clarke of michigan discusses his election to the house, legislative priorities, and leadership of the democratic party. "washington journal" is next. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] host: house and senate members return for a lame-duck session of the president returns from its overseas trip. house ethics committee kicks off its hearing on charlie rangel. an eight-member panel will consider 13 counts of violations. live coverage on c-span 3 and our website starting at 9:00 a.m.. also in town, new members of the house and senate. freshman orientation begins today. the newly elected lawmakers broke -- will vote wednesday -- will vote wednesday on the party leader. president obama plans to meet with congressional leaders on the next that on the bush tax

cuts. both sides are discussing compromises. other legislation is pending before congress before this lame duck. the power changing hands to the republicans in the house, we want to know from all of you, what do you expect to know, what do you expect to see and read, what level of transparency do you want in this new congress. you can start dialing in. all numbers are on your screen. we will get to your phone calls in just a minute. how can a new congress become more transparent? john boehner, presumptive speaker of the house, addressed the issue. he has several times last week in a news conference after his transmission team met to discuss what is next. he talked about the issue. here is what he had to say. >> clearly it is an honor. when i first came, it was a real interesting moment. because i never thought i would be here. i never thought i would do anything like this.

and there have not been that the people in the history of our country who have had a chance to serve in the house. so, i remember that first day. very special. >> can you share some recollections? >> a lot of people and a lot of kids. my two daughters were with me. almost 19 years ago. >> do you still remember putting your hand on the bible and taking the oath? >> yes. >> what is that experience like? >> well, it was the motion. it is emotional now even thinking about it. >> why is that? >> standing there with my two girls and raising your hand. >> you have had a chance to do with a number of times cents. did you still have the same feeling? >> well, the first time was certainly special but even now it is a very important moment. host: that was the presumptive

speaker of the house john boehner talking actually on some timber 30 about this idea of taking over. we did an interview with him. you can watch the whole thing on our website, c-span.org. let me show you what john boehner had to say, leader of the republican party, last week, on this issue. >> you know, my favorite place in the capital would be the porch on the west side of the capital outside the speaker's office. it just provides a gorgeous view right down the mall. and you get to see all of the government's standing on that porch. >> what do you expect from this new congress, what level of transparency? baltimore, maryland. derek, independent line. caller: good morning. thank you for having me. i don't know what to expect. the house is in republican hands, and the democrats have control of the senate.

unfortunately, i think we will see more of the same but just intensified. the fights will just the way worse. instead of concentrating on what we need to. obama set up the debt commission and it came up with a rough draft last week and nobody talked about any proposals to seriously reduce our deficits. so, i think it will be more of the same. host: you say you think there will be more fights. negotiations over tax cuts and continuing resolutions over budget, etc. do you want to see those negotiations, or fight, as a seventh, out in public or do you want to see conference committees or leadership talks, etc.? caller: i would rather see them out in public because that way the public would be more

engaged and they can express their views a little better. i am tired of the back room. i don't want any leadership committees. i don't want them huddling behind office doors. i would love for them to be out in public. host: would you watch? that is the question. would you watch? would you watch is there -- if you were allowed to see president obama's meeting this week with republicans and democrats on what to do next on the bush era tax cut, if we were able to show you that meeting, would you watch? caller: i most certainly would. i really would. host: let's go to alexandria, virginia, republican might help me with your name. the win, caller. caller: i want to agree with the last caller about the lack of transparency. right now, everything is all back room deals. in the american people really have no idea what is going on in congress. i think it should be more transparent.

they should actually have that to a meeting between the president and the conrences. we need to know who is getting money from home. we need to audit the federal reserve. we need to change the campaign finance laws. i'd just think there are some and if things that need to be changed to make democracy work. host: what would you like to see? caller: i would like to see it mainly the things i just named. who is paying who, where is the money coming from, i want to know what they are talking about, who is making backroom deals. health care reform, and all of that. who is making decisions and who is gaining from them as well. host: are you interested in reading legislative bills if they were posted, and should there be 72 hours or maybe a week for the public to read them? caller: i think president obama

said it would be at least 72 hours or a week when he was elected. i don't think it happened. all of the amendments are added at the last minute. they also need to be given a 72- hour window. i can't say i would read every single bill. some are thousands of pages. but i would read the bills that are relevant. for example, health care. i also want to know who wrote these bills. for example -- i would want to read the bill and know who wrote the bill. host: linda, democratic line. caller: good morning. really see the same thing we saw the last eight years. it is amazing that we only use 3% of the brain and over the last eight years it has come through loud and clear. i expect for them to continue to humiliate the president might have done. i expect nothing to get done the

way in the last two years because their main mission is to bring the president down. i expect the attack he tactics. host: we got your point. , tuesday on point, what we're talk about a thomas transparency, what do you want to see either visually on cameras, bills online. what parts of the government process would you pay attention to? we ask the person in charge of the republican leadership transition efforts and a house, he was an are newsmakers at and we asked about this issue of transparency and here is what he had to say. >> there are things to open the process. my degree in journalism from the university of oregon. i was in radio for 22 years. i believe the best tonic for government is openness. and it is the people's work. the rules committee has been wired for cameras for years but they were not allowed to be

installed. already david dreier, who will be the world's committee chairman, i believe, asking the architect to get the cameras in there. i think there are things we can do to open up the process and cut the cost. that -- host: that was congressman greg walden. what level of transparency do you want? julie, independent. in michigan. good morning. go ahead, julie. doing well. caller: good. i would like to say that while the issue of transparency is critical. -- what people said in the election was is it is not just an issue of transparency but an issue for responsiveness. there is a cynical sense out there -- and you heard it in some of the other callers, we can watch everything but if we don't have access, then the people who are being watched the don't really care how what they do impacts us.

my husband works in the state of nebraska because he lost his job, and ordered to be our family is 10 hours away from us and we see him once a month. this is the kind of stuff i don't think really is on the front burner on the minds of the folks we will be watching. i am totally in favor of transparency and i applaud c- span because you are one of the few places, for those of us to work during the day, we can see this stuff because we don't stay home all day and watch tv. we have to be out there trying to support our families. i appreciate the fact that i can come home at night and catch up. host: how you catch up, julie? i go online and i watch the feeds -- i just finished the alliance for health corp. -- health reform discussion. i advise seniors on their part d coverage, and today is the

first day open enrollment starts. it is critical not only for my clients but what i do, the kind of decisions that are made. i think there are tons of ways people out there who are employed and can sit at home all day can come back and access portions of washington lies -- life that impacts how they will send their children to college or what the future may hold for them specifically in. it is critical that we have ways to access this, including the committees. and we should be able to have a feed with a computer so we can select activities of our particular congressperson and have that come up as deeds -- what did they do today? if each particular congressperson was aware of that kind of scrutiny they would be less apt to be exposed to

lobbyists because that exposure would be revealed. host: do you have any concerns, as others do, that lawmakers would just play to the cameras? caller: there is always a sense where people play to the cameras. but the more cameras there are the last time there is to say other than what you want the world to know you said. eventually, of course, there is a sense you are going to be held accountable for what you say in one room when you walk into the next. i think that is what we have to do out in the real world. i can't say one thing to my boss and turnaround and say something different to a client or co- worker. that is what grownups do. we have an issue both in the private sector and governments of character. but this is not politics versus

capitalism. it is an issue of character no matter where someone is. if they are hypocritical or they have evil or selfish intends, it is going to be eventually revealed and it has to be revealed and our elected representatives, too. host: julie, independent calling. here is the front page of " politico" this morning about new members, freshman orientation. part of their weak and balls of voting on leadership. well the class of 2010 resist the ways of washington, is the article.

we have a shot, showing the outside of that hotel in washington. a few blocks away from where we are on capitol hill, where a lot of new members are staying. we were not allowed to go inside the motel because of security. if you go back to the article, talking a little bit more about what they are calling the wining and dining treatment, it says that those canvasback's were filled with thick manuals on congressional ethics and guides to life as house members.

we are talking about what you expect from the new members, from those who were reelected as far as transparency. chattanooga, tennessee. democratic line. go ahead. caller: it is payback time. all of these years of tax cuts and stuff like this, and carrying jobs overseas -- because everybody was not getting health care, that is why they did it number one is the of unemployment but employment was supposed to be number one. we need to get this deficit down and stuff, so it's payback time. host: we will move to kim on the republican line in illinois. i think you are here. is that kim in huntley, illinois? all right. we will figureut the phone

lines and let me get back to you in just a second. this is "of finance of times" this morning. fedders likely to fly in the lame-duck period. it did give offenders are likely to fly in the lame-duck period. by the way, and that issued the "the washington post" editorial called for action now on that.

richmond, virginia. don on the independent line. caller: thank you for taking my call. i think we all like year would like to see just what we are talking about. i think there are lots of deals that go on that kind of behind- the-scenes. but i would be interested to hear people's comments on how does a new member of congress get into positions of some power without telling what i would consider the party line. i will be curious about the response. host: what do you think about that? we lost him. judy, democratic line. poured orange, florida. you are next. caller: thank you for taking my call.

there is one thing i have been looking at and considering, and i have met -- haven't heard anyone suggesting it, why don't we have transparency on the legislators and how they are investing their funds, in what countries? there could be a conflict of interest for what we need here in our country. host: fresno, california. marco, independent line. how much transparency you want from this new congress? caller: i would just like to see more facebook, twitter things. facebook was not an elected official but she went to the facebook page, john mccain and even harry reid taking to twitter. i would like to see that transparency, here is what i am voting for. where they are uncertain issues. that is transparent to me. host: david, independent line in

oklahoma city. good morning. caller: yes. about this transparency. you have a guy that raised $8 million and did not even show up in his own district to run for office? what is he doing but the $8 million. you've got these groups, they don't have to even say where they got their money from. and they are moving in and they can spend it -- unlimited funds electing people. how do you elect the people who represent the people? what is this guy doing the $8 million, how is he spending it? it did just disgusts me what is going on in washington. host: the issue of what to do next on the bush era tax cut is likely to come up. a president obama will be meeting with democrats and republicans to talk about the issue. here is the headline in "the new york times." president obama returns, facing unpredictable congress and lame

duck session. the leader of the senate was in one of the morning shows and here is what he had to say. >> would you be willing to go along with the temporarily extending the upper income tax cut if the republicans would then go along with extended the tax cuts for the people in the lower brackets? then i think there is a compromise in the making. democrats originally -- >> i think there is a compromise and the making. the democrats were calling for those getting the low $250,000 and the republicans everyone. what about moving into a million dollars? i say they should not get it for three reasons. they are the only group whose income substantially have gone up in an last decade. middle-class incomes have declined. second, there are not likely to spend it. they have plenty of money anyway. a third, we have a big deficit problem. we have a jobs problem. better to put the money into deficit reduction, creating

jobs, then to give it to the millionaires and billionaires. i think that is a good compromise. i heard senator mcconnell talk about small business. but under his plan, things like warren buffett, bill gates, the head of exxonmobil, would get a tax break. they are not small businesses and the plan i would propose what income is virtually all small-business is. host: a little bit more on what charles schumer would like to do. this is "the new york times." on the other side of the aisle, jim demint, republican from south carolina, who has been very critical of spending also addressed this issue of tax cuts, and here is what he had to say. >> would you accept a temporary

extension of all of the bush tax cuts for the middle-class as well as those making more than $250,000 a year? >> good morning, chris. we need to remind everyone that we are not talking about cutting taxes, we are talking about keeping current tax rates of the same. i now think there is anything ways to negotiate on taxes, particularly on small businesses. i hope we can get a permanent extension but the president wants to compromise on a two- year or three-year -- three-year extension, which is important is that business is another tax ras over the next year so they can plan growth and to add people. if we keep things in a state of flux, i am afraid we will continue to of the jobs problem. >> two or three year extension, you would be on board for? >> and that is all we can get out of the president -- and he is the president. we will work with him on that. but i hope he will not come back on the idea that we will raise taxes on 750,000 small

businesses, as he has been talking about. if he can work on our side of a ledger think we could work together. host: on that issue, "the washington times" frontpage, liberals product obama to show muscle in the tax cut battle. back to your phone calls about transparency. how can the congress be more transparent? we will go to rich on the democratic line in syracuse, new york. caller: good morning. i was thinking that any tim a congressional person meets with a lobbyist it should be either recorded were videotaped and maybe c-span could rifled through that and and some of the interesting ones. host: would you watch that? gamma come -- caller: especially if it is interesting, if they are using

money to try to influence them. i don't know. host: ok. all right. betty is a democrat from mobile, alabama. you are on the air. caller: yes, ma'am. i really don't think there is gone to be anything done in congress. there is too much of a power struggle on who is going to do this and that and they are not interested it didn't what is good for the people. pretending they are interested but they are not. host: what could they do to change your mind? caller: i think make -- if they get money out of politicians and quit putting our government up for sale to the highest bidder, we might actually get someone in their that might help do something good for the country. host: an update on the senate race in alaska this morning. politico -- big monday for

murkowski and miller. but the vast majority of right -- write-ins counted -- that is "the politico" story of this morning on the alaska senate race.

republican line. how can they be more transparent? caller: good morning. i would like more transparency from the white house, for one thing. host: we are listening. caller: ok. i'm not hearing. thank you, i'm sorry. good morning. i would like to go back to obama and his transparency from the white house and what happened in the meetings with all of these corporate executives and what deals were made. and in regard congress, i would like to see the rules committee opened up. i would like to see all the committees opendoc. i watch c-span a lot. frankly, there have been an awful lot reruns like nothing is going on in washington, d.c.,

right now. i can't believe nothing is happening on the republican side or even on the tea party side. everything has been just constant reruns of the same thing on c-span. like to see.at i'd as far as i am concerned, they should open up the calendars of the congressman, white house, and everyone else as long as it doesn't endanger anyone. that's about it. host: updates on a story. at afghan president saying he wants a limited role of u.s. military and afghanistan. here is "the washington post." we are talking about transparency in congress.

democrat line. caller: i would like to thank c- span for your contribution to transparency. it is really wonderful. i would like to agree with the caller earlier saying this is a matter of character. i would like to go back to when nixon got caught and he had to say i'm not a thief. and by the time reagan was in -- you are not a thief. one thing i witnessed myself is i was trying to deliver petitions for a political group to difference -- some constituents, to their representatives, and i had a stack of petitions the size of maybe a stacked -- stack of xerox paper. not that many petitions. and our group was stopped, and at the same time lobbyists were going in with suitcases filled with all sorts of propaganda. that really should change.

host: that was any in silver spring, maryland. democratic line. we showed you the outside of lenfant plaza hotel in washington when new members are studying this morning. you can see it there. some of them are coming out and gathering to get on buses. they began freshman orientation later this morning. that is where most of them are staying. that is a few blocks away from capitol hill, where we are. you can see staffers, members, police, all outside l'enfant plaza hotel. we will continue to dig in there and show you some action if we see some this morning. but we are covering a lot here this week. the house and senate return. they take up legislative business beginning this afternoon. there are leadership of votes. these new members will vote on who will represent them. for democrats and republicans, it is wednesday.

the president meets with the democrats and republicans over tax cuts. go to c-span.org." -- go to c-span.org for our coverage. caller: one thing, you need to be more transparent about this tax cut, they talked about for the rich. i am a republican. i have had a small business. somebody has $250,000 income off of a small business, i think giving a tax break on that would prohibit them from reinvesting so they can appreciate more equipment -- it would be a negative. host: how closely are you following this whole tax cut debate? caller: pretty close. we had a business prior to the collapse of the economy and looking for ways to get back into the business so i watch it very close. but i know from my experience

that as long as you have equipment to depreciate, your taxes go down. if you give these people a cut for not doing anything i don't think it would be a positive for the economy. i just don't. i just don't agree, because i know how it works. i would like to say one thing. that is the first thing i ever saw mr. schumer say that i actually agree with. host: on the issue of transparency, our question for all of you this morning. part of the conversation is a letter c-span has written last week to john boehner, presumptive speaker of the house. it is a follow-up of the letter we sent to other income big speakers. nancy pelosi, newt gingrich as well. you can find this letter on our web site if you go to c-

span.org. and you can find our past letters as well what we write to his bed in -- in this spirit we renew a request we made to speaker gingrich and pelosi to allow house floor proceedings to also be covered by c-span cameras. we do not propose to change the current house reporting is -- recording system. the request is for small robotic operated cameras in the house chamber, mixing in to production. shots would allow us to produce a second feed of house floor debates that is a journalistic product. as the only network that uses this daily feed c-span proposes to take the lead on the project and assume the cost of installation and operation. we would make this feed widely available on the web, archiving on c-span's online video library and string it live on our website. this is a letter signed by brian lamb, written sued john boehner

and a copy was sent to nancy pelosi, steny lawyer, eric cantor, and greg walden, chairing the transition team. the next zero call goes to florida on the democratic line. we are talking about transparency. if caller: first of all, that is an excellent letter you all are sending. i hope they respond to it. my suggestion for transparency is to do the same thing we did in florida. we enacted the sunshine act. that sunshine act requires when two or more officials made and speak about any government business, that they have to be out and opened. it has to be recorded. it works very well in florida. they should consider it in washington.

host: we will go back to the l'enfant plaza hotel. busy. people are starting to gather and coming out with books and other pamphlets as they head to capitol hill. freshman orientation against around 9:00 a.m.. there will be meeting in the capital of visitors center, the new section of congress. this hotel is a few blocks from where we are here, as new members of congress come to washington for the first time to meet with each other and to talk about the road ahead and vote for their leaders as well. north carolina. democratic line. -- republican line. go ahead. caller: i thought i -- host: can hear you. sorry about that. if you just told maybe we will try to come back to you. don, democratic line, toms

river, new jersey. caller: i would like to see the president and also the congress be more transparent. the reason for that is, i am a senior citizen. and they knocked down twice our cost of living increase. among or so ago the president spoke that he was going to do something, try to get $250 passed through congress, whatever, to give seniors a break because picture they are not getting the money. now i hear nothing about it. it is like dead. nothing in the press, nothing on television any more. it is the middle of november. inconsistency. the president says stuff, and he doesn't follow through. host: what do you want done? caller: i think it should be passed at all the seniors get the two injured and $50. we need it. they say the cost of living didn't go up. my food went up. utilities went up.

medical expenses, everything else. item 68 years old and i am on disability. i look forward to that cost of living increase. this is the second time they knocked it down. he said he is going to try to get everybody to read and 50 -- congress has to probably pass it. but he has not said anything about it. host: that issue is one the newspapers as saying might come up in this lame duck session, as well as extending unemployment benefits. the deadline is november 30. fort wayne, indiana. victor on the independent line. caller: the best thing they can do is tell on the old congress that they are not getting along and agreeing and make it public. make it go nationwide. host: are you still there?

finish your thought. caller: that was all i had. i just want to make sure they would tell on the old congress because acting that is going to be the problem. host: waterbury, connecticut. george and the democratic line. caller: everybody figured it out but nobody wants to do anything. the republicans, they struck out three times. mr. bush couldn't even get through. host: ok. anything else? caller: people have to remember, mr. obama didn't do it. he is trying to straighten it out. according to republicans, party of no, they want to do us all in. they want to take my social security away. host: we have been showing you pictures of l'enfant plaza and at little activity outside the hotel. we learned a fire alarm was set off and that could explain why

you are seeing the strains of people leaving the hotel. we will try to keep you updated. philadelphia, rowland, independent line. how can the new congress be more transparent? caller: and i live? host: you are, go ahead. remember to turn a television down, or else you get the feedback and it is a little confusing. editorials i would to show you. "the wall street journal" editorial as about gop posses spending test. we are going to talk about those issues with two members of congress coming up that 8:30

a.m., as senator michael lee, republican of utah, and hansen clarke, a new representative, democrat from michigan. scott, independent line. caller: good morning. i would say less power and less money. it takes a very special person to handle that type of situation. that would be my solution for our problems for transparency and corruption. host: here is "the new york post" this morning about charlie rangel's ethics hearing. here are some facts. it will be tried by members of the house committee on standards and official conduct. it will be divided evenly between republicans and

democrats. you need a majority, not a unanimous melt required to hold of the violations. it will be broadcast live on new york one and c-span 3 as well as our website, c-span.org. miami, florida, pj on the republican line. caller: the only way would be to make public everything and make sure that they show when they are getting together with lobbyists. to make public -- any small thing. that would be it. host: ok. virginia. a bill on the democratic line. what are your thoughts? bill, i think we lost the bill. let me show you the op-ed piece of this born-again -- this

morning written by defense secretary robert gates and secretary of state hillary rodham clinton. that is today's op-ed piece by hillary clinton and robert gates about the start treaty. it would issue that could come up in a lame duck. north carolina. allen, independent line. caller: thank you for taking my call. what i wanted to talk about is the arrogance of congressman like chuck schumer when he talked about he think it would

be better to give tax cuts to this person and that person but it wouldn't be good to give its to the millionaires. has he forgotten it is their money? it doesn't belong to the government. they act like it is their money and that they are doing you a favor by letting you keep your own money. it is not their money. it is our money that we work for. and they set up and spend trillions and trillions and trillions of dollars that they have no way to pay for on the craziest programs can ever imagine in your life. like there is an endless supply of money. it doesn't make any sense at all what is going on in washington. you talk about transparency. first, you have to do about the apathy of the american people. host: a little bit more from outside of the l'enfant plaza hotel. you can see the buses lined up. new members are voting on republican leaders and they will be meeting for freshman

orientation. you house and senate members, most of them staying at the hotel a few months -- blocks from capitol hill. las vegas, barber, democratic line. good morning. caller: good morning. i just know this when you are reading a little bit early about the freedom works and other people meeting with the tea party and the people that are coming into the transition team today, or this week, and i would like to see that put on c-span who they are meeting with each time that they come in to meet, especially the tea party people, like freedom works, we know they are the ones who give them the money to have this tea party, one of the groups. i would really like to see that. ta below we used to get c-span 1 and c-span2, and now i notice you have c-span 3. i would like for you to tell how

do we get these programs because i think my husband thinks i am and not just watching c-span. and as far as transparency is concerned, i think the more that we can see on television, the better things would be. thank you. host: if you just call c-span, go to our website, c-span.org, and if you go to the "about" section, you'll learn about and there is also a "contact us goes good area and you can call and explain what you just explain to me. independent line. we are talking about the new congress and it being more transparent. what are you -- your thoughts? caller: i do not think they will be more transparent unless the media forces them to. they say they want the tax cuts for small business but they voted against a bill to help

small business. they say they are for a state's rights but they want to use but federal government to force states to let insurance companies keep insurance companies do business across state lines. they said they are against socialism but they are -- they want to help the farmers every year and tell them what to grow. why doesn't the media tell like it is? host: last fall call on this question this morning. as we continue this conversation about what is next for the lame- duck session and show you pictures outside the l'enfant plaza hotel in d.c., new members are staying there, we will be right back with a discussion about the agenda for this week in the coming weeks.

[captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] >> see what people are watching on the c-span video library. with most recent videos, most watched, and most shared. right on the home page. and click our special 2010 election analysis tab for our continuing coverage of the midterm elections. what you want and when you want. >> this week, the look at the future of smartphones.

it demands on the wireless spectrum and federal policy with qualcomm ceo paul jacobs. "of the communicators -- "the communicators." >> the studentscam documentary competition is in full swing. a washington, d.c., through my legs. your documentary should include more than one point of view as long -- and c-span programming. up load despite -- or 20 of for your chance at $5,000. $50,000 in total prize is. the competition is open to grades 6 through 12. for all the rules and how to upload your video, go to studentscam.org. >> "washington journal" continues. paul cain is with "the washington post". what is on the agenda?

guest: one thing that was not on the agenda was the fire alarm for freshman orientation. i am still waiting to hear exactly what happened. basically they are coming back now with a big, full plate of agenda. still deciding what to do about the bush era tax cuts. they have an unemployment insurance benefit expired. those are for people who had the limit, 12 months been the usual limit. those expire november 30. they might have to tackle that. they also have the jury may have to come up with something to fund the federal government. that could probably be handled the week after thanksgiving. but that is still a major issue. they can't figure out whether to fund it for a few months or just punted for an entire year. that is just the big issues. they're a lot of small ones underneath.

there also leadership elections that you talked about. an ethics trial for charlie rangel. and a couple of key internal party caucus of votes about things like earmarks, what to do about that, some committee chairmanships. there are just lots of big issues of taba in terms of taxes and spending and then just sort of politically underneath they really have to figure out what to do, but each of -- each of these caucuses. host: we were just talking about the issue of transparency. is this some been the public needs to watch and see and know about? guest: know. -- no. senate leadership election will be on tuesday. there is no suspense there. both the house, senate republicans and senate democrats reelecting their top leaders

without any challenge. on wednesday, the house does it. these are always done within their own caucuses, behind closed doors, several speeches are given, nominating speeches by a friend, mitch mcconnell, for instance, to reelected, will have john cornyn speaking on his behalf. those are never open to the public. the ballots themselves are then secret ballots, too. so, if it is a close race it has always been suspicions about different people who sort of promise you, sure, i will vote for you for minority leader and then under secret ballot they vote the other way. hearing push back about speaker nancy pelosi become a minority leader for democrats? guest: that is probably the biggest political issue this week we are going to see. there are a lot of rank and

file democrats that look at the losses, and they just think somebody -- in a sports metaphor way, they look at it as a and a sports team that performed that badly would fire their manager, probably their general manager, everybody would probably get canned. some of these guys are looking at these results saying we are going to reelect the same exact leadership team. they are kind of a little bit befuddled. but nobody has stepped up. nobody is challenging her right now. she is a very powerful figure. she always starts with a base of 30-35 votes from the california democratic delegation. it is easily the foundation makes getting to the majority much easier for her than anyone else. as of now, no. there is not a challenge. there is consternation, frustration.

host: on the republican side we know john boehner is likely to be the presumptive speaker. the front page of "buff -- "the christian science monitor pair caught a story about him leading the gop to a historic victory. a profile of him in the magazine and all of this week. but there has been discussion whether or not there should be a tea party candidate in the leadership ranks. where are they on that? guest: there is always a sort of -- there is always a question of whether or not there should be competition for the sake of competition or whether there should be, you know, either end of the caucuses want to be sort of ideologically pure, and both have somebody to vote for who is different. the reality is with boehner, he is in a very strong position right now within the republican

conference. if somebody ran as a tea party candidate for leader, they might get 10 or 50 votes. but they are going -- 10 of 15 votes but they will have 240 or so voting. he will be easily reelected. the big tea party issue, i think, is going to be earmarks debate within the senate republican conference. jim demint is pushing that. i think you can have a real internal battle. the battle lines are drawn between jim demint and mitch mcconnell. i think that is where sort of the conservative activist steve farr -- tea party folks will put the issue -- efforts and. it could be earmarked issue? guest: yes. there will be a motion by jim demint tomorrow in the republican organizing meeting. kind of like a nonbinding

resolution. the reality of it, what happens when -- you know, it might pass. it might -- might take 24 votes. they will have 46 people voting. if it passes, it is sort of unclear whether or not it is really binding because harry reid and senate democrats plan on continuing doing their marks. we may be in a weird situation in which senate democrats are the only four of the party caucuses that go with ear marks. you could have everybody in congress who secretly wants an earmarked for their home town go to their senate democrats saying can you do me a favor. just don't put my name on it. host: what do you expect from this meeting between the white house and democrats and republicans on the bush era tax cuts? guest: thursday the president was going to have both chambers leaderships, bipartisan

leadership, down to the white house, their first meeting since the mid terms two weeks ago. it is unclear right now what the white house wants to do, whether they want to draw out a confrontation a bit longer or if they want to settle on a deal. obama heads overseas thursday night. i think we will get a sense by thursday morning whether they are looking to get a quick deal for continued the in in and fighting. host: we will go to phone calls. ann on the republican line from oklahoma. caller: yes. i didn't think it had to be directly on that subject. you mentioned a few minutes ago about the treaty with russia. i don't know if you are familiar -- this is a brilliant man with an audience of millions. he said it to the senate and the

congress, spoke to them about a week or two ago and said be very careful of any treaties you sign. and this is extremely important. we don't have great confidence in the present making -- president making treaties. he gave away the tan russian spies. more popular but being popular in the world than safety -- more popular in the world than safety. host: that is an issue possibly with the lame-duck congress. they could bring this up. henry clinton, secretary of state -- hillary clinton, secretary of state, saying to act on this. guest: the numbers are different because it is a treaty. so it requires a two-thirds

majority in the senate. they need 67 votes. if they are going to get this passed, it is probably easier to do now while you still have a senate with 59 democrats, most of whom would presumably be for this. then you still have some of the older, retiring senators, republicans -- voinovich, judd gregg, who might be open to supporting this. they will be pretty close to having two-thirds. it is a big, massive, international arms treaty. the time it takes to handle that, as well as dealing with tax cuts, dealing with unemployment insurance benefits, and a few of the other things, including defense authorization bill which has the don't ask- don't tell issue, no one is sure if they have enough time to take

up of the start treaty and give it its full time it would require. it may get squeezed out just on the timeline. host: how long are they in session for? guest: they would like this to be in essentially two weeks. in now, break on friday, go home for thanksgiving, come back a week after thanksgiving and stay just one week. it is possible, if they do decide to take up the start treaty or defense authorization bill in the senate, it is possible we could stretch this out a little bit longer. they do not want to be here christmas eve the way they were last year at 7:00 a.m. casting votes on health care. ask- it includes a don't don't tell issue as well. guest: that is the big hang up right now. for almost 50 years, the defense bill, this is the policy bill

that outlined various policy prescriptions for the military. it is and always-pass bill. it usually passes with a huge bipartisan support. but it has the don't ask-don't tell banned in it might not -- lifting the ban right now. and that has created political problems. john mccain has not been supportive of that. it made it a very complicated issue. in addition, because it is such a big bill, it usually takes two weeks of time on the senate support to offer all the various amendments. again, time constructions are going to make that a dicey bill. host: jenny is a democrat from louisville, ky. caller: how are you today? host: doing well. caller: i have a couple of questions or comments, okay? first of all, i can understand congress, it takes them so long. they spend time arguing and it

takes them so long to try to make a decision on everything. i think until some of these things are worked out through the lame duck, i one more comment. they talk about -- everybody knows how much congress makes, okay? so i think they should do something to them, just like they are doing for the people who receive social security who worked all their life. i think they should either cut there. host: another caller called in previously and ask about those

checks to social security, $250. social security participants are not going to get a cost-of- living adjustment, and some are looking for that. could that come up in a lame duck? guest: anything that could be viewed by republicans, conservatives as a new spending program would be very difficult to get through. even a lot of the democrats who lost who still have to vote on the hill, i do not think they want their last bill to be a spending -- something that is ridiculed as a spending plan. that is one of the issues. how to stimulate the economy without driving up the deficit.

those are usually two things that tend to go hand in hand in regular times. if there is a downturn, congress has primed the pump, but many feel that there has been too much spending and they are driving up the debt. host: wisconsin. matt, independent line. caller: i hope republicans and democrats can come together and get the economy going, no matter what it takes. host: specifically, are you hoping for tax cuts? caller: probably. a little bit of both.

the middle class and the rich will be happy, but i do not know how they can do that. guest: the last two callers have addressed this issue about bipartisanship and comedy. mitch mcconnell and christopher dodd, coming from different perspectives, have both said the same thing. one of the things that drove up partisanship was that the margins were so big for democrats. the democrats began every piece of legislation thinking, they just need to get 60 votes in the senate. they just need to find that one, two republicans. republicans were not big operators with democrats. democrats will come back and say that is part of the problem.

but both mcconnell and dodd say that the mindset will be different. people will begin to work, knowing, democrats will know that they need sen republicans. the reality is, if you can get seven, you can probably get 17, 20. that might be pie in the sky in this era that we live in, but that is what we are hoping for. host: dennis in arkansas. good morning. caller: good morning. my question is, why every time

there is a spending cut or something else, it is the little guy who gets iran did? people are on social security. -- guy gets rear ended? these big banks, fannie mae, freddie mac, if they would take the money that is being wasted by the administration and put it back into social security, which was supposed to be a trust fund to start with until the government got a hold of it, we would not have a problem. this over $2 trillion health care bill needs to be repealed. host: were you following the headlines when the debt commission came out with their proposal to reduce the debt,

proposed raising the age and means testing for benefits? what did you think of that? caller: there was blood shooting out of my eyes. why is it always the little guy who is rear ended? host: we will leave it there. the issue of the deficit proposal. the report that we saw last week started the debate. the report from the full committee comes out december 1. is this congress going to act on that? guest: that is going to be a difficult issue for them. it will be such a broad, sweeping plan when they are

talking about 20 in with social security at all. it always creates tension on capitol hill. -- about toying with social security at all. the amount of time they want to devote to this puts a lot of pressure on them. i find it difficult to tackle something this sleeping. i think the deficit, tax cuts, tax hikes, they need to figure out that matrix in order to bring down spending. i do not think they are there yet. host: you will be on capitol hill to cover the charlie rangel ethics hearing. what do you expect? guest: it will be weird and crazy. charlie rangel is always

entertaining. he does not have a legal team, unless he got one over the weekend. he has not been in the courtroom as a lawyer since the mid- 1950s's, and he will be defending himself. my understanding is he will give an opening statement. if at any time chiang -- charlie rangel talks, it will be interesting. i do not know if he will be questioning witnesses, doing the full defense. we are not clear on how that will go, but he will be up there defending himself, really fighting for his legacy. he has been here for 40 years. he wants his chance to get his side of the case out.

the deck is pretty strongly stacked against him right now. he wants this viewed in context. these were minor infractions, not something major and criminal. host: could he be impeached? do they not go to that level? guest: congressman gene green told me and a couple of reporters in july and that their recommendation was something called a reprimand. it is a lower level of punishment that only requires the full house to vote and say yes, he has been reprimanded. he would still be able to vote in congress, he would still be able to collect his pension when he resigns, whenever that is, but he does not want to accept that rebuke.

he does not want to accept anything that makes him look corrupt. host: what do you know about the prosecution? guest: it will be made up of staff lawyers who have done the real nuts and bolts in the investigation. blake chisholm is the staff director of the house committee. he will basically be the lead prosecutor. host: the hearing begins at 9:00 a.m. this morning. paul kane, will this go hours, days? guest: we think it will go a couple of days. the house ethics committee operates under the ally of secrecy. this is a case that deals with

home in the dominican republic, 12 years of financial disclosure forms and how they were not filed properly, assets that were not disclosed. ever issues about fundraising for the city college of new york and a wind that they were going to name for charlie rangel. this discussion could take a few days. then the committee will go into deliberations and go through each of the 13 counts against him and vote on him. if they found him -- find him guilty of the violations, then it goes to the full ethics committee, which has to figure out the sanction. host: phone call from bill. tidewater, virginia.

caller: thank you for taking my call. i would like to comment on bipartisanship. the president needs to understand -- just look at the coverage from the veterans day where they were accusing him of being awol while he was on business with the country. talking about this health care bill, it is a health care insurance company bill. a friend of mine went to the hospital. she was having symptoms of a stroke. but she was conscious. they sat her down in the admissions room and a guarded asking her questions about health insurance, who would be paying for her stay. her insurance card was in her car.

her friend had to run out to the car to get that stuff. in the meantime, she passes out on the floor. that was the only way that they would help her. host: trying to repeal health care. when do you expect that to come up? guest: republicans have decided they would like to build the case for health care repeal. they do not want to rush a bill to the floor in early january and have this vote. the phrase that john boehner used was "lay the foundation, build the framework" for this. it could take several months. they want to move these things through committee.

you could have several committees considering it. you could be looking at deep in the spring time before they bring this up. host: a tweet -- guest: i think the health care plan that congress gets will stay intact. we have not heard a lot from speaker to be boehner. host: next phone call. brenda in california. caller: i have been a democrat my whole life. i went to bat for president obama. he went on to make comments on mexican radio that american

citizens were their enemy. i talked to a lot of seniors across the country like myself who felt the same way, it was the american citizen that put hiin office. feels becomes -- if he stil that strongly about it, he should go to mexico and the the president. host: next phone call. caller: regarding the congressional agenda, there are a couple of things that must happen. they must pass the bush tax cuts. one of the things in my background, things that i have heard on c-span, the rich are getting richer, the poor are getting poorer. this is also happening in england. i am republican. i tend to want tax cuts too good

to everybody but there is a feeling in the back of my mind -- what is going on here? i have heard people comment, particularly on the recommendations of the new budget report committee, that it is very much in favor of the rich. that is one thing in the back of my mind. guest: i spoke to chuck schumer after the election and asked him about the downfall of the democrats. he said that they lost touch with the middle class. in such tough economic times, they were pushing an agenda that was helping 30 million uninsured people, clean energy issues over

here. he felt they did not have a broad enough agenda that was covering everybody, at least not the middle class. his line was, in times like this, people will choose no government over a government that will help somebody else. some of the other callers have hit on this theme, the government is helping this person, that person, and not themselves. that is what the republicans will be trying to do. finding an agenda that cuts across the entire middle class, base, so they do not feel like they are giving in to a specific interest group.

host: patricia from cleveland. good morning. caller: good morning. i want to talk about the economy. the president only had two years to get the economy back up and going. infrastructure would be a great thing. second, everyone in washington, don't they know that some people need insurance? they have taken away insurance. republicans only want to see democrats fail. host: we are going to leave it there. >guest: infrastructure issues. we have covered shorts and a year, gov. bloomberg, and others who are retiring but they have a group together that is pushing infrastructure. they believe we can cut infrastructure pretty quickly if

the government spent money on bridges, highways, rail. rendell told me he wants a to under $50 a year program -- that that is what he believes obama and the democrats coulshould pu. this is part of what they're trying to get through, between stimulating the economy and getting people back to work, but doing it in a way where it does not send the deficit soaring. infrastructure is one of those key areas that obama has talked about. he has talked about creating an infrastructure bank. host: lafayette, louisiana. you are next. caller: you have a marvelous program. keep up the good work. there was a woman who called

ahead of me and asked the very question that i wanted to. all this cutting that congress wants to do from people who need help, why is john boehner going to get a raise when he gets to office? will all the other members of congress give themselves a raise while they cut the pay of the regular people? guest: i had not thought about that, but he does get a raise the way the salaries are structured. the speaker of the house is the person in congress. it is close to $230,000. what no one has asked him about this, whether he will take the raise or not. we do not have any formal details yet, but one thing he

could be proposing is slashing the costs for each committee. we will see how big of a cut he proposes. there are some longtime staff who are concerned about this. he feels that is one thing they can do to sho that they are taking this seriously and shrinking their budget. host: omaha, nebraska. linda. caller: this is a problem that is a couple of years in congress where everything is unfounded, it involves the 100% disabled veteran.

because of that, the of the day awarded an amount for this. insurance premiums have all been refunded over those 30 years and taxed to me at a single rate. the court ruled for two different types of entitlements, that they cannot offset each other. the three generals wives who were all over 55, they had their insurance pmium taking care of, so now they have two different entitlements. but now they expect me to remarry because of the over 55 rule to get the insurance premium that the nearly every month. host: do you have a question?

caller: what is the difference between being underfunded and legally right to pay? the court ruled something legal but they are using the unfunded theory. guest: i cannot speak directly to her case. the biggest issue, in terms of unfunded that we will see in the weeks ahead is the unfunded mandate that so frequently is the bane of many governors where congress passes something and creates a new program but basically forces states to pay a large share. lamar alexander of tennessee is offering a resolution tomorrow in the senate meeting, and as official policy, republicans would not pay for any unfunded

mandates. there is a long way to go before we can see it in practice but it is an issue that republicans are bringing up. host: dairy in michigan. you are on the air. caller: i have a question on social security. i understand something like $800,000 a year and above you do not need to pay social security taxes, is that correct? host: i think we lost him. sioux city, iowa. caller: i am a little bit perturbed that congress gets a raise.

big businesses get a raise. why are you declining our social security increases when we have paid into it for so many years? host: it sounds like this could be a big issue for seniors who came out to vote for a republican. if republicans vote no on this, it could come back to haunt them. guest: it is a real concern. the callers are definitely showing that. i do not know that democrats have the will right now to push something like that, but it could create a real backlash among low-income elderly, back

to a democratic side. it will be something we have to watch. host: paul kane is in washington to cover the charlie rangel ethics hearing. we will also be covering the hearing on c-span 3 and c-span radio. coming up next, we give you the opportunity to speak to two new members of congress. mike lee of utah is here. hansen clarke, a democrat of michigan, he will also be here with us after that. >> the co-chairman of the president's deficit commission says if congress has toace up to red ink problems that threaten america's propefuture. he and anne linton said

recommended sharp spending cuts because, in his words, the path that we are on is unsustainable. he proposes raising the social security retirement age to reduce the deficit. "the financial times" reports said a group of economists have written an open letter to ben bernanke, asking him to reconsider and discontinued the fed's plan $600 billion asset purchase. the letter was written by a republican-minded economists. the letter will be posted this week as an advertisement in "the new york times." >> the c-span that works.

we provide coverage of public affairs, nonfiction books, and american history. it is all live and online and on social networking websites. it is washington your way. the c-span network. >> this year's studentcam documentary competition is in full swing. this year's theme is washington, d.c. through my lens. upload your video before january 20 for your chance to win the grand prize of $5,000. the competition is open to middle and high school students grades 6-12.

host: we want to welcome to the washington journal table senator elect mike lee of utah, here for your first week in washington. there is of vote that will be happening with the caucus to more on the republican side. that is over earmarks. do you believe in a moratorium? guest: yes, and i plan to vote for one tomorrow. host: mitch mcconnell has said that it will not save a lot of money and it is a constitutional issue. the power of the purse strings lies with congress. gues i do not dispute congress has the power of the purse. that is not what this is about.

this is about the need for meaningful reform. the earmark process has been abused. it is a small percentage of the national budget. we are talking about less than half percent of 1% of the total budget. but when both are traded and bought, as we saw with the cornhuskers kickback, the louisiana purchase, it needs to disparities in government by divvying up little treats that can be passed out to states but members of congress. host: how will you be voting on this week's proposals? guest: i intend to support the existing leadership. we may not agree with everything but our core principles are intact. host: so you would not like to

see somebody like jim demint? guest: i would support speaker mcconnell. i do not believe that we need new leadership. host: an issue that republicans from the previous congress are likely to take up in this lame duck, and the debate whether you pass and on the bus bill for one year to keep the government running, or should they, in your opinion, keep the government running for two months until members like yourself and vote on this budget and do what you ran on, which is tackle the spending? guest: i would like to see a short-term continuing resolution that could take us further down the road. host: what would you like to see

in the budget, if that is the case? guest: we need a balanced budget. we are spending money that has not yet been turned. -- earned. it is a form of taxation without representation. host: you have talked already about a balanced budget initiative. who are you talking to, as far as senate leaders, are you talking to democrats, republicans? guest: we have proposed language in a balanced budget amendment that would comprise the text of an amendment to the constitution. i have already spoken to a few of the incoming freshmen about this, and i continue to talk to others about this.

we got within one vote in the senate in 1995 of passing a balanced budget amendment. it is something to take up again. 2011, we will see this through. host: what are you hearing from your colleagues? guest: so far, i am here support from the incoming freshmen. i have not spoken to leadership yet, but i believe they will be supportive. host: committee assignments. which committees would you like to sit on? guest: energy and natural resources would be a good one. my state has a lot of resources available. other committees and i would be available for -- interested in would-be banking, commerce, judiciary, which would be unlikely because my senior all this serves on that one.

host: do you think there should be incoming freshmen like yourself, talking about earmarks, tackling spending, should you be on the financial committee to keep them in check? that is the editorial and "the wall street journal." guest: certainly, we need to move toward a balanced budget. at would be an improper first step. host: that would not necessarily be something that you push for with leadership? guest: is something that we can talk about. host: mike lee is our guest. we will get to your phone calls in a minute. republicans, 202-737-0001. democrats, 202-737-0002. independents, 202-628-0205. we also have a twitter page. if you want to send in your itter, s, go to twt

@cspanwj. do you have an account? guest: my campaign did. i think we will continue to use it. host: the bush tax cuts are going to resurface this week. where are you on that? caller: i think we need to preserve them. -- guest: i think we need to preserve them. host: jim demint supporting your campaign. he said over the weekend perhaps there is room to compromise on this issue and not make the permit for everybody. guest: if you are thirsty and someone offers you a partial's of water, you are probably going to take it. a temporary extension is better than none at all.

host: grove city, pennsylvania. go ahead. caller: i had a question about social security. they say that social security is going broke. why not give a cost-of-living raise to those of us that are under even $50,000? why could they not give those people the cost of living instead of everybody? host: where are you on this issue of possibly giving seniors on social security another $250 check. is that a good idea? guest: eventually, it has to happen. it could this coming year. long term we need to look at whether we need to reindex based

on inflation or cost of living. in the long run, we have to look at changes to make social security more sustainable. host: i am sure you saw the proposal from the chairman in the deficit committee. what are your reactions to what they propose? guest: i would like to see a slightly more aggressive proposal, one that would balance the budget instead of simply reducing deficit spending by $4 trillion over the next decade. host: do you believe what they proposed could pass? guest: anything that moves us in that direction is a good thing. host: texas. don, you are on the air.

caller: you say you want to balance the budget but you want to give the rich a tax cut. how can you do both? guest: when we look at past budgets, revenues that have been brought in, we moved our budget back to a 2004 base. that would send a signal to the economy where we could ramp up to revenue levels equal to 2006. if we simply did that, we could balance the budget and we would be able to cover the increase we have incurred over the last few years. we would still be able to keep social security move forward.

above all, we need to get to the point where having a out budget as a requirement. we need to force congress to do the work so that we can get there. it is time to stop borrowing from our unborn children and grandchildren. host: mike lee is our guest. he won his race with 61% of the vote. dallas, texas. john. independent line. caller: thank you for taking my call. i have a question on the psychology of the economy. i think there is a trend where our liberal or democratic president's win elections. they come in and tell people they will -- it will --

redistribute wealth, and therefore, they take the money off of the economic poker table and put it under the mattress. this happened when carter was elected. it did not happen so much with bill clinton. he was basically a pro-corp president. i wanted your take on this. obama was not that at the call when he blamed it all on bush. it could be the psychology of the economy that is at detriment. guest: you raise a valid point. franklin roosevelt referred to this. those with capital power had reason to invest. they had reason to create wealth

and jobs. they decided to withhold funds and not invest and create jobs because there is so much uncertainty about what will happen with their money. the american dream is built upon the idea that we want to encourage rather than punish. those people who have money to invest, if we promised them that if they invest, they can benefit from that -- that is what creates wealth and jobs. it has been said recently that there is as much as $2 trillion out there that is being held, not being invested, money that could be creating jobs if we had a tax system that was not scaring people from investing. for that and other reasons, i think we need to secure and

extend the bush tax cuts. i would repeal a obamacare in its entirety. they are, as fdr would say, creating a capital strain. host: what are you hearing about how the senate works on the repealing of health care? how do republicans want to go about doing that? guest: if we were to repeal health care in its entirety, we would expect the president to veto it. we are not going to get a super majority in both houses to override that veto. but what we could do is pass a budget that does not fund the implementation of obamacare, the promulgation of all of these regulations. host: gene in michigan. go ahead.

caller: to help the deficit, why don't all elected officials cut their payments by 20% and reduce their benefits? maybe others would be willing to give something, too. guest: we will be looking at across the board cuts in many areas. that could mean salary cuts for individuals. it could also mean a halt in new hires. one way or another, we need to look at across the board cuts. host: fort stewart georgia. allen, democratic line. caller: i have a question about the health care system.

everybody pays into a system. everyone in the military pays into the system and everyone is covered. how come we do not implement this into the civilian population where everybody could get basic health care insurance? if not, people who go to the emergency room every day who do not have health care insurance, who is paying for that? we are. if they do not have insurance, they could to the emergency room, they are treated, but it falls on the american people. guest: we definitely need health care reform. i would like that to be done at the state level, not federal level. it is the state that licenses

doctors and nurses, hospitals and clinics. it is the states that regulates health insurance policies. it is the state that the government's medical malpractice suits. it interrupts the accountability of the practice when you inject the federal government. we have tremendous diversity among the 50 states, their geography, socio-economic trends that affect the consumption of health care. some states, such as my state of utah, the annual per person average expenditure on health care is around $3,800 a year. here in the district of columbia, it is over 8000. so you have a tremendous disparity over what it costs to cover some one. each state has its own approach based on the composition and geography, other factors that

are driving market forces in that state. it ought to be the state that decides issues like this, for example, what you are describing, health exchanges. interestingly enough, obama wants to set up these exchanges and i think it makes more sense for the states to set them up on their own. host: this person tweets in regarding the bush tax cuts. in regards to adding to the deficit, are you concerned about that? guest: absolutely. i am concerned about anything that would deepen the deficit. if we preserve the bush tax cuts, we could balance the

budget. that is necessary. it is important to emphasize, whenever we increase taxes on any segment of the population, especially those in a position to invest, we are discouraging the creation of jobs. this would perhaps be the biggest tax increase in history. we could not proceed without that with a clear understanding that we would be killing jobs. host: president clinton, -- if the bush tax cuts expired, they would go back to where he had them. they were able to balance the budget with republicans. why not go back to the clinton- era tax rates? guest: to have a massive tax increase at a time like this would kill our economy.

we cannot afford to do that. host: lake placid, independent line. go ahead. caller: i think what we are seeing here is a grass-roots movement that we had in the last election. it is more of a transfer of power from the career politicians back to the people. we are tired of congress running up a huge debt and not fixing the problems. we are sick and tired of high unemployment, health care that is going out of sight, programs that do not work. the person we had on earlier from "washington post" and a lot of the journalists that i listen

to, they miss the picture completely. this is not about republicans or democrats. this is about the people taking control of their destiny. guest: i could not agree more. grass-roots movement, that some have called the tea party, are based on american principles. the idea that the federal government has limited powers. it is supposed to focus on a few basic responsibilities that are distinctively national in character -- defense, immigration, trade with foreign nations. if you get outside of those powers, you have a strong presumption that they are up to the states.

congress has suggested that it is all powerful. that there is no problem they cannot solve. we need to get away from that because that is what has led us to where we are. within a year's time, we will be approaching $15 trillion. it is unfair that an infant born today has a share of our national debt, a $50,000 bill. that is wrong. host: mike lee clerked for samuel alito before coming to washington. then he clerked for supreme

court justice alito. why did you come to washington? guest: i learned a lot when i clerked from the justice alito. growing up, i learned that a lot of the problems that we have argued to the failure of congress. the fact that those are not always enforced by the court does not mean that members of congress should restrain their own power. when they are looking at a proposal that does something extraordinary, for example, telling americans who their doctor is, purchase an insurance policy -- we have to make sure that we can sustain it. host: talk about where you grew

up. guest: i was born in arizona, i grew up in the utah. my father was an assistant attorney general in the ford administration. from 1981 to 1986, we moved back here in washington when my father work for the solicitor general. then i moved back to utah and went to law school at brigham young university. host: i read that you went to school with harry reid's kids. guest: that is right. strom thurmond's as well. host: have you met harry reid? guest: yes, absolutely. we have swung in their pool.

some of the young politician that i knew -- i kept my political teeth in their house -- but our families are friends. host: your parents were friends? guest: yes. host: next phone call. caller: senator elect lee, congratulations. i have a couple of questions for you. replaced the bush tax cuts with extending the current unsustainable tax rate. thank you. host: your response? guest: the call focuses on the fact that what we are really

looking at is, this tax system that expires, it is a massive tax increase. host: scott on the democratic line. largo, florida. caller: good luck to you, senator. you are going to need it. you say the bush tax cuts will be an increase. i disagree with you. they were a gift. the tax rates were set at a certain rate. the republicans came in and decided these tax rates should be different. they decided they would give a gift to the american people. they would lower their taxes for 10 years. we saw, as you stated earlier, that the rich are holding back their money and not creating jobs. you called it a strike? this has been going on for three years now. that means these rich people

have been getting a tax break for 10 years but they have only been doing their obligation in taxes 47, so for three years, they are going to be on strike. so how are we going to reward the people? you and the republicans want to give them another gift. guest: your question presupposes if we just increase their tax rate they will start to create jobs again. that is simply not the case. we know when you increase tax rates you discourage investment. when you discourage investment, you the work job creation. we cannot afford to do that right now. -- thwart job creation. host: next phone call. caller: i juswant to thank you, senator, for making us

realize that you are what we are hoping for. you can change this nation. who said after so many passages, after this monstrosity with obama, remember, the election of 2012 is coming. whoever wants him to lose, vote for the repeal. guest: your comments are reflective of many others that we have heard throughout the country. people who are concerned about the fact that the government has grown too big and too expensive. growing to the point where congress is willing to pass a 2700-page monstrosity, as you so eloquently put it. a bill that few members of

congress read before they passed into law. that is wrong. our federal government was built upon the proposition that national governments have discerned tendency to become tyrant's until powers are checked. tyranny is compounded when you have legislation like the one you described, the 2700-page health care legislation. james madison wrote, i believe in federalist no. 61, that it would be of little benefit to the american people that a lot is written by men of their own choosing if the law is so voluminous and complex that they cannot be understand by the people. that is a much more severe problem when it is not just the people who cannot understand the legislation, but the passing into law that cannot understand it.

host: st. louis, missouri. dee on the democrat's line. caller: thank you for c-span. a couple of callers back, you said that a tax increase proposes -- presupposes jobs. that is not the issue. this nation is in twoars, has a huge debt. the only people in this nation that can afford to start contributing to the healing of this nation now are the millionaires and billionaires. it is not about jobs when we are talking about the debt. even with jobs, we are talking about people who save their money anyway.

they can afford to start hiring now. they are just hoarding their money, waiting to hear for a continued tax break that they knew would be expiring this year anyway. guest: you cannot force people to create jobs, you cannot force people to invest. you cannot just as soon people will do that because they will not, if the economic conditions are not beneficial to them, causes them to feel incompetent about investing their money. regardless of what it is someone wants to balance the budget, whether they want to have less government, or whether they want to maintain the sustainability of entitlement programs that the federal level, both of those objectives make it necessary to balance the budget. i do not disagree with that. to the same extent and reason,

it is essential that we not increase taxes right now. if we did that, it would be that much more difficult to balance the budget. the government cannot create wealth. all that can do is redistribute it. when it redistributes wealth, it tends to shrink the total amount available in society. and we all suffer as a result. host: mike lee thank you for host: we will be talking to another member of congress, hanson clarke. but shortly we are expecting live coverage of charlie rangel. here is a news update from c- span radio. >> it is 9:00 a.m. eastern time.

retail sales increased last month by the largest amount in seven months. the increase was nearly double the gain in had -- that had been expected and the largest increase since march. officials are defending new anti-terrorism security procedures of this -- of the nation's airports. homeland security -- a home when secretary janet nepalitano said the bodies can machines are safe and the images are viewed in private. the head of the security administration says that everyone wants the best possible security and the tsa is looking for a balance between security and privacy. a military hearing will resume today for major new -- assigned to determine whether the army psychiatrist -- four major nidal hassan to determine whether he

is fit to stand trial. in an e-mails statement for a muslim holiday, he calls the reports about flexibility "near baseless propaganda." >> the c-span networks provide coverage of politics, and on -- and american history all available to you on radio, television and on-line and social networking websites. and we take c-span on the road with our local content vehicles. it is now available in more than 100 vermillion holmstedt created by cable and -- 100 million

homes, created by cable and provided as a public service. >> make a 5 javaid minute video on this years scene -- a theme, washington d.c. drew my lens. it should not include the c-span programming. upload by january 20 for your chance to win $5,000. the competition is open to middle and high school students grade 6 through 12. >> "washington journal" continues. host: hanson clarke was elected in early november to represent the 13th district, democrat in michigan. welcome to the table. guest: great to be your and great to be here on the backdrop of the u.s. capitol. host: what is your impression so

far? guest: i can see why members of congress are caught up in the washington culture. we are giving -- we are given though first-rate treatment. i have to keep in mind my job here. the public is very angry because they did not feel that congress was looking out for their best interest, that congress and of the assailant-spending money bailey of banks that foreclosed -- that congress ended up spending money bailing out banks that foreclosed many homes. insurance companies like a ig many times but overcharged save drivers or home may have been overcharged on the rates

because they may work a blue- collar job. host: "the ways of washington" is the headline in the politico. what specifically do you take issue with that was inappropriate? guest: nothing that is inappropriate. it is the fact, though, that if you are not grounded in your job, which is to serve the taxpayers and citizens, you may start to think that what the lobbyists tell you is actually the truth, that you are a part of a privileged class. that is the problem. i reviewed the preamble of the declaration of independence to get this job. it talks about those rights, those god-given, inalienable rights for life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. but even more important, it talks about how those rights are

preserved and honored. the government works to the people, not politicians. many people run for office so that they can be served by the public. we had a system there that we were playing politics as opposed to serving the taxpayer and employers would not put up with it, so they located elsewhere. host: later this week you will vote on who represents the leadership in your party in the house. do you agree or disagree?

guest: no, not at all. the leadership does not represent the entire country. i believe miss pelosi has done a solid job leading the caucus, but i'm here to represent metro detroit. the leadership does not affect the agenda. it is really the public that should. we as the representatives must carry that out here. host: how you plan to do that? guest: by being grounded, listening to people, acting on their concerns, and frankly, not getting involved with all of the lobbyists who fear of people away from serving the public. -- who of the year people away from serving the public. i lost my family in detroit and

everything i valued in life. that has kept me very grounded. i was able to get a job created by an act of congress 30 years ago through the comprehensive employment and training act. but most importantly, it gave me the self-confidence i needed to know that i could serve my community because that job assigned me to a local high school working with truant teens. i know that some of our viewers right now, this sounds so basic and elementary, but it is the point. in order for a representative democracy to work, we have to have people that served the taxpayers and citizens, not this culture in washington. host: that sounds like transparency in washington. how can this congress be more transparent? do you plan to be more

transparent in your meetings, with your colleagues, etc.? guest: transparency is the minimum foundation. we have to be committed to the taxpayers and citizens. when i talked to people in metro detroit, they want basic things. they want a safe neighborhood, a decent job. employers want to be able to borrow money so they can hire people and expand businesses. folks want not only a good income, but they want to get out of debt. it was held paying off their mortgage -- they want help paying off their mortgage and student loans. the washington culture complicates everything with all of the wheeling and dealing and payoffs for the financial services institutions. that is what makes it complicated. the important thing is for people like me who are hired by people to save focus by focusing

on people. this culture can be very intoxicating, you know, the dinners, the meals, the kinds of accolades that you received. many members believe they are part of a privileged class. it is a culture in washington that has been magnified in detroit. that is why people hired me, because they wanted to get rid of that old arabic culture. -- arrogant culture. host: do you want to return the money? guest: the area that i represent, we do not have enough of our tax dollars returned back to the people in ways that will

effectively help them. the problem is, these pet projects really help just one single institution as opposed to the broader public. the defense -- depends on how you define the remarks. host: in this article -- guest: no, that is not true. it is bailing out the financial institutions that are the largest contributors to congress. we could have achieved the same result in stabilizing our home values and our national economy if we get people in their homes longer, allowed them not to be evicted, but negotiate better with their lender as opposed to only bailing out the financial

institutions. that is not really the point. as we all know, the bulk of our tax dollars go to several key areas, social security, health care, defense. and right after that, the interest payment on our debt. we have to reduce our debt. that is the only way that, i believe, weekend strengthen our position globally. we need to free up the money instead of just paying the money to pay the interest on the debt. host: the shourd obama compromise the push-era of tax cuts -- should obama compromise the bush era tax cuts? guest: a believe we need to pay down the debt so that we can invest it in what we need here. otherwise, we reward people -- i

think it is important to reward people who take risks on investments. i can see why we would keep the cuts on capital gains. it is money that creates jobs, and also a good job training. host: hanson clarke is a new face to washington, elected to represent the detroit metro area. wisconsin, go ahead. caller: you mentioned the constitution. what about government being for the people, of the people, and by the people? host: and what does that mean to you? caller: i think we have been forgotten. guest: i completely agree with you. this government is set up for one group -- one purpose and that is to serve as, the citizens and taxpayers.

not these guys that are handing objects in washington and try to cater to the egos of the members of congress. i totally agree with you. host: next call from michigan, democratic line, go ahead. caller: i was born and raised in detroit. mr. hanson need to tell the truth. no one -- and no one invest in detroit because it is predominantly black. guest: i disagree. racism, yes, we have had a history of racism in this country. my mother was an african- american. but we have had our own politicians take the people for granted. it really does not have to do with race.

i'm here to serve the people that hired me and i will work for the collective good of all the taxpayers in that region. host: independent, dave in north carolina, go ahead. caller: i have a couple of questions about the situation going on with the health care bill and honesty and transparency. when thing that will begin to come up is the doctors fix, which is the 22% increase in medicare payments to doctors, that was already signed into law. i'm sure that is going to be overlooked and eliminated. that is what any fun -- everybody says, anyway. decrease inut 11% signin

salary for doctors. the other one is the prescription drugs that are made here in america and are sold at cheaper in canada. i watched a whole hearing on c- span about that. guest: he is raising two important points. regarding the position payments, the caller is referring to the sustainable growth formula, which for physicians is not really sustainable. the reform law has a panel involved set up there that could unfairly reduce those reimbursement payments to physicians. here is why that is important. i want physicians to be adequately reimbursed, especially those that practice in our rural areas and inner cities because we want to relocate there. i think we need to look at

entitlement programs holistic we and our we need to redesign the structure. and not do it in a piecemeal way, which the current health care reform law could be focusing on. regarding the prescription drug issue, that is a reflection of the political power of the disk -- therescription drug lobby. i will not allow that to influence me. host: here is an issue from one of our twitters inere. guest: the caller alludes to a very important issue. if we want to attract jobs to the city of detroit, we need to improve the quality of life. if an employer wants a safe area to relocate, we need to do this. one of the best way is to strengthen our schools. i have are the spoken to the mayor of detroit, about a model

to expand school hours through the day and the weekend and get through the school year so that we can keep our used off the streets. much of the crime is committed by a our youth. if we can have after-school programs and extended days, that will help. we can coordinate the city operations with the plic and private sector to keep those, centers are open. that will help keep the kids off the street, learning, and i believe, keep our streets safer. host: our guest here this morning was voted in to office by about 79% of the vote.

for worth, texas, james, democratic line, go ahead. caller: the republican that was on before him, he's always talking about taxes and raising taxes, but we are trying to solve a problem. what got us in this position is the war in iraq. and these rich people, all they want is their money. people are worried about money and not worry about all of the folks that lost their lives in iraq. guest: the caller has right to be concerned. many times in the military, it is young african-american men that go into the military

because they do not half employment. -- they do not have employment. the unemployment rate in detroit is considerable. there are many young black men that have lost their lives in these wars. also from a fiscal perspective, if we are responsibly line down our military effort in iraq and afghanistan, and if we allow the tax cuts to expire, we would be on the road to eliminating our debt overall and having a stronger economy and have more of our tax dollars where we need it. host: which committees would you like to sit on? guest: i do not believe the committee assignments are that vital to a member of congress oppose the ability to serve the public, and here is why i say that. -- into a member of congress's ability to serve the public, and

here is why i say that. i served on staff and i see the resources available and they are considerable to help a person. i am looking to provide security to my region, but most important, i will be able -- and effective advocate to the people i represent. i will work for initiatives like regional transit to link people together, improve the quality of life, and attract jobs and industry back into that region. host: what other experienced do you have? guest: i am an artist. as a visual artist, i use my imagination. i have to look past what i see on the surface to examine the colors and lines. that has made me more open serve -- open person. the tough times that i've had in

this city, i can now appreciate what people are going through, auto industry the on roa that never thought they would be facing that kind of situation or the veteran that is getting meals out of garbage dumpsters, were the single malt -- the single moms who are facing tough times. i know that the people who elected me are facing great financial and securities and people in this country now are feeling insecure and they are angry because they see congress spending money on private institutions that do not benefit them directly. who i am, even more than my years in legislature, serving on staff, it makes me a better advocate. when the people who represent

the people. we do not need political wheeler and dealers. that is who i am. when i stayed committed to our roots and to serving the public , and really keep in mind those principles in the constitution, that is what i will keep in mind. i'm here to serve the people, not the government culture. host: lea, go ahead. caller: i want you to know i feel like you're a breath of fresh air this morning. the way you speak to the people is something that needs to be emulated by other politicians. instead of talking about partisan policy as usual, you're actually talking about issues that are facing the american people today. , we are going through the worst economic crisis since the great depression.

when i turn on my television i hear people bickering back and forth about menial things instead of addressing what is going on with the american people. on the other side, i see them off, always been concerned with the financial sector, since that sector is what finances their campaigns. i see very few actual talking about investing in our nation. guest: thank you so much, and the caller is right. this job is simple, to serve the public and taxpayers. but many people get caught up in the political bickering and posturing. i'm not here to prove republicans wrong. i'm here to serve you and return your tax dollars back to you in the most effective way possible that will serve the most of us in this country. and if we cannot do that, then

we need to pay down that debt. the job is very simple. the constitution outlines it. i'm here to represent the people, not myself and not these political leaders. host: john on the republican line, go ahead. caller: i would like to point out that if people wish to see what is ahead for our country, all they need to do is take a vacation in detroit. this is what will happen if you give labor unions control. guest: i totally disagree. the main obstacle in detroit for decades has been the city's political culture. most of the time, people would run for office so that they can be elevated, not to serve the

public, but to serve themselves and their families and their political cronies. that has taken a toll on the industry because employers to not want to locate in to a city where they have to play politics. they will locate elsewhere. i will work with everybody. i do not care what party they are, what color they are, or where they live. if they are americans and their legal citizens here and they want to invest in this region they want to help hire people and will respect our laws, i will help them higher here. -- i will help them hire here.

host: do you agree or disagree? guest: i disagree in the sense that we give politicians to much power in terms of making our country great. we're the ones as citizens that make this country great. it is our initiative. as a matter of fact, the detroit metro was so strong because of manufacturing. that is what we need to focus on. let's get together and let the elected officials know what we need. the members of congress, we're the ones who shape and control the budget, how the money is spent. i will ask you, not a partisan bickering and obstructionism on

behalf of the people that you put in office. we have got to work together to find a way to do it. the people are in charge and in power, not the elected officials. not even the president. yes, we use our judgment and our skills. but i believe we should not veer away from the common good. ictu the public with this premise, that all of you watching right now, that you collectively know what is best for our country and it is my job to listen to you and to act on that and more to the best of my ability and with other members of congress on behalf of the taxpayers and citizens. host: next caller, you are on the air. caller: i believe that is what the problem is, you are not listening. if you are not hearing this morning. it is the democratic alliance

that is a major problem right now. in a longer represent the -- they no longer represent the working man, the unions don't. also, the back door dealings that went on with health care, the democrats were going lockstep with the nancy pelosi, calling people in from their vacations early, releasing bills in the middle of the night. that is what we are objecting to. if you truly want to hear what the people believe, you need to listen to what they are saying today. guest: i hear what you are saying. i respect your concern. i'm not here to vilify any institution. labor and business, we have got to work together. that is how we will turn the economy around and make this structure. i will not attack certain business practices, nor labour.

nor will i attack any politician, regardless of republican or democrat. that is not my focus. we do not live in a perfect world, but we are a democracy. we have got to face the issues and that we have commitments on certain ideological positions. i respect that. i may not agree with all of them, but we have to work for the common good. what we need a simple, we need an equal playing ground for everyone. we should provide a good education so that they can get a good job. we should loosen up some of these regulations so that lenders will be able to allow small business to grow. and as a member of congress, we need to help businesses so that they do not have to hire an accountant or lawyer to have sole access to them. this is not about bashing institutions, but helping

people and returning tax dollars to the people. i know this is simple, but it is very basic and important. when you get into the issues that are so complicated, i'm not going to do that. yes, i'm a democrat. i'm from the city of detroit. i respect the rules that labor unions play, but i will not bash the corporations and employers because we need jobs. i am help -- i am here to help unify and serve the public. host: what are you looking forward to the most this week? guest: the practical issues of getting the office support, that is good. but most importantly, i will talk to members of congress to try to dispel their image they have of metro detroit and certain urban politicians. and i want them to know that i'm committed to working with them. i'm talking about republicans and democrats. in fact, i reach out to the

opposite side of the state of michigan to representative wilbur, who is a conservative republican. i know that he and i can find common ground, both as christians, to work with each other. that is what i want to focus on. i am multiracial. my mom was african-american and native american and my dad was from india. i grew up in the inner city. i have had tough times in my life and i was able to go to a great school like cornell and georgetown. it allows us to respect many different point of view is having a varied background. it is about having a love for people, even those who oppose you politically. because of that love comes respect and you are able to work with each other. you probably will not agree on

most issues, but you can work on some basic things that can serve the common good. that is what this country is all about. and i appreciate the opportunity to serve you hear it in this critical time in our nation's histor host: -- nation's history. host: hanson clarke, thank you so much. we will turn our attention to those new smoking videos that you heard last week. the fda unveiled proposed graphic warning labels for cigarette packs. we want to show you a few of the proposed labels.

there are 36 different warning labels that the fda is proposing to put on cigarette packs. every day, about 1000 teenagers become regular smokers. about 400,000 people die every year from smoking-related problems and the cost to treat it exceeds $96 billion per year. the fda has said this is an anti smoking campaign. others say it is unconstitutional. we want to get your thoughts this morning. the what do you think of these proposed smoking labels? i want to show you some other statistics be found on the american heart association website. about 46 million adult smokers. of 3.4 million teenagers. 23.5% of men are smokers and 23.6% of women. and among blacks, 17% our men

and 18% are women. from the other side on this, this is a new or times article. it says that manufacturers vowed to fight the labels in federal court. the reporter of this story, gardner harris, is joining us on this -- the phone this morning. how did this come about? guest: this came about with the jamestown settlement in the 1600's with virginia.

you know, tobacco, in any and -- in many ways, is the original sin for the united states. it is the reason for some in this country that this country was founded. and it caused a global epidemic. there are millions across the world, and of course, all of this really started at the jamestown settlement. the world has been trying to adjust ever since and over the last 40 years as the awareness of the risks of cigarette smoking has grown, regulators across the world have begun to take steps. the most recent step in many countries across the world -- i think there are 38 at this point -- is to take these very graphic warning labels on cigarette packages and have them dominate

much of the cigarette package. but it is a battle, of course, because the cigarette companies do not want these warning labels on their products. in the united states, at least two large cigarette companies are suing over this. and across the world, these same manufacturers are also bringing suit in country after country after country, including in your gaudette, brazil, and elsewhere. -- in uganda, brazil and elsewhere. host: what does it mean the label will be dominated? guest: it means they will be large and some of these labels will be cartoonish. but is to make these products unappetizing, particularly for teenagers.

their decision making process is not the best. they do not want to start with this because the graphic will tell them how they will end up if they do. as you said, there is a body with a toe tag on one of them. there is a man blowing cigarette smoke out of a hole in his throat, a tracheotomy in his throat. which, of course, can happen when you have cancer of the larynx and it is removed. you can no longer breathe out of your mouth and nose. six out of 10 smokers die from the disease. they have a one in 10 chance of dying of lung cancer. the lung cancer is by far and away the most deadly cancer in the united states, accounting for more deaths than births -- breast cancer, colorectal cancer, pancreatic cancer and several others combined. government officials are trying to come up with any strategy they can to cut down on it.

host: the manufacturers of cigarettes to say this in fringes on their property rights and their freedom of speech rights. and other countries have tried this. what is the counter argument in other countries and have these labels been effective? guest: the research is not particularly good on how the labels have been effective, and particularly, which labels are most effective. they seem to be working in countries that have started to use them. there does seem to be on additional to ammunition dodge dimunition in -- dimunition among teenagers. it had been declining for several years, but most recent

years it has hit a plateau. researchers are hoping to kick started to the next level. the united states was the first country to mandate the warnings. those are the surgeon general's warnings that we all see. yet know, smoking can cause miscarriages orland cancer, but those are relatively easy to -- can cause miscarriages board or lung cancer, but those are relatively easy to ignore. the packaging is still dominated by the other graphics or materials that the manufacturers want on there. but these new warning labels cannot be ignored. they will have half of the pack. some countries are going to 80% of the pack. nearly entirely all of the pack will become these graphic warning labels. and there is a real balance

here. there is some research that suggests if you go too far with too much of a ghoulish, gruesome warning people will quickly dismiss them and not pay attention. public health officials are trying to strike a balance, not being too ghoulish, but also trying to show very frankly what you will wind up if you continue to smoke cigarettes. host: when will these proposed labels go into effect? when will people start to see them? and these lawsuits being put out there by the manufacturers, could that stop these new labels? guest: absolutely. the process is that the labels are proposed as part of a proposed rulemaking. the f in about a week is going to release their results of an

18,000-person survey on line that they did. there were testing these various labels with smokers to see which ones they thought were most effective. there will also accept comments from the public -- they will also except comments from the public for the next six months. ey will whittle down the 36 proposed levels to nine final labels by next june and make them permanent. they will require manufacturers to start using them over the following year. by june of -- i think is actually october of 2012, cigarette companies will not be able to distribute any packs or carton's that do not have these labels on them. they will be required to use all nine labels in equal fashion.

and these warnings will also be required to take up about 20% of any advertising that these companies do. and of course, you still have some magazine advertising. they are not allowed to advertise on television any more. there has been one federal ruling in a court in kentucky earlier this year in which the federal judge sort of split the baby, saying that the fda could, indeed, require these graphic warning labels, but requiring that they only be in black-and- white is going too far. he thought that allowing the use of colored ink should be allowed and that banning colored teen for some reason in fringes free- speech rights. obviously, this is one of those areas of law where, can use

kreme afire in a crowded movie theater is the argument -- can you scream, "fire!" in a crowded movie theater is the argument. host: gardner harris with the ."ew york times we will get our viewers' opinions of this. athens, ohio, debbie, what do you think? caller: i think it is very heartfelt sickening to hear someone trying to get around this. they need to stop. there needs to be a song put out, smoke, smoke your life away. it starts from drugs and starts from smoking marijuana and the stress that is in the world today.

why can't the fda say, stop, put a roll out and then the whole thing. let america be the leader in it. host: all right, george, your thoughts? caller: i have been a smoker for 60 years and i have no cancer. i have chewed tobacco, no cancer. but overseas, they sprayed with chemicals that can cause cancer. we need to eliminate foreign tobacco, not american tobacco. host: of right, -- all right, new jersey, go ahead.

caller: my mother-in-law died of lung cancer in 1996. these pictures are not that graphic. i mean, they are telling the truth because i watched this woman died. my husband regrettably does started smoking again. i have never smoked a cigarette in my life. we are trying to curtail that. here is the other thing, they are going to have to start putting them on telephones, because the radiation being emitted from them, it is bad. i think that is coming down the pipe, too. host: cocoa beach, fla., and t.d. as a democrat, your thoughts on these labels? caller: i have been a smoker for many, many years and i think the problem is that the tobacco companies are paying off the politicians, so nothing will really be done. the graphic labels will be nothing.

it means nothing. smoking is an addiction. at when the tobacco companies start paying for people to stop, when they start paying for rehab or medications to get the nicotine out of the system, then maybe something will change. otherwise, nothing will change. you can quit smoking pot with no side effects, but you cannot quit smoking cigarettes. host: this is a quote from .nthony tenslehensley shreveport, louisiana,

elizabeth, republican line, what do you think? elizabeth, are you with us? i will put you on hold. we will come back to you. port charlotte, fla., steve, independent line. caller: i do not get where they have the right to come out with any loss stating anything on the cigarette packs. is it under the commerce clause? does it fall under the welfare of each individual of the united states? it is the individual the needs to quit. host: let me quote you what the "new york times" says about this article -- about these labels in this article. what you think? think it is crap. we find the polls because we find -- with higher lawyers that are supposed to be -- we find

loopholes because we hire lawyers better suppose to be representing the people. just like the guy you had on before. he is an ex lawyer, so you will know how to write laws. host: the obama administration said it in their view to the "new york times" that the new labels were part of its comprehensive effort of the tobacco control plan. next phone call comes from wyoming, ruth, republican line, you are on the air. caller: the thing that concerns me is there is an enormous amount of publicity little about the after decades of use. host: what do you mean? explain that a little bit more. caller: nicotine is a fairly strong drug and there are

withdrawal side effects. host: ok. caller: for example, it is a diuretic and people can tend to fill up with fluids. host: what do you want done? caller: i would like to see some more balance in the warnings. there are dangers to quitting also. host: stanville, ohio, sharon as a democrat, good morning. caller: i just want to comment that huge, greedy insurance companies lobbied against tobacco growers and producers for years. why don't they put graphic pictures on gas pumps, pesticides, and the food that we consume and feed our children every day? we're not talking about 20 or 30% of the population, but 100% exposed. it is all killing us. and we all have to die, but we do not get to choose the method. if people want to spend their

dollars on smoking, have added. host: this piece was written on saturday. a little bit more from this story in the "new york times" that ran on saturday --

will go on to kansas, your thoughts, go ahead. to agree'm inclined with the smoking labels. under the condition that if we're going to label things, we need to label things. not just one thing. booze -- theres are several other items that can be labeled with warnings. it seems like tobacco has been the big thing for the last 15 years now. there are all kinds of warnings. every time you see pharmaceutical ads, then you've got this guy who is rapidly speaking during the

advertisement saying all of these bad things about this drug and what can happen under certain conditions. these need to be labeled. they need to be labeled on the containers. if we are going to play fair, let's play fair. if we're going to label, let's label. host: we will hear from randy, republican in lexington, tennessee. caller: i think this whole thing is, hypocritical. how many more families are destroyed by alcohol? how many people are killed by cirrhosis of the liver? you do not hear anything about our call. -- alcohol. host: you think it goes too far corner -- you think it goes too far or across the board? caller: across the board.

host: according to this "new york times" article, india is the fifth largest smoking market. beavercreek, ohio, brenda, democratic line, go ahead. caller: i would like to say this is about money, money, money. my son said years ago, i told him when he was a teenager, why can't we ban all of these kinds of things, drugs, marijuana,

even smoking. and he said, look how many people in the united states and iran a world would be without a job? it is about -- and around the world without a job? it is about money. host: we will move on to alabama. caller: i would like to say -- host: we're listening, jake. are you there? i think we lost him. we will move on to maine, elizabeth is a republican. go ahead. caller: cigarettes in this country can be made illegal. that solves the problem. just do not sell them. and the tobacco companies can go into some other profession. growing fruits and vegetables would probably be a good thing to go into. host: mass., alan, democrats might your perspective?

-- a democrat, your perspective? caller: the advertising on the packages will not make any difference whatsoever. many years ago, danny -- denis leary said you can call them tumors in aipac with a skull and crossbones across it and they will -- tumors in a pack with a skull and crossbones aggressive and they will still one of to get them. host: i want to show you some other headlines. congress returns to the lame duck session today. here is the front page of the wall street journal this morning. in the opinion section of the "wall street journal" mps

written by alan blinder writes in defense of ben bernanke. critics are branding it as a dangerous experiment. back to your phone calls about these new smoking labels. margaret in new york, independent line, go ahead. caller: this is interesting. many people have alluded to this. in this country, money runs everything. even the fda at this point, just like the rest of congress. and there are many things that should be banned that are not. the for instance, bpa, which is in an -- which is in many

plastics. it actually affects the fertility health and men. europe and other countries band- aid a long time ago. we do dot demand -- banned it a long time ago. but we do not demand anything. we're all trying to get there. people do get drunk and killed on a call. -- alcohol. my father died probably from lung cancer and a call. -- alcohol. we have to be a lot more vigilant and active. and that is pretty hard, right? host: more on this lame-duck session from the "wall street journal."

the big spending decisions loom because congress adjourned in september to campaign without passing of the 12 spending bills needed to finance the government for the fiscal year that began october 1.