questions and comments. after that, new dietary guidelines with kathleen sibelius and agriculture secretary tom vilsack. also coverage of startup america, a white house initiative to support and entrepreneurship to create jobs. this morning on "washington journal," an assessment of the republican congress and the push to create jobs. also a look at the situation in egypt with the united states institute for peace. after that we will chat with michelle garcia of the national center for victims of crime on state and federal stalking laws. guest:" i -- "washington journal" is next.

[no audio] this was a scene in liberation square in cairo, egypt, about 30 minutes ago. protests continue. the secular opposition banded together around dr. mohamed elbaradei. dr. elbaradei may lack the support, but could serve as an acceptable figure to the united states. secretary of state hillary

clinton. on all five sunday talk shows asking for an orderly -- appeared on all five sunday talk shows, asking for an orderly transition. dr. elbaradei says, "clinton's words erode american credibility." the phone numbers are on your screen. let's begin with "the washington post," "u.s. seeks a swift transition in europe -- egypt. obama has aligned itself -- obama's administration has aligned itself to an orderly transition, amid concern that unrest could spread across the arab world. in telephone calls, egyptian -- in telephone calls to egyptian leaders, president obama and his top national security advisers tried to reassure them that their countries remained vital

u.s. strategic partners. senior administration officials said that the transition -- 'transition' wording, used by both the white house and secretary of state, was carefully chosen to indicate a desire for our representative, interim government to run egypt. clinton resisted invitations to call explicitly for president hosni mubarak to stand down." "old guard false in behind -- falls in behind the young." the diplomat, mohamed elbaradei -- "last thursday, a small group of internet-savvy young, political organizers

gathered in the car or home of an associate of mohamed elbaradei. they had come to plot a day of protests. most are under 30 years old, according to one of the lawyers who is one of the group, which organized an earlier day protests last week via facebook. they were surprised and delighted to see that more than 90,000 people signed up to participate, emboldening others to turn out and bringing tens of thousands of others into the street. surprised by the turnout, older opposition leaders from across the spectrum, including the outlawed muslim brotherhood, the liberal protest group the egyptian movement for change, and the umbrella group organized by dr. elbaradei joined in, vowing to turn now their supporters for another day of protests.

they decided to follow a blueprint similar to their previous protest, urging demonstrators to converge on the central liberation square. they asked people to gather at friday prayer before marching together toward the square. they distributed the list and its spread by really -- spread virally. they even told dr. elbaradei which rallies he should attend -- which mosque he should attend." what is next? caller: as long as the administration plays it cool, this may work out. i think secretary clinton stood by another ad hominem attack on the iranians -- slipped by another ad hominem attack on the iranians. i just hope that nobody comes out and says that this is the candidate that the united states would support. we cannot do that.

we can hope. we can maybe do things that would encourage people in that direction, but by labeling somebody as the u.s. candidate -- all that does is get attention to us and not the process in egypt. they have to have some short of interim process. let me tell you, there may be people in egypt, in the military and mubarak supporters, who look at the chinese example -- where they suppress people in beijing. we had a state dinner with them. this is not an attack on obama. republicans did it to -- it, too. we may have a serious situation. i hope we can get through this transition. basically, the administration needs to keep the line, with the support of the republicans, that it has. host: what do you mean by "play it cool/" -- cool?"

caller: it means you nudge the situation along, without looking like you're going to dump your friend, knowing that is the reality. some people are talking that the protests in the streets are going to wear themselves out. we have had a lot of people being let out of jail -- allegedly breaking out of jail, which i do not think anybody believes -- for the purpose of disrupting the demonstrations and causing instability. you have seen actions by the egyptian government, supposedly aimed at discrediting the demonstrations. it is just a matter of saying -- seeing whether the guys can hold out over the long term, or whether they accept the fact that it is time to make the transition to a more democratic government, in a way that allows for the type of stability we did not have when we have the transition in iran.

host: it sounds like you follow as closely. why is that? do you have some experience with this? i notice you are in arlington, va. caller: i do not have experience with this, other than that i have been a student of conflict resolution in that part of the world for a long time. host: pete from texas, go ahead. caller: it is going to be tough to follow up that call, because john sounds like he is very. that -- very erudite. we want democracy. we espouse democracy, yet, it is not in our favor, we do not want to do with. and on -- not love and on -- lebanon -- not lebanon -- the west bank is a perfect

example. i think it boils down to the saudi arabians who attacked us because they were in tyranny. i think it boils down to that. they were in tyranny, we had to live with that, they have no democracy. they treat their women terrible. they are the biggest oil -- you know, we succumb to that. host: what should be done, then? caller: we, as far as egypt goes, i think we have to let the situation play out. we know that is the dawn of civilization, it is egypt. you can tell by the pyramids and everything like that that is the most important thing. hosni mubarak did us a good service, i mean, as far as at that time. i was barely out of high school at that time when that was going

on. we did not have the peace agreement between egypt -- did have the peace agreement between egypt and israel. there was -- he did take on all of those assassination attempts and that type of thing. host: the papers are full of notations and opinions that president obama has not yet called for hosni mubarak to step down. what do you think -- why do you think the president should not do that, or do you think the president should? what is behind that kind of decision? caller: it is impossible for the u.s., including our great president, to be judgmental about this, because we made bad decisions in the past. what i believe that we should do is support the egyptian people, showed them -- show them that we

support freedom and democracy, and, hopefully, you know, that there is a smooth transition. just look at the numbers, though, i mean, as far as the food prices. host: but do you think hosni mubarak can stay on in the interim for six months, even if the promises a so-called "free and fair election -- he promises a so-called "free and fair election"? caller: his intelligence minister is going to take over. there is no doubt that the ball is going to drop. i do not know what the egyptian people think about him. that is a natural transition. i think there will be elections as soon as can be. but you have to get the people out of the streets. you cannot have a great society

like egypt is, our ally, and have people feel the way that they do, as desperate as they feel. i think -- and it goes back to social networking -- which are not really espousing -- i am not really espousing. mark souder bird was the man of the year. look at what is going on -- mark zuckerberg was the man of the year. look at what is going on in tunisia and egypt. host: we want to hear from you. louisville, kentucky, bobby, an independent. you're next. we will put you on hold. you have to turn the television down. dennis, good morning. caller: my main concern is the

situation is more complex than some people are painting the picture to be. i think people scream "democracy" when they want to get their guy. for american foreign policy -- and i am genuinely call for promoting democracy and freedom in countries where it is a realistic possibility. and it may be a realistic possibility in egypt at some point in time, but there are other considerations for american foreign policy. the reason we kept hosni mubarak in there as long as we have is the position in regard to israel and the peace treaty. if anybody believes that the muslim brotherhood is interested in a democratic representation, they do not understand the muslim

brotherhood. host: why do you say that? caller: the muslim brotherhood is a hard-core islamic group. hard-core islamic groups are pushing for sharia law, which is not about democratization, it's about theocracy. i absolutely believe that there are tons of people in egypt that are genuinely crying out for democracy. and i feel for those people, but i'm not sure what american foreign policy can do to make that reality. host: do you think the secretary of state or the president of the united states should be leery of any sort of agreement between elbaradei and the muslim brotherhood? caller: absolutely. this is what i think. any time cries for democracy, up in the midst of people -- come up from the midst of people who

are starving -- i understand that the profit-sharing, because of the diminishing of oil prices -- it is a dangerous atmosphere to try to create a democratic shift and reach. it is ironic to me that the people -- as a book, not all -- and i do not want to make this political -- some who were criticizing the concept of george bush trying to make a shift -- shift iraq in a democratic direction. that had 10 times the possibility of happenings and this does. there is a piece in the wall street journal. "the two likeliest political outcomes for mubarak. before the current crisis, there were good options.

the administration of george w. bush pressed president hosni mubarak, publicly and privately, to encourage the emergence of non-islamist political parties. our calls for action were generally ignored and non- islamist parties were persecuted and suppressed. as important as the freedom agenda was to president bush, there were other issues, terrorism, the israeli- palestinian conflict, that require us to deal with the egyptian government. the egyptians are proud people. no nation wants to be seen giving in to pressure from another state, even a close ally. in the end, the decision was president mubarak's. he made it, and he is now facing the consequences. if given an array of choices, i

believe that the egyptian people will choose a democratic future of freedom and not an islamist future of imposed extremism. of the muslim brotherhood is legalized -- while the muslim brotherhood, if legalized, would certainly win seats in a new parliament, there is every likelihood that the next edition government will not -- next egyptian government will not be a muslim brotherhood government will cr." caller: i want to give you a history, if anyone does not know the history of mubarak. he came to office after his predecessor was shot. he was the vice-president then, and then he got elected. there was no choice for the egyptian people to have represent them. constitution-- the

has changed. instead electing him 40 the terms, it became two terms and-- for two terms, it became two terms and the president can elect himself. people do not want him. every time egyptians say, "i do not know what to do. i cannot find food. i cannot find jobs. people like me at to go everywhere in the world in order to find a better future -- have to go everywhere in the world in order to find a better future." this has been happening before i was going -- born. nobody believed egypt would do this, because we always go for the government. we always go for the person who

rules. people have been living under $2 per day. there are people who have no food. they live in no condition that anyone here would approve of. host: caller, can i jump in real fast? can you give us your name? when did you come to the united states? how old are you, if you do not mind telling us? do you have family over there? caller: i came over for a graduate school in 2000. my parents are in alexandria. my sister is in cairo. i will tell you the situation right now. i will tell you how it started. there was a call for everybody, after a long time of oppression. the tunisian people have done that.

the egyptian people thought, "ok. we can do it." facebook is not the only way, but it was the most available way for them to voice their opinions. host: how old is your sister? caller: my sister is 30 years old. host: issue part of the protests -- is she part of the protests? caller: no, she has little kids. she would not be able to leave them. host: have you been able to be in contact with her? caller: my mom has a lead line, so i can talk to my mom as often as a -- a landline, so i can talk to my mom as often as possible. i have to tell you this situation. the phone lines started to work. the police have withdrawn completely from the streets. my dad is in the military.

he has -- he started to protect people. people are forming committees in order to protect themselves after the police have withdrawn and they are attacking people that are causing this looting. there is chaos in the country. -- they are trying to put chaos in the country so that we will say, "please, please come back and be our president again." they are protecting themselves. they are trying -- i will tell you something. also, i want to say something about the muslim brotherhood. host: i wanted to ask you about that. give us your impression of the

muslim brotherhood and this agreement, or their support, behind elbaradei. caller: you have to take the agreement of the minority and majority in order to have support for every sector in the country. but the muslim brotherhood, as i see it, it is not a popular one. the only reason that it is popular in the media and the international media is because there are so many other representatives of the country -- mubarak has been trying to show the world an alternative for his reign. i say "reign" because he is a dictator. not many people like the muslim brotherhood. if i have my vote, i will never vote for them.

host: we have to leave it there. we are showing the pictures, courtesy of the our jazeera network -- al jazeera network. this is from about one hour ago. protests continue. "usa today" -- "egypt's past and present at a glance." you heard that caller from connecticut going through the past 30 years ago as she sees it. bobby, an independent. good morning. caller: in february, 2008, "national geographic" ran a story about ancient egypt. they had a lot of beautiful artifacts. i was wondering about the safety of those. i remember what happened in iraq. host: before we came on, i had heard on one of the networks that there was concern about the artifacts in egypt, but that the

army was protecting many of the museums, many of the places where the artifacts were. so far, any that have been damaged could be fixed. that is what i heard this morning. let's look at "the washington times." "clinton warned against 'chaos' in egypt. she makes clear that mubarak has been an important partner for the united states." in "the new york times," it says that president obama made a number of calls, calling for restraint. the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, admiral mike mullen, spoke on sunday with his counterpart, the chief of staff of the egyptian army. defense secretary robert gates spoke with two of his counterparts. no details were given.

milwaukee, robert, democratic line. good morning. caller: good morning. i feel that, actually, the united states is doing just exactly what we should be doing. we are just right of observing things and seeing where they are going -- just kind of observing things and seeing where they are going. in so far as hosni mubarak, he has been there for 30 years. there is absolutely nothing the united states can do to change that situation, because he has always been a friend with israel and the other countries in that particular area. the people are upset because of the financial crises that they are having. however, i do not want to get into this thing about blaming obama, or blaming the democrats, or anyone or anything that is going on in egypt. we're just going to have to

observe things and take our time and be careful about what happens. host: the headline in "the new york times," "in egypt, military at ready to commit to hold in capital -- at ready amid tumult in capital." yesterday on cnn, dr. elbaradei was on the show. he was asked about president obama. this is what he said. >> do you want president obama to come out and publicly ask president mubarak to resign? >> i mean, obviously, that is going to happen, i think if not today, tomorrow. it will happen that he has to leave the country within the next few days. there is no way out, as i see it. it is better for president obama not to appear -- that he is the last one to say, "president

mubarak, it is time for you to go. leave before things are getting out of hand." we have seen the fate of other dictators. i do not want to see that happen. host: we're talking about what is next for the united states in the egyptian -- in egypt. go ahead. caller: i do not understand how bankrupt u.s. takes money at gunpoint from its citizens to finance what they complain is the bad government and other countries, particularly the middle east, which has been around a lot longer than the u.s. why don't we take all of the guns, all of the money, and leave the region, and let the region determine what it wants? what is the u.s. think it can be the great meastor -- why does the u.s. think it can be the great maestro? we should not rule the world.

we should have our own government that controls its own finances. no one should allow other countries to dictate what they do. why do believe we know what is best for every country from -- do we believe we know what is best for every country from north korea to pakistan to the middle east? host: if the united states stays out of it, what do you think is in it for that country, as an egyptian-american? caller: the fighting will continue. people are fighting over religion all the time -- if you think you can solve piece where people are fighting over religion all the time, you are more foolhardy than i thought. host: "support democracy and stability will take care of itself. don't meddle, and nobody will

meddle with you. international institutions will keep the peace. balance-of-power politics will do it. history makes fools of us all. we make deals with dictators, and reap the whirlwind of terrorism. we intervene in afghanistan and the part, only to watch the taliban take over -- and depart, only to watch the taliban take over. sooner or later, the theories always fall. history has its upward arcs, but most crises require weighing unknowns against unknowns, and choosing between competing evils. some choices are not america's to make." caller: good morning. how are you this morning?

host: questions or comments? caller: i sort of agree with the last caller that we need to stay out of their affairs. but, in that we need to realize what started this situation, it is not just a regional problem. we're in a one-world economy now, although people do not want to admit it. if we can somehow find a way for the people to provide for themselves, in a way that they feel satisfactory, this problem would not have arisen. if there was no economic problem, then people would be fine with mubarak. all comes down to how their personal lives are going, as far as the economy, the inability to find a job, to find food. in part, that is probably due to the government's misappropriation of their funds. when you overtax a people,

they're going to revolt. mubarak should have saw this coming when they propose the taxes they are now enforcing -- proposed the taxes that they are now enforcing. host: "the mass movement involving egypt exposes the fact that it has been hiding in plain sight in a decade in which china has brought more people out of poverty than ever in human history. egypt has missed out to the country ranks 137th in the the world with per capita income -- in the world with per-capita income. even that, at best, is in middle -- is in the middle of the pack. egypt has long been famous for crony in efficiency.

yet hosni mubarak was graced with nearly $2 billion in annual u.s. aid, another $5 billion from dues from the suez canal, and $10 billion in tourism, so he could buy off a considerable portion of the 80 million egyptians." are you there, caller? good morning. what are your thoughts? caller: the way we are dealing -- afraid of dealing with the muslim brotherhood, it is just like being afraid of change. basically, you know, every time they get suppressed, they come up with a big, radical change. like sadat, when he played with this car, he ended up with the assassination. mubarak pushed him away from power, from a normal democratic

society. the u.s. should not be afraid of dealing with them. i will give an example -- turkey, an islamic country, is part of the whole, you know, changes that happened in the region. we should, here, start dealing with them, not as something to be afraid of. this is what is coming in egypt, eventually, unfortunately or fortunately. it is just -- this is part of the change that is going to happen. we have to deal with that. host: caller, what do you make of the headline that elbaradei and the muslim brotherhood have come to some agreement that he should be the person that replaces mubarak? caller: whoever is going to lead there, regardless, they have to

put their hands together -- heads together. this is not an organized type of revolution. it is an organized -- unorganized. it is spontaneous. there is just a lot of people that right the -- ride the wave. host: here is "the washington post" on dr. elbaradei. he received only a lukewarm reception when he spoke at tahrir square. protesters said they would rather continue to operate as a diffuse people's movement than as an organized opposition. what do you make of this "lukewarm support" for dr. elbaradei? caller: none of the people who

ran the administration are known to the media, or known to anywhere. i don't mind that they have elbaradei as a figure to negotiate a change of power in this society. it is a transitional period, until things clear. host: do you think that egypt can have "free and fair" elections? caller: in the past, no. in the future, yes, it will. but in the past everything is just one party leading -- many creating everything from media to the election boxes. it was a big mess. host: we will leave it there.

more from "the washington post." "protesters called on the united states to openly embrace their cause, with many saying they believe that will bar possibility to stay in office would hinge on whether he continues to receive support from america." caller: midmorning. i have been telephoning for almost -- good morning. i have been telephoning for almost 25 years. i think the american government -- we have this one-size-fits- all approach to democracy. you have to understand that different countries have different perspectives on life, on how to live their life, and you cannot force them to your way of thinking. i echo the sentiments of the gentleman earlier.

[unintelligible] we prop of governments who do not have the support of their own people. people are born in a system that is not sustainable. we have to rethink our policies as it relates to other countries, and allow them to decide what their destiny in the future will be. we also have to be consistent in our policy. we cannot be forcing them to leave their country -- his country, whatever -- and, at the same time, ignore 242. we have to be even-handed.

therere not even-handed, will not be equal rights and justice. host: here is an e-mail that says, "it is premature to predict what form of government egypt will take. the reason for the demonstrations is to put food on the table first and politics afterward. the problem of a 30-year dictatorship has been recognized for a long time, but nothing was done. i think bharrat is don." mubarak is done." santa barbara, go ahead. caller: i have been listening to these events for a long time. during one of the commentators talk about how rich this guy was -- a hearing one of the government -- the next thing i

am looking to see is how much money he gets away with when he gets out of the country, and that is something somebody should be keeping an eye on, to give it back to the people. host: moody's investor services has downgraded egypt and changed its outlook from stable to negative for the country. the u.s. embassy in cairo says it is arranging to begin flying americans out of egypt today. we're seeing news stories online that's as egypt protesters have planted -- planned a million- -- that says egypt protesters have planned a million-man marche tomorrow. "protesters gave a call for a million-man march." florida, jay, go ahead.

caller: good morning. i always try to stay america the should -- america should stay out of this. can you hear me? host: we can. america should stay out of this. why? caller: can you hear me? host: we are listening. go ahead. caller: because of the problems between gaza and israel, i think america should stay out of this. the people of egypt will decide their future, like the americans do. host: ok. israel is on the front page of "the new york times." "israel's military planning

requires peace with egypt. nearly half of natural gas it uses is imported from egypt. diplomatic ties began with the 1979 peace treaty with the egyptian prime minister, benjamin netanyahu -- with egypt. prime minister benjamin netanyahu has met with president hosni mubarak of egypt more than with any other foreign leader, except president obama. the effect on israel could be profound if mubarak was driven from office." caller: i believe that will bart is not going to give up. i think that mubarak is going to use his military. he has given the people a warning with the overflight of the jets and helicopters. by thursday, it is this is not resolved, i think that mubarak

will resolve it militarily, like the chinese did in tiananmen square. i think the fact that they went away until thursday is because friday is the muslim holy day and most people observe it, and it would bring a little bit of quiet to the area. i really do believe mubarak is not going to leave. i think the egyptian people are making a mistake in thinking that he will not use his military to stay in power. host: what should the united states do? caller: i think president obama is doing exactly the right thing. i think president obama is in a bad situation, and he is trying to keep the united states in the middle of road, and i think that is the right thing for him. i think he is doing a good job. it is obvious to me -- i was a republican, but i am independent

now. it is obvious to me, after the last two years, that the sole objective of the republican party is to get obama defeated in 2012. he and i. that's is -- and i think that he is doing a good job -- i did not vote for him. i also think that mccain is being a good, loyal american by supporting the president and trying to make sure that we and do the righrt place what is right are the world -- by the world. i think mubarak will have elections once he puts down the chaos. they use words like a "chao -- like "chaos" to justify what

they're going to do. i do believe there will be elections, and mubarak will leave after the elections. host: "the ranking republican on the armed services committee envisions more promising events." providing certain conditions were met, mr. mubarak agrees not to seek reelection, turns over his government to a caretaker, and insurers 'a -- and insures a transparentpen election in september.'" good morning. caller: 90 for taking my call -- thank you for taking my call. there is an old expression, "oh, what a tangled web we weave when

first we practice to deceive." are you familiar with it? host: what does it mean to you? caller: we have, through hundreds of years, practiced to deceive. thank you for taking my call. host: we have a caller from saudi arabia. your thoughts? caller: i think that president obama should stand up and say what it is that mubarak is. he is a dictator who has been in power for far too long. instead of trying to straddle the fence, he must call it like it is. we cannot put policy over principles. either we believe in democracy and we want to see it for the rest of the world, or we want to

maintain our policies, and the hell with everything else. host: are you an american living in saudi arabia? caller: i worked at one of the universities. i am an american living in saudi arabia. host: what is happening there? caller: it is very quiet, which tends to be the case in the kingdom. things are very quiet here. what i want to get back to -- do you have another question for me? host: i am sorry. i cut you off before. i should have let you finish. go ahead. caller: the people in this part of the world are looking for leadership from the u.s., based upon our articulated principles. when we start vacillating about those principles, they are confused. people here love the u.s.

if you walk down the street, anywhere you go -- like i said, i work at one of the universities. the people loved the u.s. they're looking for principled leadership. it seems like everything that happens is based upon what is best for israel. they are saying, "we understand your special relationship with them, but be fair." that is all they're looking for. host: we will continue taking your phone calls in about 45 minutes when steve heydemann, vice president of the united states institute of peace, joins us to continue our conversation about the unrest in egypt. first, we turn our attention to the u.s. economy with mark zandi, chief economist at moody's. we will be right back. sunday, "booktv," "indepth"

welcomes r. emmett tyrrell. his latest, "after the hangover -- the conservatives road to recovery." join us sunday at noon eastern on c-span2. >> jay carney will be the new white house press secretary. he worked for vice president biden and as a correspondent for "time" magazine. lawrence -- learn more about him on line at the c-span video library. it is washington, your way. >> every weekend on c-span3, experience american history tv, starting saturday at 8:00 a.m.

eastern -- 48 hours of events telling america's story. hear eyewitness accounts of events that shaped our nation. top history professors and leading experts delve into america's past. american history tv -- all weekend, every weekend, on c- span3. >> "washington journal" continues. host: mark zandi, chief economist with moody's economy.com, joining us to talk about the state of the u.s. economy. let me show our viewers the front page of the washington times. "with the gdp record, 'economy is back.'" what is your prediction? last year, we greeted

1.3 5 million private sector jobs -- created 1.35 billion private sector jobs. i am hopeful that we can double that. that will bring down unemployment, which is very important everyone. host: what is turning this headline on its head here? what could revert this? guest: there are many things to worry about. i heard your previous conversations about the turmoil in egypt. that could have significant implications of it were to spread to the rest of the middle east. if the price for oil were to rise significantly, that would be a problem. europe's situation is still very unsettled. their debt crisis has not been nailed down. the chinese are trying to slow their economy. they may not get at just right. we have a slew of problems here. state and local governments are cutting back.

the foreclosure crisis is ongoing. i could go on, but there is a long list of things to still be very nervous about. host: "the baltimore sun" as this headline -- has this headline. do you cut and borrow or invest and grow -- cut and grow, or invest and grow? which is it? guest: we're going to have to do both. we have to cut government spending. we have a very significant, a fiscal problem. our deficits are large, and they are not going to get small enough unless we make changes. it also requires tax increases. it would be prudent to focus on spending cuts. i do not think you want to start the cutting in 2011, because of all the things i mentioned i am nervous about. the economy needs to be off and

running before we engage in real, significant cutting, but we're going to have to do that. and we think about the spending cuts we engage in, we have to think about it in the context of global competitiveness. we do not want to cut back on the things that make our economy tick, our investment in the form of education spending and infrastructure, as well. we're going to have to cut, but we have to be very prudent as to how we dohat, so we do not undermine our economy, which is obviously key to addressing your -- your problems -- our long- term problems. host: what your do we begin cutting -- year do we begin cutting? i do not think it would start in 2011. unemployment is still 9.4%. the collective psyche is still

very fragile, so i do not think i would start its itthis year. -- start it this year. by 2012 or 2013, i think we'll be in a place to do that, and we should be very aggressive. host: do you wait longer to address the medicare program? guest: i think medicare and medicaid will be a tough thing to attack, at least in that timeframe. longer run, we're going to have to come back to it. our problems are centered around rising cost of health care is and the cost of those programs. we're going to have to come back to back, but i do not think we can address those problems in the next couple of years. social security -- i think we can begin to tackle that. it is a more manageable problem with some very clear solutions.

i think that should be part of the discussion on how to rein in government spending over the next couple or three years. host: where did you come down on the economic impact of repealing the new health care law and replacing it, or leaving it as is? guest: i do not think the health care law has a significant impact on the economy, certainly not in the next couple, three, four, five years. i think that the impact of the health care reform is that it has insured a large number of the uninsured, and has roughly paid for it. we do not know precisely that it will get it right, but i think it is pretty close. i do not think it would make a lot of sense, at this point, to backtrack significantly on that, at least from an economic

perspective. at this point, it is important to nail down what we have done and provide clarity to businesses and people, so they can get on with their business and let the economy move forward. the one major disappointment i had with the health care reform, again, from an economic perspective, is that i do not think it addressed the long- term growth in health care costs. ultimately, we have to get the growth in health care costs to slow, and i do not see anything in the reform that convinces me that will happen. we will have to come back to that at some point, when the political environment is right for it. host: unemployment numbers for january come out on friday. what do you expect? what is your prediction? guest: i think we will probably see a gain of about 150,000 private-sector jobs. that is not bad.

we will need more than that, on a consistent basis, to bring down unemployment, but that is prettya good. -- pretty good. unemployment fell sharply in december, in part related to statistical issues that are going to a white in this data. unemployment will move up a little bit. it is going to be 9.6% in january, i suspect. just to give you a benchmark, we need to create 150,000 jobs per month, just to maintain that stable rate of unemployment. we have to see job growth that is measurably better than that to start bringing down unemployment. i am hopeful and confident that will happen, but that is still a forecast. host: you are on the air with mark zandi. caller: thanks for your insight. you brought up so many points already. i just want to touch on the health care reform that you

talked about. being from massachusetts -- i think they are modeling their system after hours, which is not perfect -- after ours, which is not perfect. it is the 800-pound gorilla. i had insurance. i have a laparoscopic -- had a laparoscopic procedure that ended up costing a total of $30,000 for one hour's work. if somebody tells me how would costs $30,000 for one hour of work, that would help me out. host: let's get mark zandi's perspective on that. guest: you put your finger right on our most significant, long- term economic problem. it is the very high cost of health care and the fact that

the cost of health care continues to increased, each and every year, very quickly. overall, health care inflation is running almost double overall inflation. that cannot continue, if you do the arithmetic. it will make health care such a large share of the economy, and the cost the government so significant, that it will break. that is exactly the problem that we need to address. the way to address that, ultimately, at the end of the day, is going to require that the cost of health care are going to have to be borne more directly by you and i as consumers of health care. if we feel the pain of those higher costs, we will become much more judicious in our use of health care, and therefore that will slow the growth of costs. i do not think we did much in the health care reform bill to adopt that principle.

therefore, we will have to come back to this and redesigned health care system again. host: how do you bring the cost surve down -- cost curve down? guest: there are a number of ways. one key way is to reduce the tax benefit employers have in providing health care to their employees. i have a very good health care plan. when i get sick, or my family gets sick, i can go shopping for health care. i really do not think about the cost, or i am not as careful as i should be in shopping for health care. if we reduce the tax benefits that employers get for providing health benefits to employees -- high-income employees like myself -- then it will start falling on me to start shopping more carefully for health care. once we start shopping more carefully, i think that will

have a big impact on the long- term growth of health care costs. host: you get ready of the third-party health insurance relationship. guest: i would reduce the insurance that goes to high- income households. or, better put, i would make them bear the cost of that -- those gold-plated health insurance plans. they would have to pay more to get those plans. host: let's go to walkie gone -- waukegan, illinois. you are on the air. caller: why do we trust moody's and all of these other ratings agencies, considering that the exacerbated the downfall of the economy -- they exacerbated the downfall of the economy? host: mark zandi? .

whether they are funded or not, the pension obligations will be on the books when you look at state debt. guest: i think that is appropriate. the state governments have provided to give pension benefits to employees and have not really paid for them.

when you are trying to assess the credit worthiness of a state government, i think you need to consider those liabilities, the unfunded pension liabilities. i think the rating agencies, including duties, are recognizing that more implausibly in the ratings they do. it affects their ability to make future payments and should be considered. host: florida on the republican line. caller: i have a quick question and then a follow-up. do you know of any business that is in existence that pays taxes, or do they passed along to their customer? >guest: they do pay taxes. the income tax rate is about 35%. the effective rate after they take advantage of loopholes is

more like 25%. that includes federal and state and local income tax. many businesses that is the cost of doing business and will drive that through to consumers, but some of them can in some industries where there is less competition or margins are higher. in many industries they bear the burden of that. there are also many f chapter corporations. -- also many s chapter corporations. people pay and individual tax rate on that income. it is not a c corp, but it is profits being taxed. i think businesses pay taxes and they're not able to pass all of that's true to their customers. host: the corporate tax rate was an issue that was brought up by the president during the state

of the union address, and he said in exchange for lowering the tax rate he wants to close loopholes, the tax loopholes by corporations. what if you do not close the loopholes and you were to then lower the corporate tax rate, what happens? guest: you lose revenue. it would be prudent to reduce the loopholes, the corporate tax expenditures. that would raise enough revenue to allow for a reduction in the marginal tax rates that businesses pay. put another way, you brought in the tax rate so you can lower the tax rate, so that can allow u.s. businesses to compete more effectively globally. right now he was income tax rates are relatively high versus the competitors in many countries. eliminating or at least reducing

loopholes, broadening the base, generating revenue i think would be very prudent. it would incentivize u.s. businesses to hire, investcorp in united states and expand and grow the economy. i think that is the idea. i think as pretty broad base support in viet ministration and congress and hopefully we are able to execute on that. host: we are talking to mark zandi joining us to talk about outlook of the economy. i want to keep updating you about the situation in egypt. egyptian president starting a new cabinet today. it is saying that it is the most significant change the interior minister who has internal security forces was replaced. his replacement is widely

despised by protesters for. caller: you look like a direct and honest person, but i am very angry this morning. i just changed channels, and on the other channel they are saying wall street is about ready to hand out big bonuses. i am watching my fellow americans lose jobs, homes, retirements, people tried to scuffle to get a job for $9 an hour, and these guys on wall street are handing out billion dollar bonuses. is there a total disconnect on wall street, and the question is should we be out in the street like the egyptians are? i am sorry for being sarcastic, but that is my question. guest: not at all. there does seem to be a disconnect puritan after three years of financial disconnect

and hundreds of billions of dollars that were put forward by taxpayers to support that and it's a system and wall street, wall street is back doing quite well and the competition is now rising. -- compensation is not rising. the $5 billion you referred to as regard to one of the hedge fund managers. he has done quite well as a traitor. -- quite well as a trader. i am not sure we should begrudge him that. the broader point is, i do think it would be prudent if wall street' were more restrained in the compensation packages that they provide, and more importantly than that, hopefully one of the reforms that comes out of this is closer look at the way compensation is made on wall street so that the incentives are right so that

people have the incentive through their compensation packages to do the right thing, that there incentives are lined up with investors. i think that is clear that was not the case and that is one of the reasons we got into this case. hopefully through financial regulatory reform and financial reform, we will see those compensation packages better designed and compensation on wall street more aligned to investor interest. i sympathize with what you are saying, it is a bitter pill only after three years of the recession for the competition bills to be so large are ready. host: on the democratic line from california. good morning. caller: thank you for this report. i am a green thparty democrat.

we want to reclaim the democratic party, just like the democrats have lost their left- wing base. i really appreciate what mr. zandi has been talking about. the thing he has not mention yet is we the tax money to bail out the banks, which were criminally fraudulent against people and damaged our society, but now when it is time to bail out state governments, we have no money to do that. the bank should be required to bail out our state governments of zero interest. i also think we need a -- host: let's take the point on whether or not to bail out states or let them filed for bankruptcy. what is the economic impact? guest: first let me stay the

state governments have received a significant amount of help throughout the recession. i think if you add it all up, it comes close to $175 billion. that has gone up from the federal government to state government for various things, police, fire, education, the medicaid program. the states have received a significant amount of help. the problem that money from the federal government to the state government runs out at the end of the state's current fiscal year, which is june 2011. after that they get no more money. their revenues are still quite low because of the recession. their expenditures are still quite high because of the recession. they have a big budget gap. without federal money, they have to close it. that means they're cutting back workers, programs, which means

the loss of private sector jobs. some states are raising taxes. illinois is in the midst of trying to raise marginal tax rates on individuals. this is a major drag on the economy. think back to the early part of the discussion, this is one of the risks that i pointed out, the cutback as state and local governments. it is a significant headwind to the economy and one thing i worry about. there is a fair amount of concern that the state's will not be able to manage their budgets and will be beginning to default on the budgets. thoughts of that are close to zero. i do not see that happening. most states are doing what is necessary and appropriate. i did not see that at all. one could argue that we will see more defaults on very small bonds, and in many cases that is

likely due to mismanagement or perhaps fraud. i do not think we will see another of those kinds of problems that it becomes a broader economic issue. the reason to be nervous -- there is reason to be nervous, but i do not think it will overwhelm us. host: marc sank zandi from moo's analytics joining us from pennsylvania. we're talking about the latest economic data. the gdp is 3.2%. unemployment is 9.4% in december. personal consumption expenditures 4.4%. the consumer price index is also up 2.1%. in mark zandi, what is your reaction to those numbers? guest: we are year and have out

from the recession and we are now starting to get meaningful growth. gdp is the value of all the things that we produce. that is growing about 3% on a consistent basis. did you will start creating enough jobs and bringing down unemployment. we're just about there. i am hopeful and increasingly confident that we will get increasingly better growth in 2011. the most fundamental reason for optimism is that american businesses are doing quite well. they are profitable. in fact, pick bany economic figure you want, they're still well below pre- recession peaks. corporate profits are now above pre-recession peak. businesses are in good shape. historically when businesses are doing this well, it is only a matter of time before they decide they have to go out and

expand operations, invest more, and they have to hire more. i do think we will see a hirinhg picked up in a meaningful way. we have not want to feel great, because it will take a number of years of very strong growth to bring down unemployment in a substantive way, but we will be growing fast enough that we will feel a lot better about things. caller: i will tell you one number that has not recovered nearly or at all is yields that the average person can get on savings. it is lucky these days if you could get over 1% from a bank. some of us are getting close to retirement and do not think it is appropriate to take on the rest of the stock market, yet with people getting 1% or less for savings, people are going

into higher-risk investments just so they can make a decent return. is there anyone giving any thought to that? guest: you make an excellent point that lowering interest rates is a positive for the economy, but there are negatives. one of the most audiencof these negatives is it hurts sabrevers. you're getting essentially nothing on short-term cds. there are negatives. in to some degree as you nicely put, one of the reasons for lowering rates is to try to convince people to take on more

risk, do not keep your money in cash, start investing in higher- yielding assets, may be bonds and other fixed income assets depending on your situation and risk tolerance, perhaps stock. but as part of the idea in getting the economy moving forward. -- that is part of the idea in getting the economy moving forward. host: here is a tweet from a viewer -- guest: the unemployment today is rated 9.4%. if you would asked most economists before the recession and what unemployment was, they would say 5%. that is where you would need to be to have a fully employed economy. my sense is that unemployment today is closer to 6%. 9.4% of women rate, 6% is full

employment, so that means 3.4% is cyclical. we should generate some of the economy to get that when it right down to at least 6%. host: why don't we go to a call so you can get a drink of water. mike in monterey, california. caller: the last calller address one of my points, which is lower rates for savers. i also want to talk about a topic that was raised a couple of minutes ago when talking about the inflation rate in the cost of health care. we all know health care is going up two to three times the inflation rate, but for elderly probably a much larger percentage of their income goes towards health care. these people have really lost ground in the past three years with very low rate of return of their savings and the fact that they have had no social security

increase for two years, but have seen their health care costs go up dramatically. guest: good point. thank you for that. i am getting over a cold. excellent point. older households had been under tremendous financial pressure in this environment. one point of clarification, you are right that the cost of living adjustments in the social security has -- there have been done in the past two years, but to compensate for that in some of the stimulus packages there have been tax cut to retirees to try to give them a little bit of the benefit to make up for the fact that they are not getting a cost-of-living adjustment. nonetheless, even accounting for

that, over -- older households are under tremendous pressure. at the end of the day the only thing that will help all of us, and that includes retirees and older households, is if we get the economy moving in business is creating jobs again so they can create tax revenues and the economy can start moving forward. one of the key ways of doing that is keeping interest rates low. this go around is just a matter of time. while you are in the middle of the process, it is not carry comfortable for the older households that are seeing the interest rates go down to nothing. host: allen on the democratic line, good morning. caller: i wanted to go back to health care for a minute. i think one of the problems is

the lack of people being injured. if someone is not injuredsured e hospitals have to pay more. one of the problems is if there is some kind of ongoing treatment they end up getting possibly put in economic [inaudible] . i heard about a couple of women that were having diabetes were having rates go up and they could not pay it and so forth. i wonder if perhaps maybe not now because i understand the economy is pretty shaky and with a lot of problems with that, if mr. zandi would it mind expanding medicaid so that we could get some catastrophic

conditions, things that might require ongoing things for people better of low or income, because it seems to me that that is part of the problem as well. guest: i think the big success of the health care reform that was passed last year is that it has insured most of the population. it did that by roughly paying for it. we do still have some uninsured people, but for the most part i think our population remains roughly intact will be insured and will pay for its spirited that was the success of it. -- that was the success of it. there are some holes in this, and not everyone may be giving the covers that we feel would be appropriate, but broadly

speaking i think it was a successful plan. the failure of the plan from an economic perspective is that it really did not do anything to address the growth of long-term health care costs. it did not implement any mechanisms for trying to get those costs growing at a slower rate in the future. that is where we will have to come back and readdress it. perhaps in the context of doing that, we can also address bill holes that are still in the coverage for people, and we will get a better sense of what those are blogger down the road once the implemented plan takes place. host: on the housing market here is the headline this morning -- then i want to show the latest christian science monitor post.

the headline to you, housing -- where is the market headed? guest: i think we have more house price declines coming. the list of concerns that i enumerated at the top of the conversation, at the very top of the list of concerns was going on in the housing market that the foreclosure crisis is ongoing. we still have millions of people in the foreclosure process. to be precise, there are 2.3 million homeowners in foreclosure, and another couple million homeowners that are close. so 4 million households roughly are in this predicament. with so many people going through the foreclosure process and many of these properties that are going to go to a foreclosure or short sale, that means we're going to see some house price declines. i think that is what the wall street journal and the christian

science monitor are observing. when house prices are declining, it it's hard to get completely enthusiastic about our economy. our home is still the most important asset that people own, and many small-business people rely on their home as collateral when they get a loan. when i got my first business loan, i had to put up my home as collateral. that is very important to job creation. small businesses are very important to creating jobs, and indeed those loans to get the cash to be able to go out and hire people. when house prices are weak and falling, we have a problem. i am hopeful that with improving job market was continued low interest rates, we will get on the other side of this foreclosure crisis by this time next year so that house prices will stabilize once and for all and begin to rise by 2012. but having said that, that is still very much a hope, and my

concern is that things turn out worse than i am anticipating and that is at the top of my list of concerns, at the foreclosure crisis continues to be a significant threat. host: there is a tweet that says this -- virginia, mark on the republican line. caller: your articles that you were just reading got to the heart of the question that i was going to ask on the housing market and basically where we will be in the short-term over the next one to two years. i cannot see this economy growing at a pace where it could possibly be growing if what you said the housing market continues to stagnate, may be declined. my question would be after hearing that information, where do think we will be this time

next year as far as housing prices are concerned? guest: i think house prices will continue to decline through most of 2011. that by the end of this year prices will be down another 4% to 5%. to give you a context, price declines from the peak will be something close to 35%. house prices peaked and the bottom will have declined 35%. that goes right to the heart of why we suffered the great recession and why we had a financial panic and 9.4% unemployment rate. it has been a significant there are sources of economic growth that will increasingly overwhelm the drug from housing. the rising stock market, the job creation that is causing

consumers to go out and spend more aggressively. consumer spending growth has picked up nicely. christmas sales were strong. vehicle sales are rising. consumers are becoming a tail wind to the economy. we are also exported a lot more, sending what we produce to faster-growing emerging economies like china and brazil. businesses are investing more and all kinds of technology. consumer spending growth, business investment, exports are all growing more strongly, and i think are beginning to and have are ready started to outweigh the negatives from housing. the housing crash is not quite over. we still haunts -- we still have some more to go, but fortunately there are other sources of growth. here is the most important thing -- but this time next year if

the drag from housing should be over. that means we will get enough growth to bring down unemployment in a substantive way. host: another tweet from you. -- for you. guest: i do not think it will have any meaningful impact because it should be no surprise to anyone that the ability of the egyptians to pay on their debt has been impaired by what they're going through right now. clearly the uncertainty is very extreme. their economy has been paralyzed by what is going on. it makes a very difficult for them to make their debt payments. so it would not be surprising to anyone, particularly in financial markets, by the downgrade. i think everyone has pretty much factors that in. i do not see that having any kind of impact. host: i want to ask you about

fannie mae and freddie mac and what happens to them. what is your perspective on that? guest: i think no one is very comfortable with the intimate and freddie mac being around for the long run. -- very comfortable with the in the mae and freddie mac being around for the long run. in part of the operations will be privatized. the other part will be consumed in to the federal government. i do not think we will be using the words fannie mae and freddie mac 5 to 10 years from now. it will take that long to make the transition because you do not want to disrupt the mortgage market and housing market, particularly since it is so fragile. it will take a long time for the transition, but at the end of the day the mortgage finance system will be very different than it is today. i just want to say one other thing. i think a ultimately the

mortgage market will require some government support. i think we're going to be able to see relatively low mortgage rates, and more importantly if everyone was to continue on with the 30-year fixed rate mortgage, some form of government support that is paid for will be necessary to ensure that in the future. host: that is what i was just about to ask you, the 30-year fixed rate if we will continue to see that. wayne in virginia. good morning. caller: earlier there were talking about hedge funds. wall street versus main street -- wall street has all the money and main street is broke. wall street is getting the money off the backs of main street. how much longer cannot go on? -- can that go on? guest: at the end of the day if we're going to succeed as a

nation wall street and main street have to move in the same direction and both have to benefit from the relationship. over a long span of economic history that has been the case. there have been points where it does not work quite as well, certainly the last few years, but i am confident we will align the interests in a way that everyone will be better off. a lot of reforms that have been put in place in sure that will occur going down the road. host: always appreciate your time and talking to the viewers. thank you. in the last hour here on washington journal we will turn our attention to another domestic issue. first, coming up, we're going to return to unrest in egypt. before that, a news update from c-span radio. >> an update on the situation in egypt. danish shipping and oil giantm , mersk is a spending

activities in egypt. the military has arrested six journalists in cairo. as the protests continue in egypt, secretary of state clinton has called top on voice to gather in washington today. ambassadors from almost all 260 u.s. embassies and other posts in more than 180 countries are expected. politicos as the gathering is being billed as the first ever meeting of its kind. u.s. foreign policy priorities for 2011 the main focus of the vallthat the ring. -- of the gathering. a white house official says jon huntsman plans to resign his post this spring to explore a bid for the republican presidential nomination. susie what ailhiles for recently

managed the campaign evertz scott is to run a new entity that is called a rise in pac, which has already been set up for his run. those are some of the latest headlines on c-span radio. >> you are watching c-span, bring you politics and public affairs. every morning espieit is "washin journal." weekdays watch live coverage of the u.s. house and policy forums at night. also, supreme court oral arguments. on saturdays "the communicators." you can also watch our programming any time at c- span.org. it is all searchable as the c- span video library. c-span, created by american

cable companies. "washington journal" continues. host: steve had a man is here to talk about the situation in egypt. -- steve heidamen. egypt opposition unites. guest: i am not sure they expect to replace mubarak the short term. what is the board that an opposition coalition come together that could serve as a negotiating partner for the regime. that would serve to divide the transition terms. until now these protests we have seen have been remarkable because they have been so spontaneous that they have not

had a clear identifiable leadership. he is trying to secure his own role as the leader of this coalition it. what makes the participation of the muslim brotherhood so interesting is they are a very powerful organized political force in egypt, and yet the relationship with the receiver has been so at the cereal is that if they were to assert themselves as the leader of the opposition, i think the military would respond very quickly to crack down. they're being very strategic and stepping back. he ithey want to be involved because they know if they're not participating in the process they could find themselves shut out later. we're seeing this coalition emerge, and i think it is a very positive sign. the egyptian government cannot say they have no one to

negotiate with about a transition period . host: you say you do not think this coalition that is emerging is one that thinks it will take over in the short-term. guest: the first step is to negotiate the terms of the transition. what will that transition look like? we know what house to of all the elections. we know it has to be inclusive, so that all of the relevant political actors are part of the discussions, but those negotiations are not themselves want to define who takes power in egypt. i think what all of the opposition once is close to what secretary clinton called for, which is the democratic process for determining egypt's political future. what we're seeing now is this. the first up is talk, the final framework, but the framework play out, and the result will be

the opposition hopes, a new more representative government for egypt. host: joining us on the phone is jim michaels. he is a military writer in cairo. i want to go to him. if you have a question for him, please feel free to jump in. let me begin with the reaction in egypt today to the obama administration to secretary of state hillary clinton on all talk shows saying there needs to be an orderly transition, we do not want chaos. guest: the reaction has been pretty much the same all along. if you talk to people on the street, there is a sense that the united states is hypocritical sometimes in its approach in the sense that they have been advocating a democracy and talking about the importance of democracy, but they want a

stronger position against president mubarak. you have a lot of gathering of anchoger in the streets here, ad they are really are only seeing one objection in their mind, and as becoming increasingly the case that they want the president to step down. guest: tto be administered -- do they realize the language has been evolving over the couple of days and the president -- the secretary is saying that the u.s. no longer views the current egyptian government as acceptable, or legitimate and wants to support as it to something different? do the people get that? guest: i am not sure they

understand the new ones. i do not think there is very strong anti-u.s. sentiment or anything like that. i think they are clearly focused on the immediate objective, which is the removal of the president. to answer your question, i am not sure they have completely absorbed the nuance of the evolution of the american position over time. host: give us the latest in cairo. what is happening? guest: there is another day of protest. the numbers are increasing as they go along. the army has continued to act with restraint. just now we're starting to see some police come back out on the street. remember they were present early on firing tear gas at demonstrators.

there is a lot of antagonism toward the police from the people. whereas the army is more respected. they stood back from the crowds and have been welcomed and respected. at any rate, at the numbers are continuing to grow. they say the president's intent is to ignore it and let this thing dissipate, and they will counter the move by increasing the crowds every day. tomorrow they are calling for a general strike and even more people. host: we saw one call for a million man march. what do you think of that? we're showing our viewers some footage from earlier this morning. guest: it is very hard to

predict. they are calling for the million man march. it would be a fairly crowded square if they got 1 million people there. it is this real sense that they are keeping order themselves, but underlying it all is a lot of tension. you know, how long will the regime continue its current policy, and will they ask the army to crack down? there is a lot of tension. no one knows what is going to happen, and they realize things could change in a nanosecond. > host: what about the alliance between the muslim brotherhood and the government? guest: there is a lot of that going on. there is a sense that this is a

guy that has been outside the country for a long time and does not have a good sense of what is going on within the country and so forth. host: so his support is not deep? guest: no, i do not know if anyone support is deep. if you ask the protesters who would they like, they say there are many qualified candidates, but no one can name one of them. guest: i think it is very important to recognize the atelbaradei is an unknown quantity for many egyptians. -- that elbaradei is an unknown quantity for many egyptians.

he is a bit of a deficit yes overcome now. that is very important to be aware of as he tries to assert his leadership over the opposition. host: before we let you go, what is it like to report there and have you had internet access, a telephone? what is it like? guest: i do not have internet access, nor does anyone in egypt for the most part. it is a throwback to what it was like reporting a few decades ago. there're a lot fewer distractions when i am writing now because i cannot serve the internet at the same time. the cell phones were in tomentum but they are back on. -- were intermountain but their back on now. host: jim michaels joining us from cairo this morning.

thank you very much. steve hydemmen let me turn to you about his comments. who are the qualified people? guest: frankly i am not sure. there is a very weak, fragmented sector of political parties in egypt. they have sucksuffered under decades of intense political pressure of the regime. it was always the goal to create a context in which they could say to washington that we are the only barrier between stability in egypt and the emergence of an extremist and thomas movement. part of the effort to make that case was to close atthat other opposition parties might have to mobilize and become mature. but we have right now is a

constellation of small, secular opposition parties. they do not have broad based public support. they are generally divided internally, and the notion that any of these could really become effective in leading an opposition, i think is a bit of a long shot. host: let's go to a democrat in atlanta, georgia. your on the air. caller: they need to work within themselves and try somehow to manage to move the united states and israeli people out of the picture. the united states did not try to bring democracy in the united east, but also prevented that. the revolution was one of them.

the question i iranians will ask is that they did not like bringing the communist or socialist party with the help of the soviet union. they did not like the democratic movement. the question is, what do they want from us? the question is honestly as americans, which i love this country so much, is that america is an imperial government. wherever they go, they look at their interest. host: we will leave it there. guest: what is so interesting about the developments in egypt is the u.s. has not played an interest role. either in sparking the protests that have forced the government to think very carefully about its future and whether in fact it has a future, but in addition, the u.s. government has been very cautious about

identifying a very particular outcome as its preferred direction of change for egypt. the government, secretary clinton, has never indicated anything in particular about the future of the president. the u.s. government has not expressed a view about the kind of outcome it would prefer in this case. it seems to me that it is trying to step back from inserting itself into this process, into this very messy process of popular protest in a way that might create opportunities for egypt since to view of the u.s. as seeking to directly influence the course of events. you might in fact say that one of the lessons that the u.s. learned from earlier experience in the middle east, including perhaps in thiran, is that sometimes we perhaps insert more

influence when we do not take a position. it is one at the end of the day that we are not able to control. host: we of a special line set aside for egyptian americans. an egyptian american is joining us from new york. you are on the air. caller: good morning. when i speak to my family right early, they say enough time for mubarak. when he assigned the vice- president, after 30 years it looks that he wants to leave someone in his place that he trusts will continue the same policies, especially towards policy with the u.s. and israel.

the problem with that is he is considered connected to mubarak. he seems like ihe jump with a parachute just a few hours ago to take over. i read "the guardian" from london that he is on the same board with george soros and a foundation that deals with crisis and stuff like that. there is some doubt about his motives and direction. host: let's talk about the new vice president named. guest: he is one of the closest confidants of president mubarak. they have been allies for decades, but became particularly

close in 1995. the president made a trip to ethiopia. general suleiman insisted he right in an armored limousine and there was an attempted assassination against president mubarak. he survived and thank him for having saved his life. as a result, he moved more closely into the inner circle. he is the chief of military intelligence in egypt. he is known in the united states as close to president mubarak himself. what we see is an effort on the part of the regime to position itself to survive the movement that transitions to a new political order. the regime understands the military, which supports and surround mubarak, understands that a change of leadership is

not the same as a change of regime. they are hoping to be participants in what ever new political order emerges in egypt as this uprising unfolds. his appointment is very much a part of that. just to speak to one part of the caller's comments, which i agreed with completely, it is not only a question of mubarak been in government for 30 years. it has been in office for almost 60 years. it has been in office almost only a decade less than the soviet union. during that time it has had only three presidents. they all eat emerged from the military to assume the position -- they all emerged from the military to assume the position. now we have the president himself lining up a group of senior insiders in order to continue the legacy of the

regime and remain in power over an extended amount of time. essentially not even a matter of 30 years, almost 60 years that this regime has been in power. host: anthony, another a ditch an american ihe egyptian americn miami, florida. when did you leave egypt and why? caller: 25 years ago. i left for business reasons. my comment is egypt is a very poor country. the only interest is two things. oil and israel. nothing else. before we implement changes, we have to be very careful. guest: i think it is true, no one knows where this is going to

lead. that is one of the challenges that the administration and washington has been wrestling with. this is a very-fast fast-moving situation on the ground. we do not know what is good to happen. that uncertainty is deeply unsettling for any government that once predictability in its relationships in a region that it views as strategically very important. i have to say i think that u.s. interests in the arab world go beyond oil and israel. during the cold war we recognize that networks of alliances were important in maintaining a balance of power in the international system and in checking the influence of the soviet union. i think subsequently in the struggle against extremism we have recognized that the u.s. has interest in maintaining relationships and parts of the world where those kinds of

trends have been an exceptionally powerful force, and in addition, i think if we take a slightly less cynical view there are interests of the united states in economic and social development that will elevate the living standards of citizens of countries in the arab world and provide them with opportunities for a future that we hope would equip them to participate as active citizens in democratic politics in ways that they have not had the opportunity over the past several decades. i agree that oil and israel do tend to be prominent priorities of the u.s. in the region. i would be reluctant to define them as our only priorities. host: "the new york times" reports that there were identical headlines.

it says the events of the past five years, the takeover of gods gaza and the shift of turkey by iran and turkey have turned many against them. just want to know one other thing.

guest: i think there is significant concern in israel about the events unfolding in egypt. they are focused very directly on the fate of the egyptian and israeli peace treaty. the muslim brotherhood in egypt has indicated that if they were to participate in a future government, it would work towards a revocation of the egyptian israeli peace treaty, and that would transform the strategic peace treaty in a way that the united states would regard as troubling. it has been one of the underlying principles of the middle east strategic thinking, that without egypt and their participation in any kind of unified arab strategic alliance or relationship, war against israel is essentially impossible. if egypt were to shift its

strategic focus and distance itself from that peace treaty, it could revive a lot of concerns about the possibilities of some kind of confrontation on a scale we have not seen since 1973. host: here is the former jordanian prime minister saying that hthe administration has ben way behind the curve on this and so far they're just reacting. cincinnati, democratic line. good morning. caller: mr. heydemmen, how do we really know that the money that the united states contributes to egypt, how do we

know that this president really uses the funds that are given to egypt, how do we know he does not use them for his own good instead of using them for what they are given to? host: the newspapers are reporting that figure is around 1.5 billion per year. guest: egypt is the largest recipient of foreign military. they receive less support than israel, but significant amount of money. it is an important question. there are high levels of corruption and egypt. it is a relevant question. one thing to be aware of is that much of the money that we offer to egypt through foreign military assistance programs is actually spent in the united states. it is intended to support the purchase of u.s. equipment. it is intended to support the collaboration between the u.s.

and the egyptian military through training exercises and other kinds of activities. a big share of the funds never arrived in egypt. they are in the united states to support firms engaged in supply of military equipment to egypt. that is one thing to be aware of. beyond that, i think there is good reason to be concerned about the way our resources and egypt have been, even if they have not themselves been siphoned off by regime figures but for purposes other than which there were intended, we have to ask ourselves if this kind of support for egypt has really worked to america's long- term advantage? whether it has really sustain our interest or supported our interest in egypt. you could argue that it was critical for egypt's continued commitment to the israeli peace process. i think that is the view the

administration has been taking. if that is the case, we've may well do it as a bargain. -- we may view it as a bargain. there is no question that that support has established very close ties between the egyptian and u.s.. and the u.s. standing has probably suffered as a result. this is one of the complex questions where we have made some trade-offs. we have sought to use funds to move egypt in a direction that were supported of u.s. interest in the region and paid a price in the process. host: let's go to independent in virginia. you are on the air. go ahead. caller: i want to point out some of the similarities i saw between iraq and egypt.

some people would say that iraq did not want the form of government, but they felt they were being treated unfairly. i would like to think that we help them achieve to be treated more fairly and have a chance at electing their president or what have you. and in egypt i would like to see that the people there accomplishing this on their own to show the rest of the world that they do not necessarily need the u.s. to achieve the same goals. i think that would be a good thing, just the whole movement, i would like to see the people do that for themselves. . .

we have not heard slogans demanding an islamic republic. we have not heard a lot of slogans against the united states. we have seen people mobilizing and protest in to try and bring about a process of democratic critical change. that is very exciting and they think will be more sustainable in the long run. host: this person is talking about the rising food prices, the political crisis driving the

political protests. guest: there are quite extraordinary levels of youth unemployment, growing poverty, a growing inequality, rising prices for basic commodities. and all of these are drivers the conflict. even as many egyptians and many arabs in other countries are struggling to make ends meet and are living in conditions of poverty, they look around and see these enormous skyscrapers going up along the nile. they see these luxury hotels being built. they see their own wealthy living lives that are vastly ostentatious. they cannot help but be a corrosive force when you encounter that day to day and have your face kind of read into the vast gap that separates you from those who have benefited from egypt's system. host: given that then and the protests that have been happening for six days, how much

longer can the protesters continue? the economy has been impacted by these protests. the trade has been stopped. people have to have food on the table. guest: that is important. what we're hearing from protesters is interesting. there say yes, these protests are hurting the economy, but decades correct -- corrupt rule by the mubarak regime have heard them even more. and if it requires a short time of sacrifice and economic disruption in order to put egypt on the right track, it is worthwhile. i am sure that bankers around the world to not agree. i am sure that stock markets around the world disagree. we saw that in the u.s. on friday. we saw it in asia overnight. but i think the egyptian people feel that if this is one of the costs of securing their political freedom, it is a price that is worth paying. host: clear water florida, an

egyptian american. good morning. caller: good morning. i have a question. sir, are you familiar with abrahuim? guest: yes, i know him quite well. caller: it says that mubarak has the power to use aid and give city way he likes, no questions asked. is that correct. >> i do not know whether that is correct or not. would you do know is that the mubarak family over the past 30 year has accumulated quite extraordinary wealth. i can assure you that the balances in the mubarak family bank account do not look anything like the salary of the presidents of egypt. wherever that money comes from, whether it comes from contributions from domestic supporters, whether it comes from the kinds of opportunities that have been available to his family because of his political

position, i could not tell you. but it is very clear that this is the case, in which a family of rather modest means with no legitimate access to the kinds of resources that they have been able to accumulate has become exceptionally rich. at the end of the day, this is only possible because of one form of corruption or another. was the judge read referring to. guest: he is a wonderful man, a political scientist at top of the university of cairo for many years. he founded a research center for civil society in egypt. he became a target of the regime. his center was investigated on trumped up grounds by the egyptian regime. he was thrown into prison for several years, and he now lives in exile. he was a long shot, a dark horse

candidate for the presidency in egypt in 2005. of course, he did not prevail. but he is a man of tremendous political courage and has been, i think, a real inspiration to many egyptians who had been looking for authentic egyptian voices will speak out against the regime. host: steve heydemann is the vice president of the u.s. institute for peace. talk about your background and your experience. host: i spend a summer in egypt at the american university of cairo in 1981. it is right in the square were these demonstrations are taking place. i study arabic. i have the right to get a teaching, and research about the arab world for almost 30 years now, which is hard to think about. my focus has been on authoritarian governments in the arab world. and how it is that these regimes have been able to keep themselves in power during decades in which democratic

transitions that took place in almost every other region of the world. host: does president mubarak have it within him to leave? guest: that is not the question. i think president mubarak basically is finished. i think we are seeing an effort to negotiate a process of transition that will permit them to leave on terms other than those of the tunisian president. if i could take a moment, that is very important. this process of change in egypt is being watched by arab leaders around the region. and if it is possible to engineer a soft departure for mubarak and the process of transition that provides space for the old order to participate in some new political arrangement, and might actually offer some kind of reassurance to other arab autocrats that they have choices, that they have an exit strategy, that it

is not only power or humiliating exile. so the way this unfolds in egypt could actually be very important to run the region. it is one of the reasons why i hope that this unfolds in a way that is a bit perhaps softer or more inclusive than what we saw happen in tunisia. host: east rutherford, new jersey, an egyptian american. welcome to the conversation. go ahead. caller: i have a common to any question. the comment is an egyptian american in the u.s. have gone against the regime in egypt with all kinds of questions. but still, the u.s. administration has not listened to the concern of the egyptian people's in the u.s. until the administration here

will keep itself isolated from the egyptian people in the u.s. -- also, we have seen that the uprising and egypt came from the middle class. the and people are very well educated. and these are not islamists. these are not what ever we call it every other day. so why feel they administration is not taking a position to support this change of power. and by waiting and waiting, egyptian people will suffer more. it will be very effective in radicalizing the next generation against our interests. thank you. host: do you have family in egypt? what they saying? caller: yes, i do. they're very frustrated. the young people will be very

easily influenced in the future, showing what is happening in the u.s. unless they make a fast movement in supporting the people in egypt. host: do you have family that are protesting? are they out there i liberation square and other places? caller: i have a family who say they're willing to die to get it right this time. they are sick and tired of what has been going on for years and years. host: ok. guest: i would hope that egyptian protesters 80 egyptian americans have been listening carefully to the language coming out of the administration over the past couple of weeks. i think it took in time for the state department said the white house to find their footing. i think initially there were quite concerned about how serious these protests were and

were reluctant to express statements for strongly in support of the protesters in strongly in support of a political transition in egypt. but we have begun to see the administration's shift. i think it has found its footing. i think some of the statements that we heard from secretary clinton over the weekend were actually much, much closer to what our caller hoped he would hear that he might have recognized. we heard our secretary of state say that the u.s. endorses a transition to a new democratic political order in egypt, that it supports the aspirations of the protesters. that is a significant shift from the kinds of comments we were hearing from secretary clinton only a week prior to that. if we look to the way the administration has been moving, i think they have been perhaps a little bit slow, but they're living in the right direction but they're responding to what they are seeing on the streets of cairo and other egyptian

cities. it seems to me that the gaps between the u.s. administration and what the protesters are lobbying for are really narrowly. >host: we were showing our viewers from the el jazeera network, a live shot of what is happening in cairo as protesters continuing to gather. it looked like there were a lot more people. they are defying the nighttime curfew. also, i saw a banner from colleges 0 saying that a journalist had been freed, but the camera equipment still remains seized. that is the headline. six algeciras journalists released, but the equipment remains seized. chicago, you're on the air. caller: i have two cards. when it, i think president obama is doing the correct thing as far as trying to support the people in egypt. i also think that is the way it

should be all over the countries. we should not be the one to go in and dictate to the people how they're supposed to run their government. and they think he is doing a great job. my second comment is this, i think that over the radio -- i think that people should start respecting the president and stop calling him obama. i think they should call him president obama, just like they did for all the other presidents. host: all right, an independent caller from chicago. caller: i was watching c-span book review last weekend, and there was a book writer, edwin black, and he wrote a book, and

i would like to know if it is a possibility, god forbid, and i have finally found someone on c- span this morning, mr. steve heydemann -- i really appreciate you being on. i do not ever want to think that could ever happen again. guest: i am not familiar with the book, so i am not sure i can directed directly. say a little more about what the challenge was that he writes about. host: unfortunately, we lost the caller. i apologize. guest: and i apologize for not be able to respond more directly. host: the ap is reporting that hundreds of foreigners have been evacuated from egypt. they are expected to arrive soon in cyprus. countries are scrambling to get their citizens out of egypt, which is in its seventh day of political unrest. the previous caller mentioned president obama, and "usa

today" front page, "pressure rises on a mubarak." the cover story continues on to the back page this morning with a lot of questions about how this impacts the united states. with the uprising means for the u.s., if you're interested in that. that's got to roseburg, oregon, democratic line. caller: good morning. i appreciate your expertise on this matter. i have a comment and question. hello? host: yes, we're listening. caller: the holstein, in my estimation, of why israel is so concerned is that it is universally understood that is fundamentally wrong when you deny the person's right to subsist. my question is my concern really

over the key of jordan. -- the king of jordan. i find the man to be extremely honorable. i agree with just about everything and have heard the men say. host: we will get to jordan in a moment. let me read the front-page story from "usa today." it's as the 1979 peace treaty with israel ended -- host: steve heydemann, do you want to talk about jordan? guest: i think the context in

jordan is quite different from what we have seen in tunisia and now in egypt. it is true that jordan shares many of these general attributes that are driving protests across the arab world. large numbers of unemployed youth, increasing levels of inequality, rising commodity prices, the kinds of conditions that are just ripe for these sorts of protest to develop. but at the same time, the system of governance is quite different. it is a monarchy. society is split between palestinians and jordanians of east bank origin. there is a long history of east dominance in the political system and the military. because of protests we have seen in jordan have tended to focus very heavily on social economic issues. and the king is responding to those concerns. it is not clear whether the kinds of changes he has been

proposing in economic policy and social policy are going to be efficient, but he is making a concerted effort. his response in in casting the protests in jordan as incurred in a set of economic grievances that there regime can address without necessarily in digit and bigger political question that we have seen in a merger in egypt and indonesia and in yemen and perhaps in some other settings as well, algeria. host: we will try to get a couple more phone calls in. hartford, connecticut, you're on the air. caller: hello. the u.s. calls for fair and free elections, and we should not be afraid of the muslim brotherhood, per say. host: what is the prospect of free and fair elections? an earlier caller said the sale of a day. there's nothing to fear from the muslim brotherhood. -- an earlier caller said the same thing. guest: in november, there were

perhaps the most corrupt and unfettered elections in egypt's recent history. before then 400 parliamentary seats, the party to more than a handful of them. responding to the protests in the streets across egypt today, the egyptian government has said that it would reopen claims of electoral fraud following those elections in november. but that is really not going to satisfy the concerns of the egyptians. the question of whether we can anticipate free and fair elections in the future really hinges on this process of negotiation that we should expect will begin to unfold over the weeks and months ahead between the regime and a coalition of opposition leaders. thus, an outcome that has clear and explicit support for the united states. secretary clinton has indicated that free, fair, democratic

elections and one of the criteria that the u.s. will use to judge whether this process is moving in the right direction or not. so my hope is that as we see this unfolds, the goal of inclusive democratic, free, fair elections will actually materialize in egypt around september, which is when presidential elections were due to be held. i hope we can see that emerge as one of the outcomes of this process. i think the caller is correct, that we have far less to fear from the muslim brotherhood then we have often heard from the mubarak regime itself. the muslim brothers have been participating in the political process in egypt now for a very long time. they have moderated many positions that have caused so much concern in the past.

they have been very strategic in very savvy in how they position themselves at this moment a political uprising in egypt. the have not tried to push themselves into the center of the political arena. the have not tried to seize the leadership of these protests. they have agreed to work with mr. el-baradei in a coalition of opposition forces during a negotiated transition. and i think they recognize that their leadership of this, if they were to assert their leadership of this protest movement, that it could actually pose risks of a military reaction. so they have responded quite strategically, in a way that suggests that if this plays out through a transition to elections, that they will compete in elections. they will no doubt emerge as one of the important political players in egypt in the future. but i am not sure there will be the dominant political player in

egypt in the future. host: you have studied how autocratic regimes to stay in power. did it surprise you that this type of headline from the "new york times" that we have seen over the past few days "protests old-guard falls in behind the young." people under 30 that were able to organize this movement. >> it does does apprise me at all. we have seen a generation of opposition figures in egypt who struggled to figure out how to navigate in place for themselves in a very repressive of authoritarian, political arena. many of them have worked over the years to reach some kind of accommodation with the rashid, to bargain with the rashid a run egime, to of -- the rati to bargain with them. it does not have the charisma or

the message that will be needed to generate support from these young protesters. host: steve heydemann, vice president of the u.s. institute of peace. thank you for being here. coming up, turned our attention to stalking laws in the united states. but first a news update from c- span radio. >> it is 23 past the hour. and congress department report just out shows a significant rise in consumer spending for the month of december. for all of 2010, consumers boosted spending by over 3%, the biggest rise since 2007, which is before the recession began. economists expect further gains this year. that will give the economy a bigger boost. moody's investors service has become at least the second such organization to downgrade that egypt's government bond rating in changed its outlook from stable to negative. the impact of the unrest in egypt has already affected the tourist industry. kindled travel plans by overseas

tourists. delta air lines and he did there have suspended flights from the u.s. to cairo, and some tour operators are avoiding the country. the state department is set to evacuate u.s. citizens from egypt on chartered planes, but it is relying largely on friends and family in the united states to relay that information to stranded americans in egypt. the charters are flying at of cairo, and an assistant secretary of state says the u.s. is looking at athens, greece commit istanbul, turkey, and cyprus as destinations. u.s. embassy in cyprus says the first flights are expected to arrive today. those are some of the latest headlines on c-span radio. >> every weekend on c-span3, experience american history tv, starting saturday at 8:00 p.m. eastern, 48 hours of people and even telling the american stories. here historic speeches by eight national leaders and eyewitness accounts of events that shaped our nation. a visit museums, and historical

sites, and college campuses, as of history professors and leading historians tell the to america's past. american history tv, all weekend, every weekend on c- span3. >> "washington journal" continues. host: michelle garcia national center for victims of crime is of, director of its stalking resource center, talking about stalking laws here in the united states. the obama administration designated january as national stop the awareness month. here's our attorney general talking about the issue. -- jackie -- january as national stalking to run this month. >> this administration is in the process of developing a comprehensive strategy to improve our efforts to prevent viruses against women, to empower victims, and to hold perpetrators accountable and

bring them to justice. host: michele garcia, what is the goal here? why make it awareness month? guest: i think it is a way to do what it says, to raise awareness across the country on that the serious issue of stalking. and in alarmingly large amount of people are victimized every year. 3.4 million adults are stalked every year in this country. i was looking to the report, and this struck me, the reasons that people do not report stalking, 72% did not think it was serious enough. but 44% did not get was a crime. guest: so often, the individual leaders are not illegal. it is not illegal to telephone someone, send a text message, send an e-mail, drive down the street. but when it becomes a pattern, then it becomes a kind of

stalking. >> what is the definition of stalking? guest: the working definition that we use is that stalking is a pattern of behavior directed at a specific person that would cause a reasonable person to feel fear. this is not a legal definition. the laws are different around the country. but you'll see that language reflected in all the stalking laws in the u.s. host: if all the laws are different, what impact does that have? guest: it does make it challenging. trying to raise national awareness means that we major professionals are working with victims and that the understand what their loss say about stocking and how they can respond within that law. host: how was it different than federal laws? guest: the definition varies. but with the federal statute, it often gives us more opportunities to hold offenders accountable and when you have offenders who are crossing state lines are using technology across state lines. it allows us to enhance our

opportunities. they can be held accountable on the state and federal level. host: when is an offender charged? guest: it depends on the jurisdiction. it highlights the key for a strong law enforcement response to the job is to build a case, collect the evidence, and other reports said that the prosecutor is able to file charges against the defender. you'll see a very from place to place to put in on the law in the skills. host: the role of technology in stocking. guest: we're seeing technology and most stalking cases these days. technology has created a whole new breed of stalkers. the technology facilitates the behavior they have always engaged in. there's always been some form of technology, whether it is cell phones are sending messages are putting spyware on somebody's computer or cell phone. most stalking cases these days and warm some sort of

technology. host: 75% of victims are stalked by someone they know. 30% are stalked by current or former intimate partner. 18 to 24 years' experience the highest rate of stocking. 11% of the victims have been stopped for five years or more. 195 victims reporting stock through the use of some form of technology, be it e-mails or instant messaging. 10% of victims are poor be monitored with gps. a peace and report be monitored through video or digital camera are listening devices. -- 8% report being monitored through video devices. guest: primary stocking -- stalking is an underutilized statue. we see few cases prosecuted by federal level. host:, near dresden how many are not guest: most stalking cases

never get reported. most victims did not report. victims minimize the behavior or do not realize the crime. when you look at the few that do get reported, it is still a very small number they get prosecuted. as we move through the system, we see those numbers shrank more and more. host: what is the penalty? guest: it depends on where you live. most states, it tends to be a misdemeanor. we see in most states where it becomes a felony. it is federal law and one of the reasons we would like to see utilize more, it has a high penalty. we're seeing the penalties increase. host: if you get a misdemeanor, what happens? guest: in most states, there would most likely get probation for misdemeanor count of stalking host: and for a felony?

guest: they might see tell time, but in most kids, there's still a good chance it will just to see probation. there many different impacts on victims. we see very real numbers in terms of lost wages. more than half victims lose time from work. many lives at least five days of work. so the income is quantifiable, from hundreds of dollars to thousands of dollars. those are just lost wages. most victims pay out of pocket to hit more security and get away from the offenders. they're very real economic costs. their costs to employers as well. there measures that it may have to take to enhance the security of all their employees. host: if you feel you're a victim of stalking, how do you prove it? guest: it is very challenging. victims often spend a great amount of time documenting the behavior and collecting evidence long before the report, if they do choose to reported. when we talk to victims and

professionals working with victims, with vice talking to -- we advised talking to victims about maintaining the evidence and saving it. it is natural to delete an e- mail that upsets you. you want it to be as far away as possible. but it is critical to maintain that documentation and evidence of health bill that stalking host: case how does a restraining order fit in? guest: we see the opportunity for many stalking victims to use protective orders. about two-thirds of states have legislation allowing for some of versions of protective order for stalking victims. in some cases, they do work. a significant percentage of believe that the protective order caused them to stop. there has to be good law enforcement response. stalking the protective orders is that it can also escalate the behavior. when we talk about protective orders, we talk about the pros

and cons. and if they choose to get a protective order, that their safety planning around that. host: how often does steve heydemann evolved into a violent crime? guest: quite a bit. -- how often does stalking evolve into a violent crime? guest: quite often. there is a higher rate of physical attack in being a victim of an attempted homicide. host: that's good to phone calls. joe from brooklyn, new york, independent. caller: 2 ever c-span. i watch almost every morning. i usually find that these laws in most states, they're more difficult for men is to utilize. being in in new york, i am going through custody battle, and i have had quite a bit of problems

with domestic violence on the part of my daughter's mother and problems with stalking with her as well. a lot of times it is through difficult for men to get the same rights on these situations than it is for a woman. and for the things that are set up, even with an order of protection, for people to take that seriously. i think it is kind of strange in this country that still at this time, in this century, we have such a huge discrepancy, not only with stalking laws, but a lot of laws that have to do parents and relationships. host: michelle garcia, the difference between men and women, how it is perceived. guest: women and nearly three times more likely to be stalked than males. overwhelmingly, victims to the females. however, there are a significant

amount of male victims, and those numbers are increasing. the law is gender neutral. there is no stalking law that makes a distinction based on gender. but what it really highlights the need for more training and more awareness about those who are responding to victims. men can be victims just as well. often the challenge is coming forward are even greater than what female victim's face. host: david, brooklyn. caller: my son was taken away from me. i have to pitch in the attorney general only mentioning women as victims. we have the same thing going on with domestic violence. the president talks about domestic violence is only having female victims. it is a very difficult for a man to come forward, and we are ashamed. many would be laughed at by authorities. you cannot take care of that little lady all by yourself? guest: i think the difficulty in the stalking victim faces is very similar, male victim or

female. there are additional challenges for male victims. if you look at how most laws are written, it does about the fear. men tend not to be socialized in a way that it is easy for them to admit fear. so i agree that there additional challenges. but i want to stress that we know that while men can be victims, the majority of victims in stalking cases tend to be female. host: california, good morning. caller: good morning. i basically have three questions. i wanted to ask the questions, off if she is connected to a particular political women's group, and i was wondering if she was stalked, if this was the thing that motivated her? finally, what was the most severe penalty given in stalking a in case in united states?

guest: i am not affiliated with a specific women's political group. the national stalking resources that center is a program from the national center for victims of crime, which is a national nonprofit that focuses on all kinds of a victim issues. i have not been a stalking victim, but my motivation for doing this work is i have been working in the violence against women filled for two decades now, in this crime if it so many people. 3.4 million people each year. we have to look to the impact not just on those victims but on their friends, family, employers, and their communities. when we start with another ripple effect, it really is an epidemic. host: and the largest penalty? guest: i cannot specifically talk to one that i am aware of. i have seen cases were individuals were convicted of felonies. they have been sentenced a couple years to are in general,

most of the penalties have still been very, very light. host: gabrielle in sterling, illinois, independent caller. caller: my brother is actually delete the girl that is stalking them. she is and everything from canceled out his credit cards to beating him up on the street. she actually got him in trouble and arrested. him not touching her or anything at all. i was wondering, for somebody and my brother's situation that actually has a stalker, he tried calling the police and everything else, where it is almost like it is the fact that is as a girl, nobody really cares for doesn't think of provides protection. host: first four from call off from men on this issue. guest: at the get highlights the reality that their male victim's but often they are under responded to by professionals in their communities. so there is a need for male victims to get services and get

appropriate responses. what he highlights is the importance of documenting the behavior. so recorded what happens, when it happens, were the witnesses, saying the evidence. so when his brother does the report to law-enforcement, there is a package there that they can then operate from. >> turn and, california, democratic caller. caller: i am a former law enforcement officer, work for the city of tampa police department. i was a domestic violence investigator. the have two little topics. one, i came home and found my wife with my minister. he ended up getting a restraining order on me. later on, we went to deposition, and he admitted that his wife had hired people to follow him around. but waited six years for a hearing, and it will not give it to me. how'd you get that reversed? i have that. two, i helped start a domestic violence to injection it falsely

accused for fathers here, and we're actually really see a documentary next month. host: what impact did that have on your career? >> i lost my job. i lost everything lost my job, house, kids. but two years later, i was apologized to, say, sorry, you're right, we were wrong. but is still have not reversed the report about this man. host: hold on . guest: it shows some of the challenges we see. stalking is an incredibly complex crime and is still misunderstood. it is under recognized and other reported. the situation he describes is unfortunate. it is not unique. we have seen cases like that, whether female or male victim, and it highlights the need for more training for professionals in our country. host: what have you done so far? caller: i went to enact appealed

to the circuit judge here in the county, he told me there is no constitution in hearn and. the judge ended up retiring. so i have gone to a different judge in a different county. that judge has reversed the cases as this will be over in one year. this is been going on for six years. i have been out of work in law enforcement for six years. i never had a complaint at the police department. my sister was a victim of domestic violence where she was pinned in the closet and killed by her husband. i was a big domestic violence advocated, and now it is hard. it is hard to look back at it. host: a republican from chandler, arizona, go ahead. caller: hello. one thing that has not been mentioned is the very little training the police have stalking on have -- tavon technology stalking.

a lot of cases could reporting, but it is at the police level. guest: 19 four victims reported some form of technology was used. that isn't interested in it for two reasons. they cannot ask about every form of technology when they drafted this survey. we see these in stalking cases frequently. like text messaging and social networking types. also, they had to know what was being used. so many of these technologies can be used without a victim's knowledge. a gps could be put on a victim's car, and it would never know. it really becomes a challenge for law enforcement, which is two-fold. one is understanding the technology. the point that you make is right on, it becomes a training issue. stalking itself is a very young crime. the first stalking law was

passed in 1990 and california. the law is less than two tickets sold in most places in this country. there is very little training for law enforcement at the academy level oregon continuing education level. it has to be a training component, a policy in critical component. we just had a national conference on technology stalking, and prosecutors and law enforcement came together to learn about these technologies. 95% of the people in their room learn about things they had never known, and they're now going to go back and use that in their investigations that have a better understanding of what these victims are saying when the report. the training is key. host: houston, texas, democratic line. good morning. go ahead. caller: hello. one thing i want to tell you is that most people take the stalking for granted.

it starts off work that would go through the parking lot, and if they see a suspicious car were live, they would go and run the license plate and then write the letter. i went and filed with the police, and a look like nothing would be done. but what happens is that people become sicker and sicker. at lunch time, that might come at the nighttime. you never know when they're going to come. it could be anything. the mental illness that exists with that, people never talk about. that is the first thing they say, they said that little lady would not do that. yes, they will. host: stalking is a crime of control and power -- that is a tweet we got. guest: it has a relationship, domestic violence and stalking. most often, victims are stalked

by someone they know. we see the connection with intimate partner violence, domestic violence. in these situations, we know that the behavior is a way to maintain or regain power control of the victim has separated from them. host: republican line, ky. caller: i was just wondering if stalking can be considered predators -- creditors of other people attending your credit? host: creditors trying to call you repeatedly? caller: repeatedly, and other people getting your information from creditors. host: most often, it excludes activities like that, creditors or telemarketers that call you to collect on a bill and try to sell you something. many of the laws are written

with constitutionally acceptable behavior. picketing is also acceptable. the laws are pretty clearly written that this pattern of behavior with the intent to cause someone fear, behavior that would cause a reasonable person to feel fear. this is like whitaker calls or telemarketing would not be under that. host: new york call. caller: how does mental illness factor into stalking? i could understand two people that know each other, has been, wife, webber, and revenge. but for two people that do not know each other guest:: in most cases, the victims and offenders know each other in some capacity. very rarely is the victim and offender complete strangers. it could be a classmate, a co- worker, neighbor correlative other than a partner. we have seen cases of cousins stalking cousins. an adult grandchild stalking a

grandparent. when we look at the researcher and mental ellis, we find that one of the studies found that less than half had a clear probable diagnosis of a mental illness. it suppresses a lot of people. i often hear folks around the country say, what are we going to do with these offenders? they're all just crazy. the reality is most of them did not have a diagnosable mental illness. even if they do, it may have no connection with their stalking behavior. and even if they do have a mental illness, we still have a responsibility to try and hold this offender accountable. with the that means prosecution or making sure they get treatment, a responsibility is to try to insure the victim is safe. host: pennsylvania, republican line. caller: what are the options available to someone when the perpetrator is a police officer

and you report it, the immediate superior says they will never bring charges against an officer. what are your options then? guest: that is a really important question to ask. it poses so many more challenges to this complex crime when you have an offender who is in law enforcement. i would be happy to talk with you more about this individually be contact the stalking resource center. but if that person's superiors are not willing to lead to the case, can you approach the prosecutor directly? can you contact a local advocacy organization to say your services agency and work with an advocate who might be able to give you specific options in your own community about how you can address the situation. there's perhaps adopted the look at is on the federal level. again, looking at whether there's an opportunity for federal prosecution here as well. i know it is a very difficult

situation and very challenging, but there may be some way to work around this. i would strongly encourage you to connect with an advocate in your community. host: ncvc.org for more information, national center for victims of crime. fairfax, virginia, democratic line. caller: when you talk about stalking when intimate partners are looking a you through facebook or just sort of finding new through various social networking sites, even without a contract, how does that play in? is that an indication of stalking behavior, something to be concerned about, or maybe just somebody who wants to know what is going on in your life peers up for the relationship has ended? guest: that is a great question, particularly around technology. given technology these days, social networking sites, the vast amount of and permission available on the internet, when

does it cross that line from maybe curious behavior to concerning behavior to that crime of stalking? it is 3 context-specific. if you look at how most laws are written, you look at, is that behavior that would cause you as a victim to feel fear or a reasonable person to feel fear? we always say to people to trust their instincts. if it feels creepy are problematic, act on that instinct. however, if it is just an old high-school friend who was tried to touch base with you, that may be different. but trust those instincts. if it does not feel right to you, act on it. get in touch with an advocate in your community, talk to law enforcement, and try to prevent this from becoming something much more serious. host: according to a 2006 survey, this is what is considered stalking --

host: chandler, arizona, republican line. caller: i have a quick question. first, why is it that women are generally stalked more than men? and second, the reason why women are generally unable to stop the stalking practice because they somehow see themselves as victims -- host: go ahead. guest: it seems there are so many reasons that we could look at, whether it is -- whether if it is connected with domestic violence, which tends to be female. whether it is a power control issue. i think your second question about what it is that we can do in terms of looking at that and addressing that and how women view themselves, whether it is

as a victim or as a target, i think we know that victims of stalking often minimize the behavior. many did not want to admit what is happening. they're ashamed and embarrassed. they do not want anyone else to know. the often minimize it. they think it is just a few phone calls or just an e-mail or is pure coincidence that he happens to show up at the there. a victim might not want to call themselves a victim or does not want to believe that this person that they know and most likely were once involved with whatever is in the to harm them. i think there are a number of reasons why victims did not want to embrace the title of the victim. host: independent line from manhattan. caller: i would like to contend that perhaps a lot of callers are juxtaposing domestic violence with stalking.

you said the majority are women, yet four or five calls today are men and myself, similarly. with telecommunications, you do not have to be just physically threatened. i have an ex he gives me 50 phone calls a day, 50 text messages, 50 e-mails. and i would say that i can see domestic violence with more women victims. i think stalking, mental harassment, things like that, it is probably equally divided. guest: when we look at research, we go back to the department of justice report released in january 2009, the largest national random sample survey ever done on stalking. there are significant number of male victims. it shows through the reserve in

the past two decades that women are most often the victims of stalking. women are nearly three times more likely to be stalked. when we look to the callers today, what of my show is that male victims are having some of the most frustrating times in terms of getting responses. so the opportunity to have that answers questions or get help, they may take that opportunity more frequently. host: dallas, texas, democratic line. caller: good morning. thank you for being on the show. i am not a victim of stalking, but i have been a victim of long-term domestic violence and it is more prevalent among women. what i am looking for -- is less sympathetic to the men that are also victims. i do recognize that they're there, but there may be a smaller portion of men.

but it is more prevalent among the the female population. one of the reasons may be because we're not -- i do not know if it is a societal factor. men are more aggressive or -- i am not sure. what i am looking for as far as victims, what kind of services could i utilize to help myself? host: we will leave it there and get an answer. guest: there may be services available in your community. unfortunately, stalking is one of these crimes and still does not get the attention that it deserves. they're very few communities that have dedicated services for stalking victims. most victims may be able to

access services to their local domestic violence program, sexual assault program, are victims services agency. but those programs may be uninformed or under informed about how to respond to stalking. one of the things that we recommend for any victim of stalking is that they look at the couple's this of the components. safety, advocacy, documentation, and support. looking at your own sense of safety. are you are in imminent threat of harm or danger? one of the great concrete tools we recommend is engaging and safety planning. this is sending they can do with an advocate. it highlights the need for services in connecting locally in your community. if you do not know the person or agency is, you can contact the stalking resource center, and we can point you in that direction to the document in what is happening so that if you do report to law enforcement or choose to get an order protection, you have the permission that can help with in the process.

and funding support for yourself as to go to this very difficult time. as much as you feel comfortable with your friends and family know, letting your colleagues and co-workers know, so that they can be there for you. they are an extra set of eyes. host: john on the democratic line from north dakota. caller: good morning. i want to know what an impact -- [unintelligible] host: bullying, could bullying be considered stalking? guest: we're starting to see more of the intersection between bullying and stalking. if you did the behavior's, very often they are very similar behavior is. massachusetts recently passed a bullying statute. if you look at that legislation,

the language is very similar to their states stalking statute. the beavers are often the same behavior is. when we look good children, -- the behavior's are often the same. when we look children, bullying the be the better way to approach it. the challenge is looking at the behavior and recognize that it is inappropriate, what ever recall it, and it needs to be dealt with. host: a: the democratic line. caller: i was wanting to have a comment for the caller that spoke this morning. i am shot at the need for all of these men calling to be victims in something that is clearly shifted towards females. i have seen several women in my life a victim of this, and i find it humorous that men are trying so hard to be victims in this. they cannot stand