would fund the government for two weeks. nancy pelosi, the minority leader, indicated that she's not pleased with what house republicans proposed. she has introduced a bill that would freeze government spending. basically, there was a difference of opinion between harry reid and nancy pelosi. republicans applied pressure yesterday. they were on the offensive. democrats were very quiet and try to come up with a plan. members of the congressional black caucus went to the house floor on monday and indicated their opposition to what house republicans are trying to do. most people do think that the government shutdown will be averted and that they will reach some deal by friday by a short- term two-week extension. the democrat silence through in a wrinkled. i think there will be some twists and turns. harry reid did some maneuvers on

the senate floor yesterday that would indicate that he will not fully embrace the house republican plan. he would have the ability to introduce his own measure. i don't think they're about to endorse the whole thing 100%. that is where we stand right now. democrats will have to indicate where they are on the short-term bill. the white house indicated yesterday that they would support this bill. the president does not want them to do just a series of two-week fixes so that we are constantly in this circle where the government could shut down in two weeks. he wants a resolution, but there's no indication they will reach a comprehensive deal anytime soon. host: bob cusack, how likely is it that things will continue to move forward at this two-week pace incrementally? guest: it could go on for the

rest of the fiscal year, until september. there's a chance there will be a series of patchwork in bills. neither side wants a government shutdown. from our poll that you referenced, there are some surprising results. democrats were seen as the political victor's the last government shutdown. the poll also finds that people will get hurt by this and it would be risky. when you look at the bill the house republicans passed, not only is it $61 billion of cuts that the president has vowed to veto, there are a slew of amendments they passed on health care, abortion, and environmental regulations that senate democrats also oppose. getting a long-term deal will be difficult. what could emerge -- these two- week fixes will be pushing into march 18 and there may be

another one that will push it into april. then we get into the debate about raising the nation's debt limit. these two things could be emerging. eventually, they will have to reach one comprehensive deal. whether you are not funding the government through a continuing resolution or you are not raising the debt limit -- both can't shut down the government. lawmakers could get tired of these negotiations and try to reach one deal. that is not going to happen anytime soon. host: house minority leader nancy pelosi is having a different reaction right now to the gop plan then -- than senator harry reid. guest: i think there will be a theme of the congress. harry reid and nancy pelosi are not going to agree on a lot. as minority leader, the house democrats do not have the power that they had in the last

congress. the democrats want to be on the same page. they want to reach a deal. at times, i think they will disagree, whether it is on trade or energy. on budget negotiations, the parties like to be unified. usually the party that is unified is the party that is winning the negotiations or the head of the spin game. it is important for them to get on the same page. on "newsmakers" van hollen indicated that he was not happy with the bill and that a lot of democrats would vote against it. at the same time, they do not want the senate to just in bracelet the house has done. remember, nancy pelosi -- as speaker, she was very upset that over 400 bills that the house

passed, the senate did not. a lot of times, the house had to pass what the senate passed. now she sees the reverse happening now that republicans are in power. she fears that senate democrats will just take what the house republicans passed. host: as the political wrangling goes on over the current budget, there are hearings looking at fiscal year 2012. what are you looking to see committee members ask a lot of the members of the obama administration? the interior secretary, the energy secretary, and the transportation secretary are coming to the hill to testify. guest: yes, ben bernanke is also testifying. there will be fascinating questions from members. we are talking about high-speed rail. lahood has proposed a $53 billion high-speed rail initiative that house republicans are not very fond of.

that could get a contentious. the irs commissioner will be testifying. i think health care will be a big issue in that hearing. the health-care mandate and the irs has asked for some money to implement and enforce the individual mandate, which has been so controversial. it has been the subject of legal challenges. on the interior secretary side, it's all about drilling. we have some senators, especially democratic senators, who have been pushing the administration to allow licenses for drilling. she blocked the nomination of the budget director for some time before she got the concessions. there's a lot of maneuvering. it's about the budget and what the obama administration has requested that congress passed, but there have also been a ton of questions with top

administration officials. host: bob cusack, managing editor of "the hill." thank you very much. our question this morning, would you blame for a government shutdown? "the hill" said most voters think a budget shutdown would negatively affect them and if one does happen, most of them would blame both parties. let's go to charles on the line for democrats in atlanta. good morning. caller: good morning. i blame the republicans. any time they do not get their way, the first thing they do -- they want to shut down the government, the same way newt gingrich did. host: do you think things have changed since the 1990's? caller: no. host: william, a republican in illinois. good morning. caller: i only know what i see on television.

the only thing that i know -- i'm a military retiree. i'm not worried about anything, but nancy pelosi and harry reid are two spiteful, hateful people. they do things to spite one another. it's the same thing with patrick leahy and barney frank. those guys, all they do is things force by and they laugh. they laugh because they can get it done. those are the people who are responsible. host: ed on the line for independents in fort myers, florida. caller: there's plenty of blame to go around for all parties. you could make a case for all of them. i contend that most of the blame should be leveled on the

democrats for a simple reason. had this budget been done on a timely basis when it was supposed to be done, they would have had the votes in the senate, the house, and the president. we would not be talking about this today. host: "the hill" reports that if a temporary federal government shutdown occurs, which party would benefit politically? people said 14% democrats. 18% said the gop would benefit politically. 16% said both. 45% said no one would benefit. someone on twitter rights -- twitter writes -- bonnie on the line for republicans. good morning. caller: this is her husband. my thought is that if you

reduce the salaries, all of them, maybe they will get together and figure out something good to do for the country. i do not think they are trying to do anything that's really great for the country. i think they make too much money. that is why they are in political office. they're not there because they are patriotic. they are there because they get more money. host: the last election -- did it change anything for you? a lot of republicans were voted into the house. caller: it gave me some new hope. i'm holding on to see if it gives us anything better. host: william joins us on the line for independents. good morning. caller: good morning. i agree with the gentleman who talked about the lawmakers that are responsible. the president, the senate, and the house. if they do not vote to enact the law, of course we will be back where we were.

i would blame the 2/3. they are spending too much money on things that are not enumerated powers. the first would be the epa. somebody tell me where you can find that in article one, section eight of the constitution. that's the thing that most concerns me. they are spending like a bunch of drunken sailors. host: "the washington post" also look set to the american public would hold responsible if there were to be a government shutdown. it says americans are divided over who would be to blame for a potential government shutdown.

host: mike is in elizabethtown, ky on the line for democrats. who would you blame for a government shutdown? caller: we are to be blamed. we continue to allow this system to stay in power. isn't that the point for the democrats and republicans to keep us divided? we know there's not going to be a government shutdown.

every four years, we go through this with the threat that the government is going to shut down and the fear that we're going to lose social security and everything is going to fall apart. then the two-party criminal cartel puts us through the situation every four years. we are to blame. we allow this criminal cartel to keep this game going year after year. we are to blame. i will blame myself for not putting more appropriate and acceptable political powers and control. host: a comment along the same lines came to us on twitter. "the new york times" -- "the washington post" points to independents as a group to watch, just like "the hill" did.

host: a republican caller joins us from tacoma. caller: what you just read is like describing a circular firing squad. this is not a republican issue are a conservative issue. this has to do with the fact that we do not have the money. first caller went to the throat of the republicans. crat in the democrat is the same as the crat in bureaucrat. if we do not have the money, how can you possibly make the money that the government can continue as it is? the president's budget is a

joke. it does not cut anything. the people who are letting us the money around the world -- who are lending us the money around the world are wondering what we're going to do. one example before hang up. the energy department has been in and assistance for about 25 years. it burns $211 billion per year. do we have more secure energy? are they cutting our throats and not letting us drill? do we still depend on people in the middle east for our energy? the budget has to be shrunken so that we can get ourselves back in order. host: let's leave it there and go back to the story in "the washington post."

host: democratic caller in south haven, michigan. good morning. caller: good morning. this is my first time getting through. host: we're glad you could join us. would you blame for a government shutdown? caller: i would not blame the democrats. when obama was sworn in, [inaudible] the republicans kept saying no to everything, just like they're saying now. i would also blamed the tea party -- also blame the tea

party. host: "obama has an edge when it comes to assessments." that comes to us from "the washington post" poll research. host: pittsburgh, pennsylvania. george on the line for independents. hi. good morning. caller: i find that this discussion is not up to what it should be. remember that when obama took office, the country was in a deep financial situation that had been going on ever since reagan. then the senate made a proposition that day -- that

they would say no to everything. that's why the budget has not been passed. it is a shame that our politicians think only of themselves and not of trying to help the country get out of this recession. what the republicans are proposing is really going to kill jobs and the fact that boehner says "so be it" is terrible to think about the loss of jobs. thank you. host: a couple of other stories in the news today. --m "politico"

host: we have been talking a lot about congressman issa's efforts to launch an investigation. now he is looking into his own staff, as well. turning to what is going on in wisconsin, the government issued an ultimatum to democrats, reports "the wall street journal." host: our question for you this morning -- who would you blame for a government shutdown? max, a democratic caller in boulder.

good morning. caller: good morning. the caller from pennsylvania had it right on. we have created millionaires and billionaires during the bush administration. the trickle-down theory does not work. therefore, i think we should tax the rich in order to bring our economy back in line. i do blame the republicans for this mess. host: scott, a republican, calling from georgia. good morning. caller: the previous caller wants to tax the rich. you might as well call it socialism or communism. i want to make sure everyone understands two points. one, we do not have a budget because the democrat-controlled congress from nancy pelosi and harry reid did not pass a budget last year. they kicked the can down the road and left it in the lap of the republicans. the american people spoke loudly and said we want control

because the democrats were messing it up. the second thing -- if we cut here and there, we will sacrifice millions of jobs. for two years, we have been spending out of control. that has not brought jobs. that has not created a good economy. it messed up. it did not work. after spending $1 trillion under obama and the democratic congress people are saying -- my gosh, jobs will not be there anymore. it just boggles the mind that people will say we will spend $1 trillion and nothing happens and then they say we have to cut our spending. oh, my gosh. everything's going to fall apart. people come awake up. everything has fallen apart. it's time to cut spending like you would if you were running your own household. host: "the financial times"

gives us background on what is going on this week. host: looking at how freshmen republicans are having an influence right now. we've had some callers talk about the influence of the tea party and also talking about whether republicans or democrats will likely be held responsible if there is a government shutdown. in "the new york times" --

host: "the new york times" reports that speaker boehner and other leaders are meeting with the freshman to get their input and let them know what is going on in a regular basis. an e-mail from north carolina. "i blame both." richard in lisbon, ohio on the line for independents. good morning. caller: good morning. i would like to read a small section from one of the most

important books ever written. this is from a chapter called "conquering the american people." this is a small section. the heading is "adding up the losses." "let's take a look at the financial rating that can be documented and add it up. the bush administration has taken some of it just to pay the bills, but i have no doubt that the vast quantities of the stolen money is used to manipulate financial markets, stimulate investor confidence, and encourage small investors to keep putting their money into a failed ponzi scheme. bear in mind, the following facts are just what i can document. taken from social security in 2001, $34 billion. federal employee retirement system, $42 billion. civil service retirement and

disability fund in 2002, $2 billion." host: richard, why do you think this is important? caller: stolen from the department of defense in 1999, $1.1 trillion. in 2000, $2.3 trillion. u.s. government funds paid to companies and individuals not entitled to receive it, $20 billion. a total of $4.629 trillion. this is taxpayer money. this is retirement money. this is the money for medical care. this is the wealth of america

and is being stolen. people need to read this book, "crossing the rubicon." 9/11 synthetic terror -- host: we are going to leave it there. we want to make sure we get other calls and e-mails. bob rates us from florida -- bob writes us from florida. looking at the news, the 2012 election race heats up. in "the wall street journal" -- "in the effort to defeat president obama." also, looking at other news, "usa today" -- the profiles one

woman who says she is mistaken for somebody's wife whenever she walks in the front door of the v.a. center. she says there's an attitude that women did not serve their country. "they think veterans are men, not women. it is an attitude the department of veterans affairs wants to change." the caller honor -- a caller on the line for democrats. hi. caller: in order for the government to work and be effective, it requires that the people are actively engaged and have a memory enough to hold the government accountable. so long as we continue to have an easy and vote for the same party that does not have our best interest in mind. , -- so long as we continue to

have amnesia and vote for the same party that does not have our best interest in mind. please have the memory and remember who put us in this situation today. eight years of republicans and now we vote the same people back in power. what are they doing again? the same thing, trying to kill the american dream for the middle-class and working-class. it is blatantly clear that they only represent the rich. i do not understand why people were not rich and who are not corporations, why would you vote for a republican? i do not understand. thank you for allowing me to talk. host: a story in "the wall street journal" --

host: michele, independent line. oklahoma city, oklahoma. who would you blame for a government shutdown? caller: i would blame everybody. everybody has had a hand in it. you had thousands of people laid off. people drawing unemployment and we have to borrow money to pay the unemployment. now they want to lay off people. what happens? unemployment, retirement benefits will have to be paid. where will the money come from? everybody take a pay cut and maybe we can balance something. cannot keep doing what we are doing. host: manhattan, new york. victor on the line for democrats.

caller: i blame the people in the south and the midwest that continue to vote for the republicans. like the caller from virginia -- hello? host: we are listening. caller: the people will continue to vote republican continue to vote against their own interest s. social security is government entitlements. why did they continue to vote republicans and the republicans do not help them? host: speaking of republicans, "the new york times" looks at how the freshmen republicans are part of the negotiations right now over how things should proceed in the house. "republicans deal with their freshman class. as republican lawmakers returned this week to washington after a week in their districts, they

had perhaps even more determination than when they left. there was universal agreement that the issues facing our country right now are critical." "the new york times" points out, to some degree -- "to some degree, the view of 1995 depends on each member's experience at that time." host: tenn., mary on the line for independents. good morning. who would you blame for a government shutdown? caller: i'm hoping to blame the

democrats -- that they would have the courage to not allow this butchery of the middle class. i see that what is going on will cost millions of people to lose their jobs, which will probably have them lose their homes. this whole situation now of no common sense will set us back 100 years. we need revenue. we need to have the government stop giving money to the oil companies with their stipends or whatever you call it. we need revenue. we need revenue from income tax , paychecks for the working man, revenue from that terrible concessions that barack obama allowed the republicans to

prolong the tax cuts for the rich. we need revenue. i just do not see it coming. everybody is so scared of being socialize or communist. how about joblessness? host: there's an opinion piece written in "the wall street journal" by charles koch. he says -- "because of our activism, we have been vilified by various groups. despite the criticism, we are committed to continue contributing and standing up for the politicians, like wisconsin government -- like wisconsin

gov. scott walker." he goes on to write, "koch companies have had little option but to do so as well, simply to remain competitive and help sustain our 50,000 u.s.-based jobs." the troy, michigan -- detroit, michigan on the line for democrats. who would you blame for a government shutdown? caller: the republicans, of course. people forget how we got to this point. anyone who believes republicans believe in working class people are sadly mistaken. so many a loss -- many of the laws -- nafta was a republican idea that shipped millions of jobs out of this country.

the change that they did in the tax laws under reagan, they were moved credit for interest deductions and then they allow the banks and credit card companies to raise rates to what we now consider loan shark rates. the other thing that i feel about the democrats is that they followed the christian principles of having concern about their fellow man. republicans are more like the scribes and the pharisees. they are concerned only with their own enrichment and let every man than for himself. thank you. host: a republican caller in michigan. good morning. caller: how were you this morning? host: who would you blame for a government shutdown? amler: i'm calling -- i following that call from my neighbor in detroit. that's why detroit is in the

shape that it is in. you have 50 years of democratic 1-party rule. getting back to your question -- i can see this happening prior to the last election in november. i think the democrats saw it, too. they knew there was going to be a huge loss. they knew there was going to be a tsunami happening to the whole political system. they were going to let the republicans have it in their court. they were supposed to have a budget put together last fall before the election, but they held off because they knew they were going to have a big loss. then the republicans would have to do what they always do. they were going to be blamed for it in the mainstream media.

the mainstream media would be all over them. it is terrible. the democrats are really just -- i do not know what to think. they are ruining this country. host: we are talking about who you would hold responsible for a government shutdown. we have them looking at a variety of polls. i want to turn our attention to another issue. "the new york times" looks at public unions. "majority in pullback -- in poll back employees in public unions ."

host: what do you think about a possible government shutdown and who you would hold responsible for that? let's go to greenbelt, maryland . tony joins us. caller: good morning. thank you for having me. when it comes down to a government shutdown and who to blame, it comes down to the citizens of the country. anytime we are left to look towards the government for our support and for our sustenance, that is a problem when we do not even take advantage of the low hanging fruit that we can do ourselves, like living within our means. people losing their jobs, foreclosures, they need help. i came across a website that helps them. that is what needs to be done. we need to help ourselves instead of looking to the government. host: philadelphia,

pennsylvania. barry on the line for democrats. good morning. caller: i was listening to the gentleman who said we need to help ourselves. i wonder if he subscribes to the idea that we do not need any government at all. host: what do you think? caller: it's easy for the republicans to blame the democrats and for the democrats to blame the republicans. i think the entire system is so messed up because you have both democrats and republicans. you have all this money given to wall street and these corporations like ge and exxon mobil. at the same time, everything is so messed up with both democrats and republicans and the white house.

they are just not looking out for the average american citizen. if you had started from the top with holding those people accountable, such as wall street where they screwed up the financial industry -- some of those people should have went to jail, just like enron. they should not have gotten bailout money. at the same time, we have to find some way to keep these corporations out of the white house and out of washington. talk about what is really broken with the political system in washington and in the white house. host: norman, oklahoma. katie, republican. good morning. caller: good morning. i blame the democrats. for all these years, they have promised and promised and

bribed all the poor people into taking more money so they would keep voting for democrats, just like the union, but nafta did not send all the jobs overseas. it is because the unions priced themselves out of jobs. i am a poor working person. i do not expect the government to help me. they keep rewarding women for having five or six kids. they end up on our social security. that's an -- that is what they need to change, not old people on social security. host: another story in "the washington post" on the freshman -- the freshmen. joe is on our democrats

-- joe is on the line for democrats from new orleans. caller: number one, we need to go to a 10% flat tax for everybody. there would be equity in the program. everybody would have an opportunity to contribute for the progress of the union. the lady who called about someone having babies -- you know, it always seems to point in one direction. everybody has babies out of wedlock. if the americans would accurately -- that conversation would not be pointing in a certain community. we need to look at the flat tax, 10%. host: one last tory in the segment. "the washington post" profiles the last u.s. soldier from world war i who recently passed away.

he died sunday at age 110. "in 1917 and 1918, close to 5 million americans served in world war i and mr. vogel's was the last known survivor -- and mr. buckles was the last known survivor." representative marcia fudge, democrat from ohio, joins us next to talk about the potential of a government shutdown. we will be right back. ♪ ♪

>> m.i.t. american history professor pauline maier on "book tv." join our 3-conversation with her, taking your phone calls, e- mails, and tweets sunday at 2:00 p.m. >> there's a new way to get a concise review of today's events. it is "washington today" on c- span radio. it will take you to capitol hill, the white house, and

anywhere news is happening to we will talk to the experts and a journalists. the stories that matter to you the most. you can listen in the washington-baltimore area at 90.1 fm or go online at c- span.org. it is also available as an iphone app or a c-span podcast. >> the people of libya have made themselves clear. it is time for gaddafi to go. now. >> as the unrest in the libya and the middle east continues, leader's continued to speak out about the future of de libya lead -- the future of libya. >> "washington journal"

continues. host: congresswoman marcia fudge joins us. thank you for being here. guest: my pleasure. good morning. host: what do you think about what is proposed right now to avoid a government shutdown? what do you think about that deal? guest: i think we need to avoid a shutdown at all cost. it is two weeks, that's fine. i believe it would hurt too many people if we allow the government to shut down. i'm more than willing to listen to the proposal. i understand it is only about a $4 billion cut from what we have been discussing. i think it's a great idea. host: do you have concerns about where those cuts would come? guest: absolutely. it's the same battle we've been fighting with the continuing resolution to this point. where do we decide that there's some balance between giving tax

breaks to the wealthiest people in the nation and not allowing 200,000 to join headstart? i have some concerns about where the cuts would be made. host: what's the potential impact for urban america when it comes to looking at some of the cuts on the table? guest: i would like to have some of the people who think it is appropriate to cut things like block grants to come to my district. i would like to show them what it means. when you look at paper and you do not look at people, you make decisions that are not good decisions. as a government -- i say this quite often. the job of the government is to take care of its people. we are not doing that, we are not doing our job. the spending bill has, in a lot of ways, said to the american people, "we are not concerned about how many of you lose your

jobs. we are just concerned about cutting spending." i don't think that's the appropriate to look at this. host: you have concerns about these cuts. what sort of bargaining power do democrats have right now in the house? guest: i do not know that we have an awful lot, but i do know that we have our voice. all of the people that are going to be harmed -- we have, i believe, the popular opinion behind us. they understand the necessity of taking care of people when the need is greatest. obviously, today, when we have so many people unemployed, we do not want to create another huge wave of more unemployment. that is what the c.r. going to do. if you listen to republicans, americans voted for republicans because we did not create jobs. if we pass the c.r., there's a low estimate we will lose

400,000 more jobs. i would think that those people who wanted job creation would be very opposed to the current cuts that are in the c.r. host: you had an op-ed piece looking at the c.r. that passed the house that cut $60 billion and you had concerns. you talked about how it was "filled with the wrong kinds of cuts at the wrong time." is there ever a right time for those types of cuts? is this because of the economic situation and where this will hit the hardest? guest: let me tell you about my background. people assume that because i'm a democrat that i'm a very liberal spender. i am very liberal, but i'm a fiscal conservative. having been a mayor of the city, you must budget -- you must balance your budget. if you are going to do that, you have to look at the cuts that

are reasonable and responsible. i do not believe that we are doing that at this point. when you decide that you are going to balance the budget on non-defense discretionary spending, you are talking about what amounts to approximately 12% of the total budget. how do you balance a budget looking at only 12% of what you are going to spend? i do not think it is reasonable. host: "the republican cuts would eliminate the v.a. they are the wrong cuts." guest: we spent $1.7 trillion on two words that are analysts' -- that are endless. it is like when you buy a car and you say this car will get me to my job so i will not put it in the budget.

that does not make sense. we need to account for the $1. 3 trillion from the wars and $ 1.7 trillion from the bush tax cuts. we need to look at it in its totality. we did not get into this situation overnight and we are not going to solve it overnight. host: representative marcia fudge is our guest. the numbers to call, if you want to get in on the conversation -- the congress woman represents ohio's 11th district. tell us about your district and how it is doing economically right now. cleveland unemployment is higher than the national average. it is over 10%. guest: if you go back to when we

first had the downturn in the housing market, it started in cleveland. we were one of the first communities to be hit hard by foreclosures, predatory lending -- by foreclosures and predatory lending. my district is quite evers and i think it's the best district in all of america -- is quite diverse and i think it's the best district in all of america. 20% of the people i represent are on food stamps. that gives a good gauge of what the need is in our community. we have more than 17,000 vacant homes in the city of cleveland. when you look at how i look at the budget, then i think you have to understand that i am going to be fighting for the people that i call the least and the last. those are the people i represent. i represent very wealthy people, as well. certainly, their needs are not as great as the people that cannot speak for themselves. i would love to show somebody a tour of my town.

i think they would be very surprised. host: let's go to our calls. phillips joins us -- phillip joins us on the line for republicans. caller: your guest talks about headstart cuts. are you aware that the department of education's own studies show that any effects from headstart are gone by the second grade or third grade. when you talk about budget cuts hurting people, are you not aware that high taxes hurt people, too? guest: let me say two things. yes, i'm aware high taxes hurt people, but those are people that heard did a lot of the people i'm talking about do not work -- yes, i'm aware high taxes for people, but those are

the people that hurt. i'm talking about people who do not work. when you talk about headstart, you said the benefits are gone by the second grade or third grade. at least there are benefits. there are people in my community that go to school totally unprepared. if we are talking about making ourselves competitive, we have to give people a good start. it's not just about education. it's about nutrition and health and a number of things that people throw out the window. yes, it does affect more low- income people than anybody else, but it is something that's needed in this nation. if we do not start to prepare young people at a time when their minds are at a point when they received things a lot easier -- if you do not teach children something by a certain age, they never catch up. i would disagree with the fact

that it is not necessary. i'm sure that children that go to day care believe it is appropriate. this is the same thing as day care. it just happens to be for low- income children. host: mike, independent caller. caller: good morning. i agree with what you have to say, but not at any cost. the military budget should be on the table. much of the budget is hit in the state department and energy -- is hid in the state department and energy. put the fans back on the table. put corporate welfare back on the table. without a healthy population, without an educated population, we fall off the cliff. i like to see eric colder start in investigation of the fat cats

that have benefited -- eric holder start an investigation of the fat cats that benefited and people who gained the system. guest: i agree with you. it is absurd to me that we would have one of the worst financial crisis in the history of this country and no one be held accountable. no one was brought up on charges or punished in any way. yes, i would love to see that. i would hope that the justice is looking at it. as relates to putting defense spending back on the table, i think it should be back on the table. we certainly have obligations to defend this country, but there are so many things we spend money on that do not make us more safe. in a lot of ways, they are a waste of money. host: representative marcia fudge is our guest.

she was first elected in 2008 in a special election. you were tubbs-jones chief of staff. look at what happened in the last election. so many freshmen republicans brought in. the tea party movement having a big effect. there is a commentary piece. host: what do you take from the message? guest: all of us want to stop the spending. we know we're in a position where we have to find ways to cut spending. i did nothing that is a

democratic or republican issue. the differences we have is where you cut and how you cut. i would say to those people who believe that democrats are just tax and spend people, the last time the budget was balanced was under a democratic, bill clinton. there was a surplus when bill clinton left office. there was a deficit when george bush left office. we want to great solvency. it is the responsibility of the entire congress. host: akron, ohio. james on the democratic line. caller: good morning. i have a couple of things i want to talk about. i hear about 50% of people not paying taxes. 50% of people living day to day

and in poverty. the other thing about paying your fair share of taxes, i am in business for myself. i can write off everything. larger businesses can write off more than i can begin to write off. there are not paying any taxes. people talk about paying your fair share or gaming the system. these businesses have parties. they write off food and everything, clothes, and the bit.hole would much rather be in the position that i am and then to get welfare. you cannot pay your bills. you're working from that and much more ahead when we get started this morning right here on "today." . if you were not a conservative, you would not be able to survive 30 days off of welfare and food stamps. anybody who thinks they can need

to trade that position with some of these people who are getting food stamps. guest: there are corporations, some of the biggest corporations in this nation who to not pay taxes. you are correct. but it is a matter of tax policy. tax policy has skewed to the wealthy. it is not that they are cheating or doing something wrong. they are -- we have given them tools to keep them from paying taxes. we need to take a look at tax policy. we need to look at corporate tax policy. when we continue to allow the wealthiest people and the biggest corporations in this nation to not pay taxes, that is what we have created this huge gap between rich and poor. we often talk about middle income people. at some point, we have to talk

about the gap between rich and poor. now it is larger than anyone imagined it would be. it is absurd to say that taxes should not be increased on the wealthiest people in this nation. some probably pay less taxes than i pay. and that we should not do things for people who are most in need. that is absurd. host: we have a comment on twitter. guest: i have not looked at it in great detail. if that would make this a fair, i am willing to look at it. i think we have to look at everything. that is one of the issues i have with this c.r. they took everything off the table instead of 12% of the budget. a flat tax is something that has been kicked around for a long time.

host: a republican caller from anchorage, alaska. you are on with the congresswoman. caller: i did not know president kennedy. i really believe in this concept of do not ask what the country can do for you but ask what you can do for your country. we have a lot of oil in alaska that we are not being allowed to drill. it is killing in our country and killing our economy. i wonder what your opinion is on that. one thing concerning corporate taxes. corporations get a tax money from the customers. i do not see where taxing corporations helps. there are still getting the money out of our pockets. any of those things that you would like to touch on would be great.

guest: corporations don't pay the tax. they take it and they keep it. it would be one thing if they were getting taxes from individuals from you and i, but that is not what is happening. i don't know much about oil drilling in alaska. i don't know whether there should be drilling in alaska. i am not from alaska. you talk about president kennedy when said asked not what you can do -- deal with what you can do with -- from your country. we have veterans that are doing things for this country every day. we're cutting their benefits. we have cut back on job training. what do we do for our veterans? they have not asked for anything. they believe the country needs them. the least we can do is not cut v.a. funding our training

programs that are helping veterans when they come home. find them decent housing. host: let's look at the proposals on the table right now with the c.r r. host: curtis was talking about drilling in alaska. oil prices and gas prices are going up because of what is happening in the middle east. how are you seeing that play out in your district? guest: i think we need to have an energy policy in this country. my colleagues on the other side of the aisle do not think that is important for if we had a

sincere and energy policy and creating our own energy weather throughout fossil fuels or through solar, wind, we may not be in the position today that when the bit is having an issue, our prices go up 9% or 10% or 15%. when you talk about -- something as simple as highway cuts per if you fix a road today, it will it be cheaper to fix it then if you do it 15 years from now. same thing if you fix a crack in your driveway. i'm just throwing out numbers. maybe it cost you $100. if you have to replace your whole driveway in five years, it could cost you $10,000. it makes more sense to fix it now. as we continue to talk about this jobless recovery, if we have people working on roads, it

keeps people employed. if we spot these programs, many of which are in progress and create a larger number of unemployed people, the economy will continue to get worse. we are in a recession because there is no spending. if you allow people to work and spend, i think we worked our way out of a recession. people to know looked down the road far enough. i believe we have to have some long-term plans and some long- term vision for this country. i think that is where we are right now as a nation. host: congresswoman marcia fudge of ohio. caller: good morning, representative fudge. guest: good morning. caller: did you ask me a

question? i'm sorry. there are some anythings i wish i could ask you. i was just pick one of my many questions. america is the superpower of the world, the richest and most powerful nation in the world. i cannot understand why it is the only industrialized nation in the world that does not have health care for its citizens, like austria, germany, switzerland, and the list goes on. are they all going to go broke? will they all go under because they have health care for the citizens? it is tied into the economy, also carry everybody runs around saying, socialized medicine is better. i call the medicine we have in this country capitalistic medicine.

the object is to make as much .oney as possible guest guest: i agree with you 100%. health care makes up 17% of gdp. it is important that we look at the fact that when we pass the health care bill, the house passed the health care bill last year. it was the single most important factor in reducing cost in this nation. if we do not start to get a handle on health care cost and provide health care for everyone, we will continue to see the cost of health care rise. it has been estimated by our budget office that the repeal of health care would cost this nation over $200 billion. how do you in good conscience

increase the deficit but say that everyone in this nation does not deserve to have health care. every other nation in this world provides its citizens with health care and they are not going broke. host: let's look in this piece from "the new york times" about president obama. host: let's listen to the president speaking about this yesterday. >> if your state can create a plan without increasing the deficit, you can implement that plan. we will work with you to do witit. i don't think any single party

has a monopoly on good ideas. i will go to bat for whatever works. i share your concern about medicaid costs. this has been a topic of a significant conversation. we know that over half of all medicaid costs come from just 5% of enrollees, many of whom are seniors in medicare as well as in medicaid. the affordable care act helps address this by changing the incentives for providers so they start adopting best practices that work to reduce costs while improving quality. we understand the pressure that you're under. host: president obama addressing the nation's governors yesterday. guest: i am not so sure he shifted. he said, if you can do what we

have done and if you can do without raising the deficit and you can provide -- i'm not so sure his position has shifted. but to those people who are opposed to the mandate, to think about it. if we are all in a position to have health care and we want to keep those costs down, we have to make sure that everybody has health care insurance. the other thing is selfish. i want to embrace the mandate. if i were to walk out of this building and get hit by a truck, why should you pay for it perfect i should have health insurance. why should the rest of america pay for your irresponsibility? the only way to keep the cost down is to ensure that every single person is in short. otherwise, my insurance premium is going to go up because i have

to pay for you not having insurance. it is important that we look at it in a way that is not angry because we are having to do it. we should seek it is necessary. if we do something like this, every person should have it. host: we have an e-mail. host: that is his perspective. let's hear from peter in memphis, a republican. caller: good morning. i couldn't disagree more with most of the comments except one that you just made. the job of government is not to take care of people. the people should be given the ability to take care of

themselves and be responsible for their own lives. you mentioned insurance. the bigger problem -- you mentioned headstart. seeing this in memphis. higher and higher-births among people who don't take care of the children because they are not married and they don't have a husband. this has turned almost into a lifestyle choice. there is no greater percentage of single mothers than among the black communities. and yet you're suggesting we should have all these programs for taking care of children in their younger years. the responsibility of taking care of children response to parents who get married. host: we will leave if there.

guest: we talked about head start. that is the only program we of talked about for young people. maybe you should look at the role of government. we have to provide security and services and safety. that is the job of government. if you have a different idea, i am surprised. let me say to you that there are more non-minorities on public assistance then there are minorities. you need to look in your numbers. i get the feeling that no matter what i or anyone else says, because you don't like the fact that poor people are getting benefits is going to be an issue with you. but i would very much say to you that it is not the black community that is the problem in this country. i know you may feel that way and i am sorry for that. check the numbers and you will find that minorities do not

consume the majority of public funding. host: last week you posted half a dozen forms on social security. it was the conversation like? will you communicating? what impressions did they have? guest: they want to make sure their social security will be safe. i think it will be. people mistakenly say that social security is an entitlement program. it is not. we pay for it out of our payroll taxes. everytime i get a paycheck, money comes out to fund the trust fund. they are concerned about -- talk about privatizing of social security. if you were to do that, it would probably put almost 50% of all singers who were on social security into poverty. when i was 21, 22 years old, i

would have had no idea how to invest my savings. in a way that would give the resources for my retirement. if we had privatized the fund even 10 years ago when the market took a huge downturn, we would have lost everything. social security did not lose a dime. not one dime. right now it is solvents and we can find 100% of benefits for the year 2037. even after that, some more in the neighborhood of 75% to 80% of benefits for generations to come. it is not broke. do we need to put more resources into it? yes. but the system is softened. it is not going to go broke any time soon.

host: we have loretta on calling from cleveland, a democratic caller. caller: good morning. i don't know if you might remember, but i had a short talk with you at the get-go gas station last year. i told you that i used to call stephanie and i was on her "tell me what i do not want to hear" team. i will start and i will just take a moment with a man called from tennessee who said it is not the government's job to take care of people. he failed to realize that that is what republicans have been doing for the past 30 years, tinkering with the tax code and favorite for the rich and

corporations. i would like to see the $900 billion tax cut on the spending cut table. that what blew a big hole in the budget. we cannot afford it. the rich corporations have retrieved -- have received two bush era tax cuts. the we had two wars -- then we had two wars. it is absurd for the city's. all the mayors should be looking at the corporation's that took tax abatement contracts and they shut down, moved overseas, outsourced the jobs. some of those companies had contracts for 20 years. host: a runner was mentioning your predecessor.

guest: -- loretta was mentioning your predecessor. guest: that tax cut will cost us $40 billion, with a b. the republicans want to close at 5 $40 million. let's start with the $40 billion. let's take knowledge the fact that we have given $1.7 billion to the wealthiest people over the last 10 years. i'm with you 100%, loretta. host: susan writes on twitter. she is asking a question of how the government can continue to spend it when it has no money. guest: that is what the

government's job is. if you have some 15 million people out of work -- 15 million people out of work. they have no resources. or they supposed to sleep on the st.? are they supposed to not feed their children but are they not supposed to send them to school? what do we do? i think the question needs to become more a question of, how do we put people in a position where we did not have to take care of them? we cannot do it by ignoring them and acting like they did not exist. that is what people who suggest what she is suggesting want to do. are we not supposed to provide police, firefighters? 0 not supposed to clean the streets in their neverland? gwyneth supposed to plow snow? what are we supposed to do?

-- are we not supposed to clean the streets in their neighborhood? host: we have more of a breakdown on will be up for elimination in the short-term spending plan. the general fund -- $650 million. host: let's go to michigan, dennis, republicans line. caller: good morning. thank you for c-span. i do not agree with anything you say. it is not your money. you are going to regulate and tax all these big businesses.

it will keep on ruining the country. that is where we're going, down the tubes. guest: i did not have a fuzzy math. i have used numbers that are accurate. these numbers come from our budget office as well as the most respected economist in this country. my math is quite accurate. as it relates to tax cuts, businesses in this country have got more tax cuts than the average person. we have given more than eight tax cuts to small businesses as well as the tax law is skewed to benefit big business. i understand the philosophy that people say, if we give more taxes, they won't hire more people. big business today is sitting on $2 trillion and they are still not hiring people. how much of a profit do they

need to make before they make an investment back into this country? that is not fuzzy maps. about ohio.talk your state is one of the ground zero locations on this debate over collective bargaining. the governor is challenging it. what do you think should be done? guest: i am a strong supporter of collective bargaining. i was raised in a union household. i understand the significance of unions. i do believe have already said we are willing to make some concessions. we're willing to sit down at the table and talk. we do have a right to discuss the working conditions and what the benefits will be. it is important that we look at the fact that our history has proven that when people sit down at the table, they come up with a better outcome. i believe we need to continue to do business that way.

host: david from new york on the democrat line. caller: good morning. i agree with the congresswoman. we must understand that there are a lot of things we're not privy to it when it comes to government with facts and everything else. we should do our homework and have comments. it is not the fact of the matter when it comes to understanding grassroots situations. it is not hard to find those. look up the facts instead of going off into space and getting upset and saying things that are factual. even when it comes to the government. the bill of rights. equal terms of condition. aggressive bargaining falls into

it. we have to craft a level playing field. guest: thank you very much -- we have to have killed level playing field. i have done all these social security forms. the first thing they say is, save it. when we created medicare and medicaid, they said socialism. people such, do not touch it. i think time says whether you're right or wrong. history will be kind to those who make sure we look out for people. host: independent line. caller: i hear people talking about cutting the military. the president needs to address the united nations and tell them we're not the police of the world. the restore reason why america has to be at the front of every

war type of operation the goes on or every humanitarian operation that the u.n.. it seems like there is a un resolution operation where america has been at the front. american men and women have to go over and support those operations. does a storm, iraq and afghanistan -- desert storm, iraq and afghanistan. the president should say, no more. guest: i am a supporter of the united nations. i agree with you, we should not be the police of the world. this president inherited two wars. we cannot be the police of the world. i support your position at 100%. our military is spread so thin because we are in so many

places. host: there is a political cartoon from "the herald" from yesterday. host: you said that you wanted to see everything done possible to avoid a government shutdown. who was the winner and loser in this? guest: the people lose. if we forget that we are here for the people, then we lose sight of why we are here. the people lose. all the federal employees lose. all the people who are expecting their mail or the people who are expecting their social security check. everybody loses. this nation loses. the rest of the world will look at us and say, these are people

who cannot even pass a budget. if we're supposed to be a superpower, then we should watch that. host: chuck from indiana. caller: i would like to address representative fudge's view of government, which constitution she is reading, along with addressing collective bargaining. let me do this instead. let me tell you that a lot of these studies we're looking at on both sides part junk science. wanted a budget that was balanced and to pay off the dead, their art to some things we could do. we can return to pre-pound global budget, -- pre-panic

level budget. we can start paying down our debt by instituting a flat tax. there is unfair advantage. the tax code is full of advantage for the older wealthy -- for the uber-wealthy. if we continue to just bicker back and forth, republicans and democrats, it will never get dunkirk the people with the biggest issue with what i just proposed are the people that are getting the greatest advantage at the greatest expense at the rest of americans. guest: i am not opposed to a flat tax. i think that is something we need to put on the table and address. i would be happy if you could send me your sites so we could send it to me. i'm easy to find.

if you send me your data, i would be more than happy to look at it. host: congresswoman marcia fudge, to life for joining us. we will talk about what is happening in libya with the ambassador to the united states. but first let's go to a news update from c-span radio. >> the u.s. ambassador to the united nations tells cbs that the united states fears the possibility of a real humanitarian disaster in libya if long time wrote muammar qaddafi refuses to surrender power. she calls exile an option for qaddafi but says he will have to enter to the international criminal court. washington will keep pressure on qaddafi until he steps down, she said. stock futures are higher as investors await the testimony

by ben bernanke. he appears at 10:00 a.m. before the senate banking committee and is not expected to cut short the bond-buying program. live coverage of the hearing on c-span radio. tim geithner is set to appear before the house finance committee to talk about overhauling fannie mae and freddie mac. he said the obama administration wants congress to approve overhaul legislation within two years and that failing to act will worsen uncertainty in the financial markets. you could watch this hearing live on our website, c-span.org. those are some of the headlines on c-span radio. >> "washington journal" continues. host: senator mark kirk joins us. talk to us about a potential government shutdown. why not let that happen put members of the tea party have

said it shut down the government until washington gets the message not to overspend? guest: washington needs agencies to maintain essential functions. i think this week will be far less dramatic. we'll pass another continuing resolution that would cut $4 billion from just the spending of that period. senior negotiators will have a bit more time to get used to the fact that government spending should go down and we will take much of the direction from the house of representatives. host: as to look into proposal from the house, do you have concerns about some of the items on the table? some education programs, broadband subsidies? guest: i think the broadbent subsidies are a particular waste of money. they were included in the

stimulus. the administration has used that as a cash kitty to defund this program, which did not make sense. even the administration has turned against this program. boring $1.5 trillion -- borrowing. this is completely unsustainable. a plan in which we have a shared burden across federal spending to reduce this common danger is the way to go. host: what you think about the c.r. that passed the house? guest: in general it is the right way to go. for the senate, the senior democratic leaders do not like to cut spending. my read on the senate floor is

they realize that spending should go down, just not as much as the house. we are entering into a far more traditional congressional set of negotiations with the senate may cut $30 billion, the house cuts $60 billion, and coming into the midrange of $40 billion to $50 billion is for the congress should end up. host: what was your reaction to what mark zandi said? guest: he was the lead author behind the stimulus, now seen as a complete failure. he was the one who predicted that unemployment would top out at 8% if the stimulus was passed. it has been a historic wipe out

and something that reflects on his record. host: senator mark kirk, republican of illinois is our guest. phones.t to the diane joins us on the republican line from new jersey. caller: good morning. i have two or three questions. i will give them to you and i will get off the phone so you may enter them. don't you feel that right now is the strongest time that you would have to enter a flat tax situation with the irs across the board including business? the second thing would been please, for us people who pay 40 years into social security, do not call it a gift.

in many respects, that is how i feel when i hear the word "entitlement." the third thing is, when the people propose on doing something about all of the money and the things that are going on with -- i'm sorry. with small interest groups, the lobby -- that lobing strong a. there is a lot lobby money. lobbying has not cut back. if they need to be heard, can you give them one day a month in front of congress and the senate put the let them be heard and that is the end of it. no more lobbying, number dinners, number trips, no more baloney. -- no more dinners. no more trips. guest: i am for a flatter and

fairer tax. if we reform the tax code and preserving the terrible interest deduction, we could overall lower rates considerably. i am concerned the united states has very high taxes, especially compared to our competitors. that encourages employers to go overseas. with regard to being able to visit a member of congress either alone or in a group, that is protected under the constitution, the right to petition. any american citizen knows that they can contact their member of congress either alone or as part of a group. that is one of your invaluable -- one of your in alienable rights. we have a real opportunity in the congress to attach real

anti-spending reforms. a balanced budget amendment to the constitution. a line item veto. wending -- ending a wasteful programs, the federal sugar program. no second engine for the f-35 aircraft. all to reduce the current danger that economists now agree faces us, which is too much spending and too much debt. caller: hello. mr. kirk, argue the same mark kirk -- are you the same mark kirk who took a mission to china a couple of years ago? guest: i am. caller: when did foreign relations or foreign policy with other countries go to the co- chair of committees and leave

the white house? guest: the president is the diplomat in chief for the united states. the state department works for him and directed. much of the foreign policy depends on federal appropriated dollars. the u.s. congress has to be involved. the u.s. constitution does not give exclusive power to the president. all the spending has to go through congress. in the foreign policy of the united states with regard to comprehensive theft of -- or the size and footprint of the state department in china, that comes before the congress. host: bud, a republican. caller: midmorning, senator. i am on my way to work. i want to ask you about the

state budget deficits. we sent a lot of money to the banks, most of them in new york city, a hundred billion dollars worth -- $800 billion worth. i was listening to the news hour last night. the combined total deficit in the 50 states is $175 billion. why can the federal government return that much money back to the states and put them back in the black? guest: we should not bailout the states. that would threaten the credit of the united states itself. all three credit ratings -- agencies in one form or another have begun to warn us that the u.s. xxx credit rating is in doubt. if we lose that -- the u.s. triple a credit rating is in doubt. if we lose that, that impede our

economic recovery. we had a similar crisis in 1881 and the senate voted to not allow daniel webster to guarantee state debt. if we bailed out the states, we thosebe a rrewarding states and punishing those states that have held the line. we should make sure we reward good behavior and punish bad. that is why the government should not threaten its own credit rating by borrowing even more to bail out those states. host: senator mark kirk soaring on the appropriations committee. military construction and education. financial service, state and foreign operations and transportation hud.

the senator served in the house of representatives when he was elected to the senate seat previously held by president obama. he is a member of the united states naval reserve. as we talk about the debt season --ceiling, a vote has been asked by the end of this month with no strings attached. do you support the? guest: -- do you support that? guest: no. it is a tremendous opportunity for reform. we should not extend the debt limit unless dramatic and profound anti-spending reform could be a task, like what i outlined, line-item veto and wiping out a large number of federal programs like the programs outlined in the gao report announced this morning. if we have that kind of fiscal discipline, it would probably be

good for the country. but just extending the credit cards to go from 14 trillion dollars to $16 trillion -- caller: if obama and the majority of democrats and the few republicans do not get the point that we cannot take care of the world, we're still going to be where your because we cannot afford to do it anymore. we are allowed 8 million illegals to keep jobs in this country. why? forcing them out with current immigration law as it does work and it would cut our unemployment rate in half. look what it would do for the

states. when these people leave our country, it would free up billions of dollars in resources. the state's predict the burden would be off some of the schools. the food program and things like that. our country cannot keep doing this anymore. guest: i support the immigration laws of the united states and i would emphasize two improvements. we need to complete the wall along our southern border. walls worker. the government should know who is entering the united states. we should have better control over that. we should make it easy to comply with federal law. the congress should verify the e-verify program so when the employer could check out the status of a potential employee

through a web-based system and get an instant answer and make it easy to comply with current federal law. host: a group of six senators hashed out a plan on debt reduction will meet today. kent conrad is determined of the senate budget committee and said the so-called budget gang has reached no agreement on a proposal but that today's meeting is important. what do you hope to see them come up with? help focus our you of what they are doing? guest: we are very focused. there is tremendous potential. they could come together with drafting legislation that made four times the kind of deficit- reduction is that the president's budget did.

i think it was a mistake. my hope is that this group could come together on a bipartisan plan to reduce the deficit. we would need the leadership of the present of the united states. that could be the key to reassure markets and boosting the economy and giving the next generation is much more deficit- free future than the one we're giving them now. host: call ron springs, colorado, a republican caller. -- colorado springs, colorado. caller: i was wondering when you are a family and do not have enough income, you have to go out and get a second job. why can the government to that? -- why can't the government to thdo that? why can't we put those on the

table as well? guest: i think we should. i voted to wipe out many of the oil company subsidies. they are doing just fine on their own. many of the corporate welfare programs are misplaced. they should not be receiving a taxpayer assistance. i think republicans should come forward with responsible defense cuts that will help lower spending. like no new combat vehicle for the marines. democrats come for with domestic spending cuts. shared burden so that we remove this common danger that is already afflicted many countries in europe, portugal, ireland, spain, greece. we should make sure that never occurred to the incumbent of the people of the united states. host: michigan, welcome.

caller: i have a general statement. talktened to all the groupurus about the relationship between the unions and the government. everything i hear is the fault of the union. they want to take negotiation away. i thought i would give him a 30-second answer to that. i think they might understand something that seems to be bothering everybody. it is about a young man walking down the road. he sees a former milking a cow. he says, excuse me, how much milk does this tell gicow give? the pharmacist, this california does not give milk -- the farmer does not givelifoow

milk. any milk i want, i have to take. guest: i think the overall problem we've faced at the state and federal man must level is that we are spending money we don't have. as margaret thatcher said, eventually governments run out of other people's money. transferring a tremendous debt onto the backs of our kids is irresponsible. it would contribute to the decline of the united states. a historian's it you could mark the decline of occurred when a pace the money lenders more than its armies. we will spend over tour de force billion dollars in interest on the debts with buildup -- will spend $240 billion.

the bill will go to nearly $1 trillion. we will be paying wealthy individuals mainly overseas almost $1 trillion in interest before we pay a single soldier or take care of a medicare beneficiary. in my view, that is not a future that we should embrace. we should embrace and much more fiscally responsible future where we have only the government that we can afford. host: we have a question on twitter. guest: in 2001, we faced the dot-com recession and the wars in iraq and afghanistan. we did present -- we did prevent a huge tax increase from hitting the economy.

i feel we are overtaxed. the records from the 1980's show for every dollar the congress or raise taxes. it spent more than $1 in new spending. there is widespread agreement that overspending is the problem. if you put a resolution on the center for st. was to start no new spending program, it would probably be defeated. the mood here is still to invent new spending and create new programs, even though 40 cents of every dollar is borrowed. i don't think we should embrace a high tax european future. we'll see many european countries like italy grow by less than 3% in a whole decade because half of the italian income goes to the government. i think we should embrace more of a low tax, high-growth future, like what the united states has. i think that is essential not

just for family income but maintaining the number one position in the world as the top economy despite tough competition from china. host: susan is a democratic caller from texas. caller: good morning. what is happening now is best in the house of representatives and some of these states is that they are trying to take everything off on the backs of the middle class. it is not -- it is the teacher calls and all the promise. not the military industrial complex. these engines and the wasted money and you'll have these committees and you have all these answers pre-answer before you even get in there instead of getting to the root of things. it is the texters and the middle

class, not wall street, which nobody has been convicted of crimes that were committed there because it was all legal. it is always the republicans always go after the poor and the defenseless. guest: i don't think anyone should go after the poor and defenses. as americans, we care about those less fortunate. we want to make sure we of public resources to take care of those who are truly in need, especially kids. we do not serve the country well when we borrow 40 cents on every dollar. when we put ourselves in hock to china and other countries and continue to reach out for a handout from other countries just to run the basic services of our government. that is why i think we need to hold back on spending so we have

a more sustainable future. i do not think this is about one group or another being singled out. i think we should have a shared sacrifice across the board. i have outlined the defense cuts i think we should have. democratic members should highlight domestic cuts, so we all shoulder the burden to meet this task. we have had dangerous times in our economic past, like after the revolution we have nearly 200% inflation. or all the costs to meet the demands of the civil war or world war ii. we eliminated those dangers from previous administration. each generation is tested. this is our test. host: you said that you're having bipartisan lunches with joe manchin from west virginia. what is it like to work along by partisan lines to fit what are

you doing to try to change the culture? guest: i am ill little surprise. in my first 60 days in the senate, how much more partisan it is then the house. the senate generally operates along -- three main lunches when senators get together. they are entirely along party lines. senator mentioned and i have decided to break out of that -- have decided toanchin break at of that. only senators are there. we're starting out as a group of two. my hope is to expand this so that we recreate a place for it bipartisan plunged were centers can get together and work out problems. host: richard in new york. caller: i am referring to comment you made earlier about the fact that the united states

government cannot belt the states because that would put our credit in a serious problem. have the real numbers available to me. however, a tremendous amount of the state deficit or a significant amount has to do with the unfunded mandates that congress has imposed upon the states over the many years. i remember this big discussion arose back in the days of school busing, mandatory school busing back in new york. with mandatory busing and with all -- i have nothing against mandatory busing. but the people of the state have to pay for it. the federal government contributes virtually nothing to that. the employees are now part of

the pension problem that is being discussed state by state trying to revise those pension systems because they are all public workers. if you have any comments about this, i would appreciate hearing them. . .

>> looks like the tea party says the threat of avenue government shutdown is the threat of an ongoing resolution has the different parts of the tea party split. because the congress never passed the budget. tea party nation founder said shut government down until

washington gets the message not to overspend dollars our national debt is now as large as our national income. something has to give. shutting down the government is pretty radical. but nothing else is working. so stpwhinet what do you think? caller: good morning. i was wondering about social security. and put bonds in there that were american bonds, and i'm wondering how much of the federal debt that we're looking at now are bonds that we hold in the federal government that were borrowed from the social security funds? if you remember it ran on the idea of -- goran on the idea of a lock box for social security. thank you. host: terry, a republican from

indiana. goon. caller: good morning. host: terry, we got back to who you would blame for this and -- caller: i just want one certain part. well, more than one certain part. but what i think should be shut down is the drug war. they said on history channel they spend over $400 billion a year on the drug war. and my step father was a state parole officer and he told me many of his paroleees said you could buy illegal drugs from the inmates, but you get a much better deal from the guards and there was a study that said our young can get drugs easier than

cigarettes and alcohol. 18 for cigarettes and 21 for alcohol. host: terry had a proposal for a place to cut spending. let's look at what's on the table right now in the proposal in the house to cut $4 billion in this interim c.r. we've been talking about this. some of the cuts would come from the general fund highway aid and striving readers. smaller learning communities. election assistance grants and ear marks are on the chopping bhock. nearly $1 billion for energy and water. also targeting labor, health and education and other areas where ear marks are previous lent. let's go to heart hill, oklahoma. gary, good morning. caller: good morning. it's nice to hear my name as opposed to what's his face or a lot of other names i've heard over the years. i'll try not to say anything

out of context or anything. the few times i've been on i've been cut off although i've never cursed. but i guess i do offend some people with my reaction to politics. in general. one, i would love to see disabled vets, any disabled veteran be separated as far as drawing their checks. i'd like them to be separated from welfare people. we're hardly welfare people. most of us either joined or enlisted and we did what we were asked to do by our country, and we put in and earned the right to, if we are drawing a disability, we earned that right. and the people in wisconsin, the government workers, because this takes in a larger context of what's been going on in this country over the past, what, 40 years? with a certain element of college kids. they go to college and get

these do-nothing degrees in psychology or criminal justice or whatever, and their only options is to get a job in the government. and they do not contribute any productivity at all to the economy. i sit there and watch government workers who are slow and measured and methodical. the only government agency that i have ever seens that really good has been the v. a. and i think a lot of that is because those people who serve and work in the v. a. have been in the military before, and the concept and productivity is completely different. host: ok. let's leave it there and go to a comment sent by email. >> almost all members of government are all responsible for this shutdown. if the american people believe they are making decisions for us, they are fools. they are all making decisions to fatten their wallets.

we talked about how the tea party nation founder says go ahead and shut the government down. here's a different per perfective coming to us from the daily caller. says congress shouldn't move so quickly to shut the government down, because it didn't work out so well for the g.o.p. in 1995. government should be willing to make cuts and elective leaders from both parties were sent the washington to get things done, not sthut government down. >> we looked at reports one the hill is reporting on this -- a poll from gallup finds more americans want legislatures who share their view on the budget want compromise rather than holding out. >> 60% would prefer a compromise. 32% say hold out. when it comes to the democrats,

70% say compromise. 49% say compromise and independent voters 61% say comp nies. so the biggest number of holdouts are the g.o.p. let's go to rick on the democrats line. caller: good morning. thank god for c-span. and another alternative point of view is link tv. i know a lot of people don't want to watch link. but c-span and electric are like our most formidable free-speech formats in the world. host: rick, what do you think about the potential of a government shutdown? who would be to blame? caller: oh, my god who would be to blame? and who would, you know, i am on social security disability right now. ok? so i mean, if you shut the government down i don't know who would pay my landlord. ok?

so i'm going to be out on the street. but i worked all my life in order to get there. i paid into the system. and hell, i was an aircraft mechanic, ok? i did important things. i made repairs on care draft and was working on private airplanes. but here i am. i am going to be thrown out on the street because people have a bad attitude on the government. do you have a comment? host: well, that's what we're here to hear from you. vance in logan, ohio. good morning. caller: good morning. aye been trying to get on all day. all morning,s that. -- all morning,s that. for the shutdown, i blame both parties. because they seem to forget who they are working for. they they are too busy toting

their party line. i don't care which ones the, instead of working for us. but one of the things i have been trying to call about is they want to cut spending. i worked in the prison system here in ohio for 22 years, and i watched inmate after inmate that was judged a either an alcoholic or drug addict. and he filled out his papers to get his $600 a month for the rest of his life. now, that is subsidized and abused and these people are either members of gangs and the they are getting money from gangs. why are we wasting money giving it to criminal. i really wanted to ask miss fudge about that. but i'll get off here. thank you for letting me on. host: comments by email from

steven in kentucky. i would blame the whole congress. they've been on recess when we are on a financial crisis. this was valuable time wasted. another comment coming to us by email from duluth, georgia, republicans should proudly accept blame for shutting down the government. all non-essential services are stopped. that's the way it should be in the first place. anything non-essential should be cut. the negative perception was a fabrication from the left. texas, molly, independent caller. hi. caller: good morning. host: hi there. who would you blame for a government shutdown? caller: just loss of jobs, to be honest with you. i live in a small town. and there's a lot of little buildings that shut down that shut down. the suing factories and stuff. the oil fields. if y'all can drill gas and oil

in texas. all the people would go back to work. all the little towns that got closed down buildings and things, if y'all could just check into that and see if the people would open them back up, all the people could have jobs again. so could you please check on that. host: molly, there will be some committee hearings this week as members of the eobama administration go before the senate and talk about the president's proposed budget for next year. i know secretary salazar will be doing that and talking about drilling and some of the policies when it comes to development. we'll be caring that on c-span later this week. hi, jerry. >> hi. who would i blame for government shutdown? i'd blame the free masons. i mean, isn't ate new world of order in the group going down? i mean, look at what they did

with alex jones and charlie sheen. host: let's look at a comment that's here in "usa today" in the foreign section. it's called "attack on planned parenthood won't help his cause." dwayne wick m says how defeating is this? the conservative allies want to stop planned parenthood to stop funds for providing funds to poor women. their idea is by blocking it it will impair its abilities to use funds for abortion. this is the reason behind the house's vote to defund planned parenthood but he said that will actually backfire. and that was something that representative -- republican

congressman has been pushing. let's go to ron on our democrat's line. caller: good morning. i think the blame should lie with both sides. because i think we get the worst legislation whenever each party has enough votes, it seems like they pass things like financial reform. that will bankrupt small banks. they are now allowing germany to buy american stock exchanges. and they are allowing g.m.o. ingredients in foods without labeling. and demanding that incon decembern't lightbulbs are going to be outlawed and intellectual property cannot be owned by unions and only the company they work for. why don't they tax non-profit organizations? i mean, there's a lot of --

like look at the ford and rockefeller foundation and gates foundation. yes. they do a lot of good. but a lot of times they are using that money to lobby congress with their studies and reports, and i think that a lot of money is just being hid that should be taxed from non-profit organizations. host: anderson, south carolina. jim? good morning. we have you on the air. so turn down your tv and go ahead. caller: hello. i'm jim kelly from south occasionally. host: ok. go right ahead and turn down your tv, please. caller: i think they tuth shut the government down and starlt it over, because originally our forefathers we started this nation as one nation under god,

and now it stays the government without god because they took god out of our government and schools, and look at where our country is at today, and the bible says allal nation that happens turn against god will be destroyed. so -- host: we'll leave it there. coming up next. the ambassador jaoaalmeida will be joining us. first a news update from c-span radio. >> an update on the war in afghanistan. nato says three of its service members have been killed. one service member killed today but in an insurgent attack and the other two died in a bombing yesterday. the deaths were the first in the month of march. a total of 68 nato service members have been killed so far this year. yemen's president is publicly criticizing the united states, a key ally. his remarks, president is a lei

says there's an operations room in tel-aviv with the aim at destabilizing the arab world. ands the run by the white house. after the speech tens of thousands of protesters marched to that university. the sheikh considered by the u.s. to be linked to al qaeda was also present at that gathering. more on libya from cnn. thank you kneesen police are trying to hold back people fleeing the escalating violence. the refugee agency is warning of a humanitarian catastrophe and says they have erected 500 tents on the border, and all of them are full. those are some of the latest headlines on c-span radio. >> m.i.t. professor paulene

maier is on book tv this sunday. watch previous in-depth programming on book tv.org. >> "washington journal" continues. host: ambassadors jaoa vale de almeida is our guest. the european union ambassador to the united states. thank you for being here. >> good morning. host: talk to us about the e.u.'s decision to enact stricter sanctions on libya. how far should it go? and why so strict? guest: well, we went beyond the united nations because we think it's important to pass a very clear message to colonel gaddafi that the european union and the u.s. very much as well,

does not accept the situation as it is today in libya. host: so that include an arms embargo and freeze gs assets. measures already included in a u.n. security council meeting. guest: basically we're putting outal all the conditions to prevent colonel gaddafi and his clan to act against his own people. this is the main purpose of the operation. that sense we went beyond the u.n. sanction. we have to understand libya is in our backyard. so we have a particular interest but also a particular responsibility in creating conditions for support of the libyan people. host: the relationship between

europe and libya. it says from the al-jazeera website the european union has condemned libya. but straining ties with tripoli presents an awkward situation. holding in the eighth largest oil holdings in the world. guest: i don't think we are alone in the way we related with libya in the past. i think we should now focus on the future. and the future is very clear for us. libyan as well as tunisian and egyptian people, they want democracy and freedom and the rule of law. and this is what we should support and what we actively support. host: ambassador jaoa vale de almeida is our guest. to join the conversation. you can call our democrats line or republicans line.

also independents's line. if you're outside the united states, that number is 202-628-0184. let's take a listen to comments secretary clinton made about libya. >> colonel gaddafi and those around him must be held accountable for these acts. these acts which vy late international obligations and common decency. through their actions, they have lost the legitimacy to govern. and the people of libya have made themselves clear. s the time for gaddafi to go. -- it is time for gaddafi to go. now. without further violence or delay. >> secretary of state hill hill -- hillary clinton speaking. what is the reaction to a no-fly zone? >> well, let me say first of

all, we are very much aligned with the u.n. position. secretary clinton, and between american officials and european officials overall. so this is a very good case, by the way. it's a case where there are clear positions between the u.n. and the united states but also areas in which we have common interest. stability in the region and economic development for the people of the arab world. so i'm very happy to see as i approach washington, there's a great degree of convergence between the europe and u.s. so there's a coordinated effort to promote democracy, freedom and rule of law in this region. host: when the secretary of state says they will continue to explore all actions. what do you think of that?

guest: i think that's our approach as well. we should not exclude any type of action in order to achieve our goals which is to support the legitimate as operations of the libyan and egyptian people and tunisian people, protection and rufle. we should not exclude any all. so to implement the sanctions. they are hard. they are strict. they have the framework. that could pat very clear pressure on colonel gaddafi and his people that thingsing cannot go on like this. host: robert. republican caller from tennessee. hi, there. caller: good morning. host: good morning. caller: listen, i want to say to the host, thank you for taking my call. but i want you to give me just a minute. because i think i got something very important to say to this man and i think america should

hear it. the best way i look at who my friends are is how they have treated me in the past. and i'm not trying to say anything negative to the european union but the united nations gave sanction after sanction to iraq and all it done was hurt the people. it didn't force saddam hussein to play any hand. it only hurt the people. when we actually did go to war with iraq, whether americans liked it or not, it was snag needed to be done. but the european people just forget to everything we went through in 1942. we liberated the whole world. and then when we needed help, it's like y'all want to send us 10 people. well, thanks a lot for the 3,000 deaths that americans talentied up in that war. over 3,000 by now, i'm sure. guest: well, thank you for the question.

i think our sanctions are clearly targeted to colonel gaddafi and his clan. not the libyan people. but the people around calf dolphy. -- we are imposing a visa and travel ban and arms embargo. and we are ready to prosecute libyan leaders if it is proven they have vylated civil rights. so we are not targeting or harming the libyan people. we are helping them to liberate from colonel gaddafi and the way it is today. host: let's look at this headline from the washington times. many libyans oppose thest invasion but endorse the no-fly zone in an effort to oust the gaddafi regime. what do you think of it?

guest: i think we should not zwroump conclusions. i think what's very important today is we realize the international committee, in particular the u.s. and e.u. nato is considering action as well. so i think we are running this operation and the management of this crisis hour-by-hour, and day-by-day. ands that what's important today. host: some american politicians have called for sending arms or possibly even sending troops. what would it have to take to get to that point? since you said all options are still on the table. what would be the sign? >> i think everybody is very atentive to the scale and action of the authorities of colonel gaddafi and people around it.

guest: i think we need see an opposition that gets organized and gets united around common objectist. so we are monitoring the situation 24 hours and seven days a week. in close cooperation, putting everything together, all the tools on our side, so we can decide the best option. host: peter, good morning. caller: thank you for taking my call. i was wondering about the assets that were frozen, is there any way to know be those assets are responsible for funding the mercenaries? and i'll take my answer off the air. guest: well, as you plainly say, we have frozen assets both in the u.s. and the european union, there's a united nations resolution in that direction. i think this is extremely important. because we have to take away from these people their capacity to finance whatever action we find illegitimate.

i cannot at this moment know exactly what kind of action they are thinking. but we have to consider all options. the best way to do that is prevent the way to get to the outside sources. host: muammar gaddafi has lost libya. much of the territory he's ruled over for the past 40 years has been taken over. he his recently-made friends are freezing his assets and openly calling for his removal. the colonel, surrounded by his increasingly unstable children are still determined to defy everyone. guest: we are sending colonel gaddafi a very clear message that comes from washington as much as brussels and london and pair is and berlin.

it comes from the entire international community. you cannot go on like this. we can not accept this. so i think we've been pretty clear. pretty vocal. colonel gaddafi has to understand that this cannot go on. and the scommupet very determined and con very zent its determination to fleevepbt. host: what would you like to see happen? guest: i think we all want, and the message is clear, that we want the situation to stop and the legitimate as operations for the people, freedom. also economic and social development, we want it to be materialized. this is what we want. but if you look back at history, there are different solutions for this problem. but i don't think we should

anticipate thousand should all end. we just wanted to make it exactly what the libyan people want, which is a capacity to determine their future. host: where have lessons been learned for europe when it comes to saying to a country like libya, we are watching you and following your lead. the people's lead versus we the european nation are telling you what to do. guest: if there's any lesson to learn, it's that these processes have to be locally owned. there has to be a dimension of local ownership. this is their revolution, not our revolution. this is the revolution of the arab people that want democracy and freedom. so i think we should be very atentive the fact that we are not imposing anything on egyptians or thank you in thesians.

we are supporting them in their legitimate as operations and helping their as operations terleds. maybe this is one less on the learn from the past. >> european union ambassador to the united states, jaoa vale de almeida is our guest. let's hear from our republican caller from illinois. hi. caller: hi. thank you so much for taking my call, c-span. i watch every day. and i would like to say also god bless our troops and veterans. and all i want to say is simply, with no disrespect to the european union, the people of this republic are waking up, and by that i mean we're awakening a giant and instead of a fight against war planes in the pacific it's going to be a fight against the fat cats in government. we are going to take our country back. the people now know the difference between democracy and republic, and we're not the stupid little people the

british once had thinking the militia was stupid. and they took over. excuse me. i'm nervous. host: that's ok, rosemary, do you have a question for the ambassador? caller: i would just like to know. no. just a statement. god bless our troops. thank you, very much. host: good morning al. caller: yes. actually sanctions are long-term. and you can't reason with gaddafi. he's a lunatic. you can reason with someone who is mentally stable. he is not. but what -- the refugees on the libyan border. there's 200,000 to 400,000 up to date. he could bomb them and massacre them. the other things -- what are

the chances of bombing the bunker of gaddafi in they know where he is. they could easily take him out, and that could be the end he takes more people of his own country. guest: well, again, there are many options for the way this could develop. and the way to reach our goal, we should not forget what the goal is. and the goal is to stride libyan people with the capacity to determine their own future. that means of course that we have to change the situation in libya, then that's what we do today. for the exact operational developments that will take place, i think it's too soon to jump to conclusions. what's important is that colonel gaddafi understands that the whole international community and the u.s. and european union are solidly together behind a clear message that this cannot go on and we will not accept this to go on.

and we want everything to materialize. host: which groups are clamping down on gaddafi? it's directed a criminal court to investigate crimes against gaddafi voting namsly to freeze assets against his family and also an arms embargo. you can also see what the u.s. is doing. moving some armed forces in the region near libya. the european union, and we of course are talking with the ambassador of the e.u. today prohibited visas and ban sale of tear gas and anti-riot gear that could be used on demonstrators. this is a peace called libya and beyond. like two other leaders in recent tiles, he stands alone.

even saddam hussein had activists worldwide opposing in iraq in 2003. but gaddafi faces an unprecedented collapse of his influence and prestige. his leadership ends with done dental nation -- condemnation from the global community. have you ever witnessed this? guest: i'm very happy with the reaction of the international community. i think we are living a sort of balloon-so i think it's important that the international community react in a correct way, and i think we are reacting in the right way.

let's see how things develop in the next hours and see what kind of reaction we need to have. but the basic condition is we are together. and the message colonel gaddafi should listen to is a clear one. host: from scranton, pennsylvania, our democrat's line. hello. caller: first, i don't think this is an e.u. problem or u.s. problem. i think our nation is involved in libya's problem because of the oil and if gaddafi is removed, who do you think would step in and be in charge of the government and my second question is do you think that the spread of the demonstrations in the middle east is due to influence from the u.s. and iraq? thank you. guest: thank you for the question. they are good questions. let me say, first of all, oil

is not the reason why we are concerned about libya. we are concerned about libya because we see the libyan people aspiring for democracy and freedom. but we also i don't want the speak on behalf of the european union but tunisia and libya are in our backyard. it's closer to sicily and italy than washington is to new york. so this is a region of strategic interest for the european union. not only because of oil. oil is an important commodity in today's economy, as we all know. but it's part of our neighborhood. it's part of the region we want to see prosper and want to see as a stable region. on what happens after gaddafi, i think this is for the libyan to decide. this is for the libyan people to decide who they want to see

in power. our role is to help create the conditions for this as operations to be materialized. of course the iraq situation in recent history plays a role. i don't want to comment now on that. i think we should certainly learn the lessons of the past. and there's many lessons one should learn, certainly. and we should concentrate on what to do to help the libyan people. host: let's look at this "washington post" article that delves a little deeper into the obama administration. although obama has repeatedly demanded legal accountability for gaddafi clinton hinted that the united states might be willing to accept a deal in which the libyan leader would agree to exile in a third

country. if the violence could be ended by his leaving, she said, that might be a good thing. president obama has not spoken puck lickly -- spoken publicly about libya since last week. but he warned the libyan leader against continued violence on his own people. guest: we've seen different solutions for the leaders previously charged. some of them come from inside 236789 some of them come from other places. again, we have a very clear message. we cannot accept the situation as it is. host: let's go to bird island,

minnesota where lee joins us on the republican line. caller: thank you for c-span and thank you for taking my call. i'd like to ask your guest if he's aware of the poll that the -- the research poll that was taken in the latter part of 2010. now this was taken in egypt, but i think you can extrapolate this out to the entire region where the poll nuned 72% of the common man on the street felt that it should be illegal for a woman to drive a car. and 82% found out people who were found guilty of thievery should have their hands cut off and 85% found that anyone changing from the muslim religion to any other religion should be put to capital

punishment. should be put to death. and i'm wondering what kind of democracy and rule of law he thought he was going to get from those people? thank you. guest: i would rather concentrate on the messages heard in temporary square. the messages heard in other parts are clear. people want to determine their future. people want freedom and democracy. if you look at the dimension of the strength and importance of young people in this revolution, young people that have access through -- these people, what do they want? they want to express freely, their views. they want also to have jobs and to have economic growth. so i see a change.

and i think we all see a change come. and this is the more optimistic side of this revolution in the arab world is that we see not the debate object religion and islamic fund mentalism, but we want freedom. we want democracy. we want economic -- we want employment. we have to address this situation. so if i have to assess what drives this protests, i would say it's more democracy, freedom and economic development thans the a religious-based approach to the way society's organized. host: ambassador jaoa vale de almeida serves at the european union ambassador to the united states. he took the post in august of

last year and originally from lisbon, pourt gal. prior to serving as the ambassador, he was the executive general to the european commission. what have you found since you've been in office that the most important relationship is between the e.u. and the united states? guest: well, i think we have two major points we need to come straight about. the one is for jobs and growth and the other is foreign policy security. one is living through difficult periods and economic crisis but also facing competition from emerging economies. our leadership or our role now is to create conditions for job conditions. relaunch conditions for growth. doing this, we are together. the u.s. and the e.u. and we are incorporating a lot

to create conditions for sustainable growth. growths that able to sustain in the future with green jobs and new technologies that create conditions for this. i would like to point out the excellent cooperation between the euros and americans on iran. our representative is chairing on the negotiations with the united states and iran. it's another example of cooperation which happens in other areas between the u.n. and u.s. host: let's take a look at the european sanctions against libya. they include the banning and supply of arms and prohibitinging trade and equipment that might be used for suppression. there's a ban on the visa of

gaddafi and family members and other people responsible for the civilian crackdown. let's hear from tim in ohio. caller: good morning. how are you doing there? a quick analysis. i'm a guy from mid ohio. and my concern as far as libya, i really don't too much care about libya. i think that they are -- their freedoms that they are fighting for is something that they have to do internally. we have many more problems. the libyans will just kind of -- they will figure out all the stuff out themselves. thank you, c-span. nice talking to you guys. guest: i take your point. and thank you for your comment.

i think in today's world, which is a globalized world, we are not isolated. a problem in greece, a small country of europe, has an impact on the international economic situation. the subprime mortgage problem here is just as important to an international crisis, so you cannot see anymore that libya is not a problem for us and americans. it is. it can impact in an extremely sensitive region of the world. also, let's look at things in a positive way. if we are able to contribute, support a peaceful, smooth transition, this is an incredible message for the hope of the arab world and all

countries living under dictatorships. this will create more markets for our products. this will promote the values we stand for, both the u.s. and e.u. and we should see this as a good thing with a good development and overall good impact benefitting both the you know and -- both the u.n. and the u.s. host: there's a $65 billion sovereign wealth fund that holds more than a 4% stake in italy's largest bank and $405 million military equipment deal between france and libya. also $15.3 billion value of a turkish construction company in libya. and then an italian between --

guest: dealing with the united states and china and turkey, really it was part of an international economy and so all that is taken good note of. now we need to build on the new situation. and we cannot forget the fact that the libyan people are speaking. the libyan people are saying what they want, and we should support him. that's where we should concentrate our efforts now. host: william in alabama. good morning. caller: good morning. can you hear me? host: yes. and you're on with the ambassador. guest: there's a little wording in the bible. it says thou shalt not knicks tribe. you've got all these coming

into the united states of america, trying to throw down their beliefs, trade in their beliefs in with yours, and they want to do away with christianty and want to replace islam all over the world. host: let me ask you. what would you like to see happen? are you saying you would prefer an isolationist policy where people stay in their own home countries? caller: right. that's exactly what should happen. guest: thank you. i don't necessarily share your views on this particular issue. i think the united states is a good example where people coming from different parts of the world can build a great society. europe is about that society. different cultures. that's what we want to

achieve. we would like to help countries like libya to achieve these levels of democracy, rcht for the others. respect for different religion and political views. that's democracy as we know it. host: how will the muslim brotherhood influence change in libya? does religion play any role in what we're seeing? it's not necessarily something that's based on religion. this has nothing to do with previous situations as we saw in iran after the fall of -- i may be wrong. i don't know. we know as much as we know from the situation over there. but i think everybody agrees that this times the much more about democracy and freedom

than it is about religion. host: steve, good morning. caller: thank you for taking my call. i wanted to thank the ambassador for taking the time to speak with us. i listened to president obama and hillary clinton, and they articulated very clearly that it's very important that the e.u. step up and really take the lead in helping change what's happening in libya. as they have more ties to libya than we do. also, you had mentioned, look back at history, at what it can show us. and one thing that came to my mind was a movie that played called "charlie wilson eswar." and it was about funneling money into afghanistan to fight the russians and give them the opportunity to stand on their

own and get their country back. and charlie wilson said the ability for thetous bring in that money, and what they did, it was the end game that much -- the end game. republicans can't deny that millions of dollars was spent. but what the importance now would have been is if we did carry the end game, the -- what would our partner be now there? and how much stronger would our relationship with the people there be? guest: yes. thank you for your comments on the history. i am an historian by nature. so i agree with you. the u.s. plays a particular

role. we are not moving away from our responsibilities. we perpetual -- and we know they want to do it together with us. so i think the conditions are there for a very good operation and the conditions are there to show together we can do better than in isolation. of course we are worried about the day after. after gaddafi steps down or whatever, whenever a change happens in libya, what comes next? we have seen a number of things in the world and we know this is a source of concern or danger for our societies. so i would like to see. i would like to see a change fully committed to the rule of law and also engaging in the process of economic development of libya. that creates the condition for stability and prosperity.

it's important for the european union but also for the u.s. that this part of the world becomes stable, prosperous. and that it's market-driven host: ambassador jaoa vale de almeida, you recently had an opinion piece in the hill newspaper defending the euro and talking about how there's perhaps a misunderstanding by some in the united states who believe as you said the european sovereign debt crisis can only have a bad ending? >> well, i think it will have a good ending. we are doing our homework. right? we are dealing with emergency situations like the one we have in greece. we are transforming this emerging mechanism we created into a permanent one so that if future crisis happen, we are better equipped than we were

last year or two years ago, but we are also addressing the root of this problem which is basically an issue of come patibility. -- an issue of competitiveness. we are looking at the root causes by addressing problems of innovation and pension reforms. these are if you find mental reforms. creating economic governance in there. some people in the u.s. are not wanting them to fail. because it's so important. host: images of protesters

attacking a police officer with a mull to have cocktail type of thing and the government dissolving and becoming resmed. how do you counter those signs of growing pains and strife? guest: i think that's an excellent expression, growing pains. these are painful. they deal with your pension rights that need to be addressed. the population is aging. we have toe address the fiscal dimension of the pension reform. we have to budget our constraints. we need budgetary austerity to deal with our deficits. in order to overwhich the situation, we need fundamental reform. the pension reformt what you are seeing is reaction from the certain sectors of the population.

but over all if you don't want to pass on to the future the burden of this. you have to accept reform. and this is what's happening today. host: ireland is the first to have an election since all this. what do you read from this? guest: well a smaller country, close to the russian border called latvia which went through an enormously painful reform process. the same government was re-elected after. host: chris on our independent's line. good morning. caller: good morning. how are you? host: fwoong. caller: my alarm over libya and the middle east goes back to the shaw of iran, what's going on with the military takeover in egypt.

and now what's going on in libya. and also to what's going on in afghanistan. we've been over in afghanistan longer than we fought world war i and world war ii. my alarm is that we don't wind up in libya with troops after being -- by the -- promised by the current prth that we were going to get out of iraq and out of afghanistan. guest: well, again i don't want to want prejudge on certainly american decisions on this particular case of libya. again, my message is i believe clear. we need to pass a clear message to colonel gaddafi, and we are doing that today. we cannot accept the swafplgtse but we are doing this together. the u.s. is not alone. and i would like the american listeners to be clear about

this. the e.u. is side-by-side with the u.s. in dealing with this situation. the other committees. the united nations security council, and -- host: sheila joins us. fwoong. caller: good morning. please give me a minute, and i would like an answer to what the -- i'm going to make a statement and i'd like an answer to a question. but on the heels of another caller who called earlier saying about everybody staying in their own country, well, i'm sure that the rightful owners, the american indians and the mexicans wish his kind had said the in their own country. but all of 24 interference into foreign affairs, libya and egypt and what are we going to do about it, i would like to know where people like you, the

european nations and the eia, where were you people and your voices when this government and the white man in this country was abusing and had taken away -- taking away their civil rights. where were you when we had the same problem going on in this country from the government around for people who think they own this country? guest: well, i think we stand the u.s. and the e.u. by the same common values. democracy, and freedom and the rule of law and quality of rights. this is what makes us so strong in the international community. . . that's what makes us so legitimate. you have to allow the libyan people to determine their own future. think think we are strong because we have strong values and we are determined to

promote those values in the world. host: ambassador thank you so much for being with us. the european ambassador to the united states since august of 2010. that's all for "washington journal" today. thank you for joining us. we'll be right back tomorrow morning at 7:00 eastern time. we'll now go to the floor of the house of representatives, which is just getting into session. the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the chair lays before the house a communication from the speaker. the clerk: the speaker's rooms, washington, d.c., march 1, 2011, i hereby appoint the honorable daniel webster to act as speaker pro tempore on this day, signed, john a. boehner, speaker of the house of representatives. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the order of the house on january 5, 2011, the

chair recognizes members from lists submitted by the majority and minority leaders for the morning hour of debate. the chair will alternate recognition between the parties with each party limited to an hour and each member other than the minority and majority leader and the majority whip be limited to five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from tennessee, mr. fleischmann from -- for five minutes. mr. fleischmann: i'd like to bring you some exciting developments from my hometown of chattanooga, tennessee. for those of you who haven't heard, chattanooga has undergone incredible transformation over the past several years. now the story of our progress is making news across the globe.

a few decades ago, chattanooga's economy was dwindling. legacy companies were closing. local manufacturers were folding in the face of global competition. we were even said to have the dirte air in america. -- the dirtiest air in america. today chattanooga is a place that's attracted $4 million in new investment in the recent re session. -- recession. it has the fastest residential internet in the united states and it's a place that won national -- one national publication called the place with the greatest economic growth in america. in august, the buzz about chattanooga brought an economic and social think tank to our city for a firsthand look. the group, called the intelligent community forum, studies 21st century growth studies 21st century growth within the global community.