallying cry is to leave us alone. host: a critic of the tea party says this movement is astroturf by billionaires' and filled with alex jones of listeners. can you interpret that? guest: i don't think the tea party represents the majority of the u.s.. i think it is about 25% of americans. host: what about these libertarian billionaires'? guest: there was an article a couple of weeks ago about the koch brothers who are for -- or

behind americans for prosperity. they spent a lot of money against john kerry in 2004. the america trust for prosperity is paying for commercials for tea party candidates. they are helping us an tea party candidate, but they are not actually on the ground doing too much with local tea party groups. they are not giving money to local tea party groups. libertarian organizations have been trying to go a grass-roots movement for years. there were not able to do because they could not get grassroots supporters. people were angry or fearful about the economy and that is what is different now. they sell wheat are spending money to get out of this recession. it did not make sense to them to get out of a recession this way. yes, i think this movement has been helped by fox news and libertarian organizations, but you cannot deny that there was grass-roots anger out there. what they have done is to

mobilize it in shape ahead. host: the book is called "boiling mad." this is all i've been on the democrats' line. caller: the thing that comes to mind with me about the tea party is ignorance and fear and fox news and that old genre which they have an affiliate of every tv station. they also money newspapers here in boston, fox news in new york, every major city. they are the ones who are whipping of fear and hatred to get people to vote against their own best interests. i have said this before on c- span. i don't understand why the public cannot see through all this. they are appealing to the worst in people. i know quite a few tea party people. they are definitely racist, homophobic, they are angry. they think they are christians

but god forbid of some little black child gets a nickel of their money, they are boiling mad. it is a sham and because the republicans have a damaged brand and dick armey and other republicans have latched onto this movement. they had hoped their wagon up and are trying to hoodwink people like they have done time and time again. who took the jobs away overseas? who ruined the banking system? it was the republicans which is now the tea party. host: we hear your point. guest: it is true and many tea party folks are angry for ruining the economy. there is a french and the tea party. -- there is a fringe in the tea party. i don't think they're all racists or bigots but there is that strained their. >host: where is the anger when

ronald reagan was president? guest: the tea party people love ronald reagan. they want to go back to those days. i think there is a bed of a rose colored glass of view on those days their big thing is cutting the size of government and the deficit. the debt and deficit increased under ronald reagan. some are honest about that and have acknowledged it. what is different now is that we do have this tremendously bad economy and people are reacting to that. that is the context. people ask why this did not come around during george bush and that is because the economy was doing better. > host: host: republican line. >caller: anyone who relies on mr. nickey for anyone for information on the tea party is crazy.

several years ago, she alleged in the new york times" that there was a failed attempt to peg a member as a racist party was a total fabrication. host: thank you for your call. are you doing this for political means? guest: absolutely not. i did this because i was genuinely curious about where this is coming from and grounded in history and what the perspective was and how it would affect our politics. host: why before the elections rather than seeing what happens and analyze the results? guest: whether you disagree or agree with the tea party, you need to understand how they are organizing. otherwise you look back and a collection and you ask how this happened. we need to understand the energy and sentiment behind this. we want to see what happens after the election, but we need to understand it going into the

election. host: that leads into our next topic pretty tea party folks are looking beyond 2010? guest: absolutely. basie olympia snowe as a republican in name only. there are lower party positions and local government and they want to build from the grass roots up. these are the lowest positions in the republican party, but from these positions they can vote for the republican party hierarchy. that ultimately decide which candidates the party endorses. host: the book is "boiling mad." thank you for being here this morning. our next guest continues the political discussion, but also thinking the democrats have a

long-term view beyond 2010. he argues that democrats can and republican party and roll the next generation. his book is called," permanently blow." >> it is 9:16 and on the headlines -- a new report says the u.s. government was slow to take seriously the threat posed by homegrown radical spread they have failed to but systems in place to deal with a growing phenomenon that report compiled by the former head of the 9/11 commission will be released today at the bipartisan policy center. that will be live at 10:00 on cspan radio and television following the "washington journal." the leader of the florida church says he will not burn copies of a car ran if he could meet with leaders who want to build a mosque at ground zero. the rev. jerry jones says if he meets with the imam in new york,

he will not burn the koran. in kabul, thousands of afghans are proper testing that the charge will do that dirty to moderate officials in kabul say at least 11 people have been hurt. a federal judge in los angeles says she will issue an order to halt the military paused don't ask don't tell policy. she declared the ban on openly gay service members unconstitutional. the u.s. district judge ruled thursday that the prohibition on openly gay military service members was unconstitutional because it violates the first and fifth amendment rights of gays and lesbians. finally, a white house official says president obama has chosen economist boston goals they to be the new chairman --saustin goolsbee to replace christina romer. the president will be live on c- span television and radio starting at 11:00 this morning. those are some of the latest

headlines on cspan radio. >> this weekend, commemorating september 11, the pulitzer prize winner of the events that led up to don 11 and we talk in detail about the twin towers, their collapse, their cleanup and excavation and the manpower it took to achieve it. huffington post editor ariane a huffington says america is losing its position as an economic and political letter -- leader and puts the blame. go to book-tv.org. "washington journal" continues. host: our next guest is dylan lowey and he is the author of a book called "permanently blue." joining us are students who are with us at our digital bus in

richmond, va. on the campus of virginia commonwealth university where the students are going to school. over the next 45 minutes, eight students from the virginia commonwealth university society of professional journalists will participate in our discussion with our guest. there are two campuses in downtown richmond and over 32,000 students attend the school. special thanks for arranging our visit to vcu and professor bonnie davis to help the ratings this. guest: this is an interesting new media environment. if you're looking to move into journalism in this year, is important to broaden your expertise in as many fields as possible. this is a you can come into it with a depth of understanding. host: let's plunge into the premise of your book.

we heard in our last segment about how the people who support the tea party are here for the long haul and they are looking ahead to 2012 and beyond to build grassroots. your book is about a long-term view of the democratic party. what is your thesis? >> wild things are looking bad for democrats in november, it looks like we will lose at least 30 seats in the house, potentially more. the things that are helping the republican party will hurt them very much a long term. what will happen as we move out of an off year election like 2010 which is a relatively small voting population that will show up to the polls and republicans are the enthusiastic voters, we moved to 2012, a presidential election year were more people will be voting who are traditional democratic constituencies. the tea party will have preventing the republican party

from gaining the center. i think we will find ourselves in a position where the democrats are in a much better position to regain a majority but to maintain the majority and the white house for an entire generation host: this is an argument about demographics? guest: at least a long-term credit a section of the demographic section would be minority voters. 80% of the population growth are the last 10 years came from minorities and 80% of minorities gay barack obama but in 2008. that population will increase over time. the hispanic population is supposed to grow 40% over the next 10 years. as we move into elections were those groups will show higher numbers, it will require the republican party figure out a way to appease the tea party on the right and also reach out to moderates. the tea party has put the republican party in a position where they cannot moderate any

more. any moves away from the fur is -- for this right of the party results in being challenged barry we saw that with lisa murkowski of alaska. she was beaten by joe miller because she was not seen as conservative enough. as it becomes more difficult for republicans to move to the center, it will be difficult for them to maintain a and a majority. host: the anchor of voters is the democrats' response to the economy and the lack of jobs. if the economic downturn continues past the election cycle, what can democrats bring to the table in terms of job creation that will appeal to voters? guest: a lot of the anger you see in the country is about the economy. there is no question about that. this white house and as congress had done a lot to prevent what would of been a second great depression, but it is difficult

for people to think about what it would have been like and look at a situation that is not great with unemployment near 10% and say it could have been at 25% so they might think things are ok. i think we will see the economy continued to recover. most economists believe the same bank. i think the democrats big challenge in the short term will be to produce job creation at a sustainable levels of the voters believe that things are moving of the right direction. in the 1930's, fdr did not have to show voters that the fix the economy. he had to show them that he was making substantial progress. voters responded in kind to that. we move into a presidential election cycle where it is not just a referendum but a choice. we will find a democratic party in a strong position to say the policies we put in place have worked and will continue to work and the alternative is unacceptable host: the largest

increase in party politics but last decade has been independent voters. where do independence fit into your scenario? guest: they are a group like to talk about a lot. in reality, it is a small group of voters. many voters like to call themselves independents and they talk about how they are not affiliated with a party. many of them are independents who always voted democrat. it is a relatively small amount of people who fit in the middle. in 2010, you'll see an enthusiasm gap for republicans versus democrats because the republicans have all lot of enthusiasm. i don't think they will be a major force in what occurs in 2010. i think in 2012 and beyond that will become an important force in terms of moving the conversation ford.

i think they can plot -- play a role. host: we will take phone calls from students and tweets in this discussion for the next 45 minutes with our guest. let's begin with a student from vcu, what is your question? caller: i have a question about the 24-hour news cycle. will this have an affect on the optimism of the democratic party? can you give examples of that? guest: a comment i made recently is that in this 24 hours a news cycle and it is a minute to minute blogosphere, every little thing that happens seems like the most important thing. it is difficult to look past a new cycle one month or an election cycle.

the bulk of the analysis we see in this country in the media these days focus is very much on what is happening in a moment. if you look more broadly, many things are changing in ways that affect democrats in positive ways. you can look at november and say they will be back. you can say that tea party is stepping support for the republicans. if you look beyond 2010 to other collections of look at demographics, you start to see that things that are helping the republican party now will hurt them later. things aren't that are affecting the american dialogue today may have very little impact in the future. host: next is a call from union grove, north carolina. this is the republican line. caller: i would like to ask this young man if he knows anything about history. host: what, specifically?

give us more. caller: i want to find out what he knows. he is telling everybody was right and wrong. does he know anything about the democratic party? guest: is yes a good enough answer for that? host: why don't you make your point. caller: who controlled the democratic party for 40 years prior to 2006? what party control -- controlled the house and the senate prior to 2006? guest: i think he is referencing that something like

a permanent majority for the democratic party for a generation as possible. between 1954 and 1994, the democratic party held the house of representatives and held the senate for 26 of those years. prior to that under fdr's tenure and through truman, they held it for roughly 14 years. there have been times certainly in the past for the democrats have been able to hold a majority for quite some time. i think we are moving into a position where that can happen again. a good example of where that potentially can happen is with the younger generation, my generation. this is a group of people who gave barack obama 66% of the vote in 2008 and it is a group that every year between 2008 and 2018 will add 4 million new voters every single year. by 2018, we will be 40% of the

eligible voting population this gives the democratic party a huge opportunity. if the republicans cannot reach out to this generation and bring them to their side, they will have problems. if they try to reach out, they will infuriates the tea party base. if they ignore this generation, there will have a difficult time sustaining a majority. host: 50 millennial -- f the millennial -- are they concerned about the millennials ? guest: they see government as playing a positive role, 85% of them were in favor of comprehensive health-care reform. they think government has a role to play.

in terms of priorities, millennials are more concerned about getting the economy to a point where it can sustain itself. they are deeply committed to the democratic party while dealing with unemployment. host: oklahoma, independent line, go ahead caller: i watched you a long time over the years and i enjoy watching you. i am glad to see that you finally made a major decision and put you in bryant's place on friday. i am one of the original libertarians. i became libertarian in 1980. the top republicans were talking a balanced budget but if you check it out, the balanced budget, that means that the government can take all your money and you have a balanced budget but we will still be

slaves to the system. i would like to ask one question. so many loose facts get thrown around. earlier you talked about how the debt doubled under ronald reagan. that is true in effect. i am no great ronald reagan fan. congress was controlled by the democrats during the 10 years there. ronald reagan doubled in come coming in, the democrats triple spending. that is the bottom line. that has been the problem. i really resent what i refer to as the democratic philosophy a racist socialization host: thank you. you gave us a lot to work with there. guest: i am not sure what the question was there but when you talk about the deficit, the last time we had a surplus in this

country was when president clinton was in office. when president bush came into office, that surplus quickly became a deficit and a debt -- and the debt when trillions of dollars higher. obama inherited that and that is an important fact for all people on the sides of the aisle to realize. host: our next journalism student is phoning in from the cspan boss. --bus. caller: in a helping to post article, you said that harry reid could not win reelection but a recent poll says he is running neck and neck with his opponent. have you changed your opinion since then? guest: about nine months ago, i wrote a piece that said i believe harry reid had no chance to win reelection. i thought he should follow the chris dodd line and retire and

the seat would be available. that was certainly wrong and i think he has a fantastic chance at this stage. that is a factor that has to do with the tea party on two fronts. we know that sharon engel was able to get the primary for the republicans and there is a tea party candidate who is qualified in nevada. those factors are putting our read in a position where he is in a in excellent position of winning. as the pots are my -- leave nevada voters are not likely to move to the extreme if they vote for his opponents. the issues of medicare and the others are far to the right. host: you hold a law degree from columbia university and a master's in public policy and a b.a. in physical science.

our first discussion this morning was about it college pays off. guest: i had a lot of college. in this economy, it is roth to take on student loan debt. 62% of the jobs available require more than a high-school education. that in itself that is the question. host: how did you get into this line of work? guest: i started working in political campaigns and college and ended up coming to washington and writing a book and working for a speech-writing from where i currently work. host: do you have touchdowns and politics of tax guest: -- touchstones in politics? guest: it moved me to believe that politics could be more than winning a game and could be about helping people. more recently, president obama

during his campaign move may -- moved me insubstantial ways and inspired me to believe that we could move forward in this country in a substantive way. host: define liberal and what you would expect from a liberal. guest: i want to find that because i think that is a difficult thing to define. i think many people have different views of that. when i refer to the millennial generation as the most liberal, i am referring to social issues. 60% of them are in favor of gay marriage. 85% of them are in favor of ending "don't ask, don't tell." a large majority is pro-choice. many issues being traditionally wedge issues, a social issues that the tea party has shied away from and evangelical right is part of a campaign, these are

issues where the millennial generation lives of more closely with the democrats than republicans. host: next is used in on the democrats' line. hello, start again. caller: good morning. yours mile -- your smile helps this discussion. at a time when conservatives met strict interpretation of the constitution and liberal meant a relaxed interpretation, it now means a conservative is to -- means to bomb muslims and bomb abortion critics and liberals' main bomb muslims and go against -- and five of the abortion clinic bombers.

people we an employee in washington, d.c. at these little businesses that surround them, that work toward this really believe there is such a bang as american democrats and american republicans and that somehow we really think that we see a difference between democrats and republicans. they are the same professional politicians that we employ and of the ones we put into office year after year. this is what i would like your guest to comment on. your last guest wrote a book called," boiling mad." you have two kinds of dogs. you have the kind that bark.

politicians are afraid of barking dogs and then you have the quiet dogs. we have be made for tv tea party, we have the made-for-tv democrats and the made-for-tv democrats. -- republicans. we 300 million americans outside of the government industry in washington, d.c., outside the fastest in history, i think what needs to happen -- i would like to know -- i would like to tell you that we are not mad we are in fear. we are the spawn of baby killers and we're having a hard time keeping things from the bottom with the way people in d.c. and new york are behaving. guest: to the point about the

parties being the same, this is an argument we have seen quite a bit of the last couple of decades. it played a major role in the 2000 election. it would be difficult for anybody to argue that the parties aren't substantially different. i cannot think of a single policy issue where you don't find disagreement among the parties. there hasn't been a single piece of legislation that has not had ultimate republican obstruction to a democratic idea. that suggests that these party stand for very different things. i am enthusiastic about the future because i think the democrats have the right policy agenda and ideals to move the country forward. host: our next vcu student is manhattan royal. that is her name. caller: good morning. in your book you mentioned that you work with a number of different candidates.

is there a reason why would you give us this information and not mention names? guest: the reason that i mentioned in the book that i have worked for democrats in the past is that i want to let readers know that i may democratic strategist. that should color part of what the book is about. at the same time, i argue i am on objective partisan and the data in the book is accurate and not just the kind of spin you would otherwise expect as i said earlier, i have worked in a number of campaigns through college at the state and local level in california. one of the more recent campaigns was by managed michael campaign in texas. i have advised candidates at

different levels. on a number of different levels including speech writing. host: how often the right for huffington post? guest: i write frequently for them. go to huffington post.com to find my archived articles. host: if democrats can articulate a clear message, none of this matters for the economy? guest: i think to some degree that is correct. a party will not earn a permanent majority unless they deserve it. that is a policy agenda that moves the country forward. 10 years from now with the economy is where it is, to as low of likely democratic majority will hold. the republican majority would have to show that their ideas are even worse.

it is important to note how dramatic these changes will be carried it will be 40% of the electorate by 2018. if you think about what a presidential election can mean, that is substantial. karl rove back in the day was talking about a permanent republican majority. he believed there was a potential to mobilize the hispanic vote and move from the democratic party to the republican party. in 2004, george w. bush won 24% of the hispanic vote which was exceptionally high. the republican party has essentially neglected the hispanic community. the reason john mccain lost in certain places was because of how anti-immigration reform became such a hot issue.

it is difficult to imagine a situation where a will win a higher percentage of the hispanic vote and john mccain did back in 2008. if they don't, how will they win the southwest and if they cannot win the southwest and florida, how will they get back to 270 electoral votes? some of this is so dramatic that it will end up making all the decisions for us. host: next is texarkana, arkansas, on the democrat line. caller: congratulations on your book. here is the reality of it -- i don't care for the right. i don't care for the left. people are tired of the lies. we are seeing that they are trying to get rid of the old dogs in washington.

get them out. business as usual. that is why many people don't understand that it was great with all this change and here comes obama. nothing has changed. people are intv and people in washington keep calling us normal folks out here fulls and ignore it. demographic or not and i have many hispanic friends and african american and everything else and they agree with this -- america will wake up and realize that washington d.c., we are through being called a die. we have been quiet and silent long enough. our families and grandkids, the future is at stake. the left can fix it. the right can't fix it. it has to be in the middle and has to be done together.

there will be a movement and i am not saying tea party or the liberals or nobody else. there will be a movement that will try to set it straight. everybody that works in politics as an agenda. america is a nation that was founded for a reason. it is for the people. the people are getting tired of being trampled on and being called a barn. the news stations have their side, republicans and democrats, and a trash each other until people get tired of it. host: 94 call. guest: i think it is an interesting point to make. i will disagree that nothing has changed since the president has taken office. we have seen the economic recovery begins. when he took office, 800,000 jobs per month were being lost.

we have passed wall street reform, health care reform, we have done things like pass equal pay laws, removed prohibition on stem cell research. there is substantial stuff that has been done the past few years. whether you agree with those policies or think they should have happened or not, it is difficult to argue that this president did not accomplish anything. i think he has accomplished more in his first two years as president and lyndon johnson -- since lyndon johnson. i think the tea party -- i think there are many people in the tea party which are not ideological. they are getting fed misinformation by fox news, by rush limbaugh, glen beck and others on conservative radio and a trust to they are listening to on television. they have no reason to believe that what they are being told our allies. they trust the politicians they have elected.

the of no reason to believe that the politicians are lying. in a number of cases, they are. that alternate reality that the media and republican politicians are creating for the republican electorate will make it incredibly difficult for the republican party should they ever get back into power to make substantive differences from the country that will result in policy changes that help move the country forward. host: next to journalism students from vcu. you are on. caller: good morning. i agree that the media makes it difficult for the democrats. how can they take back that power and excitement that they

had in the 2008 election? guest: that is an excellent question. with regard to 2010, what will happen between now and election day will be the substantial portion of the campaign. the political jockeying among this spent last two years talking about midterms but most americans are keying in now. it will require that the democrats mobilize the organization that was helpful for the in 2008 in order to move voters to the polls. we hear about the enthusiasm gap and a recent poll had a 25% gap between our democrats and republicans were in terms of enthusiasm are you likely to vote in november? it is easier to be enthusiastic about the possibility of taking back controls then be enthusiastic about maintaining control. it is important to recognize there are a number of democrats who are waffling whether they will show up to vote.

if we can mobilize them to the polls, it will play very well for the democrats in 2010. i think we will still lose a number of seats by the difference between having a bad day and losing 30 seats and a horrible day losing its majority will come down to whether we have the organization to bring it out. i think is important not to underestimate the campaign abilities of the president of the united states. to this point, he has concentrated primarily on governing. i think you will see that he will be traveling around the country making his case for democrats. i think the key is to make sure that people recognize this is a choice election and not a referendum. at local level, i think that's where states will they. i think there is a number of congressional districts that may have slipped to the republican party. a tea party republican has been nominated and moved the ideology to the right but they are

unlikely to win. it takes a handful of those seats to fall to the republicans. for the democrats to maintain a majority. host: his new book is called," permanently blue." our next phone call is from tennessee. what is your town? are you there? caller: unicoy. host: independent line, go ahead caller: who is to blame? i listened to both parties. your guest has said that we have not listened to both sides. i used to say that both parties or blind. i now say that a leader is only as good as the people he or she leaves. ds.

every american has the obligation to stop the waste and fraud and abuse. we have a moral obligation to demand responsibility, morality, and prosecution. implementing these values to our government and corporations, churches, and factories and moms and dads has destroyed our country. our health care has doubled the cost of other countries. with low satisfaction. our government contracts are abuse. no one has ever prosecuted. i agree with many of your callers. it is both political leaders. we need to come together instead of endeavor one needs to watch and care about every dime that is spent.

taxpayer dollars should be spent correctly to help the people and to help our country become strong. we don't have any money to spend and i think corporations and people are more, i don't know, i think they look at every dollar that is spent and hopefully corporations will let loose some money and jobs will come back to guest: that is obviously a popular sentiment on either side of the aisle that greed is a problem in this country. i think it is important to recognize that the news we have seen in the last two years and how we move forward on the issues. the wall street reform package was a substantial move in that direction the recklessness of the bags was a large reason why we found ourselves in an economic crisis that was spiraling to the point where we were at the risk of entering a true depression. we put the banks in their place and brought forth a wall street

reform. we have created a consumer protection agency to make sure the consumers actually have the protection they deserve. she mentioned the health-care costs have doubled. absolutely, there's no question that the cost of health care is a major problem. it is about recognizing we passed a health care bill that will expand coverage and prevent insurance companies from participating in the practices like denying care for preexisting conditions, denying coverage when you get sick. these are things that companies can no longer do and health insurance is available and there are generous subsidies for those who can afford it. these are big, big steps with generations in the making. it would be worth it for the american people to stop and recognize that these problems we have been concerned about for so long are problems we are actually solving today. host: we will take our next

student by 5 by fa caller: own phone. caller: can you give us an example of how the democrats can hold off the white house? guest: let's take a look at 2012. once we get into 2011 and the republican primaries begin and candidate for president start to come out, the media will talk quite a bit about what kind of horse race it will be. we will hear about national polling that shows obama of by two or down by three. the whole conversation for one solid year will be about that. the reality is that what will unfold in 2012 will almost certainly unfold in a way to get barack obama reelected. we were so impressed back in

2007 when he raised $25 million in the first quarter of spending. it was the first time that people thought this guy could potentially win a presidential election. he is building his organization from scratch. when he started his reelection campaign, he will start where he left off last time. that was raising $100 million in the final month. we're talking easily $300 million raised in the first quarter and possibly more. we are talking about a $1 billion campaign. we're talking about an electorate that will not be small and traditional republican the way an off-year election like 2010 would be. minority voters will show up in 2012 and young people will show up in higher numbers. there will be 16 million new young voters voting in 2012. who he runs against is a big question and i am not sure it matters to the individual.

the republican primary system is set up in a way that makes it almost impossible for someone to get nominated if they are are on the fur is a -- furthest right of the party. you will end up seeing a republican primary and i were 90% of the voters are white, 60 percent as a sign of them are the evangelical. it will be difficult for republican candidate to win in iowa without having a far right stance. in the general election, it will be more or less impossible for them to reach out having taken the positions they have taken. i mentioned the hispanic vote and i think it is unlikely in 2012 that the republican candidate will get more of the hispanic vote than john mccain did. i think that will help barack obama win in the southwest and hold florida. if he can do those two things,

he will win the white house. this will help democrats remain tame the presidency over long term. host: we are talking on the day before the ninth anniversary of the 9/11 attacks. we have a number of the events tomorrow. at 9:30 michelle obama and laura bush joined secretary salazar in commemorating flight 93 in pennsylvania. 44 people died in that crash. we will have taped coverage of president obama after that with secretary of defense gates and mike mullen at a ceremony at the pentagon honoring the 59 people aboard the plane that hit the pentagon and the 125 people killed in the pentagon itself. at 2:00 p.m., air-traffic controllers and other aviation officials will talk about their experiences on 9/11. it is a symposium at the university of texas and that will be on cspan afternoon.

that is tomorrow on c-span and the president has a press conference today at 11:00. we will provide live coverage on that -- of that on c-span. back to live calls and this one is from orlando on the republican line. caller: i heard the young man say a while ago what a millennium liberal was and that is like a social liberal. i worry about gay marriages and "don't ask, don't tell." every barrier is torn down by people like him. it is the destruction of our world and the destruction of our country. if there is no morality, there is nothing. we are empty vessels. abortion and everything that comes from the creator, they want to destroy.

i don't understand that this is the beginning of the end. if we have no compass to follow -- i would like to ask this young man, how this got fit into all this? he can from somewhere. -- he came from somewhere guest: this race is one of the more interesting points about whether the republican party will find themselves over the long term. how can you get her vote and a member of the millennial generation but at the same time as a republican party member? this is what the republican party will see over the long term. when they have to move to the right, when we move into the election cycle where there are far more democratic constituencies voting, it becomes an incredible challenge to win her vote and when the middle. i don't see how the republican party can ever do that again. st